IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-02-04
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:51:41 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:52:54 [wendy]
- agenda+ RDF Techniques
- 14:53:12 [wendy]
- agenda+ bugzilla issues
- 14:59:18 [ben]
- ben has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:59:43 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has now started
- 15:00:06 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 15:01:44 [Zakim]
- +Chris_Ridpath
- 15:01:53 [Zakim]
- +Wendy
- 15:02:02 [Zakim]
- +Don_Evans
- 15:02:41 [wendy]
- ben are you on the phone?
- 15:02:57 [Zakim]
- +??P20
- 15:03:01 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P20 is Ben
- 15:03:01 [Zakim]
- +Ben; got it
- 15:04:44 [Zakim]
- +Tim_Boland
- 15:05:17 [ChrisR]
- ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:05:31 [donaldfevans]
- donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:06:33 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=188
- 15:06:38 [Zakim]
- -Don_Evans
- 15:07:28 [wendy]
- don? are you going to rejoin the call?
- 15:07:33 [donaldfevans]
- yes
- 15:07:43 [donaldfevans]
- sorry, hit wrong button
- 15:08:01 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=248
- 15:08:55 [wendy]
- action: chris compare latest html techniques draft with older write-ups to make sure everything included.
- 15:09:02 [Zakim]
- +Don_Evans
- 15:09:04 [Zakim]
- +??P44
- 15:09:18 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P44 is Lisa_Seeman
- 15:09:18 [Zakim]
- +Lisa_Seeman; got it
- 15:10:56 [Zakim]
- -Tim_Boland
- 15:11:33 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=576
- 15:11:40 [Zakim]
- +Tim_Boland
- 15:11:41 [wendy]
- closed. michael added a link to the file.
- 15:13:13 [wendy]
- unmute lisa
- 15:14:36 [wendy]
- RDF Techniques - lisa overview
- 15:15:20 [wendy]
- lisa wants input about the direction to head with this document before heading too far forward. currently, it's more like a brain dump.
- 15:15:27 [chaalsNCE]
- chaalsNCE has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:15:43 [wendy]
- there are different sections: 1. explaining the benefits of RDF to accessibility (similar to css doc)
- 15:16:11 [wendy]
- 2. usage - how you work with existing ontology. how to choose an ontology.
- 15:16:49 [wendy]
- 3. media equivalents
- 15:16:55 [Zakim]
- +Charles
- 15:17:33 [wendy]
- want people to look at: 1. general structure of the document, 2. how much detail to include in the document (are we going to assume understand gateway techniques before read rdf techniques?)
- 15:18:40 [wendy]
- 3. writing clearly and providing clear test section shows potential of rdf. experimental.
- 15:20:23 [wendy]
- documenting existing techniques that work with existing engines, but don't know which one the user will use.
- 15:20:34 [wendy]
- would like a single way to clarify text so that renderers are conformant to that.
- 15:21:12 [wendy]
- lisa would like to see a standard way to create an ontology to provide alternatives, simplifications, etc.
- 15:21:38 [Zakim]
- +Dave_MacDonald
- 15:22:13 [wendy]
- q+ to say "we can't standardize an ontology in a techniques document. this sounds more like a deliverable of a working group chartered specifically to create this standard"
- 15:22:25 [wendy]
- lisa: how do we want to approach this kind of stuff?
- 15:23:46 [ben]
- q+
- 15:25:12 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 15:25:12 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say "we can't standardize an ontology in a techniques document. this sounds more like a deliverable of a working group chartered specifically to create this
- 15:25:15 [Zakim]
- ... standard"
- 15:25:19 [wendy]
- ack chaals
- 15:25:19 [Zakim]
- chaalsNCE, you wanted to perhaps disagree with wendy :-)
- 15:25:45 [wendy]
- we can write ontologies to do stuff. write a tiny vocabulary to do tiny tasks.
- 15:25:57 [wendy]
- similar to saying, "here's some html code to do x"
- 15:27:01 [wendy]
- useful to look at this stuff similar to css techniques. you can write a technique that uses css to satisfy a guideline but don't write "here's how to write a document in css."
- 15:27:27 [wendy]
- ack ben
- 15:28:01 [wendy]
- our audience is not as likely to be familiar with rdf than with html and css. what are we doing to give people introductory info about rdf?
- 15:28:09 [wendy]
- ack Lisa
- 15:28:49 [wendy]
- very briefly (couple sentences) about what rdf is then links to more info.
- 15:29:12 [wendy]
- want to see a paragraph that introduces to rdf and why might be using for accessibility.
- 15:29:46 [wendy]
- q+ to say "benefits of tech would be useful for each techniques. a summary of issues and benefits."
- 15:29:52 [wendy]
- mute lisa
- 15:30:09 [wendy]
- ack chaals
- 15:30:09 [Zakim]
- chaalsNCE, you wanted to suggest (very quickly) that techniques should be pretty self-contained - "copy this and this, and do this and you get that..."
