1 16:00:22 <API> #startmeeting
   2 16:00:22 <tota11y> Meeting started Thu Oct 31 16:00:22 2013 CET.  The chair is API. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
   3 16:00:22 <tota11y> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
   4 16:00:35 <API> #topic 5 minutes of margin period
   5 16:05:24 <API> and the 5 minutes mark is here
   6 16:05:28 <API> so lets start the meeting
   7 16:05:39 <API> although I foresee a light meeting today
   8 16:05:49 <API> #topic 3.12 work
   9 16:06:02 <API> #info Wayland is still the main item.
  10 16:06:13 <API> #info threads have been somewhat quiet
  11 16:06:24 <magpie> specific threads?
  12 16:06:27 <API> #action API will ping the different threads open
  13 16:06:39 <API> magpie there is a open thread at gnome-accessiblity-devel
  14 16:06:42 <API> and at wayland devel
  15 16:06:54 <magpie> ah yes I am following that
  16 16:07:11 <API> ah btw, I have just remembered something
  17 16:07:15 <magpie> should we try to encourage the mousetweaks developers to say some words?
  18 16:07:30 <API> #info last week I have been talking with mousetweak developers, on a thread started with magpie
  19 16:07:43 <API> #info they are also having some problems using directly wayland
  20 16:07:55 <API> #info as wayland doesn't allow to access to some features
  21 16:08:20 <magpie> (note 'I'==API in that case)
  22 16:08:21 <API> #info in the same way, they are removing some of the code that used X in order to use at-spi2
  23 16:08:48 <API> magpie, well, you were also on the thread
  24 16:08:49 <API> in any case
  25 16:08:56 <magpie> I am not sure what information is needed before a decision can be made
  26 16:09:20 <jjmarin> hi !
  27 16:09:28 <API> #info so that means that right now, some mousetweaks features will work if at-spi2 gets the proper porting
  28 16:09:30 <magpie> hi jjmarin
  29 16:09:54 <API> #info we will also keep mousetweak developers on the loop
  30 16:10:04 <API> magpie, thanks for remember that thread
  31 16:10:09 <API> too many threads last week
  32 16:10:17 <magpie> #info there have been discussions about whether to implement mousetweaks in gnome-shell
  33 16:10:39 <API> magpie, so directly on gnome-sell¿
  34 16:10:56 <API> in the same way that the magnifier was implemented as a built-in feature on gnome-shell
  35 16:11:01 <API> in opposite to a different app in gnome2?
  36 16:11:05 <magpie> #info there was a concern that other desktops would not be able to use it if that happens
  37 16:11:28 <API> (fwiw, this  is also my concern too)
  38 16:11:30 <magpie> in the same way as a magnifer
  39 16:11:35 <API> magpie, ok
  40 16:11:38 <magpie> through hoverClick.js
  41 16:11:44 <API> out of curiosity
  42 16:11:51 <API> who were involved on that discussion?
  43 16:12:03 <API> only gnome-shell developers or mousetweaks+gnoume-shell developers?
  44 16:12:28 <magpie> it would be the easiest thing but the worry is that people using ubuntu etc would lose out
  45 16:12:56 <magpie> API, it was discussed in the thread before I cc'd you in
  46 16:13:12 <API> magpie, ah ok
  47 16:13:23 <API> sorry, I understood that you were talking about
  48 16:13:24 <magpie> maybe you don't get to see that, let me know if you want me to forward it on
  49 16:13:32 <API> a different chat on IRC #gnome-shell
  50 16:13:50 <API> magpie, not neccessary
  51 16:13:53 <API> but thanks for the offer
  52 16:14:15 <API> in any case, I will resume the infos
  53 16:14:29 <API> #info the rest of the 3.12 items are more or less in the same status
  54 16:14:46 <API> #info still waiting for a formal proposal from mike gorse about async API for at-spi2
  55 16:14:51 <magpie> all the onboard discussion I am not sure what it means for mousetweaks wayland planning but it seems important
  56 16:14:51 <API> hmm, mgorse is not here
  57 16:15:20 <API> onboard discussion?
