IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-09-30

Timestamps are in UTC.

20:02:48 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
20:02:51 [Michael]
zakim, I am Michael_Cooper
20:02:51 [Zakim]
ok, Michael, I now associate you with Michael_Cooper
20:02:58 [Zakim]
20:02:59 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log world
20:03:04 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
20:03:04 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Avi, David_MacDonald, Doyle_Burnett, Yvette_Hoitink, Michael_Cooper, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Ben_And_Greg, Roberto_Ellero, John_Slatin, Takayuki_Watanabe, Wendy,
20:03:07 [Zakim]
... ??P5
20:03:10 [bengt]
zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
20:03:10 [Zakim]
+Bengt_Farre; got it
20:03:31 [bcaldwell]
bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
20:03:38 [bengt]
zakim, I am Bengt_Farre
20:03:38 [Zakim]
ok, bengt, I now associate you with Bengt_Farre
20:03:54 [Zakim]
20:04:10 [Zakim]
20:04:15 [Zakim]
20:04:24 [sh1mmer]
Zakim, I am Tom_Croucher
20:04:24 [Zakim]
ok, sh1mmer, I now associate you with Tom_Croucher
20:04:44 [David_MacDonald]
David_MacDonald has joined #wai-wcag
20:04:59 [sh1mmer]
Gregg on the move again.
20:05:31 [Zakim]
20:05:55 [Becky]
Becky has joined #wai-wcag
20:07:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]
zakim, mute me
20:07:06 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
20:08:21 [wendy]
Topic: programatically...
20:08:39 [wendy]
choices: determined programmatically, progr. located
20:08:46 [wendy]
make a good pair?
20:08:52 [wendy]
20:09:47 [wendy]
gv question of use "prog determined" or "derived prog"
20:09:59 [wendy]
"can be derived programmatically"
20:10:51 [wendy]
aa determined seems easier to understand.
20:11:02 [wendy]
aa "determined by program"
20:12:14 [wendy]
pair: programmatically determined with programmatically located
20:12:30 [wendy]
20:12:35 [wendy]
Topic: baseline technologies
20:12:51 [wendy]
20:13:01 [wendy]
20:13:18 [wendy]
20:14:14 [wendy]
this topic needs resolution before we can resolve other issues.
20:15:02 [Zakim]
20:15:45 [wendy]
gv will we have to draw a line and ask users to upgrade to a certain level?
20:16:01 [RylaDog]
RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
20:16:20 [RylaDog]
20:16:28 [RylaDog]
20:16:41 [wendy]
gv have to pick that level and authors write to
20:16:53 [sh1mmer]
20:16:55 [wendy]
ack Ryla
20:17:10 [wendy]
khs state our assumption?
20:17:26 [wendy]
gv not sure have to write in the guidelines, but will have to assume it in order to write guidelines.
20:18:39 [wendy]
current assumptions: user agents do not need speech built-in, will use a screen reader. some have speech built in, that's great.
20:18:50 [wendy]
assuming some level of keyboard support - authors don't have to do that.
20:19:01 [wendy]
q+ to say "assumptions"
20:19:24 [wendy]
jw whatever the minimum is should not be built into the guidelines. as time goes by, that will need to change. it will differ for different technologies.
20:19:27 [wendy]
ack jason
20:19:44 [wendy]
jw need a standard/recipe for determining baselines and that's what should be built in. thus, the issues with UAAG.
20:19:53 [wendy]
gv if we put in a formula, the baseline will move.
20:20:18 [bcaldwell]
20:21:16 [wendy]
jw how specify criteria for determining baseline capabilities that are not tech specific.
20:21:47 [wendy]
ack david
20:22:10 [wendy]
dmd techs are movable and not bound by same process.
20:22:22 [wendy]
dmd are we pinning selves into corner if have baselines in the doc?
20:22:30 [wendy]
dmd "two versions before the current version"
20:22:42 [wendy]
zakim, who's making noise?
