IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-06-03

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:41:46 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
19:41:53 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log public
19:41:58 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log world
19:53:35 [Yvette_Hoitink]
Hi Bengt, hi Wendy
19:53:47 [wendy]
hello yvette, hello bengt
19:53:53 [bengt]
hi everyone
19:55:16 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
19:55:19 [bengt]
zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
19:55:19 [Zakim]
ok, bengt; I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
19:56:31 [Yvette_Hoitink]
Cool to see my proposal made it to the agenda ;-)
19:56:42 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has now started
19:56:49 [Zakim]
19:56:55 [MichaelC]
MichaelC has joined #wai-wcag
19:57:16 [MichaelC]
zakim, I am Michael_Cooper
19:57:16 [Zakim]
ok, MichaelC, I now associate you with Michael_Cooper
19:57:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]
Hi Michael
19:57:20 [MichaelC]
Hi yvette
19:58:34 [sh1m]
sh1m has joined #wai-wcag
19:58:47 [Yvette_Hoitink]
Hi Tom
19:58:53 [sh1m]
19:58:55 [wendy]
zakim, this will be wcag
19:58:55 [Zakim]
ok, wendy, I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM already started
19:59:00 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
19:59:00 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michael_Cooper
19:59:07 [wendy]
michael is prompt. :)
19:59:08 [Zakim]
+ +1.441.915.aaaa
19:59:12 [Zakim]
19:59:19 [Zakim]
+ +1.512.476.aabb
19:59:24 [MichaelC]
my work clock is a few minutes fast I think
19:59:42 [Zakim]
19:59:50 [sh1m]
Zakim, ??P2 might be Tom
19:59:50 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??P2 might be Tom', sh1m
19:59:53 [wendy]
yes, my clock says 3:59 :)
19:59:59 [wendy]
zakim, 512 is John
19:59:59 [Zakim]
sorry, wendy, I do not recognize a party named '512'
20:00:05 [wendy]
zakim ??512 is John
20:00:09 [wendy]
zakim, ??512 is John
20:00:09 [Zakim]
sorry, wendy, I do not recognize a party named '??512'
20:00:12 [Zakim]
20:00:14 [bengt]
zakim, ??P2 is Bengt_Farrre
20:00:14 [Zakim]
+Bengt_Farrre; got it
20:00:15 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
20:00:15 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, +1.441.915.aaaa, Bengt_Farrre, +1.512.476.aabb, Wendy, Andi_Snow_Weaver
20:00:23 [wendy]
zakim, +1.512.476.aabb is John_Slatin
20:00:23 [Zakim]
+John_Slatin; got it
20:00:32 [Zakim]
20:00:42 [Yvette_Hoitink]
zakim, ??P6 is Yvette_Hoitink
20:00:42 [Zakim]
+Yvette_Hoitink; got it
20:00:43 [sh1m]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
20:00:43 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, +1.441.915.aaaa, Bengt_Farrre, John_Slatin, Wendy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Yvette_Hoitink
20:00:53 [bengt]
zakim, I am Bengt_Farre
20:00:53 [Zakim]
sorry, bengt, I do not see a party named 'Bengt_Farre'
20:00:54 [Zakim]
20:01:02 [wendy]
zakim, ??P5 is David_MacDonald
20:01:02 [Zakim]
+David_MacDonald; got it
20:01:02 [bengt]
zakim, I am Bengt_Farrre
20:01:03 [Zakim]
ok, bengt, I now associate you with Bengt_Farrre
20:01:10 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
20:01:10 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, +1.441.915.aaaa, Bengt_Farrre, John_Slatin, Wendy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Yvette_Hoitink, David_MacDonald
20:01:15 [Zakim]
+ +1.703.273.aacc
20:01:19 [bengt]
zakim, mute me
20:01:19 [Zakim]
Bengt_Farrre should now be muted
20:01:20 [Zakim]
20:01:26 [wendy]
zakim, +1.703.273.aacc is Paul_Bohman
20:01:26 [Zakim]
+Paul_Bohman; got it
20:01:27 [bcaldwell]
bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
20:01:39 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
20:01:39 [sh1m]
I might be 441
20:01:48 [sh1m]
Some one mute that see if I can talk
20:02:13 [wendy]
zakim, +1.441.915.aaaa may be Tom_Croucher
20:02:13 [Zakim]
+Tom_Croucher?; got it
20:02:15 [Zakim]
20:02:23 [wendy]
zakim, ??P9 is Gregg_and_Ben
20:02:23 [Zakim]
+Gregg_and_Ben; got it
20:02:28 [Zakim]
20:02:34 [sh1m]
Zakim, I am Tom
20:02:34 [Zakim]
ok, sh1m, I now associate you with Tom_Croucher?
