<AWK> +AWK

<KimD> +KimD

<Rachael> +Rachael

<Joshue108> +Joshue108

<AWK> Having trouble with webex - hang in there everyone

<SarahHorton> +SarahHorton

<Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List

<AWK> Scribe: Laura

AWK: Don’t have an extensive agenda today.

<Joshue108> KimD or Greg if either of you would be up for scribing next week?

AWK: TPAC, Update on tech timeline, and Github Issues
... a lot of work is being done in task forces.
... keep your band with in mind.

TPAC debrief

TPAC

We had reports from all the task forces.

Number of SCs almost 50.

AWK: We don’t know how many will show up in the final doc.
... Very good meeting.

Josh: Thanks to everyone. Was a good meeting.
... good to see progress. Feeling positive.

Kathy: Echo similar points.
... good to hear what the other TFs were doing.
... need to find out user needs for SCs and how they may be combined.
... lots to think about.
... need to review proposals.
... overall worhwhile.

AWK: meweting with digital publishing.
... they are adopting WCAG 2 and then adding to it.
... they are aware of the Dec 1 deadline.

Katie: was unaware that WCAG is combining with IDPF potentially
... awesome thing.

AWK: IDPF melding not finalized yet.

<Zakim> Joshue, you wanted to say that ePub also have a bunch of new techniques that are getting updated in early Oct

David: some complications but going forward

<Joshue108> http://www.idpf.org/epub/a11y/techniques/techniques.html

<Ryladog> Yeah!!

<Ryladog> more technique to review!

Josh: They have techs
... we can fold them into our docs after working group review..

AWK: spent time on silver planning.
... we are not chartered to do Silver yet.
... but we are plannning and having conversatioins.
... we are working on charter
... interested in having WCAG stay current. On a 2 year cycle.
... not sure how long silver will take.
... want to keep moving forward. 2.1 will help us there.
... 2 year cycle. If silver takes longer we may have a 2.3

katie: who was invovled with that consensus?

AWK: people in the room.

David: not me

katie: decoupling is a bad idea in my mind.
... would be a nightmare.
... we should get 2.1 including TF work.
... don’t punish TF’s if SCs are not ready

josh: thanks to silver group for thier work.

<kirkwood_> +kirkwood

josh: don't think we had consensus but were close

<AWK> ack to say that there is a difference between consensus in a room and on the group

josh: SCs that do not make it in 2.1 will get into 2.1 or silver.
... we are on a strict timeline
... want to see COGA SC in there but have to be practical.

Katie: we need to include COGA SC. They need our help.

josh: let’s do that.

katie: can’t do it alone.

AWK: purpose after Dec 1 is that we work on SCs.

<Ryladog> I agree that components may need to bbe combined

AWK: will be improvements for COGA in 2.1 some may have to wait to silver.
... some may be before silver.

kathy: agree that deadline is challenging.
... SC’s don't need to be perfect.
... we need the user requirements.

COGAs SC personalization SCs needs to work with mobile’s SCs

katie: need to hash things out and get it on the books.
... need to work together. Need dedicated time to work on it.

<Zakim> AWK, you wanted to talk about decoupling

s/sedicated/dedicated/

awk: consensus in the room is different than group consensus
... we should be focused on WCAG matching the world.
... always policy effort occurring around the world. WCAG needs to keep pace.
... need to keep up to date.

<Joshue108> I think that's fair.

Katie: we need to be up to date.
... there are ways to handle it.

josh: agrees with AWK.
... do people object to 2 year cycle?

<jeanne> +1 to a two year cycle for updates to WCAG

katie: we need to continue to improve WCAG.

josh: have been hamstrung with policy constraints.
... I am prepare to give 2 year cycle a go. We need to get 2.1 out.

David: we want a regular cycle. But maybe not put 2 years in the charter.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say best practices come in many forms and to say we need can´t overlook policy implications, but also can´t be blocked by them

Michael: Not opposed to 2 year cycle.
... better to charter in 2 year blocks then recharter.
... don’t stop because we are afraid.
... need to find a balance.
... we can do other things. we don’t have to abandon extensions.

<Zakim> AWK, you wanted to clarify decoupling further, not to decouple the ability to work with policy but to decouple timing

<Ryladog> +1 to david and michael

Michael: we can have short-term and long term goals.

<Ryladog> I mentioned Best Pratices exactly for that purpose michael

<Joshue108> I think that was the misunderstanding.. its not about decoupling from policy.

<Ryladog> I am all about worthwhile work

<Ryladog> :-)

<Ryladog> yes, thanks

awk: don’t think we are in disagreement.
... we will be taking a crack at writing a new charter.

Silver

awk: we looked at silver at TPAC.

Shawn: Presented options and structure.
... discussed preferences.
... Options on flexibility was preferred

Jeanne: may want to think about sending out for public comment
... we need to start breaking it to the public but not before the charter is done.
... we want to start talking to people.
... how and when is dependent on other factors.

awk: doesn’t seem like a bad thing. But may not get much feedback.

jeanne: it is a way to start getting the word out.

<Zakim> Ryladog, you wanted to unsure about this at this time

jeanne: many factors to keep in mind.

katie: may complicate other things.
... needs to be done carefully.

josh: not against. need to work out how.

<SarahHorton> Hello :)

awk: need to chart out our plans.

Techniques and Understanding timeline

<AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Timelines

awk: timelines are appoaching.
... timeframe is in about a month and a half

GitHub issues

awk: we have some new items.

<AWK> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues

<AWK> #236

awk: does anyone want to take a look athe these?

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/236

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/233

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/232

awk: indicate here or on Github.

Mo: I will take Luminance / Luma confusion #236 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/236

Rachael: I will take https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/234

awk: any other business?
... okay. Thanks all.

<AWK> Trackbot, end meeting

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144  of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/meeting/meeting/
Succeeded: s/WCAG is combining with them/ WCAG is combining with IDPF potentially/
Succeeded: s/we can fold them into our docs/we can fold them into our docs after working group review./
Succeeded: s/sliver/silver/
Succeeded: s/dont thing we had consensus/don't think we had consensus but were close/
Succeeded: s/we on a strict timeline./we are on a strict timeline/
Succeeded: s/sedicated/dedicated/
FAILED: s/sedicated/dedicated/
Succeeded: s/policiy/policy/
Succeeded: s/-erm/term/
Succeeded: s/withwhile/worthwhile/
Succeeded: s/Rachelle/Rachael/
Succeeded: s/busuness/business/
Found Scribe: Laura
Inferring ScribeNick: laura
Default Present: AWK, JF, steverep, marcjohlic, Joshue108, Mike, Elledge, GregL, KimD, jeanne, kirkwood, jon_avila, Laura, David, MacDonald, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Rachael, Lauriat, Kathy, JamesNurthen, Joshue108_, mhakkinen, alastairc, Laura_Carlson, Shawn, David-macdonald, Charles_LaPierre, Avneesh_Singh, George_Kerscher, Shawn(for_part), SarahHorton, Greg_Lowney, Makoto, Wilco, moekraft
Present: AWK JF steverep marcjohlic Joshue108 Mike Elledge GregL KimD jeanne kirkwood jon_avila Laura David MacDonald Katie_Haritos-Shea Rachael Lauriat Kathy

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 27 Sep 2016
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/09/27-wai-wcag-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.