IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-09-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:59:49 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
13:59:55 [Michael]
rrsagent, make logs world
14:00:23 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has now started
14:00:32 [Zakim]
14:00:40 [Zakim]
14:01:31 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
14:01:36 [Zakim]
14:01:47 [Michael]
zakim, ??P14 is Ken_Kipness
14:01:47 [Zakim]
+Ken_Kipness; got it
14:02:14 [bcaldwell]
bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
14:02:26 [Zakim]
14:02:29 [Zakim]
14:02:35 [bcaldwell]
zakim, ??P25 is Ben
14:02:35 [Zakim]
+Ben; got it
14:02:43 [Zakim]
14:02:59 [Becky]
Becky has joined #wai-wcag
14:02:59 [wendy]
zakim, drop wendy
14:02:59 [Zakim]
Wendy is being disconnected
14:03:00 [Zakim]
14:03:18 [Zakim]
14:03:20 [ChrisR]
ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
14:03:34 [Michael]
zakim, ??P21 is Chris_Ridpath
14:03:34 [Zakim]
+Chris_Ridpath; got it
14:03:40 [Zakim]
14:03:49 [Zakim]
14:03:50 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
14:03:50 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Jenae_Andershonis, Ken_Kipness, Michael_Cooper, Don_Evans, Ben, Wendy, Chris_Ridpath, Becky_Gibson
14:05:13 [wendy]
zakim, who's making noise?
14:05:23 [Zakim]
wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Michael_Cooper (10%), Chris_Ridpath (19%), Becky_Gibson (30%)
14:05:29 [Becky]
zakim, I am Becky_Gibson
14:05:29 [Zakim]
ok, Becky, I now associate you with Becky_Gibson
14:05:39 [wendy]
zakim, mute Chris
14:05:39 [Zakim]
Chris_Ridpath should now be muted
14:05:47 [wendy]
zakim, unmute Chris
14:05:47 [Zakim]
Chris_Ridpath should no longer be muted
14:06:19 [wendy]
zakim, who's making noise?
14:06:29 [Zakim]
wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Jenae_Andershonis (4%), Ken_Kipness (37%), Michael_Cooper (28%), Chris_Ridpath (9%)
14:06:38 [wendy]
zakim, drop Ken
14:06:38 [Zakim]
Ken_Kipness is being disconnected
14:06:39 [Zakim]
14:07:06 [Zakim]
14:07:16 [Michael]
zakim, ??P14 is Ken_Kipness
14:07:16 [Zakim]
+Ken_Kipness; got it
14:08:13 [wendy]
14:08:35 [wendy]
policies for contributions of test cases:
14:27:36 [ChrisR]
QA Handbook re acquiring test suite:
14:27:47 [Michael]
14:28:03 [Michael]
Need to come up with a formal set of steps to transfer test suite
14:28:16 [Michael]
Do we need to follow the QA process?
14:28:55 [Michael]
How will test suite be maintained after transfer?
14:29:37 [Michael]
Does test suite even have to be on W3C site?
14:29:51 [Michael]
Partial Answers:
14:30:04 [Michael]
We probably still should follow QA process to make sure we don't miss things
14:30:14 [Michael]
Give editor access to Chris et al to maintain tests after transfer
14:30:26 [Michael]
It would be good for tests to be on W3C site
14:31:30 [wendy]
hey michael, i can take over minutes - just wanted to get that email out.
14:31:35 [Michael]
14:32:01 [wendy]
cr agreeing on tests. have posted 6 to the list. there hasn't been much discussion, but it closely follows the techniques document.
14:32:11 [ChrisR]
testsuite for ALT:
14:32:11 [wendy]
cr review these 6 tests and determine if accessible?
14:33:03 [wendy] - no disagreement
14:33:15 [wendy]
14:33:22 [wendy]
"should" thus it is an optional test
14:33:29 [wendy]
idea is that alt-text is as short as possible
14:33:48 [wendy]
bc it is not a must. as long as it is not required
14:33:58 [wendy]
mc "must vs should" "short vs defining short"
14:34:35 [wendy]
wac if alt-text gets too long, use a description
14:34:46 [wendy]
cr if you have alt-text longer than 100 characters, then look at it.
14:35:30 [wendy]
bc want authors to evaluate appropriateness of alt-text.
14:35:42 [wendy]
mc general statement vs when using an automated tool
14:36:31 [wendy]
cr if we tell them it has to be short, we need to give them a limit.