20:22:53 [Zakim]
wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: David_MacDonald (24%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (40%), Ben_And_Greg (34%), Takayuki_Watanabe (10%), Katie_Haritos-Shea
20:22:55 [wendy]
ack tom
20:22:56 [Zakim]
... (4%)
20:22:56 [sh1mmer]
ack Tom
20:23:13 [wendy]
zakim, mute loretta
20:23:13 [Zakim]
Loretta_Guarino_Reid should now be muted
20:23:54 [wendy]
tc what are min. requirements for user agent? examine why we require scripting or avail w/out. is there a tech reason that screen readers find more difficult to imp than other things.
20:23:59 [wendy]
tc if so, that should be rexamined.
20:24:02 [wendy]
ack wendy
20:24:03 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say "assumptions"
20:26:01 [David_MacDonald]
zakim mute me
20:26:18 [sh1mmer]
Zakim, Mute David_Mac
20:26:18 [Zakim]
David_MacDonald should now be muted
20:26:39 [sh1mmer]
ack ben
20:26:45 [sh1mmer]
ack bcaldwell
20:26:49 [wendy]
wac scripting is a very different animal. how much of this could be solved by handling scripting differently?
20:27:10 [wendy]
bc it is an everyday activity for authors make decisions about user agent support and backwards compatibility.
20:27:28 [wendy]
bc thus, just declare that. externally, we could provide guidance about what is an appropriate baseline.
20:27:52 [wendy]
ack loretta
20:28:17 [wendy]
lgr does UAAG make assumptions about tech? i believe UAAG is tech neutral.
20:28:22 [sh1mmer]
20:28:25 [wendy]
ack jason
20:29:22 [wendy]
zakim, who's making noise?
20:29:24 [sh1mmer]
Zakim, who's making noise?
20:29:31 [sh1mmer]
jynx ;)
20:29:41 [Zakim]
wendy, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
20:29:53 [Zakim]
sh1mmer, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Ben_And_Greg (47%)
20:30:01 [nabe]
zakim, mute me
20:30:01 [Zakim]
Takayuki_Watanabe should now be muted
20:30:28 [wendy]
jw unless we get back to neutral tech requirements, when the imps are available the content dev can include those features in the baseline.
20:30:32 [sh1mmer]
ack tom
20:30:32 [wendy]
ack tom
20:31:03 [wendy]
tc can write scripts that break navigation for everyone who does not have scripts enabled. thus, not always an accessibliity issues.
20:31:52 [wendy]
tc if no one can use it, it isn't accessible to anyone.
20:32:06 [wendy]
tc careful that not going into overkill
20:32:08 [wendy]
ack alex
20:32:09 [Becky]
20:32:35 [wendy]
al is there a page that is guaranteed that works with every screen reader out there?
20:33:06 [wendy]
al unless screen readers devs have to meet a standard, why does the content provider?
20:33:35 [wendy]
gv none of our guidelines say that you have to be compatible with asst. tech
20:34:11 [Zakim]
20:34:20 [wendy]
fyi: from UAAG - A user agent that conforms to these guidelines will enable access through its own user interface and through other internal facilities, including its ability to communicate with other technologies (especially assistive technologies). UAAG 1.0 is not aimed at developers of assistive technologies (e.g., screen magnifiers, screen readers, speech recognition software, alternative keyboards, braille devices, etc.), although these technologies w
20:35:29 [wendy]
zakim, ??P15 is Kerstin_Goldsmith
20:35:29 [Zakim]
+Kerstin_Goldsmith; got it
20:35:32 [wendy]
ack becky
20:35:55 [wendy]
bg if using javascript, make it is accessible.
20:36:01 [wendy]
bg not all of the screen readers work the same.
20:37:10 [wendy]
gv some people assuming that javascript must be in baseline.
20:37:32 [Yvette_Hoitink]
q+ to say "disabilies -> JS turned off?"
