IRC log of wai-wcag on 2003-08-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:03:57 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:04:10 [wendy]: zakim, who's on the phone?
14:04:10 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Roberto_Scano, Roberto_Ellero (muted), Chris_Ridpath, Dave_MacDonald, Michael_Cooper, m3m, Wendy
14:04:32 [Zakim]: +??P17
14:04:45 [wendy]: zakim, ??P17 is Ben_Caldwell
14:04:45 [Zakim]: +Ben_Caldwell; got it
14:05:21 [bcaldwell]: bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
14:06:04 [rscano]: zakim, who is speaking?
14:06:14 [Zakim]: rscano, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Michael_Cooper (15%), Ben_Caldwell (20%)
14:07:03 [ChrisR]: ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
14:07:21 [wendy]: ===
14:07:22 [wendy]: action items
14:08:08 [rellero]: 01,9901agenda?01,99
14:09:42 [wendy]: issues:
14:09:55 [wendy]: 1. relationships between techniques (and and or relationships)
14:10:56 [wendy]: 2. prioritize techniques? e.g., with data tables using th is the primary thing, the top priority.
14:11:25 [ChrisR]: ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
14:11:45 [wendy]: minimum sufficient, optional
14:12:19 [wendy]: ands, ors, ifs, elses
14:12:39 [wendy]: th can be minimum sufficient if simple table. for complex tables, it is not.
14:12:54 [wendy]: how will checklist capture this?
14:13:01 [wendy]: split out separate table types.
14:13:12 [wendy]: layout tables: xyz, see-also optional techniques
14:13:23 [wendy]: data tables: must do xyz, may do
14:15:53 [wendy]: split techniques by element or group by concept?
14:16:18 [wendy]: ok to group thead and tbody
14:16:49 [wendy]: scope on own headers and id together, axis a third (thus 3 techniques)
14:18:32 [wendy]: since mutually exclusive include in one technique and the checklist item is "do this or that" and technique describes how to choose which one to select.
14:18:58 [wendy]: splitting into separate techniques could help us prioritize, especially those that aren't supported today. could label them as "future" techniques.
14:19:34 [wendy]: techniques should be granular that are bundled together and associated w/prose as a separate process.
14:20:01 [wendy]: in bundling, address issues of adding explanatory material, doing the ands and ors (grouping)
14:31:21 [wendy]: want to avoid issue of person who develops to a technique then finds out that it doesn't work (because of preference for some other technique).
14:31:51 [wendy]: checklist: something use to determine conformance, techniques how you achieve conformance (here's how to do it)
14:32:14 [wendy]: every success criterion covered in each techniques document.
14:32:36 [wendy]: a technology that only addresses a few success criteria, techniques says what they can do but not conformance.
14:32:44 [wendy]: a checklist include items from multiple technologies.
14:32:48 [wendy]: techniques could also do the same.
14:33:20 [wendy]: can people use techniques alone to determine conformance?
14:33:48 [wendy]: then need a placeholder technique that says "can't use this technology to meet checkpoint/success criteria xyz"
14:34:58 [wendy]: should be able to get that info from techniques, i.e. link to css techs from html techs. already have placeholder to link to mathml techs from html techs
14:37:38 [wendy]: action: michael play with structure, how influences requirements. fine-tune requirements for techniques and checklists.
14:37:45 [wendy]: action: wac keep playing with techniques.
14:39:07 [wendy]: action: wac link to success criteria (instead of pulling in text of success criteria create links to)
14:39:49 [wendy]: curious if there are techniques that map to multiple success criteria.
14:40:12 [wendy]: drop action 1
14:40:17 [wendy]: RRSAgent, drop action 1
14:40:30 [wendy]: action: michael play with structure, how influences requirements. fine-tune requirements for techniques and checklists.
14:40:36 [wendy]: RRSAgent, drop action 2
14:40:46 [wendy]: action: wac keep playing with data table techniques
14:40:54 [wendy]: ===
14:41:13 [wendy]: summary of link discussion
14:41:19 [wendy]: (from the list)
14:41:51 [wendy]: mix of structural markup and links, don't need to require meaningful links.
14:42:35 [wendy]: surveyed some people who use screen readers.
14:43:06 [wendy]: use headings for diff purpose.
14:43:24 [wendy]: can get a list of links. if get a bunch of "click here" isn't helpful.
14:46:08 [wendy]: "if can't figure out the link, won't follow it."
14:46:40 [wendy]: users seem to be saying, "this is a real problem." authors saying, "they should be doing it ths way."