  58 16:15:23 <API> onboard the osk?
  59 16:15:32 <API> or literally onboard?
  60 16:16:10 <magpie> I mentioned that the onboard could end up in gnome-shell based on the discussions from GUADEC but I was not able to offer any help with that other than to add you into the thread
  61 16:16:45 <magpie> I think the onboard keyboard and mousetweaks are linked in a few ways
  62 16:16:57 <API> magpie, fwiw
  63 16:17:06 <API> gnome-shell is using caribou as the osk technology
  64 16:17:13 <magpie> and it would be important to be able to use the onboard  in and out of the shell without problems
  65 16:17:20 <API> and yes, there are some discussions about doing all by themselves
  66 16:17:23 <API> but my questions
  67 16:17:32 <API> is because default osk on ubuntu is called onboard
  68 16:17:41 <API> but is  not related at all with caribou
  69 16:17:45 <API> or used at gnome-shell
  70 16:18:06 <API> so, are you talking about a discussion to use onboard instead of caribou?
  71 16:18:21 <API> or are you just using the literal meaning of onboard?
  72 16:18:30 <magpie> API, to be honest I got a bit lost during the onboard debates but it's all in that same thread.
  73 16:18:41 <API> well, as I said
  74 16:18:49 <API> on that thread they were talking about curretn gnome-shell osk
  75 16:18:58 <API> so sorry for the noise
  76 16:19:05 <API> there are a lot of osks around
  77 16:19:25 <magpie> I was hoping you might see what it all meant for the future of mousetweaks
  78 16:19:58 <API> well, in this case
  79 16:20:07 <magpie> i can see if I can pull out something from the thread
  80 16:20:15 <API> the options are trying to do as we were doing till now
  81 16:20:18 <API> keep that spliting
  82 16:20:20 <API> or merge
  83 16:20:33 <magpie> yes essentially
  84 16:20:34 <API> the things is that we need to know better what wayland will asume as
  85 16:20:43 <API> own or delegated to the compositor
  86 16:20:53 <magpie> either way they would need to work in wayland though wouldn't they?
  87 16:20:53 <API> that is one of the reasons those threads need some ping
  88 16:21:04 <API> yes, they need to work under a wayland environment
  89 16:21:19 <API> but the question is if it will be supporte as a high level feature directly on wayland
  90 16:21:23 <API> so used in more places
  91 16:21:45 <API> or if it will be delegated to specific wayland compositors (ie: gnome-shell)
  92 16:22:02 <API> in any case, as I said, lets see if people say more stuff on the wyaland thread
  93 16:22:12 <API> and I will use some of the stuff we discussed today
  94 16:22:23 <API> and on the mousetweaks thread to revitalize the discussion
  95 16:22:26 <API> having said so,
  96 16:22:35 <API> any more questions, doubts, comments on this topic?
  97 16:23:18 <magpie> I think putting in gnome-shell would get it in there faster but maybe the standalone should not be dropped in the long run so that it stays available but leaving gerd and francesco to decide what they want
  98 16:23:52 <API> well
  99 16:23:58 <magpie> It would be useful to determine exactly what information would help them arrive at a decision
 100 16:24:01 <API> gnome classic is still around
 101 16:24:10 <API> so mousetweaks standalone will be still needed
 102 16:25:04 <magpie> yeah. I kind of want them both because it'll never get in the a11y menu if it's not in g-s
 103 16:25:30 <API> in any case, probably this is more material for threads or #a11y, as meetings are basically for updates
 104 16:25:38 <jjmarin> where is the mentioned thread about mousetweaks and wayland ? in wayland-devel list ?
 105 16:25:38 <API> so if you don't mind I will move to next topic
 106 16:25:44 <magpie> go for it.