14:38:36 [wendy] - "meaningful" how do we define?
14:40:50 [wendy]
mc can pass all the tests, but get to final one "meaningful" and could not pass
14:41:18 [wendy]
cr think the meaningful test is most likely to get dumped because can't describe that well
14:41:22 [wendy]
mc unless define a procedure
14:42:41 [wendy]
Ask yourself, "Why is it there? What does it illustrate or add to the text?" from
14:43:14 [wendy]
bg "company logo" vs "ibm logo"
14:43:17 [wendy]
mc vs "ibm"
14:45:58 [wendy]
continued discussion about "meaningful"
14:46:19 [wendy]
mc "right pointing arrow" vs "go to next page"
14:46:37 [wendy]
bc that gets back to success criteria
14:48:25 [wendy]
14:48:28 [bcaldwell]
1. For all non-text content that is functional, such as graphical links or buttons, text-alternatives identify the purpose or function of the non-text content. [I]
14:48:28 [bcaldwell]
2. For all non-text content that is used to convey information, text-alternatives convey the same information. [I]
14:48:28 [bcaldwell]
3. For non-text content that is intended to create a specific sensory experience, such as music or visual art, text-alternatives identify and describe the non-text content. [I]
14:48:29 [bcaldwell]
4. For multimedia and time-dependent interactive content, text-alternatives identify the content and media alternatives are provided as described in guideline 1.2. [I]
14:48:32 [bcaldwell]
5. Non-text content that does not provide information, functionality, sensory experience and is neither multimedia nor time-dependent interactive content, is marked such that it can be ignored by assistive technology. [I]
14:48:35 [bcaldwell]
6. Any text-alternatives provided are explicitly associated with non-text content. [I]
14:48:45 [wendy]
have a test for each one or are they within the "meaningful" test?
14:49:08 [wendy]
cr 20 questions for each image, ignore them all?
14:49:30 [wendy]
bc a process needed to identify the different types of images (when it conveys information vs when it provides function).
14:49:54 [wendy]
mc split up techniques as well
14:50:00 [wendy]
(since split SC)
14:50:09 [wendy]
bc or an example for each
14:51:08 [wendy]
cr #5 - that's covered by
14:51:42 [wendy]
cr if using image as link, identify link target - could add a test (if don't already have one in anchors)
14:51:59 [wendy]
bc perhaps just add a few more tests...replace "meaningful" with "functional images" or something
14:52:13 [wendy]
cr have to make sure the tests cover the success criteria completely
14:52:21 [wendy]
ja the end-to-ends can help with that
14:52:54 [Zakim]
14:53:46 [wendy]
action: chris review success criteria and map to tests
14:53:57 [wendy]
mc what do about "alt-text should be short"?
14:54:18 [wendy]
bc as long as have "should" it is not required. it's part of the toolbox. but it won't apply in every case.
14:54:38 [wendy]
cr and we're responsible for identifying ambiguous terms.
14:54:46 [wendy]
cr defining
14:55:33 [wendy]
mc w/caveat that it is should not a must, more of a test of the guidelines
14:57:23 [wendy]
wac get review
14:57:41 [wendy]
wac need to link to test suite somehow. editorial note on this test.
14:59:04 [wendy]
15:01:02 [wendy]
wac chunk techniques like did with general?
15:01:16 [wendy]
wac resources section links to related tests?
15:01:35 [wendy]
mc a view (TOC) all of the test files for given technique are collected together
15:01:50 [wendy]
mc a given test file may apply to multiple techniques, the TOC could point to some test files more than once.
15:01:56 [ChrisR]
Draft view of tests mapped to techniques:
15:03:31 [wendy]
cr note that this is from an older version of the techniques
15:04:16 [wendy]
wac similar model to links from SC to general - single link for each technique that would link to TOC of tests for that technique
15:05:11 [wendy]
wac publish as WG note or in WCAG WG space?
15:05:17 [wendy]
mc have same status as techniques
15:05:21 [wendy]
cr checklists should be the same too
15:08:14 [wendy]
wac need to find a way to publish one piece at a time instead of everything at once, although b/c of the way we generate links between things can't update one chunk at a time.
