IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-09-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:01:45 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:01:54 [Zakim]
14:01:56 [DonFEvans]
DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag
14:01:58 [Zakim]
14:02:18 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
14:02:18 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P3, John_Slatin, Matt, Don_Evans, Becky_Gibson, [Microsoft], James_Craig, ??P13, Wendy
14:02:22 [Zakim]
14:02:40 [wendy]
zakim, ??P3 may be Tim_Boland
14:02:40 [Zakim]
+Tim_Boland?; got it
14:02:43 [Zakim]
14:02:44 [Zakim]
14:02:48 [Ben]
zakim, ??P5 is Ben
14:02:48 [Zakim]
+Ben; got it
14:02:52 [Michael]
Michael has joined #wai-wcag
14:03:20 [Michael]
zakim, who's on the phone?
14:03:20 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Tim_Boland?, John_Slatin, Matt, Don_Evans, Becky_Gibson, [Microsoft], James_Craig, ??P13, Wendy, Gez_Lemon, Michael_Cooper, Ben
14:03:25 [wendy]
zakim, ??P13 may be Ken_Kipnes
14:03:25 [Zakim]
+Ken_Kipnes?; got it
14:03:36 [Becky]
I am becky_gibson
14:03:40 [wendy]
zakim, [Microsoft] is Jenae_Andershonis
14:03:40 [Zakim]
+Jenae_Andershonis; got it
14:03:49 [Becky]
zakim, I am Becky_Gibson
14:03:49 [Zakim]
ok, Becky, I now associate you with Becky_Gibson
14:05:29 [wendy]
14:05:34 [wendy]
Topic: Renaming Gateway
14:07:50 [wendy]
js gives history of the name of naming gateway. Shawn recommends calling it General.
14:08:34 [wendy]
js calling it "gateway" suggests a certain type of function.
14:09:27 [wendy]
js does anyone object to retitling the document or want to discuss it? endorse bringing it to the call tomorrow?
14:09:34 [wendy]
tb what is the defn of a general technique?
14:09:47 [wendy]
tb or is the content of the document general?
14:10:07 [james]
q+ to suggest, "introduction to techniques"
14:10:17 [wendy]
js it's about framing issues and design challenges
14:10:52 [wendy]
js there needs to be something in the middle between the abstract guidelines and the very specific technology-specific techniques
14:11:08 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log world
14:12:07 [DonFEvans]
DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag
14:12:21 [wendy]
ack james
14:12:21 [Zakim]
james, you wanted to suggest, "introduction to techniques"
14:12:28 [wendy]
jc if it's just a matter of semantics.
14:12:54 [wendy]
bg the comments from IBM didn't understand why it was named "gateway"
14:14:03 [wendy]
bc would people skip "introduction"? does that imply it doesn't have any content?
14:14:13 [Zakim]
14:14:24 [wendy]
js for some people, if it isn't tech-specific they may skip it anyway.
14:15:11 [wendy]
slh would it still contain general techniques and pointers to tech-specifics?
14:15:24 [wendy]
js confusion about what "general technique" means
14:15:48 [wendy]
js think it contains general issues about making certain types of content accessible and provides links to appropriate tech-specific techniques
14:16:04 [wendy]
js frames the issue, explains it, suggestions for what happens in given techs, then points to specific technologies
14:16:18 [shawn]
shawn has joined #wai-wcag
14:16:21 [wendy]
bc also needs to contain techniques that are very granular, but that apply to more than one technology
14:16:50 [wendy]
js where that makes sense, yet
14:16:54 [wendy]
14:17:26 [wendy]
js e.g. 1.1 discussion about what makes appropriate text alternatives. 1.3 discusses making structure perceivable.
14:17:34 [wendy]
slh those sound like general techniques
14:17:39 [wendy]
ack gez
14:17:48 [wendy]
gl "overview of techniques"
14:17:54 [shawn]
14:17:59 [wendy]
ack shawn
14:18:36 [wendy]
slh don't think of intro or overview of having any content but give background. and that what js outlined is more than that.
14:18:44 [wendy]
slh any of those will be better than "gateway"
14:19:01 [wendy]
slh if you say "general techniques" it sounds like it has content of its own.
14:19:21 [wendy]
jc combine into "general techniques and overview"
14:19:36 [wendy]
js it doesn't provide an overview of wcag and not really of techniques either.