- 15:30:32 [wendy]
- intro to rdf, not our bag. better to providing techniques.
- 15:30:38 [wendy]
- example is "intro to earl"
- 15:31:05 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 15:31:05 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say "benefits of tech would be useful for each techniques. a summary of issues and benefits."
- 15:31:11 [chaalsNCE]
- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/talks/200311-earl/all
- 15:31:31 [chaalsNCE]
- [/me agrees with wendy]
- 15:31:48 [wendy]
- don't need to do a primer, but links to more info
- 15:32:16 [wendy]
- ===
- 15:34:02 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=725
- 15:34:34 [wendy]
- purpose of author benefits section? in css there are tutorials.
- 15:34:36 [wendy]
- reference those
- 15:34:44 [wendy]
- specifically css 2.1
- 15:38:10 [wendy]
- action: tim proposal and research for bug 725
- 15:38:45 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=726
- 15:40:02 [wendy]
- functional grouping or how people will use the doc?
- 15:40:08 [wendy]
- will they use diff sections together.
- 15:40:23 [wendy]
- box model then font text and selectors, logical groupings.
- 15:40:31 [wendy]
- desire goal of ordering
- 15:42:52 [wendy]
- ack lisa
- 15:43:32 [wendy]
- 3 possibilities: 1. via wcag 2.0 guidelines 2. via specification 3. via how people are using/how people are learning (tutorial: easiest to more advanced)
- 15:44:13 [wendy]
- rdf techs draft doesn't order by guidelines.
- 15:44:17 [wendy]
- techniques gateway does
- 15:44:20 [ben]
- q+
- 15:44:30 [wendy]
- zakim, mute lisa
- 15:44:30 [Zakim]
- Lisa_Seeman should now be muted
- 15:44:36 [wendy]
- ack ben
- 15:44:57 [wendy]
- organize similar to html techniques, they are a reference set. i.e., "tables" or "lists" in one place.
- 15:45:42 [wendy]
- groups and ordering of those groups
- 15:45:47 [wendy]
- group by element/property, order by ?
- 15:46:06 [wendy]
- ack Dave
- 15:46:21 [wendy]
- flexible presentation?
- 15:48:53 [wendy]
- action: tim propose reordering of css techs based on css spec. (issue 726)
- 15:49:17 [wendy]
- latest css techs: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-CSS-TECHS-20031219.html
- 15:49:31 [wendy]
- ack chaals
- 15:49:31 [Zakim]
- chaalsNCE, you wanted to suggest a different ordering for rdf
- 15:50:09 [wendy]
- rdf: guideline or something more familiar
- 15:51:44 [wendy]
- rdf primer trying to teach rdf, techniques is to give them what need to solve problem.
- 15:51:47 [wendy]
- ack lisa
- 15:53:54 [wendy]
- do people need to understand accessibility before getting to this doc?
- 15:53:58 [wendy]
- (this doc == rdf techniques)
- 15:54:29 [wendy]
- zakim, mute lisa
- 15:54:29 [Zakim]
- Lisa_Seeman should now be muted
- 15:55:28 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=727
- 15:55:53 [wendy]
- many 3rd party sites have information.
- 15:56:12 [wendy]
- css wg has an implementation report template, but not much info from that yet.
- 15:56:32 [wendy]
- q+ to ask "3rd party sites offer info about assistive technologies?"
- 15:57:12 [wendy]
- template for reporting support
- 15:57:18 [wendy]
- template for selectors
- 15:57:25 [wendy]
- (related to test sutie?)
- 15:57:35 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 15:57:35 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to ask "3rd party sites offer info about assistive technologies?"
- 15:58:21 [wendy]
- template is related to the test suite
- 15:59:31 [wendy]
- use template to report assistive technology results?
- 16:00:22 [wendy]
- action: tim explore with css wg about features of template wrt assistive technologies
- 16:00:33 [wendy]
- ack chaals
- 16:00:33 [Zakim]
- chaalsNCE, you wanted to ask is this particular to CSS? Should we collect up same for HTML? and then just note what elements/properties/etc are required in each technique?
- 16:03:37 [wendy]
- variety of methods for us to gather info.
- 16:04:47 [wendy]
- if someone wants to submit a technique, we have two things: 1. xml source files are available 2. a form that will generate the xml
- 16:05:22 [wendy]
- ack dave
- 16:09:11 [wendy]
- action: jenae and wendy think more about the user agent support sections - link to others? test own? work with other WGs?
- 16:09:32 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=728
- 16:10:05 [wendy]
- allowable values and where they are specified is stated clearly in 2.1 spec (which properties can take which values).
- 16:10:12 [wendy]
- is something else meant here?