15:08:46 [wendy]
mc perhaps for november draft, live in WG space, but eventually should live at same level as other documents
15:11:25 [wendy]
action: michael for 8 oct html techs link from alt-text technique to 1st of the alt-text tests
15:13:02 [wendy]
action 2 = michael for 8 oct html techs link from alt-text technique to test suite (whehter it be 1st test or TOC of some sort - work with Chris)
15:18:06 [wendy]
submitting techniques
15:18:38 [wendy]
bg has 4 techniques for adding labels
15:21:12 [wendy]
make bulleted list for user agent issues for 8 oct drafts but flesh out dtd for support for the 3 nov draft
15:22:33 [wendy]
bg diff alternatives: use php to generate on the fly if don't have javascript
15:22:40 [wendy]
(replaces heading w/images)
15:23:03 [wendy]
bc breaks jaws ability to do header navigation
15:23:18 [wendy]
bg put background image on the header?
15:23:53 [wendy]
bc can get header in list, but as reading document it doesn't see them as headings (can't skip to using 'h')
15:24:27 [wendy]
action: becky rework example (replace div with header)
15:25:06 [wendy]
mc agreed to put thse techniques in
15:25:19 [wendy]
wac with disclaimers
15:25:40 [wendy]
bg check with very large fonts
15:27:23 [wendy]
bg reference source
15:28:39 [wendy]
bg send info back to developer, perhaps he can include additional info on his blog
15:29:02 [wendy]
HTMl techniques proposals on the list
15:31:17 [wendy]
mc if decide that script only used accessibly, drop that technique (for fallback). keep that technique (for fallback) until know decision about scripting.
15:31:47 [wendy]
new drafts next friday
15:31:51 [wendy]
including change logs
15:33:40 [wendy]
next week: checklists, transferring test suites into w3c space, public drafts on friday, and then the dublin meetings
15:34:10 [Zakim]
15:35:55 [wendy]
action: wendy make visible (member-space?) summary of DIWG/WCAG WG and send to Becky
15:36:26 [Zakim]
15:36:27 [Zakim]
15:36:31 [Zakim]
15:36:32 [Zakim]
15:36:33 [Zakim]
16:02:02 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
16:02:04 [bcaldwell]
bcaldwell has left #wai-wcag
16:02:10 [wendy]
zakim, bye
16:02:10 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were Jenae_Andershonis, Michael_Cooper, Ken_Kipness, Don_Evans, Ben, Wendy, Chris_Ridpath, Becky_Gibson
16:02:10 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag
16:02:15 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log world
16:02:22 [wendy]
RRSAgent, bye
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
I see 4 open action items:
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: chris review success criteria and map to tests [1]
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael for 8 oct html techs link from alt-text technique to test suite (whehter it be 1st test or TOC of some sort - work with Chris) [2]
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: becky rework example (replace div with header) [3]
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wendy make visible (member-space?) summary of DIWG/WCAG WG and send to Becky [4]
16:02:22 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
21:06:25 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
21:06:36 [wendy]
programmatic object - sequence, selection, and iteration
21:06:41 [wendy]
ncludes: scripting, java, flash w/action script
21:06:45 [wendy]
"when we talk about scripts, are we talking about script web content or the result that is web content? you don't see script on the screen, you see an ojbect, or an image as a result. "
21:07:26 [wendy]
mc programmatic object "action of doing something" issues of fallback are a technology-support issue
21:07:37 [wendy]
bc basic requirement about labeling?
21:08:08 [wendy]
bc distinction between what a prog. object/script does (so can choose to change UA or identify it before something happens) vs it having a text alternative
21:08:52 [wendy]
mc dependson what the object does. applet: label it, like an image. however, are web sites that have html framework that loads flash.
21:09:32 [wendy]
mc even need to label it (the flash site)? w/flash - if it *is* the site, what would be the label?
21:09:52 [wendy]
bc current user agents don't say anything. needs a mechanisms that the site is encoded in flash.
21:10:23 [wendy]
mc the fact that flash is programmatic is not why you have to do it, it's the lack of support
21:11:25 [wendy]
mc require text for images in cases where text is not supported
21:11:55 [wendy]
bc screen readers say "graphic or image" when encounter regardless of alt -text
21:12:05 [wendy]
bc they don't say "here's an object" or identify other types of content.
21:13:30 [wendy]
bc the user has to make a choice like disabling javascript or plug-ins in order to search for alternatives
21:13:40 [wendy]
bc applies across all the types at one time
21:13:58 [wendy]
mc images handled separately from javascript
21:14:12 [wendy]
mc renders image also provide alternative. scripting is one or the other.