20:02:39 [sh1m]
Zakim, yes
20:02:39 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'yes', sh1m
20:02:46 [sh1m]
Zakim, I am Tom_Croucher
20:02:46 [Zakim]
ok, sh1m, I now associate you with Tom_Croucher?
20:02:46 [wendy]
zakim, ??P10 is Takayuki_Watanabe
20:02:47 [Zakim]
+Takayuki_Watanabe; got it
20:03:21 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
20:03:21 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, Tom_Croucher? (muted), Bengt_Farrre (muted), John_Slatin, Wendy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Yvette_Hoitink, David_MacDonald, Paul_Bohman,
20:03:24 [Zakim]
... Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Gregg_and_Ben, Takayuki_Watanabe (muted)
20:03:50 [Zakim]
20:04:03 [Zakim]
20:04:23 [Becky]
Becky has joined #wai-wcag
20:04:27 [Zakim]
20:04:39 [GVAN]
GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
20:04:47 [Andi]
Andi has joined #wai-wcag
20:04:57 [Zakim]
20:05:04 [Zakim]
20:05:16 [wendy]
zakim, [Microsoft] is Mike_Barta
20:05:16 [Zakim]
+Mike_Barta; got it
20:05:47 [Zakim]
20:06:26 [wendy]
regrets: sailesh, roberto {costaldo, ellero, scano}, doyle
20:06:28 [Zakim]
20:06:40 [wendy]
scribe: andi
20:06:51 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phoen?
20:06:51 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, wendy.
20:06:55 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
20:06:55 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, Tom_Croucher? (muted), Bengt_Farrre (muted), John_Slatin, Wendy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, David_MacDonald, Paul_Bohman, Loretta_Guarino_Reid,
20:06:58 [Zakim]
... Gregg_and_Ben, Takayuki_Watanabe (muted), Avi_Arditti, Katie_Haritos-Shea, JasonWhite, Becky_Gibson, Mike_Barta, Yvette_Hoitink
20:07:06 [Zakim]
20:07:13 [sh1m]
Zakim, Tom_Croucher? is Tom_Croucher
20:07:13 [Zakim]
+Tom_Croucher; got it
20:08:25 [wendy]
new internal WD:
20:08:26 [Andi]
New internal draft published today
20:08:38 [Andi]
Suggestion to delete SC in 3.1
20:09:37 [Andi]
"meaning of contracted words can be programmatically determined" should be deleted because it is covered by the next SC
20:09:42 [sh1m]
Original proposal:
20:10:36 [Andi]
no discussion, no opposition to removing this SC
20:10:38 [andyjudson]
andyjudson has joined #wai-wcag
20:11:48 [Andi]
next agenda item - walk through the guidelines
20:15:12 [Andi]
may be able to remove some exceptions because they can be covered by "scoping"; i.e. Web site owners can exclude certain portions of Web site from conformance claim
20:15:45 [Andi]
20:16:07 [Andi]
Mike: has a proposal for re-wording that removes need for exception
20:16:14 [Zakim]
20:16:28 [Andi]
1.1 SC 1 - marked for further discussion
20:16:29 [wendy]
agenda+ discuss 1.1 per Mike's comment
20:16:35 [wendy]
zakim, ??P16 is Kerstin
20:16:35 [Zakim]
+Kerstin; got it
20:18:17 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
20:18:18 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, Tom_Croucher (muted), Bengt_Farrre (muted), John_Slatin, Wendy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, David_MacDonald, Paul_Bohman, Loretta_Guarino_Reid,
20:18:20 [Zakim]
... Gregg_and_Ben, Takayuki_Watanabe (muted), Avi_Arditti, Katie_Haritos-Shea, JasonWhite, Becky_Gibson, Mike_Barta (muted), Yvette_Hoitink, Matt, Kerstin
20:18:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]
20:18:27 [wendy]
mike muted himself. :)
20:19:34 [wendy]
ack mike
20:19:45 [wendy]
ack yvette
