IRC log of wai-wcag on 2003-12-18
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 21:00:34 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:00:35 [rellero]
- Hi
- 21:00:37 [bengt]
- hi
- 21:00:47 [rscano]
- hi wendy :)
- 21:00:54 [rscano]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 21:00:54 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Doyle, Roberto_Scano, Roberto_Ellero, Dave_MacDonald, JasonWhite, Michael_Cooper
- 21:01:00 [rellero]
- zakim, mute Roberto_Ellero
- 21:01:00 [Zakim]
- Roberto_Ellero should now be muted
- 21:01:28 [Zakim]
- +Avi_Arditti
- 21:01:30 [Zakim]
- +John_Slatin
- 21:01:41 [Zakim]
- +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:02:02 [Zakim]
- +??P20
- 21:02:17 [Zakim]
- +??P21
- 21:02:30 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P20 is BengtFarre
- 21:02:31 [Zakim]
- +BengtFarre; got it
- 21:02:44 [bengt]
- zakim, I am BengtFarre
- 21:02:44 [Zakim]
- ok, bengt, I now associate you with BengtFarre
- 21:02:45 [rscano]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 21:02:45 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Doyle, Roberto_Scano, Roberto_Ellero (muted), Dave_MacDonald, JasonWhite, Michael_Cooper, Avi_Arditti, John_Slatin, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, BengtFarre, ??P21
- 21:03:13 [Zakim]
- +Wendy
- 21:03:43 [ben]
- ben has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:03:44 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 21:03:54 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P21 may be Gregg
- 21:03:54 [Zakim]
- +Gregg?; got it
- 21:03:55 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Doyle (18%), ??P21 (25%)
- 21:05:11 [rscano]
- zakim, mute me
- 21:05:11 [Zakim]
- sorry, rscano, I do not see a party named 'rscano'
- 21:05:19 [rscano]
- zakim, i am Roberto_Scano
- 21:05:19 [Zakim]
- ok, rscano, I now associate you with Roberto_Scano
- 21:06:01 [Zakim]
- +??P28
- 21:06:20 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P28 is Mat_Mirabella
- 21:06:20 [Zakim]
- +Mat_Mirabella; got it
- 21:06:33 [rscano]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 21:06:33 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Doyle, Roberto_Scano (muted), Roberto_Ellero (muted), Dave_MacDonald, JasonWhite, Michael_Cooper, Avi_Arditti, John_Slatin, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, BengtFarre,
- 21:06:36 [Zakim]
- ... Gregg?, Wendy, Mat_Mirabella
- 21:06:56 [wendy]
- zakim, Gregg? is Gregg-and-Ben
- 21:06:57 [Zakim]
- +Gregg-and-Ben; got it
- 21:07:10 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:08:33 [wendy]
- starting with Doyle's summary of checkpoint 1.6:
- 21:08:34 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003OctDec/0581.html
- 21:08:39 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 21:08:49 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Doyle (10%), John_Slatin (14%)
- 21:11:58 [Zakim]
- + +1.206.568.aaaa
- 21:12:31 [wendy]
- zakim, +1.206.568.aaaa may be Mike_Barta
- 21:12:31 [Zakim]
- +Mike_Barta?; got it
- 21:13:14 [wendy]
- minutes from 4 December: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003OctDec/0458.html
- 21:14:48 [wendy]
- in visual presentation make it easy to dist foreground words and images from the background
- 21:18:52 [wendy]
- same as what was proposed, but w/out the word "default"
- 21:19:12 [wendy]
- discussion about including word "default"
- 21:19:42 [wendy]
- default included in success criteria rather than guideline
- 21:20:33 [wendy]
- level 1 does not constrain presentation. (thus this has to be level 2?)
- 21:20:50 [rscano]
- why don't substistute "words and images" with "visual contents" ?
- 21:20:55 [wendy]
- if everything had style sheets, then could say construct content so that certain types of content background could be removed.
- 21:21:15 [wendy]
- currently: no level 1 criteria that are generic approach.
