InterNational
Committee for Information Technology Standards
INCITS Secretariat, Information Technology Industry Council (ITI)
1250 Eye St. NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20005
Telephone 202-737-8888; Fax 202-638-4922;
Email: incits@itic.org
DOC: V2/02-0051
Date: September 3, 2002
Project: Administrative
Ref Doc: V2/02-0022,
V2/02-0023
Reply to: Joe Roeder, V2 Secretary
Email: jroeder@nib.org
Subject: MINUTES of NCITS V2 PLENARY MEETING #8
Meeting Location:
This meeting was hosted by the RERC on Communications Enhancement and
RESNA, at the 2002 RESNA Conference in the Lake Superior Room A, Hyatt Regency
Minneapolis Hotel in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Meeting Dates:
1. Call to Order.
Bill LaPlant, V2 Chair, called the meeting to order and welcomed the members and guests.
2. Introduction of attendees.
Ref:
V2 members
Observers and guests
A quorum of voting members attended on both days.
3. Approval of the Agenda.
Ref:
LaPlant proposed the agenda be revised to have the Pebbles presentation (8.1.1) today and the Metadata discussion with W3C and Dublin Core (7.6.1) on Friday morning.
LaPlant asked that the agenda for plenary #8 be accepted as amended.
The agenda was accepted by unanimous consent.
(See attachment - FINAL AGENDA FOR V2 PLENARY MEETING #8 at the end of these minutes)
ACTION, Roeder will make sure the links in the agenda document point to the correct web site URL. [P8/3]
4. Approval of the Minutes for plenary meeting #6.
Ref:
LaPlant asked that the minutes be accepted as presented.
The minutes for plenary #7 were accepted by unanimous consent.
5. Review of action items.
Ref:
urban recommended postponing the review of action item until after the task group reports (agenda item 8.2).
The modification to the agenda was accepted without objection.
The review of action items was not taken up again during the plenary.
6. Administrative Reports.
LaPlant said he made a request to INCITS to reconsider participation in ISO SC35. Without participation, V2 will not have access to their documents until after they are completed and will not be able to influence their work. Also, we will not have a path to easily move V2 documents forward internationally.
He noted that participation would cost INCITS $60,000. LaPlant proposed that if JTC1 TAG and INCITS vote to merge, V2 members should immediately start lobbying JTC1 TAG members for support for SC35 representation. He said we cannot promote V2 documents internationally without participation in SC35. He said if the merger happens, it will occur in the next 60 to 90 days.
LaPlant said ISO IEC and JT1 operate under an overall structure with specific scope for the higher level committees. They create work groups for specific work items. Each work item must garner enough support among the membership to be accepted and to have participants sign up to do the work.
6.2 Roll Call of Members in Jeopardy Due to Failure to Attend Meetings.
Ref:
GSA was dropped by INCITS from V2 for non-payment of membership dues and Xerox attended plenary #7, so both letters are overcome by events. No action was taken by the plenary.
7. Review of Related Activities
Ref:
See "6.1 Chair Remarks" in these minutes.
7.2 Web Accessibility Initiative.Ref:
Gilman said we should be aware of a W3C working group called "multi media interaction" that is in the formation stage and will soon have a public requirements document. They are welcoming disability use cases. They come from the mobile space and build the devices we want to see as accessors. The multi media interaction group and the device independence group are potential sources of useful material for V2.
Haritos-Shea suggested the web services and the Voice XML groups are additional W3C groups to consider.
Gilman added that the CC/PP working group was just reauthorized.
7.3 IEEE P2001 Web Engineering Best Practices Guidelines.
Ref:
LaPlant said the latest version of the Web Engineering Best Practices Guidelines has been approved but not yet published.
A new activity has been proposed having to do with security and LaPlant will follow up to ensure V2 has appropriate linkages. The new group may have input into the FCC's technical advisory group on wireless local and personal networks, which are potential underlying technologies for the V2 standard. These technologies have service and ID discovery features but at a different level than V2's concern. LaPlant said we do not need a formal involvement with this group but we should be aware of what they are doing.
For the next agenda, this item will be changed to "IEEE activities", with subitems for "web engineering" and "wireless networking".
7.4 Accessibility Forum.
Ref:
Kindrick said the Access Forum has an interoperability project, which is focused on interoperability between E&IT (electronic and information technology) and AT (assistive technology). In conjunction with the Access Forum, ATIA (Assistive Technology Industry Association) has formally created a working group for interoperability issues.
June Perritt from IBM and Randy Marsden from Madentec have been appointed chair and co-chair, respectively, of the ATIA working group. They are working to recruit organizations to participate, particularly those involved with major operating system platforms and with user agent activities of W3C.
7.5 Access Board Proposed Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards.Ref:
LaPlant said the Access Board has several technology assistance documents on their web site to help with questions about how the section 508 regulations are applied. Also, anyone can send questions to the Access Board. The Access Board has no plans to change the standards.