20:38:09 [Yvette_Hoitink]
zakim, unmute me
20:38:09 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
20:38:09 [wendy]
ack yvette
20:38:10 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink, you wanted to say "disabilies -> JS turned off?"
20:38:11 [Michael]
q+ to emphasize _recommended_ baseline
20:39:05 [wendy]
yh aren't pwd likely to have javascript turned off?
20:39:24 [wendy]
gv people may have preferences, but if *have* to turn off scripting to deal with the page, different matter.
20:40:05 [wendy]
tc should javascript be in the baseline?
20:40:06 [wendy]
ack john
20:40:20 [wendy]
js when was javascript introduced?
20:41:10 [Yvette_Hoitink]
zakim, mute me
20:41:10 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
20:41:11 [wendy]
20:41:16 [Michael]
ack michael
20:41:17 [Zakim]
Michael_Cooper, you wanted to emphasize _recommended_ baseline
20:41:23 [gregg]
20:41:38 [wendy]
1995 -
20:41:51 [wendy]
js diff between something been around a decade vs a year
20:41:54 [wendy]
ack michael
20:42:16 [wendy]
mc if you follow script accessibility techs, people shouldn't have to turn off javascript. could stil have it in the baseline.
20:42:18 [wendy]
ack gregg
20:42:33 [wendy]
gv not just how long it has been out, but feasibility to make accessible.
20:43:01 [wendy]
gv is it possible to use it in an accessible way
20:43:24 [wendy]
gv the baseline we're talking about is the assumption we're making for the construct of our guidelines.
20:43:39 [wendy]
gv as michael pointed out, someone could choose a different baseline (lower it)
20:43:45 [Becky]
20:44:04 [wendy]
ack alex
20:44:14 [Michael]
q+ to say gl are functional, baseline more technique-level
20:44:21 [wendy]
al something that it can be made inaccessibly doesn't mean that you can't use.
20:44:38 [wendy]
gv ther ehas to be a way to make it accessible.
20:44:58 [wendy]
q+ to say "things that can' do w/javascript. there are issues that pfwg addressing."
20:45:09 [wendy]
ack jason
20:45:10 [Yvette_Hoitink]
For the record: Javascript was announced by Netscape and Sun in November, 1995, as the next generation of Netscape's Lifescript
20:45:35 [wendy]
jw we start out talking about requirements (wrt 4.2) and min. degree of support.
20:45:36 [Yvette_Hoitink]
20:46:02 [wendy]
jw then quickly, we discuss javscript and the general problem which has nothing to do w/javascript - which technologies someone is using.
20:46:17 [wendy]
jw i haven't heard anything about a proposal for addressing in general terms.
20:46:36 [wendy]
jw unless we have a way to move forward generally, we won't get anywhere.
20:47:21 [wendy]
jw we're not addressing the underlying problem.
20:47:24 [wendy]
ack becky
20:47:36 [wendy]
bg don't think we can figure out general criteria until after we discuss specifics.
20:47:55 [wendy]
bg if move away from javascript, what's stance on css? it's also a baseline that we assume or not.
20:48:09 [Yvette_Hoitink]
zakim, mute me
20:48:09 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink was already muted, Yvette_Hoitink
20:48:12 [Michael]
ack michael
20:48:13 [Zakim]
Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say gl are functional, baseline more technique-level
20:48:15 [wendy]
ack michael
20:48:36 [wendy]
mc not sure that see the basleine discussion as effecting guidelines, since they are functional requirements.
20:48:44 [wendy]
mc they are independent of technologies and baseline.
20:48:50 [wendy]
mc guidelines say "functional requirements"
20:49:00 [wendy]
mc "baseline" says here are techs can use to fulfill those requirements.
20:49:24 [wendy]
mc for a technology that doesn't meet baseline criteria, guideline should exist that say "unsupported techs need fallbacks"
20:50:07 [wendy]
gv since guidelines set criteria that have to be met, if don't assume basline don't know what needs to be met.
20:50:20 [wendy]
mc the checklist will need to consider baseline, but guidelines themselves don't.