- 21:21:35 [wendy]
- "in visual presentations make it easy to distinguish foreground words from teh background"
- 21:21:46 [wendy]
- level 1 success criteria: don't have any at this time.
- 21:26:31 [doyle]
- raises hand
- 21:26:43 [wendy]
- ack doyle
- 21:26:57 [wendy]
- concern that no level 1 criteria for this guideline.
- 21:27:13 [wendy]
- move level 2 up to 1?
- 21:28:12 [rscano]
- i agree... it is "basic" that the content must be "readable"
- 21:29:03 [doyle]
- raises hand
- 21:30:14 [wendy]
- "mechanism for all non-illustration text to be presentable..." but covered under 1.1 (user can modify text and alt-text to be readable)
- 21:31:12 [wendy]
- ack doyle
- 21:32:10 [wendy]
- red/green color deficiency. it's not that you can't see red/green. some people see shades of yellow/tan instead.
- 21:32:23 [wendy]
- could care less what color they see, we want them to see the text over the background.
- 21:32:41 [wendy]
- that's covered elsewhere (not using color as method to navigate...to convey important info)
- 21:33:14 [wendy]
- since deals w/default presentation, has to be level 2
- 21:34:55 [wendy]
- "note. Guideline 1.1 already requires that all text be accessible via assistive technology therefore all text could be represented in high-contrast form by a user technology"
- 21:35:16 [wendy]
- (put a note in the level 1 success criterion saying that there isn't one now but..Note...)
- 21:35:24 [rscano]
- good
- 21:37:12 [wendy]
- can provide diff style sheets for diff devices and uas (delivery contexts ala Device Indie vocab),
- 21:37:20 [wendy]
- no "default" presentation.
- 21:37:28 [wendy]
- at level 2, all author-supplied presentations meet the requirement.
- 21:37:39 [wendy]
- which one the user gets depends on the device and which style sheet is applied.
- 21:38:23 [wendy]
- therefore, don't use the term "default presentation" if have multiple possible presentations (depending on device/delivery context)
- 21:38:29 [wendy]
- prefer to use the term "author supplied"
- 21:38:49 [wendy]
- there are situations where there is not a default presentation.
- 21:39:31 [wendy]
- "presentation that comes about as result of combination of author-supplied presentations and delivery context"
- 21:42:00 [wendy]
- in the 2nd sentence, get rid of word "assistive" since trying to say that text is available to people who do not have AT.
- 21:42:11 [wendy]
- "available to the user so that it can be represented..."
- 21:43:02 [wendy]
- add an example to clarify.
- 21:43:59 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Scano
- 21:44:23 [wendy]
- Ben reads proposed wording of note (instead of level 1 success criterion)
- 21:44:43 [rscano]
- rscano has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:45:01 [wendy]
- (similar front part)...all text could be represented so that all text can be distinguished from the background.
- 21:45:13 [Zakim]
- +??P13
- 21:45:15 [wendy]
- oop...that doesn't look right. i must have written the same phrase multiple times.
- 21:45:19 [rscano]
- zakim, ??P13 is Roberto_Scano
- 21:45:19 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Scano; got it
- 21:45:23 [wendy]
- Ben? could you paste the text here for the minutes?
- 21:45:25 [rscano]
- zakim, i am Roberto_Scano
- 21:45:25 [Zakim]
- ok, rscano, I now associate you with Roberto_Scano
- 21:46:29 [wendy]
- "mechanism" - is kludgy (grab text and paste somewhere you can read it). for level 2, should be something that allows someone to stay on the current page.
- 21:48:19 [doyle]
- raises hand
- 21:48:58 [wendy]
- what talking about in level 2, seems to be provided by 1.1 unless mean to say that author provides a mechanism in the content.
- 21:49:10 [wendy]
- either enough contrast or author provides mechanism.
- 21:52:08 [wendy]
- copy and paste from pdf? if not copy protected or if have "trusted" screen reader.