Haritos-Shea remarked that David Capozzi of the Access Board staff was at the Access Forum and said that they are looking at ways to bring the regulations into closer alignment with industry. [NB: in a post made after the plenary, Doug Wakefield clarified that the issue is not a revision of the 508 provisions authored by the Access Board, but rather, revisiting the way the FAR added the requirements to the procurement regulations.]
7.6 Other.7.6.1 Dublin Core
Ref:
Haritos-Shea introduced Liddy Nevile of Dublin Core and Dan Brickley of the W3C RDF Interest Group who joined by phone for this discussion.
Liddy Nevile chairs the Accessibility Special Interest Group of the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) and will join V2 at plenary #9.
Haritos-Shea noted that Dublin Core already have in place learner information profile metadata for students. She also noted IMS has a white paper document on accessibility. [Ref: "IMS Guidelines for Developing Accessible Learning Applications" - http://www.imsglobal.org/accessibility/index.cfm]
Sheppard said V2M is looking at differences for services in public realms and private realms.
Liddy Nevile said there are different approaches to where the metadata belong and that personally she is not comfortable with someone else holding this information. The question is where do we go to define users or to define devices.
Liddy Nevile said that, So far, the W3C work produced a list of "don'ts" and need a set of requirements. She spoke about EARL, evaluation and report language [Ref: http://www.w3.org/2001/03/earl/]
She has been saying to IMS, "don't solve your problems, look at how problems are being solved in general."
Sheppard said he is working on a primer and Dan Brickley asked for a copy. Sheppard and LaPlant said they need another 30 days to get this document into shape.
Dan Brickley said another family of work at W3C is Web Services. Gilman said V2 is interested in similarity and noted that UP&P has service description very much like the web services description.
LaPlant said V2 has an obligation to harmonize with ISO IEC. The issue is how to interface the web services with commercial products.
LaPlant said V2 plenary #9 (September 30-October4, 2002) will devote 2 days to additional metadata issues and invited Dublin Core and W3C RDF to join. Liddy Nevile said she would be available the latter part of the week of the plenary and Dan Brickley said he will make sure a W3C person is available. LaPlant asked that a subgroup consisting of Gilman Sheppard Haritos-Shea Liddy Nevile and Dan Brickley put together the agenda for the metadata part of the plenary. This subgroup will use the V2M reflector.
Liddy Nevile said Dublin core will meet in Florence in late October and invited V2 members to attend.
There was some discussion about the extent of metadata needed to support the user needs and preferences and how registering this information poses privacy concerns. LaPlant suggested including security experts in the metadata discussions. Liddy Nevile said privacy has political dimensions and there needs to be a political solution as well as a technical solution.
7.6.2 XForms
Trewin discussed the work that was done to compare AAIML with XForms. Initial observations were gathered and specific questions Passed on to Stephane Maes and his group. This was followed by a conference call discussion with Stephane.
Some aspects of XForms noted by Trewin include:
Trewin summarized the comparison with these conclusions:
The recommendations to V2 are:
There was discussion and the following motion was proposed:
Motion: (Trewin) that in addition to its existing activities and directions, V2 shall take on the following three tasks:
The motion passed by unanimous consent.
8. Presentations.
Ref:
View slides for Pebbles presentation at P8
Brad Myers gave a presentation on the Pebbles project which is investigating how a hand-held computer can be used as a "Personal Universal Controller" (see slides).
8.1.2 Trace URC Prototype
Ref:
View Slides for Trace Prototyping Presentation at P8
Gregg Vanderheiden gave a presentation on the Trace URC Prototype (see slides).
8.2 Ad hoc Task Group Reports.
8.2.1 V2A - AIAP-RC Editing.
Ref:
View slides of V2A report at plenary #8
Trewin presented a report on the work of task group V2A which was very active since the previous plenary. She covered what has been done, what has not been done and what should be done next. V2A revisited the remote console requirements list, continued AAIML development, explored concepts for cognitive layers in AAIML, listed example targets for all elements of AAIML and Compared the interaction layer in AAIML with XForms.
See item 7.6.2 of these minutes for the discussion on XForms.
Trewin reviewed the AIAP-URC document development. The plenary discussed the modifications leading up to version 3.7 of the draft. The areas covered included:
There was some discussion about whether to accept the non-controversial modifications first and then deal with the controversial ones or to accept all the modifications and keep the controversial issues open for further work.
Motion: (V2A ad hoc) that V2 plenary accept the modifications to the URC document as proposed by V2A with the exception of
The motion passed by unanimous consent.
There was discussion on the ordering of information from the target device.
Motion: (V2A ad hoc) that we edit the document saying that the underlying transport mechanism preserve the ordering of information and control items as set by the target device to the URC and open an issue to look at ordering of the URC.