 107 16:25:49 <API> jjmarin, started as a private thread
 108 16:25:53 <magpie> wait
 109 16:25:56 <API> although I offered to move to public
 110 16:25:59 <API> well sorry
 111 16:26:04 <API> it started public
 112 16:26:05 <jjmarin> ok
 113 16:26:07 <magpie> would it be ok to raise this on that thread?
 114 16:26:11 <API> but some replied privately
 115 16:26:27 <API> magpie, raise this?
 116 16:26:30 <API> this == ?
 117 16:26:31 <magpie> oh it has been raised
 118 16:26:55 <API> well, yes I mentioned that it could be re-openend
 119 16:27:01 <API> but just at that moment the thread stopped
 120 16:27:05 <magpie> to get some advice about what to do and get the emails thread discussed there
 121 16:27:13 <magpie> emails topics
 122 16:27:21 <magpie> email topic
 123 16:27:37 * magpie got there in the end
 124 16:27:47 <API> magpie, as I said, I will use part of the discussed on that thread, and today, to ping other mailing lists
 125 16:27:54 <API> mostly to get advice
 126 16:28:01 <magpie> oh awesome
 127 16:28:04 <API> as it seems that mousetweak developers also have doubts
 128 16:28:10 <API> (everybody has doubts)
 129 16:28:17 <API> (doubts for everybody)
 130 16:28:33 <magpie> thanks, I think it will be better coming from you
 131 16:28:37 <magpie> nope
 132 16:28:46 <API> nope?
 133 16:29:28 <magpie> oh i thought you were asking whether there were any doubts from us
 134 16:29:37 <magpie> to move to the next topic
 135 16:29:52 <API> ah ok
 136 16:30:01 <API> #topic W3C updates
 137 16:30:03 <API> clown, ?
 138 16:32:21 * API has the feeling that clown is at the meeting just in name/spirit
 139 16:32:41 <clown> API, oh the meeting started?
 140 16:32:53 <clown> Ah — time change in europe...
 141 16:32:54 <API> clown, 30 minutes ago ...
 142 16:32:55 <API> :P
 143 16:32:58 <clown> but not in Canada.
 144 16:33:01 <API> ah true
 145 16:33:04 <API> we are special
 146 16:33:06 <clown> I was here over an hour ago.
 147 16:33:08 <API> or you are special
 148 16:33:17 <clown> everyone is special!
 149 16:33:27 <API> my fault
 150 16:33:27 <clown> Okay.  let me get the W3C update.
 151 16:33:37 <API> probably I should have sent a email to the list warning about this
 152 16:33:49 <API> this==time change in europe
 153 16:33:52 <magpie> what warning API ?
 154 16:33:54 <magpie> oh
 155 16:34:11 <magpie> yeah it's horrible and dark now
 156 16:34:58 <clown> #info  The 48 hour call-for-consensus for publishing the last call working draft of the ARIA UAIG document went out yesterday.
 157 16:35:02 <clown> #info http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2013Oct/0142.html
 158 16:35:19 <clown> #info so far, there have been nothing but postitive votes.
 159 16:35:49 <clown> #info  Likely that after the 48 hour period is over, the document will be published as a last call draft by Mon.
 160 16:36:18 <clown> #action Joseph will email the a11y interest list when the UIAG document is published as a last call draft.
 161 16:36:23 <clown> questions?
 162 16:36:39 <API> just one about how the document is created
 163 16:36:53 <API> it have a kind of squedule, as gnome do with releases?
 164 16:37:04 <API> or it is "just discussed" and when it is ready is announced?
 165 16:37:26 <API> my point is if after this new version is published
 166 16:37:33 <clown> curent state is various W3C memebers are allowed to vote for/against publishing as last call status.
 167 16:37:35 <API> if there is a defined plan for the next version
 168 16:38:14 <magpie> clown, do you agree with everying that's going to be published?
 169 16:38:18 <clown> if published, the world at large is invited to make comments about the document — criticize, ask for modifications, or say, "it looks good".
 170 16:38:54 <API> clown, well, yeah I understood that
 171 16:38:59 <clown> The period of time for comments is until Dec 6 (I think) — it is early December.