20:50:50 [wendy]
ack wendy
20:50:50 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say "things that can' do w/javascript. there are issues that pfwg addressing."
20:51:12 [wendy]
ack alex
20:51:26 [wendy]
al when i think about baseline, there is at least one way to achieve something.
20:51:51 [wendy]
al it may cost a lot of money, but that is a baseline. it's one functional way for the user.
20:52:18 [wendy]
al the high bar on the other side is to make it work under every condition
20:53:31 [wendy]
q+ to ask "michael's proposal for guideline. how make 'supported' testable?"
20:54:05 [Michael]
q+ to say "reasonable baseline"
20:54:05 [wendy]
al if technology exists, it is accessible. is it cheaply accessible? separate question
20:54:39 [Yvette_Hoitink]
q+ to say "price is limit for everyone, not just disabled, so no accessibility issue"
20:55:22 [wendy]
gv we are not talking about socio-economic status
20:55:59 [wendy]
gv if people without disabilities can do it with 640K but pwd require 10 gigs, then that problem is associated with disability.
20:56:10 [Yvette_Hoitink]
20:56:18 [wendy]
al have to specify the delta
20:56:39 [bengt]
I see that as a usability question
20:57:45 [wendy]
ack wendy
20:57:45 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to ask "michael's proposal for guideline. how make 'supported' testable?"
20:58:52 [gregg]
20:59:43 [wendy]
ack michael
20:59:43 [Zakim]
Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say "reasonable baseline"
21:00:38 [wendy]
wac characteristics of accessible content: usable without vision, usable without hearing, etc. deal with support issues at tech-level. sounding like a policy issues, wrt how asst. techs are purchased for pwd, alhtough there is not international policies and not everyone covered.
21:01:16 [wendy]
mc the recommendation we make should be more conservative than the earlier example of $1000 product. thus we need to determine a reasonable baseline.
21:01:20 [Yvette_Hoitink]
q+ to say "price is limit for everyone, not just disabled, so no accessibility issue"
21:01:24 [wendy]
mc it is based partly on practicality
21:01:42 [wendy]
mc "unsupported tech" sounds like until user agents and that should be thought out.
21:02:10 [wendy]
mc thinking of it as replacement for images as well, b/c only need text alternative is that images aren't supported
21:02:15 [wendy]
ack gregg
21:02:34 [wendy]
gv we can talk about "usable w/out vision" but our job is to make them concrete.
21:03:08 [wendy]
ack jason
21:03:31 [wendy]
jw we're avoiding the core issue, what is the general requirement and how do we specify it?
21:04:48 [wendy]
jw ways to specify that don't undercut UAAG? either take a subset or require conformance to.
21:05:14 [Yvette_Hoitink]
zakim, unmute me
21:05:14 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
21:05:37 [wendy]
zakim, who's making noise?
21:05:38 [sh1mmer]
Zakim, who's making noise?
21:05:47 [Zakim]
wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Doyle_Burnett (9%), Yvette_Hoitink (39%), Roberto_Ellero (69%), Ben_And_Greg (19%), John_Slatin (15%), Alex_Li
21:05:50 [Zakim]
... (4%), Wendy (25%), JasonWhite (15%)
21:05:55 [wendy]
zakim, mute Roberto_Ellero
21:05:55 [Zakim]
Roberto_Ellero should now be muted
21:06:00 [Zakim]
sh1mmer, listening for 12 seconds I heard sound from the following: Yvette_Hoitink (43%), Roberto_Ellero (14%), Wendy (8%), JasonWhite (23%)
21:06:13 [wendy]
21:06:17 [wendy]
ack yvette
21:06:17 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink, you wanted to say "price is limit for everyone, not just disabled, so no accessibility issue"
21:06:26 [RylaDog]
21:07:10 [wendy]
yh if can only accessible if free or less than $1000, then saying if you want to create commercial sites then you can't follow the guidelines. we should make guidelines that are usable by people who want to mae commercial products.