- 21:52:16 [wendy]
- (yes, if ...)
- 21:54:38 [wendy]
- assuming the user agent can cut and paste.
- 21:54:46 [wendy]
- no, machine readability.
- 21:55:27 [doyle]
- hand up
- 21:55:58 [wendy]
- author can lock up document so that not generally accessible, specific to "trusted" uas.
- 21:56:09 [wendy]
- that is not accessible...it needs to be generally accessible.
- 21:56:16 [wendy]
- ack doyle
- 21:56:37 [wendy]
- at 4 december, thought we decided not to force person to leave browser. i.e., not use cut and paste.
- 21:57:09 [wendy]
- only leave browser if don't have an AT that can make text accessible to you (in manner that you need)
- 21:57:29 [wendy]
- ack John
- 21:57:50 [wendy]
- saying that there can't be graphical text? (bitmapped text in an image)
- 21:58:20 [doyle]
- hand up
- 21:58:22 [wendy]
- if associate alt-text w/bitmap text, then you can get text.
- 22:00:24 [wendy]
- difference between image of text that is functional versus image of text that is not functional (i.e., image of the text "Menu" vs photo of an intersection that includes a stop sign where the word "stop" is not necessary to using the content.)
- 22:02:13 [doyle]
- hand down
- 22:05:03 [wendy]
- ben? please post here?
- 22:05:22 [wendy]
- any text presented over background is electronically available...so text can be distinguished from background
- 22:05:57 [rscano]
- 01is electronically 01available = is accessible :)
- 22:06:10 [wendy]
- any text presented over a background is electronically available so that it can be represented to that text can be distinguished from the background
- 22:06:56 [wendy]
- action: john take this language and make plain language: any text presented over a background is electronically available so that it can be represented to that text can be distinguished from the background
- 22:08:51 [ben]
- Any text that is presented over a background is electronically available
- 22:08:51 [ben]
- so that it could be re-presented in a form that allows the text to be distinguished
- 22:08:51 [ben]
- from the background.
- 22:08:51 [ben]
-
- 22:08:51 [ben]
- Note: text that meets guideline 1.1 should satisfy this criterion.
- 22:09:36 [wendy]
- ack john
- 22:09:51 [wendy]
- reason to specify what the background is?
- 22:10:26 [wendy]
- text from today (that ben just pasted) also included in bugzilla in bug#660:
- 22:10:27 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=660
- 22:10:47 [wendy]
- remove the phrase "background, grayscale.." just say "background"
- 22:13:11 [doyle]
- hand up
- 22:15:39 [wendy]
- ack doyle
- 22:18:08 [wendy]
- doyle discusses juicy studio implementation of AERT color contrast algorithm (developed by Chris Ridpath)
- 22:18:27 [wendy]
- this used to be the algorithm suggested in previous drafts of WCAG 2.0, taken out b/c not confident it works.
- 22:18:42 [wendy]
- would like to test it with brewer pallette and lighthouse recommendations.
- 22:20:06 [wendy]
- action: gregg talk with Chris Ridpath
- 22:22:33 [wendy]
- >The AERT document [2], technique 2.2.1 for the WCAG1 proposed an
- 22:22:33 [wendy]
- >algorithm that worked reasonably well but was not perfect. Some
- 22:22:33 [wendy]
- >colour combinations were passed, though many people would find them
- 22:22:33 [wendy]
- >unacceptable, and other colours were failed though many people would
- 22:22:34 [wendy]
- >find them acceptable.
- 22:22:37 [doyle]
- sorry had to leave for a minute
- 22:22:59 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003JulSep/0407.html
- 22:23:28 [wendy]
- he also says, "
- 22:23:28 [wendy]
- My current feeling is that we're not going to find a perfect algorithm.
- 22:23:28 [wendy]
- Maybe the best we can hope for is a test that will give a qualified result.
- 22:23:28 [wendy]
- Perhaps something like "75% of people surveyed found the colour combination
- 22:23:28 [wendy]
- to be difficult to read".