 172 16:39:13 <API> but as you said that all were positive votes, I was assuming that the document will be published as it is right now
 173 16:39:30 <API> so I was thinking on the future
 174 16:39:36 <API> just curious about the procedure
 175 16:40:19 <magpie> maybe there's a page with their cycles
 176 16:40:24 <clown> Yes, API, it is published with "last call" status.  After the comments are answered, it is either published as "Proposed Recommendation" (= release version 1.0), OR it goes back to another last call status.
 177 16:40:55 <clown> that's not a smiley  "proposed recommendation" = release version 1.0.
 178 16:41:38 <clown> It would go back to last call status if at least one of the comments was considered a fatal bug.
 179 16:42:12 <API> clown, well, my question (probably asked too early)
 180 16:42:18 <clown> meanwhile, while in last call status, the document is forked and work begins on the 1.1 version  = with "editors' draft" status.
 181 16:42:20 <API> if it is a plan for release version 1.x or 2.x
 182 16:42:36 <API> ah ok
 183 16:42:52 <API> so it is forked for 1.1
 184 16:43:11 <API> and as I asked, there are provisional deadlines or this is "refined until all agree" procedure?
 185 16:43:19 <clown> Yes.  There are already ARIA 1.1 issues that will affect the implemenation guide.
 186 16:43:49 <clown> it is "refined until all agree", pretty much.  W3C works by consensus.
 187 16:44:07 <clown> as for magpie's question:  "clown, do you agree with everying that's going to be published":
 188 16:44:31 <clown> I don't know yet.  I ams still runnning the tests.  A couple are failing, and will probably mean changes to the document.
 189 16:45:23 <clown> #info This table shows the status of the features that MUST be implemented in order to satisfy "proposed recommendation" status:
 190 16:45:25 <clown> #info https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testreport?testsuite_id=2
 191 16:45:52 <clown> You'll see that I have a lot of tests to run under the ATK/AT-SPI column.
 192 16:46:07 <API> well, I can't
 193 16:46:14 <API> it ask you for login+passwd
 194 16:46:30 <clown> really???  That's supposed to be public.  Shoot!
 195 16:46:47 <jjmarin> yes, it asks to me too :-)
 196 16:47:08 <magpie> you need to login for that
 197 16:47:20 * clown checks the URL.  There is a version that allows testers to modify the document.
 198 16:47:40 <jjmarin> An account (with a password) is required to view the page that you requested.
 199 16:47:40 <jjmarin> If you don't have one, request a new account.
 200 16:47:54 <jjmarin> http://www.w3.org/Help/Account/
 201 16:47:55 <clown> This is supposed to be the privileged url:  https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testreport/annotate?testsuite_id=2
 202 16:48:18 <clown> this is supposed to be the public (read only) url:  https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testreport?testsuite_id=2
 203 16:48:48 <jjmarin> both of them ask form user/password
 204 16:48:49 <clown> Okay.  I'll touch base with the gate keeper, and see if I can get him to change that.
 205 16:49:20 <clown> joanie should have access, since she is an 'invited expert' (and she has her credentials set up).
 206 16:49:23 <API> clown, ok thanks
 207 16:49:58 <clown> wlcm.
 208 16:50:18 <API> so
 209 16:50:24 <API> anything else in this topic?
 210 16:50:28 <API> comments, questions, doubtS?
 211 16:50:45 <jjmarin> nope from me
 212 16:50:47 <magpie> nope
 213 16:51:46 <API> #topic Marketing
 214 16:51:47 <API> jjmarin, ?
 215 16:51:59 <jjmarin> yes
 216 16:52:28 <jjmarin> #info Juanjo is working in improved content for ATK entry in the wikipedia
 217 16:53:33 <jjmarin> #info He has some holes in his understanding of ATK and AT-SPI
 218 16:54:01 <jjmarin> I think I will write API with some questions :-)
 219 16:54:18 <API> ok
 220 16:54:22 <magpie> jjmarin, is that not generated?