- 16:13:51 [wendy]
- action: tim go through css spec and create exhaustive list of which properties can be used with absolute vs relative units.
- 16:14:04 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=729
- 16:14:36 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-CSS-TECHS-20031219.html#scripting
- 16:16:07 [wendy]
- svg animation? smil, ecmascript.
- 16:16:25 [wendy]
- rare to use css in svg animation. can do it, but rare.
- 16:16:47 [wendy]
- smil?
- 16:17:23 [wendy]
- smil layers usually w/in smil xml. can do as css, but not usually in practice.
- 16:18:12 [wendy]
- mathml - some scripting.
- 16:21:01 [wendy]
- move this issue to client-side scripting
- 16:21:28 [wendy]
- action: wendy take action to develop/find a technique for css, scripting, html
- 16:21:54 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=730
- 16:22:38 [wendy]
- action: wendy udpate css xml for references
- 16:22:47 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=731
- 16:23:31 [wendy]
- do css techniques organized to apply to both wcag 1.0 and wcag 2.0?
- 16:26:29 [wendy]
- related to publishing revised wcag 1.0. also helpful to publish revised techniques (working group note).
- 16:26:42 [wendy]
- revising techniques, even more important in some cases (providing more detail and clarifications)
- 16:27:48 [wendy]
- two documents or one?
- 16:28:01 [wendy]
- one document: might be contradictory techniques between 1.0 and 2.0. need to make sure don't contradict.
- 16:28:20 [wendy]
- e.g., in 1.0 "all tables must have tables" in 2.0 "only data tables, layout null"
- 16:29:24 [wendy]
- look at techniques 1.0, are we steering people in diff direction from 2.0
- 16:29:44 [wendy]
- action item - look at 1.0 techs and 2.0 techs and where do they conflict?
- 16:30:15 [wendy]
- action: dave look at 1.0 techs and 2.0 techs and where do they conflict?
- 16:30:28 [wendy]
- if anything can do with 1.0 techs to bring them closer to 2.0, w/out contradicting 1.0.
- 16:30:54 [wendy]
- ack lisa
- 16:31:29 [ChrisR]
- ChrisR has left #wai-wcag
- 16:31:35 [wendy]
- put a checkpoint reference document, how would these techniques map to 1.0. not saying official techniques, but here are how they map.
- 16:31:51 [wendy]
- ack chaals
- 16:31:51 [Zakim]
- chaalsNCE, you wanted to agree with Lisa that collecting RDF information about techniques mqppings between the two versions would be a good idea
- 16:32:33 [wendy]
- should be simple to determine if a technique applies to multiple checkpoints.
- 16:32:43 [wendy]
- and then say 1.0 or 2.0 or something else.
- 16:33:53 [Zakim]
- -Charles
- 16:34:16 [wendy]
- action: wendy check with micahel about publishing mapping of success criteria to html techs
- 16:35:04 [Zakim]
- -Chris_Ridpath
- 16:35:14 [wendy]
- second reference: perhaps not render, but field that allow to map a technique to 1.0, once have techniques fleshed out, have better idea of conflicts.
- 16:35:49 [wendy]
- w/in xml express if a technique applies to 1.0 or 2.0 or both
- 16:36:40 [Zakim]
- -Lisa_Seeman
- 16:36:42 [Zakim]
- -Tim_Boland
- 16:36:50 [Zakim]
- -Don_Evans
- 16:36:56 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft]
- 16:37:13 [Zakim]
- -Ben
- 16:37:44 [Zakim]
- -Dave_MacDonald
- 16:37:48 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 16:37:49 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
- 16:37:50 [Zakim]
- Attendees were [Microsoft], Chris_Ridpath, Wendy, Don_Evans, Ben, Tim_Boland, Lisa_Seeman, Charles, Dave_MacDonald
- 16:37:55 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 16:37:55 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 16:43:53 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- I see 10 open action items:
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: chris compare latest html techniques draft with older write-ups to make sure everything included. [1]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T15-08-55
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: tim proposal and research for bug 725 [2]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T15-38-10
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: tim propose reordering of css techs based on css spec. (issue 726) [3]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T15-48-53
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: tim explore with css wg about features of template wrt assistive technologies [4]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T16-00-22
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: jenae and wendy think more about the user agent support sections - link to others? test own? work with other WGs? [5]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T16-09-11
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: tim go through css spec and create exhaustive list of which properties can be used with absolute vs relative units. [6]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T16-13-51
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy take action to develop/find a technique for css, scripting, html [7]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T16-21-28
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy udpate css xml for references [8]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T16-22-38
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: dave look at 1.0 techs and 2.0 techs and where do they conflict? [9]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T16-30-15
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy check with micahel about publishing mapping of success criteria to html techs [10]
- 16:43:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/02/04-wai-wcag-irc#T16-34-16