14:20:39 [wendy]
js it could contain an overview of techniques
14:20:45 [wendy]
slh what are concerns with general techniques?
14:22:07 [wendy]
slh think that good to be brief in document and link to outside document that can go into more depth (re: overview)
14:22:11 [wendy]
js also for techniques?
14:22:36 [wendy]
js the overview for 2.0 will also include techniques? best thing is for general techs to reference that?
14:22:58 [wendy]
slh yes. the overview to wcag 2.0 should have all of it.
14:24:12 [wendy]
anyone object to proposing a rename to "General Techniques for WCAG 2.0"?
14:24:57 [Zakim]
14:24:58 [wendy]
resolved: will raise it in tomorrow's telecon
14:26:00 [wendy]
shawn - if you want to drop off, that's cool.
14:26:05 [wendy]
Topic: scripting techniques
14:26:17 [Zakim]
14:26:55 [wendy]
m3m first internal draft is strawman to start discussion.
14:27:12 [wendy]
m3m would like to see it become a repository for good grab and go scripts.
14:27:22 [shawn]
shawn has left #wai-wcag
14:27:27 [wendy]
m3m want to provide good code for dhtml menus - there are good existing candidates.
14:27:54 [wendy]
m3m currently 9 techniques and 5 in the html techniques that should move over
14:28:03 [wendy]
m3m there are a few bugs in bugzilla to address
14:28:16 [wendy]
m3m will need to figure out boundary between html techs and scripting techs
14:28:42 [Zakim]
14:28:49 [wendy]
bg confused about it having to work with javascript disabled.
14:29:31 [wendy]
m3m this goes back to wcag 1.0, "transforming gracefully"
14:29:53 [wendy]
m3m when i have talked with people who are using javascript and say "i can't possibly do this in html" that isn't correct.
14:30:29 [Zakim]
14:30:33 [Michael]
q+ to discuss two broad types of script access issues
14:31:15 [wendy]
m3m in general, apps that require javascript - would like to see be more rare.
14:31:22 [wendy]
bg what about where javascript increases accessibility?
14:32:04 [wendy]
m3m not against using it, but would like to see examples. even dhtml menus can degrade. with a little extra thought, many of the things done with javascript can be done w/out javascript.
14:32:27 [wendy]
m3m document.write vs using divs and display that people don't know about.
14:33:03 [wendy]
q+ to say "part of tomorrow's agenda"
14:33:16 [wendy]
ack michael
14:33:16 [Zakim]
Michael, you wanted to discuss two broad types of script access issues
14:33:21 [Zakim]
14:33:46 [wendy]
mc 2 types of script accessibility issues 1. javascript should degrade 2. when you use javscript is the use of it accessible
14:34:00 [james]
q+ to ask for Matt for specific examples of "javascript used to overcome technical limitation" unavailable without javascript
14:34:21 [wendy]
mc the first one is on tomorrow's agenda. both uses we want to talk about in scripting in techniques.
14:34:30 [wendy]
ack wendy
14:34:30 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say "part of tomorrow's agenda"
14:35:31 [wendy]
ack james
14:35:31 [Zakim]
james, you wanted to ask for Matt for specific examples of "javascript used to overcome technical limitation" unavailable without javascript
14:35:56 [Michael]
q+ to consider dynamic menus
14:36:05 [wendy]
jc i can think of some theoretical examples but nothing have seen on a web site
14:36:40 [Becky]
14:37:01 [wendy]
m3m need to figure out what can't be done.
14:37:26 [wendy]
m3m e.g., the espn scoreboard (can't be done w/out a reload).
14:37:55 [wendy]
jc they could reload the content, put a button on the page for folks who want to update results.
14:38:27 [wendy]
m3m becomes an issue of server load.
14:39:05 [wendy]
m3m decreasing server load is one of primary reasons for using javscript.
14:39:19 [wendy]
ack michael
14:39:19 [Zakim]
Michael, you wanted to consider dynamic menus
14:40:16 [wendy]
mc thinking about dynamic menus: 1. degredation - if not using dhtml how navigate the site? 2. if script running - can you access it? can you use the keyboard to navigate it? if activate, will screen reader read the links that appear on the page?
14:40:33 [wendy]
mc we need to provide both kinds of issues.
14:41:02 [wendy]
mc even if we talk about degraded experience, most people will experience the non-degraded.
14:41:04 [wendy]
ack becky
14:41:14 [wendy]
bg we use content-editable feature.