20:19:54 [Andi]
Yvette: candidate for scoping
20:20:25 [Andi]
Yvette: 1.2 SC 3 is candidate for scoping
20:20:46 [Andi]
1.2 SC 4 is candidate for removal - can be covered by scoping
20:20:58 [Zakim]
20:21:36 [bcaldwell]
ack Gregg
20:21:40 [wendy]
ack david
20:21:46 [Andi]
1.2 SC 5 candidate for removal - scoping
20:22:16 [Andi]
1.2 SC 6 candidate for removal - scoping
20:22:58 [Andi]
1.2 Level 2 SC 1 candidate for removal
20:24:59 [andyjudson]
andyjudson has joined #wai-wcag
20:26:39 [Zakim]
20:27:07 [Zakim]
20:27:20 [Andi]
2.1 Level 3 SC 1 & 3 - only difference is the scope
20:27:30 [wendy]
zakim, ??P12 is Kerstin
20:27:30 [Zakim]
+Kerstin; got it
20:28:03 [Zakim]
20:28:16 [Andi]
2.2 SC 1.1 is candidate
20:28:58 [wendy]
andi - i don't think we're identifying candidates for removal, i think we are identifying candidates for further discussion during this call.
20:29:15 [Andi]
20:30:14 [Andi]
correction to minutes - these items are not candidates for removal but candidates for further discussion wrt scoping
20:32:01 [Andi]
2.4 SC 2.2
20:33:11 [Andi]
2.4 SC 2.1 needs to be revisited - John thinks we decided last week that this is part of 1.3 and we removed it.
20:33:44 [Zakim]
20:35:44 [Andi]
clarification of definition of "scope" - tells you which parts of the content are covered
20:36:18 [Andi]
2.5 SC 2.2
20:36:39 [Andi]
2.5 SC 2.3
20:36:54 [Andi]
2.5 SC 3.1
20:38:33 [Andi]
goal is to simplify or eliminate because we have scoping
20:39:30 [sh1m]
So that scoping can be determined by legislators etc, rather than being a trait of the guidelines
20:39:31 [wendy]
zakim, mute katie
20:39:31 [Zakim]
Katie_Haritos-Shea should now be muted
20:39:46 [wendy]
zakim, who's making noise?
20:39:59 [Zakim]
wendy, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Michael_Cooper (14%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (4%), Gregg_and_Ben (85%)
20:41:47 [Andi]
3.1 SC 3.1 - some items in strategies may need to be discussed
20:44:09 [Andi]
4.1 SC 1.1
20:44:31 [Andi]
4.1 SC 3.1
20:45:28 [Andi]
4.1 SC 1.1 needs plain language re-write
20:47:39 [Andi]
4.2 SC 3.2 needs plain language re-write
20:47:46 [Yvette_Hoitink]
20:48:49 [Andi]
1.1 SC 1.1
20:49:31 [Andi]
Yvette: likes the fact that sometimes we do have some scoping discussion in the success criteria - makes it really clear
20:49:53 [Andi]
Yvette: if delete everything that can be handled by scoping, have a much less powerful document
20:50:52 [Andi]
Yvette: scoping is part of criteria. Can't do everything at Level 1 but there should be some basic accessibility
20:51:12 [Andi]
Yvette: scoping is good tool to distinguish between different levels of accessibility - shouldn't be too quick to cut it out
20:51:45 [Yvette_Hoitink]
ack Yvette
20:53:29 [Andi]
Mike: split content into different categories with specific requirements for alt text for that type of non-text content
20:54:25 [MichaelC]
q+ to say I like Mike's approach, although the guidelines are probably agnostic to the existence of "null" alt text - that's an HTML technique and I'm not sure what the guideline requirement would be for that concept
20:54:47 [Andi]
Categories: 1. non-text content having no bearing on meaning of content (there only for presentation)
20:55:14 [Andi]
2. non-text content that has iconic or functional use - alt text must detail the function of the the element
20:55:52 [Andi]
3. non-text resources that encode specific information in non-text form (chart, wav files, etc.)