14:47:02 [wendy]: click here might be a unique problem. there is no pattern. context could be before or after.
14:47:10 [wendy]: "click here for xyz" or "xyz. click here."
14:47:23 [wendy]: kynn's examples were good from author's perspective.
14:47:44 [rscano]: one people with fisical disability don't click... is best to say "Choose this option for...."
14:47:55 [wendy]: s/fisical/physical
14:48:05 [rscano]: thank u :)
14:48:28 [wendy]: click here has more than accessibility problems.
14:48:44 [wendy]: try to come up with valid use case? don't think we need to.
14:49:38 [rscano]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2001OctDec/0072.html (old discussion about Click Here)
14:49:39 [wendy]: types of link text that people found problematic: anything ambiguous, null link text (link around image w/out alt-text), long link text, alt-text for image as link "logo"
14:49:56 [wendy]: abbreviations, multiple instances of same link text
14:51:20 [wendy]: "ambiguous" links: shouldn't prevent people from making one word a link.
14:52:02 [wendy]: maybe the link is ambiguous on purpose
14:52:25 [wendy]: stock text (more info, click here, etc)... meaningless link text
14:52:35 [wendy]: not ambiguity, but meaningless
14:52:41 [wendy]: doesn't add any semantic value
14:52:58 [wendy]: inconsiquential
14:53:00 [wendy]: (sp?)
14:53:31 [wendy]: e.g. blog - hard to remember if already used one word
14:53:46 [wendy]: force links w/diff link text to link to same location.
14:53:51 [rscano]: link for the minutes: http://www.stsci.edu/institute/WebSite/linkwording
14:54:28 [wendy]: can do a check. link checker can pick up this issue.
14:54:50 [wendy]: e.g., name, link to email
15:00:01 [wendy]: w3c mail archives an example
15:00:39 [wendy]: navigation - need to go to the same place each time (or perform the same action)
15:01:00 [wendy]: but there are instances in context that may have the same link text but go diff places
15:04:05 [wendy]: if no context, link should make sense on own (e.g., navigation bar). if in context, can be more ambiguous. AND don't use inconsiquential text (e.g., click here, more info, etc.)
15:07:03 [wendy]: amazon.com - over 180 links, yet if just read the page will take a long time.
15:07:24 [rscano]: also this... http://www.diodati.org/forum/discussioni.asp?f=1&id=565&ev=562&id1=726&ev1=562&tot=58
15:10:48 [wendy]: links discussion moving towards writing style.
15:11:28 [wendy]: other options: use an icon w/alt-text or title on a
15:11:37 [wendy]: non-issue if can navigate headers
15:14:35 [wendy]: is non-core navigation repetitive link text a barrier.
15:16:18 [wendy]: action: michael summarize survey results about link text
15:16:47 [wendy]: action: dave write proposal for link text
15:17:47 [wendy]: action: michael work with dave on link text action item
15:18:15 [wendy]: ===
15:18:22 [wendy]: break. when come back: tabindex for links
15:18:31 [rscano]: ok
15:18:36 [Zakim]: -Dave_MacDonald
15:18:51 [Zakim]: -Roberto_Scano
15:18:52 [Zakim]: -Roberto_Ellero
15:23:57 [Zakim]: +??P1
15:24:02 [rscano]: zakim, ??P1 is Roberto_Scano
15:24:02 [Zakim]: +Roberto_Scano; got it
15:24:14 [rscano]: zakim, i am Roberto_Scano
15:24:14 [Zakim]: ok, rscano, I now associate you with Roberto_Scano
15:25:19 [Zakim]: +??P8
15:25:24 [Zakim]: +Dave_MacDonald
15:25:25 [rscano]: zakim, ??P8 is Roberto_Ellero
15:25:25 [Zakim]: +Roberto_Ellero; got it
15:25:30 [rscano]: zakim, mute Roberto_Ellero
15:25:30 [Zakim]: Roberto_Ellero should now be muted
15:25:34 [rellero]: 01,990101,99zakim, I am Roberto_Ellero
15:25:41 [rscano]: zakim, who is here?
15:25:41 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Chris_Ridpath, Michael_Cooper, m3m, Wendy, Ben_Caldwell, Roberto_Scano, Roberto_Ellero (muted), Dave_MacDonald
15:25:43 [Zakim]: On IRC I see ChrisR, bcaldwell, RRSAgent, wendy, rellero, Zakim, rscano
15:28:19 [wendy]: ===
15:28:35 [bcaldwell]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20030807.html#skip_nav
15:31:47 [wendy]: Use the HTML 4.01 tabindex attribute to...