 221 16:54:23 <API> as soon as you have a text
 222 16:54:29 <API> I can review it
 223 16:54:45 <jjmarin> magpie: what do you mean ?
 224 16:55:06 <magpie> or something you could generate from the comments using mallard/doctools stuff?
 225 16:55:37 <jjmarin> nope, it is for the wikipedia. It has to be a text easy to understand
 226 16:56:03 <magpie> oh sorry i thought you meant the actual api document
 227 16:56:04 <jjmarin> it is not to drop ATK documentation in the wikipedia
 228 16:56:14 <jjmarin> magpie: ok :-)
 229 16:56:37 <magpie> do you have a link?
 230 16:57:02 <jjmarin> and the merge email from API makes me think my understanding is worse I think
 231 16:57:21 <magpie> yeah that was complicate
 232 16:57:51 <API> well, the idea is just explain what it is
 233 16:58:01 <API> and then add links to gnome documentation and gnome api reference pages
 234 16:58:21 <jjmarin> magpie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessibility_Toolkit
 235 16:58:23 <API> in any case, as soon as you have a text to review, I will not have any problem to review it
 236 16:58:57 <jjmarin> API: ok, I'll email you ;-)
 237 16:59:07 <jjmarin> and even ask you
 238 16:59:40 <API> ok, so anything else?
 239 16:59:58 <magpie> there could be a section on atk in gnome-shell, that'd be handy :-)
 240 17:00:21 <jjmarin> do you mean in the wikipedia ?
 241 17:00:35 <magpie> aye!
 242 17:01:03 <clown> there is a section on that page for "User Interface", and it lists GNOME Shell already.
 243 17:01:07 <API> well, for gnome-shell, just saying that it is accessible, and have built-in accessible features (like magnifier) would be enough
 244 17:01:22 <magpie> here? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessibility_Toolkit
 245 17:01:28 <clown> yes.
 246 17:02:03 <API> in any case, we are slightly over time
 247 17:02:06 <clown> there is a "table" near the bottom that lists all sorts of thing that use ATK on GNOME.
 248 17:02:14 <clown> *sorts of things
 249 17:02:35 <API> so I will move on if you don't mind
 250 17:02:44 <clown> fine with me.
 251 17:02:47 <API> #topic Miscellaneous time
 252 17:02:48 <magpie> i have some questions but not re: marketing is the general bit coming?
 253 17:02:50 <magpie> oh
 254 17:02:54 <magpie> cool
 255 17:03:13 <API> #info This week we have been discussing on IRC about pyatspi2 deprecation in favor
 256 17:03:19 <magpie> is there a specific deadline for 3.12 proposals?
 257 17:03:38 <API> #info of pure python gobject-introspected bindings, and also about atk and at-spi2 merge
 258 17:03:41 * magpie lets API do the infos
 259 17:04:00 <API> #info API sent a email summarizing all what involves that to -devel list
 260 17:04:01 <API> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-accessibility-devel/2013-October/msg00014.html
 261 17:04:15 <API> #info after some discussion a wiki page will be created
 262 17:04:25 <API> #info probably this task will be postponed after 3.12
 263 17:04:40 <API> magpie, about your question
 264 17:04:47 <API> do you mean 3.12 feature proposals?
 265 17:05:54 <magpie> yep though i am not exactly certain how a 'feature' is defined wrt the lines between it and say, an enhancement or bug
 266 17:06:39 <API> magpie, well there was always a vague line about that
 267 17:06:56 <API> in general feature is something that dractically change user interaction
 268 17:07:05 <API> and that that are material to release notes
 269 17:07:12 <magpie> mousetweaks in g-s would likely be a feature right?
 270 17:07:29 <magpie> what would high dpi scaling for the magnifier be?