21:14:22 [wendy]
bc alternatives often not options until disable something else
21:14:36 [wendy]
mc no reason an asst tech couldn't grab info from dom
21:16:48 [wendy]
mc write in terms of how things should be vs how things are
21:17:48 [wendy]
mc more likely to be future-proof
21:17:54 [wendy]
gz yes
21:18:04 [wendy]
bc can live with it, but need to spend energy hammering on UAs
21:20:21 [wendy]
mc in guideline level wouldn't have anything that speaksto programmatic objects (per se), unless if have guidelines abouthow to make them accessible (e.g., keyboard access), however wouldn't say "provide fallbacks" do that at technology-specific level depending on support
21:20:35 [wendy]
mc determine if we should recommend fallbacks for given technology and how
21:22:48 [wendy]
non-text content: 1.1 (generally), specific non-text content - multimedia (1.2) and programmatic objects (4.1/4.2) either collapse or be more specific.
21:22:52 [wendy]
is 1.1 primarily about images?
21:24:07 [wendy]
can we get rid of the term non-text content?
21:24:21 [wendy]
instead use images, multimedia, and programmatic objects (or prog funcationality?)
21:24:34 [wendy]
lump progr. objects into non-text content with function
21:24:45 [wendy]
equivalent handled under 4.2
21:25:10 [wendy]
is text as ultimate fallback always the right answer?
21:25:16 [wendy]
view from a different perspective.
21:25:59 [wendy]
there are different media types people encounter: structured text, static images, multimedia, audio-only, video-only, dynamic interactions (programmatic objects)
21:26:08 [wendy]
need guidelines related to each one
21:26:33 [wendy]
then we're not thinking text or non-text, thinking about media types
21:27:14 [wendy]
what about text/xml that could end up either in structured text or an image (if converted to svg)
21:28:09 [wendy]
dealing with text in raster image different from svg
21:28:58 [wendy]
principle: make text scalable, for raster images do x, for svg do y
21:29:16 [wendy]
just call it data? depends on the transformation process
21:29:56 [wendy]
mathml explicitly provides a visual version and a logical version, supposedly interchangable
21:31:29 [wendy]
at the moment, svg is not widely supported, and therefore needs text equivalent - not b/c the text is not there but b/c of lack of support
21:32:10 [wendy]
assuming the author will have to interact w/supporting tech to figure out what it is
21:33:01 [wendy]
still have to identify what it is (a chart, a decoration, etc.)
21:33:56 [wendy]
similar argument to identifying contents of data table
21:35:35 [wendy]
(and structured relationships within )
21:37:11 [wendy]
question of baseline. if cna't define it, never know what tech someone will use.
21:37:24 [wendy]
will always label images, why are other technologies treated differently?
21:37:47 [wendy]
maybe someday... 20 years or so? :)
21:38:03 [Gez]
Gez has joined #wai-wcag
21:39:34 [wendy]
even for images, matter of technology support.
21:41:13 [wendy]
mc no matter what unsupported technology, provide a label regardless of the media type. if is supported, don't need a label.
21:41:26 [wendy]
currently, set is the same.
21:41:31 [wendy]
however, how do you define supported?
21:57:25 [wendy]
going through JIS to see how they work it out. General principles are good.
21:58:58 [wendy]
can we throw baseline over the wall to policy?
21:59:46 [wendy]
like to say "declare baseline" then give info about reasonable baseline given today's technology.
22:01:14 [wendy]
is scripting its own thing? anything else like it
22:01:16 [wendy]
22:01:58 [wendy]
current inaccessible uses of javascript: menus
22:03:06 [wendy]
client-side validation
22:03:32 [wendy]
security, time, cost - not accessibility issue.
22:03:57 [wendy]
inserting content
22:04:07 [wendy]
javascript calculators (price calculators)
22:04:15 [wendy]
could change content at a rate someone can't keep up with
22:04:29 [wendy]
accessibilit of the function not of javascript support for the function
22:04:40 [wendy]
separate accessibility issues if sripting is not supported
22:04:50 [wendy]
is tehre a work around?
22:04:59 [wendy]
where does javascript create accessibility issue?
22:22:45 [Zakim]
22:28:19 [Zakim]
22:28:21 [Zakim]
22:28:26 [Zakim]
22:28:27 [Zakim]
Team_(wai-wcag)21:00Z has ended
22:28:28 [Zakim]
Attendees were Michael_Cooper, Ben, Wendy, Gez_Lemon
22:50:09 [wendy]
zakim, bye
22:50:09 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag
22:50:12 [wendy]
RRSAgent, bye
22:50:12 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items