The motion passed by unanimous consent.
Issue 91 will be left out for now and no motion was proposed.
Regarding issue 134 (command status) Vanderheiden noted that significant issues were raised in the discussions that need to be looked at more closely. No motion was reported out.
Motion: (V2A ad hoc) that we include nested row and column headers for the matrix interactors and we allow help text for columns and rows for matrix interactors.
The motion passed by unanimous consent.
The approved items will be reflected in version 4.0 of the draft AIAP-URC document.
8.2.2 Framework.
Ref:
View slides of V2B talking points for Plenary 8
Gilman reviewed the results of the framework group discussions (see slides).
8.2.3 V2C - Managers.
Ref:
LaPlant said the V2C minutes will be attached to the minutes for plenary #8.
8.2.4 Discovery.
Ref:
View slides of V2d Report at P8
Zimmermann reported on the work of task group V2D (see slides). He said the group is discovering more open issues and the work of this group should be an ongoing activity. New open issues were discussed at length.
V2D posted to TWiki and to the work-def reflector the proposed solutions and rationale for 3 open issues:
Motion: (Zimmermann) that the proposed solutions for issues 37, 148 and 122 be accepted.
The motion passed by unanimous consent.
8.2.5 Editing.
No report.
8.2.6 V2G - Glossary/scenarios.
Ref:
View slides of V2g Report at P8
Kindrick reported on the work of task group V2G (see slides).
Following the presentation, Vanderheiden proposed a vote of confidence on the template. The vote of confidence passed unanimously.
8.2.7 V2M - Metadata.
Ref:
See discussion in item 7.6.1 of these minutes.
8.2.8 V2S - Security.
Ref:
View slides for V2S presentation at P8
View Slides for V2S work Paper at P8
John Chapman reported on the work of task group V2S (see slides).
9. Discussion of tasks and priorities.
9.1 Working Sessions.
LaPlant asked for a motion to reconstitute the ad hoc groups with the same chairs as listed in agenda 8.2 until the next plenary.
Zimmermann asked that V2A do the same for UP&P what they did with XForms.
Following discussion, Zimmermann proposed that the motion be amended to add an assignment to V2A and V2D to contact the UP&P group. Zimmermann volunteered to be in charge.
Motion: (Chapman/Sajka) to reconstitute the ad hoc groups with the same chairs as listed in agenda 8.2 until the next plenary with the addition that V2A and V2D be assigned to contact the UP&P group.
The motion passed by unanimous consent.
Sheppard said members need to register for plenary #9 to get NIST security passes.
Kindrick said V2G has 17 issues, with 9 closed issues to be reflected in scenario to make sure the elements are justified. This was followed by a discussion about closing items before the scenarios are done.
Zimmermann said all must use the master TWiki list of open and closed issues, but each working group must maintain their own issues documents.
It was suggested that V2G can hold an issue open until there is an adequate scenario and that V2G should put a note in the issue to keep it open. It was further suggested that V2G take on tracking that issue and remind others to watch out for scenarios.
Sheppard noted that some issues have more than 1 group working on an issue. Zimmermann said if one working group closes an issue, they must notify the other working group and if there are no complaint, then the issue is closed.
LaPlant said [each group?] may need a scenario part of an issue [in order] to close an issue. He said annotations by V2A, V2G, etc. are still issues and they need to be close out.
LaPlant said to make sure this process is in the minutes.
There was concern expressed about managing the open issues document with so many issues shared and multiple groups editing on 1 document. There was discussion about TWiki and other tools, the need for a data base with the ability to generate reports and do word search. LaPlant will draft an open issue on the question of how to have accessible docs for V2.
Zimmermann proposed a presentation on modeling tools and someone proposed one for managers tools. LaPlant said this will be addressed in V2C.
10. New Items.
10.1 Planning for Implementers' Workshop
LaPlant said he has not yet drafted a proposal for a CSUN workshop for prototype Implementers. He will provide a draft by the next V2C conference call and members should email any objections to the proposal to LaPlant in the subsequent 2 weeks.
10.2 V2 Server
Sajka said she has acquired a DEC Alpha server and is in the process of setting it up. When the server is operational on the internet, Sajka will set up a new V2 web site for direct access.
11. Future Meetings
11.1 Gaithersburg (NIST) October 2002
11.2 January or February, 2003, West?
11.3 April, May, June, 2003, South or East?
11.4 August, September, October, 2003, North?
LaPlant said the next V2C meeting will be July 11 at 2 PM (ET).
The next V2 plenary will be September 30 - October 4, 2002, at NIST in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
12. Summary of Action Items
Ref:
13. Adjournment
V2 plenary #8 adjourned at 5 PM (CT) on Friday, June 28, 2002.
SUMMARY OF REFERENCES IN THESE MINUTES