 271 17:07:38 <API> moustweaks: yes probably
 272 17:07:49 <API> but in any case, probably that doens't need to be proposed
 273 17:07:59 <API> as the idea is having something giving the same functioanlity
 274 17:08:04 <API> and we are still discussing how
 275 17:08:15 <API> and about dpi scaling for the magnifier
 276 17:08:16 <magpie> ah yes, that makes sense
 277 17:08:21 <API> not sure
 278 17:08:27 <API> that seems like part of the dpi support
 279 17:08:36 <API> not like a feature itlsef
 280 17:09:09 <magpie> ok good thought it worth checking just in case.
 281 17:09:18 <magpie> what is your plan for tinting?
 282 17:09:43 <API> well, tinting was already proposed on previously releases
 283 17:09:55 <API> and was automatically moved to next release
 284 17:10:05 <API> as caret tracking was also moved to following releases before
 285 17:10:11 * magpie has not run g-s recently to know the status of the at-spi2-core bug mgorse is workin on
 286 17:10:14 <API> so I will not propose it again
 287 17:10:20 <clown> tinting functionality has been there for a long time.  The "only" thing missing is a dialog for users to use to make use of it.
 288 17:10:26 <API> is already included as a feature that we will tackle on
 289 17:10:48 <API> magpie, we already talked about htat
 290 17:11:01 <API> we are waiting for mgorse proposal for asyn API for at-spi2-core
 291 17:11:12 <magpie> is already included? can you clarify that sentence I didn't understand what you meant there?
 292 17:11:12 <API> that proposal will also include (afaiu)
 293 17:11:17 <API> extra information on events
 294 17:11:23 <API> that are part of the solution for that bug
 295 17:11:30 <magpie> ah ok
 296 17:12:13 <magpie> does it still have a control center problem?
 297 17:12:55 <API> control center problem right now is managed with 3.10 fix, it is, setting manually the waiting time
 298 17:13:06 <API> as I said, the final (aka "good") solution for that
 299 17:13:13 <API> is part of the proposal mike gorse is working on
 300 17:13:15 <magpie> i should be able to check that today anyway
 301 17:13:33 <API> ok
 302 17:13:39 <API> so, 15 minutes over meeting time
 303 17:13:43 <magpie> is there a deadline for that proposal?
 304 17:14:00 <API> we can't put deadlines on a work that is done purely on volunteer time
 305 17:14:06 <clown> btw, happy hallowe'en everyone!
 306 17:14:13 <API> mgorse already knows that as soon as possible the better
 307 17:14:17 * magpie loves halloween
 308 17:14:43 <magpie> i was just wondering if i could help
 309 17:14:44 <clown> is anyone wearing a costume?
 310 17:14:44 <API> ok, that is the sign that the achieved totally miscellaneous time
 311 17:14:57 * clown sadly, is not wearing a costume.
 312 17:15:11 <magpie> always when on IRC clown :-)
 313 17:15:13 * clown exactly, API.
 314 17:15:19 <magpie> today: cinderella!
 315 17:15:31 <magpie> tomorrow: shrek
 316 17:15:39 <clown> glass slippers?  Watch out for your feet!
 317 17:15:41 <API> I have a costume, Im disguised as myself
 318 17:15:44 <API> having said so
 319 17:15:46 <API> closing meeting
 320 17:15:49 <magpie> tis ok i'm sat down ha
 321 17:15:53 <magpie> ok API thanks
 322 17:15:54 * clown was hoping for skeletor, API
 323 17:15:58 <API> thanks everybody for coming and giving feedback
 324 17:16:03 <clown> thanks API.  Gotta run.
 325 17:16:09 <API> clown, I already used it, when I was 10 years old
 326 17:16:11 <clown> it's an hour and 15 minutes over for me...
 327 17:16:12 <magpie> turrah
 328 17:16:17 <API> it is not a good idea repeat costumes
 329 17:16:18 * clown waves bye!
 330 17:16:33 <API> people would say that you lack imagination
 331 17:16:43 * API thinks that still have a photo of that
 332 17:16:47 <API> soo
 333 17:16:48 * clown wants to see a picture of API in his skeletor cosutme when was 10 years old.
 334 17:16:51 <API> #endmeeting