20:56:57 [Andi]
4. non-text resources which encode no specific information (for example sensory experience)
20:58:12 [Andi]
4. alt text must explain what the resource is and what relevance it has to the content
20:58:12 [Yvette_Hoitink]
20:59:34 [Andi]
Mike to send proposed wording to list
20:59:40 [MichaelC]
20:59:50 [Andi]
People with concerns need to respond within two days
21:00:14 [Andi]
Yvette: how does this solve the scoping question?
21:00:16 [sh1m]
21:00:57 [Andi]
Mike will re-write based on comments posted to the list
21:01:10 [Zakim]
21:01:20 [Zakim]
21:01:29 [bcaldwell]
ack Tom
21:01:39 [bcaldwell]
ack Mike
21:01:42 [bcaldwell]
ack Kerstin
21:02:04 [bcaldwell]
ack Yvette
21:02:29 [Andi]
"my site conforms except for all the pictures" is not a valid scoping statement
21:02:47 [Andi]
can only exclude sections of the site, not "elements" of pages
21:06:16 [Zakim]
21:06:53 [Andi]
David: how will we make sure people don't scope out things horizontally?
21:07:01 [Andi]
Gregg: okay except at Level 1
21:07:13 [bcaldwell]
21:07:46 [wendy]
ack john
21:08:31 [Andi]
John: Doesn't see that Mike's re-statement or current wording are "scoping" issues because have to do with purpose of content not where it appears on site
21:08:45 [Yvette_Hoitink]
q+ to say "spelling test"
21:08:55 [Andi]
John: agrees that there is a clarity issue but not sure it applies to scoping
21:09:00 [wendy]
ack yvette
21:09:00 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink, you wanted to say "spelling test"
21:09:13 [Andi]
Yvette: was an exception in 1.1 for "spelling test" which makes it a scoping issue.
21:09:40 [Yvette_Hoitink]
q+ to say "example spelling test in scoping"
21:09:44 [wendy]
q+ gregg
21:09:48 [wendy]
ack bcaldwell
21:10:21 [wendy]
q+ to say "content aggregators - related to Ben's question"
21:10:38 [sh1m]
21:10:42 [Andi]
Ben: understood you could scope out aspects of site for which you have no control; for example, framework is conforming except for submissions by users of the site
21:10:59 [wendy]
ack yvette
21:10:59 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink, you wanted to say "example spelling test in scoping"
21:11:20 [Andi]
Yvette: examples can clarify how you can use scoping
21:11:56 [wendy]
spelling test could either be vertical or horizontal exception/scoping
21:12:12 [wendy]
ack gregg
21:12:42 [wendy]
ack wendy
21:12:42 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say "content aggregators - related to Ben's question"
21:12:54 [Andi]
Gregg: Notes or examples could explain
21:13:20 [Andi]
Wendy: need to understand how this applies to "content aggregators"
21:14:07 [Andi]
Wendy: John raised a good example about a learning application. if framework is accessible but actual lessons are not, it's not useful
21:14:21 [sh1m]
ack tom
21:15:07 [wendy]
q+ to ask, "how does scoping apply to web services? or personalized pages that you don't know what the framework is?"
21:15:12 [Andi]
Tom: still not quite scoping because not saying everything on a spelling test should be exempt. Only those elements that are essential to spelling test function are excluded
21:16:56 [wendy]
ack mike
21:17:04 [Andi]
Tom: Scoping would exempt whole page but with spelling test only exempting certain elements on the page
21:17:40 [Andi]
Mike: 2 aggregation issues in Bugzilla.
21:18:06 [Andi]
Mike: Would like to treat anything aggregated into a page as part of page - issue is testing
21:18:06 [sh1m]
21:18:39 [wendy]
need to make sure when exempt spelling test we don't accidentally exempt captcha
21:20:15 [Andi]
Gregg: restates Ben's comment - not just "spelling". could be anywhere in the guidelines where something is presented in a bad form for the purpose of correcting it.