15:32:12 [wendy]: future technique. needs user agent issue info.
15:32:43 [wendy]: tabindex for form controls
15:33:02 [wendy]: put in separate category, not mention here wrt links
15:33:15 [rscano]: yep.. i agree
15:33:38 [wendy]: tabindex supported diff on forms vs links?
15:35:09 [rscano]: in the form, tabindex move the user agent (i'm thinking to a screen reader) to the <label> or to the form object selected? (<input> ...)?
15:35:13 [wendy]: user agent test suite: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/TS/html401/cp0101/0101-TABINDEX.html
15:35:16 [wendy]: combines forms and links
15:37:42 [wendy]: ben has started testing.
15:37:54 [wendy]: action: ben test for support of tabindex in tools
15:38:34 [wendy]: clearly need to list user agent issues. label as future technique? yes.
15:40:23 [wendy]: are these four separate techniques?
15:42:00 [wendy]: keep map but use lists or divs to group.
15:42:13 [wendy]: map technique doesn't validate?
15:42:29 [wendy]: example code didn't validate.
15:42:49 [wendy]: example may be from techniques doc. michael will clean up.
15:43:08 [wendy]: lists, map, and div for grouping. its own technique.
15:44:39 [wendy]: first technique the minimum, the rest are optional.
15:45:13 [wendy]: change from "skip navigation" to "groups of links." we're not talking about just nav links, but any group of links.
15:45:49 [wendy]: once UAs support grouping of techniques, retire this technique, require grouping.
15:47:35 [wendy]: action wendy: break navigation links into 4 separate techniques
15:48:24 [wendy]: ===
15:48:27 [wendy]: keyboard access
15:48:52 [wendy]: future technique?
15:48:56 [wendy]: lots of UA issues
15:49:28 [rscano]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20030807.html#tab_order
15:49:55 [wendy]: accesskey takes precendence over user agent control?
15:50:37 [rscano]: "This example assigns "U" as the accesskey (via "accesskey"). Typing "U" gives focus to the label, which in turn gives focus to the input control, so that the user can input text." this is wrong...
15:51:40 [wendy]: action: wendy which browser has an "accesskey" mode? (or was it a dream?)
15:51:46 [rscano]: ... it depends what browser is choosen... CTRL + U is right for IE
15:53:44 [rscano]: in IE it is CTRL + key
15:53:50 [wendy]: opera 7.0: activate access keys: Shift + Esc, Enter HTML access keys A-Z
15:54:45 [rscano]: with MacOS 8.6 there is no need of other click
15:55:11 [wendy]: which browser does the content win over user agent?
15:55:18 [Zakim]: -m3m
15:56:03 [wendy]: action: ben confirm that there are browsers where content accesskey used instead of user agent accesskey.
15:56:16 [rellero]: 01,9901in IE is ALT + "X" where X is the accesskey01,99 and enter
15:56:39 [wendy]: ===
15:56:42 [wendy]: anchors and targets
15:57:01 [rellero]: in MAC CMD + apple
15:57:04 [wendy]: action: wac clean-up examples (that scroll horizontal)
15:57:30 [rscano]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20030807.html#popups
15:57:49 [wendy]: do not change the current window - mean switching frames?
15:57:55 [wendy]: what are the mechanisms for informing the user?
15:58:06 [rscano]: Wendy, target= is not allowed in XHTML Strict :-/
15:58:20 [wendy]: sounds like do not ever use pop-ups.
15:58:37 [wendy]: there is an "and..." what about "unless you inform the user"
15:58:44 [wendy]: are pop-ups ok if you inform the user?
15:59:18 [wendy]: we all agree on this interpretation.
15:59:29 [rscano]: we could use <a href="page2.html" title="[external link] description ....">Text</a> ?
15:59:51 [rellero]: about target= is not allowed in XHTML Strict, there are already used workarounds based on js
15:59:58 [wendy]: how to inform the user - in technique?
16:00:53 [wendy]: ways: w/in link text, in title attribute, near the link but not in link text, image w/alt + in link
16:00:57 [rscano]: Microsoft uses in his web site to use images for external links :)
16:01:28 [wendy]: are other mechanisms sufficient?
16:01:34 [wendy]: if general warning on the page, is tha tok?
16:02:13 [wendy]: could UA inform user?
16:04:46 [wendy]: associate w/checkpoint 3.4 - consistent and predictable behavior
16:06:13 [bcaldwell]: two options 1- what are mechanisms that are sufficient for notification of changes and 2 - is there specific text that should be in that notification?