- 22:23:30 [wendy]
- "
- 22:23:48 [wendy]
- joe responds: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003JulSep/0411.html
- 22:24:07 [wendy]
- why do we need an algorithm? why not suggest color combinations?
- 22:24:10 [wendy]
- ack Dave
- 22:25:47 [doyle]
- here here to the brightness issue - right on!!! What I miss for sure
- 22:26:09 [doyle]
- hand up
- 22:26:45 [wendy]
- hex covers hue and brightness?
- 22:28:01 [wendy]
- ack doyle
- 22:28:31 [wendy]
- brightness: that's what brewer palette is about.
- 22:28:59 [wendy]
- more important that contrast (brightness and hue provide contrast). it's not hte colors, it's the separation of colors through brithness and saturation.
- 22:29:43 [wendy]
- 98% of color deficiency issues go away when deal w/brightness.
- 22:30:15 [wendy]
- level 3: be the level 2 but no "mechanism"
- 22:31:00 [wendy]
- Testing The Readability Of Web Page Colors, by Chris Ridpath, Jutta Treviranus, Patrice L. (Tamar) Weiss
- 22:31:03 [wendy]
- http://www.aprompt.ca/WebPageColors.html
- 22:31:20 [MattJUROR]
- MattJUROR has joined #wai-wcag
- 22:31:32 [wendy]
- (thanks for pointing this out Roberto)
- 22:32:16 [rscano]
- ;-)
- 22:32:54 [wendy]
- ===
- 22:33:07 [wendy]
- gregg talks about possible proposals to the flicker guideline
- 22:33:51 [wendy]
- will see tool in near future. criteria would be based on the tool ("as measured by...")
- 22:34:03 [wendy]
- assume "as measured by algorithm..." rather than by tool x?
- 22:34:26 [wendy]
- the tool uses a variety of codecs to deal with variations.
- 22:34:35 [doyle]
- question will tool be cross platform - re: non operating system dependent
- 22:34:47 [wendy]
- nervous about making software the definition
- 22:35:08 [doyle]
- is the algorithm the tools
- 22:35:24 [wendy]
- it (the tool) is based on a set of standards.
- 22:36:06 [wendy]
- publish algorithm in stable place and reference that (rather than require tool)
- 22:36:29 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 22:38:08 [bengt]
- bye
- 22:38:09 [Zakim]
- -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 22:38:10 [Zakim]
- -Avi_Arditti
- 22:38:11 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Cooper
- 22:38:11 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 22:38:12 [rellero]
- bye
- 22:38:12 [Zakim]
- -Mike_Barta?
- 22:38:13 [Zakim]
- -Doyle
- 22:38:14 [Zakim]
- -Dave_MacDonald
- 22:38:15 [Zakim]
- -Gregg-and-Ben
- 22:38:16 [Zakim]
- -BengtFarre
- 22:38:18 [Zakim]
- -Mat_Mirabella
- 22:38:20 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Ellero
- 22:38:22 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Scano
- 22:38:33 [bengt]
- bengt has left #wai-wcag
- 22:38:49 [Zakim]
- -JasonWhite
- 22:38:50 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
- 22:38:51 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Doyle, Roberto_Scano, Roberto_Ellero, Dave_MacDonald, JasonWhite, Michael_Cooper, Avi_Arditti, John_Slatin, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, BengtFarre, Wendy, Mat_Mirabella,
- 22:38:53 [Zakim]
- ... Gregg-and-Ben, Mike_Barta?
- 22:38:58 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 22:38:58 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 22:39:01 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 22:39:01 [RRSAgent]
- I see 2 open action items:
- 22:39:01 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: john take this language and make plain language: any text presented over a background is electronically available so that it can be represented to that text can be distinguished from the background [1]
- 22:39:01 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/12/18-wai-wcag-irc#T22-06-56
- 22:39:01 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: gregg talk with Chris Ridpath [2]
- 22:39:01 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2003/12/18-wai-wcag-irc#T22-20-06