14:41:29 [wendy]
bg can't think of a way to use that without javascript: a full-blown editor with toolbar,etc.
14:41:37 [wendy]
bg we've made that accessible
14:42:00 [Michael]
zakim, mute Michael_Cooper
14:42:00 [Zakim]
Michael_Cooper should now be muted
14:42:02 [wendy]
bg i could use text area instead of rich-text editor, but am i not meeting the "provide full functionality" guideline?
14:42:39 [wendy]
q+ wendy to say "another issue is that content editable is valid? what about xforms?"
14:42:58 [wendy]
m3m content-editable is not valid
14:43:03 [james]
q+ to mention content editable validation
14:43:47 [wendy]
bg outlook that ships with every version of windows that looks like a browser but is actually a client
14:44:32 [Michael]
ack wendy
14:44:32 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say "another issue is that content editable is valid? what about xforms?"
14:45:44 [wendy]
wac yes, content-editable isn't valid. wish we could effect adoption of xforms.
14:45:59 [wendy]
m3m if using content-editable should pay attention to ATAG not WCAG.
14:47:18 [wendy]
jc have worked on validation of content-editable
14:47:20 [wendy]
ack james
14:47:20 [Zakim]
james, you wanted to mention content editable validation
14:47:31 [wendy]
jc mentioned at sxsw. photomat (wordpress) and ??
14:47:50 [james]
Brian Alvey Weblogs, Inc.
14:48:04 [james]
did the A List Apart CMS
14:48:14 [wendy]
LyX - word-processor front-end for LaTeX -
14:48:38 [wendy]
wysiwyg, xforms
14:49:22 [wendy]
14:49:46 [wendy]
funny that i think this are actually xWindows libraries not xml/xforms from w3c
14:51:30 [wendy]
XML Events:
14:53:50 [wendy]
from Xforms FAQ: "Build 'shopping basket' and 'wizard' style forms without needing to resort to scripting."
14:53:58 [wendy]
but does not mention WYSIWYG editing
14:54:04 [wendy]
14:56:14 [wendy]
meanwhile...the discussion continues about specific javascript techniques (jc gives feedback, m3m says addressed already or in the works). return to issue about javascript and degredation.
14:56:56 [wendy]
mc we have to question 1.1 which says "text alternative for non-text content" and perhaps broaden idea of what an alternative is.
14:58:37 [wendy]
wac multmedia is also non-text content and 1.1 may need to become "alternatives for non-text content are provided" and then for different types of content the alternatives will vary
14:58:56 [wendy]
e.g., for multimedia - captions, audio descriptions. for scripts - ??
14:59:39 [wendy]
bg i submitted a technique but it doesn't meet the guidelines that scripts must degrade
14:59:51 [wendy]
jc i have dhtml menus that you are welcome to
15:00:31 [Ben]
archives for techniques submissions:
15:02:06 [wendy]
bc at WWW2004 they were building excel-like applications using xForms.
15:02:38 [wendy]
bc even if use xForms still need graceful transformation for browsers that don't support xforms.
15:02:57 [wendy]
bc what is the degredation?
15:03:36 [wendy]
jc could you have an html fallback for existing content-editable strategies?
15:03:43 [wendy]
bg is that equivalent?
15:04:00 [wendy]
jc not full functionality but the end-result is the same
15:04:17 [wendy]
m3m many ways to generate html from a text area
15:04:53 [wendy]
m3m there are many mini languages designed for that. at least, if have an invalid fragment the processor can do something with it.
15:05:23 [wendy]
m3m requiring someone to know what is going into that box isn't that much of a constraint on the user.
15:05:35 [wendy]
jc could use java applets instead.
15:05:57 [wendy]
bg then they have to load the applet. you either have script on or you load an applet
15:06:21 [wendy]
jc is it is an intranet or public app? if intranet, don't have technical limitations.
15:06:44 [wendy]
bg development costs of building both javscript and java versions.
15:06:59 [MattSEA]
15:07:13 [wendy]
another draft on 8 October
15:07:37 [wendy]
mc if there are specific techniques to discuss, please raise them
15:08:43 [wendy]
it is not currently in bugzilla
15:09:16 [wendy]
Topic: checklist brainstorming
15:09:45 [Michael]
zakim, who's making noise?
15:09:55 [wendy]
matt? can you add content editable to bugzilla? it isn't a bug yet.
