See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 19 April 2012
<scribe> scribe: akirkpat2
<MichaelC> scribeNick: awk
<Loretta> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120419TF/results
<korn> Do we not queue in WCAG calls?
<Judy> [in scope: how a wcag2 provision would apply to non-web ict; out-of-scope: whether a wcag2 provision ought to apply to non-web ict]
<greggvanderheiden> IN THE OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this task force is to respond to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content. It is not the purpose of Task force to make any judgements of as to whether WCAG or any particular provisions should be used with non-web content but rather to comment on the meaning of the WCAG guidelines, success criteria and conformance
<greggvanderheiden> model and how it should be understood if it were to be applied to non-web electronic documents or software. IN THE "OUT OF SCOPE" SECTION: * any judgement as to whether or not WCAG or any provisions SHOULD be applied to non-web content.
<greggvanderheiden> Software would include, Applications, operating systems, and software in ICT that also has hardware aspects
<Andi> This task force was formed in response to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content.
<greggvanderheiden> IN THE OBJECTIVE: This task force was formed in response to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content. It is not the purpose of Task force to make any judgements of as to whether WCAG or any particular provisions should be used with non-web content but rather to comment on the meaning of the WCAG guidelines, success criteria and conformance model and
<greggvanderheiden> how it should be understood if it were to be applied to non-web electronic documents or software. IN THE "OUT OF SCOPE" SECTION: * any judgement as to whether or not WCAG or any provisions SHOULD be applied to non-web content.
<greggvanderheiden> great minds…. it looks identical -- yes?
<Andi> in the second sentence, I suggest "it is not the INTENT" rather than "it is not the PURPOSE"
<greggvanderheiden> OK one sec
<greggvanderheiden> IN THE OBJECTIVE: This task force was formed in response to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content. It is not the intent
<greggvanderheiden> of Task force to make any judgements of as to whether WCAG or any particular provisions should be used with non-web content but rather to comment on the meaning of the WCAG guidelines, success criteria and conformance model and how it should be understood if it were to be applied to non-web electronic documents or software. IN THE "OUT OF SCOPE" SECTION: * any judgement as to whether or not WCAG or any provisions
<greggvanderheiden> SHOULD be applied to non-web content.
<greggvanderheiden> Additionfor OUT OF SCOPE section: Other than a statement that
<greggvanderheiden> Addition for OUT OF SCOPE section: Other than a statement that “The taskforce does not assert that the WCAG is a comprehensive or complete set of guidelines for ICT (including Web content).” the task force would make no comment on specific gaps or how to fill them.
<greggvanderheiden> Addition for OUT OF SCOPE section: * Any comment on the application of WCAG to non-ICT”
<Zakim> Judy, you wanted to comment on the concern that she is hearing about "implied comprehensive coverage," and to explore whether we can come up with wording that would very narrowly
<Judy> [judy hearing a suggestion that the doc that the group produces should itself include a clear statement of what the doc does _not_ cover]
<greggvanderheiden> SUGGESTION: Include the limitations of the task force in the report so that it is clear why it did not comment on some aspects
<Loretta> Judy, I'm not getting the echo.
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say last week I heard objection to being too broad about reivew of the conformance section; now I'm hearing objection about being too narrow
<greggvanderheiden> Every place that is says "principles, guidelines, and success criteria" add "conformance requirements" ,
<korn> I heard "Conformance Criteria"
<greggvanderheiden> so that it reads "principles, guidelines, success criteria and conformance requirements" , but leave the 2nd bullet under what is included as it is to refer to conformance in general
<korn> No objection Judy
<korn> I have heard it briefly much earlier; I am muted (and have been)
<Andi> note to Judy - typo in the text under "Dependencies" heading: "dependencises" should be "dependencies"
<Loretta> ck a
<Loretta> Can WG approve acceptance of LC-2604, from last week's survey, which has unanimous consent?
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say I was involved in a task force to analyze why W3C specs come in late a lot of the time. One of the factors is that timelines were known to be
<Judy> [judy: heard from peter an interest in ensuring that we haven't put our pencils away too early for addressing input from other efforts"
<Judy> [judy: hearing from gregg: good to avoid sunsetting, and good to avoid slack]
RESOLUTION: Judy will produce another draft for next week
RESOLUTION: Accepted by unanimous consent
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Experience so/Experience shows/g Succeeded: s/Experience so/Experience shows/g Found Scribe: akirkpat2 Found ScribeNick: awk Default Present: Andrew_Kirkpatrick, Judy, Cooper, Peter_Korn, Bruce_Bailey, Maureen_Kraft, Alex_Li, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Cherie_Ekholm, Andi_Snow-Weaver, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, +1.253.381.aaaa, Marc_Johlic, Robin_Tuttle Present: Andrew_Kirkpatrick Judy Cooper Peter_Korn Bruce_Bailey Maureen_Kraft Alex_Li Gregg_Vanderheiden Cherie_Ekholm Andi_Snow-Weaver Loretta_Guarino_Reid +1.253.381.aaaa Marc_Johlic Robin_Tuttle Regrets: Kathleen_Wahlbin Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2012AprJun/0023.html Found Date: 19 Apr 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/04/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]