16:06:41 [bcaldwell]: how close should notification be to the link?
16:07:01 [bcaldwell]: is a general statement (ex. all links on this page open a new window) enough?
16:07:05 [wendy]: i'm back. thx ben.
16:07:42 [wendy]: notification should be close to links. if buried in text, not good enough.
16:07:47 [rscano]: for people with low memory or cognitive disables i think is not sufficient to put the general statement
16:08:42 [wendy]: how many people are likely to encounter the general statement?
16:09:22 [wendy]: if a long list of links, as long as preface list, should be ok.
16:09:25 [rscano]: a thread in the IG: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2002JulSep/0793.html
16:09:26 [wendy]: how about w/in the grouping?
16:10:04 [rscano]: Kynn suggest for CSS
16:10:06 [rscano]: a[target="_new"]:after { content: "(This will open in a new window.)"; }
16:10:21 [wendy]: depends on context
16:10:38 [wendy]: possible for user agent to let the user know.
16:10:44 [wendy]: possible in principle, not in practice.
16:11:00 [wendy]: future and current technique?
16:11:12 [wendy]: current: associate w/link future: here what do instead
16:11:17 [wendy]: or just retire it
16:14:00 [wendy]: issue for: magnifiers, screen readers
16:14:24 [wendy]: breaks the back button. sometimes confusing about how to get back to where you were.
16:17:29 [wendy]: need to survey people who use screen magnifiers.
16:17:39 [wendy]: particularly about use of tooltip, titles.
16:19:43 [rscano]: magnifier inside Windows XP zoom also tooltip and titles
16:20:06 [wendy]: action: dave talk with folks about use of screen magnifiers and pop-ups
16:20:41 [rscano]: yep!
16:20:44 [rscano]: :D
16:20:48 [wendy]: ===
16:20:51 [wendy]: images and image maps
16:21:06 [wendy]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20030807.html#alt
16:21:21 [rscano]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20030807.html#images-image-maps
16:21:25 [wendy]: example should talk about purpose vs description.
16:21:36 [wendy]: or should that be in gateway?
16:22:10 [wendy]: gateway is layer in-between guidelines and technology-specifics
16:22:45 [wendy]: good to have html-specific examples that help clarify the general (from gateway)
16:22:52 [wendy]: also, negative example to show what not to do.
16:23:16 [wendy]: also, a really long alt-text and say "this is wher eyou use longdesc"
16:23:47 [rscano]: yep
16:24:00 [rscano]: http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/~flavell/alt/alt-text.html here some good suggestion...
16:24:25 [wendy]: action: wac follow-up with Kynn re: his comment for checkpoint 1.1 and examples. does he want technology-specific or just more?
16:24:51 [wendy]: current example should be in an a element, otherwise doesn't make sense.
16:25:57 [wendy]: action: wac clean up examples
16:26:24 [wendy]: label example as html or xhtml. use role?
16:26:43 [wendy]: drop action 16
16:26:49 [wendy]: RRSAgent, drop action 16
16:26:54 [wendy]: action: michael clean up examples
16:27:40 [wendy]: isn't a technique for long descriptions in objects
16:28:01 [wendy]: what if want a short and long description and use object?
16:29:34 [wendy]: usage of object might be future technique.
16:29:51 [rscano]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20030807.html#longdesc here there is an example of longdesc use as "data"
16:32:27 [rscano]: object don't support "longdesc" but only "alt" and "title".. http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/objects.html#h-13.3.4
16:33:31 [wendy]: put link in object to link to long description
16:33:44 [rscano]: ah ok
16:33:56 [wendy]: link to accessible version
16:34:11 [rscano]: why not use [d] link?
16:34:41 [wendy]: or embed accessible version in html, embed it directly. or choose to have link.
16:36:41 [wendy]: action: ben how do screen readers handle embedded content?
16:37:06 [wendy]: refer back to gateway techniques (descriptions)
16:37:56 [wendy]: embed element complicates it.
16:38:01 [wendy]: no technique for embed.
16:39:23 [wendy]: do have a technique in "embedding multimedia objects" that shows how to use embed for backwards compatibility.
16:39:29 [wendy]: thus, precedence.
16:39:40 [wendy]: new browsers support object?
16:39:56 [wendy]: action: ben test object support
16:41:47 [wendy]: ===
16:41:51 [wendy]: long descriptions of images
16:42:41 [wendy]: short text equiv for img, long description for img, text equivs for object as 3 techniqeus
16:42:51 [rscano]: yep!