21:20:27 [wendy]
ack wendy
21:20:27 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to ask, "how does scoping apply to web services? or personalized pages that you don't know what the framework is?"
21:21:00 [Andi]
Wendy: scoping by content type and "profiles"
21:21:10 [Andi]
don't want to accidentally exempt captcha
21:21:23 [Andi]
Wendy: how does this apply to web services?
21:22:03 [Andi]
Gregg: where user gets to pick what goes on their home page for example
21:22:30 [Andi]
Wendy: been discussing adding metadata to components. would help aggregators (both services and people)
21:22:45 [Andi]
Wendy: don't know if we can "require" metadata but it would make things a lot easier
21:22:55 [Yvette_Hoitink]
q+ to say "effective"
21:23:00 [Andi]
Wendy: metadata requirement would fall under guideline 4
21:23:15 [sh1m]
ack tom
21:24:08 [Andi]
Tom: agrees with Mike about aggregation. aggregated content should be responsibility of aggregator but source must also be responsible
21:25:06 [Andi]
Tom: still doesn't think "spelling test" example is scoping but thinks that demonstrations of bad things that need to be corrected can be scoping
21:25:44 [Andi]
John: ways of using metadata to describe examples of inaccessible content and could also use actual human readable text
21:26:08 [Andi]
John: there are specifications for accessible learning technologies which we ought to look at
21:26:13 [Andi]
Action John: look at these specs
21:26:29 [Andi]
Yvette: if we require metadata, SC will be less effective
21:26:42 [wendy]
action: john look at IMS specs for tests, metadata, etc.
21:26:58 [Andi]
Yvette: SC depend on how much they help accessibility and how many people will do it
21:27:20 [bcaldwell]
ack John
21:27:22 [bcaldwell]
ack Yvette
21:27:22 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink, you wanted to say "effective"
21:27:42 [wendy]
ack matt
21:27:54 [wendy]
ack john
21:28:16 [MattSEA]
MattSEA has joined #wai-wcag
21:29:25 [Andi]
Gregg summarizes: spelling test and aggregator are open issues under scoping
21:30:25 [wendy]
open issues: spelling test and aggregator issues
21:30:35 [wendy]
action: mike send proposal/summary wrt 1.1
21:31:40 [wendy]
21:32:12 [wendy]
next week: normative checklists
21:32:17 [wendy]
week after: 1.2
21:32:25 [wendy]
next week: defn of structure? more scoping?
21:33:07 [MattSEA]
MattSEA has left #wai-wcag
21:33:45 [Andi]
face to face in Palo Alto hosted by Oracle July 12 - 15
21:34:56 [Zakim]
21:42:16 [Zakim]
21:42:17 [Zakim]
21:42:18 [Zakim]
21:42:19 [Zakim]
21:42:20 [Zakim]
21:42:21 [Zakim]
21:42:22 [Zakim]
21:42:27 [Zakim]
21:42:28 [nabe]
good bye
21:42:29 [Zakim]
21:42:35 [bengt]
21:42:36 [Zakim]
21:42:38 [bengt]
bengt has left #wai-wcag
21:42:58 [Zakim]
21:43:08 [Zakim]
21:43:09 [Zakim]
21:43:10 [Zakim]
21:43:11 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
21:43:12 [Zakim]
Attendees were Michael_Cooper, Wendy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Bengt_Farrre, John_Slatin, Yvette_Hoitink, David_MacDonald, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Paul_Bohman, Gregg_and_Ben,
21:43:14 [Zakim]
... Takayuki_Watanabe, Avi_Arditti, Katie_Haritos-Shea, JasonWhite, Becky_Gibson, Mike_Barta, Matt, Tom_Croucher, Kerstin
21:43:23 [wendy]
zakim, bye
21:43:23 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag
21:43:26 [wendy]
RRSAgent, bye
21:43:26 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items:
21:43:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john look at IMS specs for tests, metadata, etc. [1]
21:43:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
21:43:26 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: mike send proposal/summary wrt 1.1 [2]
21:43:26 [RRSAgent]
recorded in