21:07:49 [Yvette_Hoitink]
zakim, mute me
21:07:49 [Zakim]
Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
21:08:21 [wendy]
ack john
21:09:07 [wendy]
js as been working on general techniques for 1.3, run into "until user agents" area
21:09:20 [wendy]
js esp wrt svg
21:10:28 [Zakim]
21:10:52 [wendy]
ack ryla
21:11:13 [wendy]
khs if going to talk about baselines, instead of putting it on the technology, put it on the content.
21:11:33 [wendy]
js text isn't accessible to everyone
21:11:43 [wendy]
js written language is not accessible for everyone
21:11:53 [wendy]
khs lowest level that doesn't require anything proprietary
21:12:45 [wendy]
wac then only allowing html
21:13:07 [wendy]
ack kerstin
21:16:06 [wendy]
action: michael, kerstin, becky, alex work on proposal for baseline (kick-off from michael)
21:18:44 [wendy]
ack jason
21:19:27 [Zakim]
21:20:03 [wendy]
wac going through policies related to captioning and audio descriptions. with wcag 1.0 adoption, try to be in synch with that, but fix major issues. concern that w/out policy piece developers feel wcag 1.0 outlaws multimedia. handle in policy?
21:20:16 [wendy]
jw scope - exclude multimedia from conformance claim.
21:20:32 [wendy]
jw one benefit of conformance claim is that allows to do easily.
21:20:56 [wendy]
jw 2 part solution: 1. what do we say to policy makers? 2. can not claim conformance to things.
21:25:19 [wendy]
21:25:32 [wendy]
ack Gregg
21:26:29 [wendy]
gv make it explicit that text alternative for image *not* audio alternative
21:26:43 [wendy]
gv leave it up to policy? this says absolutely that a caption is required.
21:29:27 [wendy]
ack jason
21:29:56 [wendy]
wac describes phase-in policies, be policy maker. we write technical requirements. can go into more details in the techniques.
21:30:10 [wendy]
wac too many exceptions to enumerate all at success criteria level
21:31:17 [wendy]
jw synch get dealt with?
21:31:39 [wendy]
ack gregg
21:32:04 [wendy]
gv keep in mind how diff between professional movie and informal web cam and cbs evening news
21:32:18 [wendy]
gv phase-in won't help that
21:32:33 [wendy]
gv if throw off to policy when to apply then have to move out of level 1
21:35:05 [DoyleB]
we use web cams for remote airport viewings for pilots
21:36:16 [Zakim]
21:36:17 [Zakim]
21:36:17 [rellero]
21:36:18 [Zakim]
21:36:20 [Zakim]
21:36:21 [Zakim]
21:36:21 [nabe]
good bye
21:36:22 [Zakim]
21:36:23 [Zakim]
21:36:24 [Zakim]
21:36:25 [Zakim]
21:36:27 [Zakim]
21:36:29 [Zakim]
21:36:31 [Zakim]
21:36:33 [Zakim]
21:36:35 [Zakim]
21:36:37 [Zakim]
21:36:39 [Zakim]
21:37:00 [nabe]
nabe has left #wai-wcag
21:37:23 [wendy]
zakim, bye
21:37:23 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were Avi, Michael_Cooper, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, David_MacDonald, Ben_And_Greg, Doyle_Burnett, Roberto_Ellero, John_Slatin, Yvette_Hoitink,
21:37:23 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag
21:37:26 [Zakim]
... Takayuki_Watanabe, Wendy, Bengt_Farre, Katie_Haritos-Shea, JasonWhite, Tom_Croucher, Becky_Gibson, Alex_Li, Kerstin_Goldsmith, Gregg_Vanderheiden
21:39:17 [wendy]
RRSAgent, bye
21:39:17 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item:
21:39:17 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael, kerstin, becky, alex work on proposal for baseline (kick-off from michael) [1]
21:39:17 [RRSAgent]
recorded in