16:43:52 [wendy]: action michael: make 3 techniques: short text equiv for img, long description for img, text equivs for object as 3 techniqeus
16:44:17 [wendy]: what say about d-link?
16:44:41 [rscano]: i've suggested it before for the object :)
16:46:33 [wendy]: issues w/d-link: doesn't translate well, not meaningful link text
16:47:58 [wendy]: instead: suggest icon, hidden text link
16:48:07 [wendy]: but if do that as well as longdesc, then person gets both.
16:49:21 [rscano]: only little percentage of the images need the longdesc
16:49:44 [wendy]: perhaps not put too much emphasis on providing both if you don't have to do it that often.
16:51:35 [wendy]: sometimes the description is in the context
16:51:41 [rscano]: if preferred to have valid XHTML/HTML for the longdesc or a text file?
16:51:44 [wendy]: longdesc can be uri to text on the same page
16:52:44 [wendy]: seen it as a footnote
16:53:01 [wendy]: (it == longdesc)
16:53:17 [rscano]: best external one... why i must load a text if i don't need it? :)
16:53:43 [wendy]: proposal: deprecated technique for d-link
16:53:56 [wendy]: preference for longdesc.
16:54:30 [wendy]: only deprecating use of "[D]"
16:54:39 [wendy]: still technique for non-longdesc link
16:54:44 [wendy]: examples: icons, etc.
16:54:47 [rscano]: yep
16:57:24 [wendy]: two separate techniques: one for longdesc one for links to descriptions
16:57:39 [wendy]: a link that is a [D] is deprecated
16:57:41 [rscano]: [D] Link is not a W3C raccomandation... so why use it? :)
17:01:43 [ChrisR]: Our German translators decided that the 'd' in d-link could stand for
17:01:43 [ChrisR]: 'detaillierte Bildbeschreibung'.
17:02:10 [rscano]: D also in Italian could be "Descrizione" "Dettaglio" ...
17:03:06 [ChrisR]: Other suggestions in German were deutschertext or datenbeschreibung.
17:04:24 [wendy]: action: michael edit image techniques deprecated techniques for d-link, img alt, img londesc, object
17:04:29 [wendy]: ===
17:04:49 [rscano]: i cannot come :(
17:05:43 [rscano]: i must present in Rome the first e-commerce software with accessibility features and also VoiceXML support :)
17:08:29 [Zakim]: -Michael_Cooper
17:08:31 [rellero]: bye
17:08:33 [Zakim]: -Dave_MacDonald
17:08:34 [Zakim]: -Chris_Ridpath
17:08:35 [Zakim]: -Roberto_Scano
17:08:36 [Zakim]: -Ben_Caldwell
17:08:36 [Zakim]: -Roberto_Ellero
17:08:37 [Zakim]: -Wendy
17:08:38 [Zakim]: WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
17:08:41 [wendy]: RRSAgent, bye
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: I see 18 open action items:
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: wac link to success criteria (instead of pulling in text of success criteria create links to) [3]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T14-39-07
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: michael play with structure, how influences requirements. fine-tune requirements for techniques and checklists. [4]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T14-40-30
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: wac keep playing with data table techniques [5]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T14-40-46
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: michael summarize survey results about link text [6]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-16-18
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: dave write proposal for link text [7]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-16-47
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: michael work with dave on link text action item [8]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-17-47
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: ben test for support of tabindex in tools [9]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-37-54
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: wendy to break navigation links into 4 separate techniques [10]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-47-35
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: wendy which browser has an "accesskey" mode? (or was it a dream?) [11]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-51-40
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: ben confirm that there are browsers where content accesskey used instead of user agent accesskey. [12]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-56-03
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: wac clean-up examples (that scroll horizontal) [13]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T15-57-04
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: dave talk with folks about use of screen magnifiers and pop-ups [14]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T16-20-06
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: wac follow-up with Kynn re: his comment for checkpoint 1.1 and examples. does he want technology-specific or just more? [15]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T16-24-25
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: michael clean up examples [17]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T16-26-54
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: ben how do screen readers handle embedded content? [18]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T16-36-41
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: ben test object support [19]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T16-39-56
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: michael to make 3 techniques: short text equiv for img, long description for img, text equivs for object as 3 techniqeus [20]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T16-43-52
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: michael edit image techniques deprecated techniques for d-link, img alt, img londesc, object [21]
17:08:41 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/08/13-wai-wcag-irc#T17-04-24