15:09:55 [Zakim]
Michael, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Ben (100%)
15:10:25 [wendy]
bc like to discuss how we associate guidelines and techniques.
15:11:19 [wendy]
bc because we've ensured each tech maps to a guideline, have some techniques that are not very important (e.g., 8 other structural elements) are mapped to a Level 1 criterion
15:11:36 [wendy]
bc would like to identify which techniques are good advice or future techniques and remove that association.
15:11:43 [wendy]
bc label them as such
15:12:03 [wendy]
bc have also wrestled with relationship between short name and the task.
15:12:23 [wendy]
bc in many cases, the task is a more appropriate title than the existing short name.
15:12:32 [wendy]
zakim, who's making noise?
15:12:43 [Zakim]
wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Ben (88%)
15:12:49 [wendy]
guess ot
15:14:14 [wendy]
mc like the rule that if there is a guideline we should have technique, ifwe have a technique there shoudl be aguideline. however, hear the point.
15:14:46 [wendy]
bc am leaning that way, because as we work on guidelines and drop criteria because they don't meet testability or requirements, have moved to general techniques (they need a home)
15:14:58 [wendy]
mc techniques can be a good home for that
15:16:59 [wendy]
mc concerned about non-w3c technologies thathave techniqeus that don't map to guidelines. are we missing something in the guidelines?
15:17:15 [wendy]
wac the "this techniue applies to guideline..." that section would be diff for those that don't?
15:17:22 [wendy]
bc part ofthe mock-up going to create.
15:17:57 [wendy]
q+ to ask, "in guidelines, would have an appendix - informative, that outlines some of these other principles? something to map to?"
15:18:01 [wendy]
ack wendy
15:18:01 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to ask, "in guidelines, would have an appendix - informative, that outlines some of these other principles? something to map to?"
15:19:21 [wendy]
bc do need to find a way to draw attention to them.
15:19:41 [wendy]
bc the checklist may present with what combination of techniques followed by a see-also
15:20:41 [wendy]
wac is this a technology-specific issue or also exist in general techniqeus?
15:20:50 [wendy]
bc primarily finding at technology-specific level.
15:20:54 [Michael]
q+ to discuss task
15:21:07 [wendy]
bc could refer to them from general, but in a way that clear they are not required.
15:21:10 [wendy]
ack michael
15:21:10 [Zakim]
Michael, you wanted to discuss task
15:21:50 [wendy]
mc talking about an appendix and e.g. of 8 other structural elements, "use semantic structure" is a requirement and in appendix, "here are some you might consider" but they are not required.
15:22:33 [wendy]
mc wrt task, in some cases more appropriate than short-names...tasks started out as checklist items. shortnames are "handles" that are not descriptive.
15:23:58 [wendy]
mc we started calling them tasks instead of checklist items for a reason. are we going back to calling them checklist itesm? we had talked about having both.
15:24:29 [wendy]
bc perhaps a missing heading level that we should introduce?
15:25:00 [wendy]
bc if we were to revisit task as checklist item, that be a link into checklist
15:25:19 [wendy]
bc could differentiate techs that were optional from requirements (by link to checklist or not)
15:25:27 [wendy]
mc still want to generate checklist from technique?
15:25:35 [wendy]
bc not sure if from techniques or test suites.
15:26:13 [james]
15:26:22 [wendy]
bc will be sending proposals to the list
15:28:05 [wendy]
Topic: QA process for test materials
15:28:25 [wendy]
move to next week
15:29:33 [wendy]
all other topics moved to next week
15:31:09 [Zakim]
15:31:11 [Zakim]
15:31:12 [Zakim]
15:31:12 [Zakim]
15:31:13 [Zakim]
15:31:13 [Zakim]
15:31:14 [Zakim]
15:31:14 [Zakim]
15:31:16 [Zakim]
15:31:18 [Zakim]
15:31:20 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
15:31:22 [Zakim]
Attendees were John_Slatin, Matt, Don_Evans, Becky_Gibson, James_Craig, Wendy, Gez_Lemon, Tim_Boland?, Michael_Cooper, Ben, Ken_Kipnes?, Jenae_Andershonis, Shawn
15:32:47 [wendy]
matt, i added the bug to bugzilla
15:32:52 [wendy]
zakim, bye
15:32:52 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag
15:32:55 [wendy]
RRSAgent, bye
15:32:55 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items