IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-10-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:46:24 [bengt_]
bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
08:06:37 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
08:06:47 [bcaldwell]
rrsagent, make log world
08:16:25 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
08:16:34 [wendy]
form at:
08:31:35 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has now started
08:31:42 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has ended
08:31:43 [Zakim]
Attendees were
08:31:44 [Becky]
Becky has joined #wai-wcag
08:31:58 [ben]
08:32:21 [MattDUB]
MattDUB has joined #wai-wcag
08:32:27 [MattDUB]
08:33:12 [David_MacDonald]
David_MacDonald has joined #wai-wcag
08:33:18 [ben]
08:33:46 [David_MacDonald]
Hi folks could you dial in
08:33:55 [ben]
Hi David, we're doing prioritization of HTML techniques again at the moment
08:34:08 [ben]
each of us are working independently on filling out the form at the above URI
08:34:27 [David_MacDonald]
ok I'll do it too
08:34:43 [ben]
if you want to work on that (use your w3c sign in stuff) for a bit we'll hop online when we're done
08:35:08 [David_MacDonald]
08:39:32 [bengt]
hmm, is that something that i can check ?
08:45:47 [ben]
yes, you use your w3c login (the same one you would use for meeting registrations)
08:54:56 [David_MacDonald]
Are you using the latest draft as the basis for numbering this form?
08:57:06 [bengt]
they use 20040730
08:57:11 [David_MacDonald]
I guess its December draft that we are using as the # system
08:57:35 [David_MacDonald]
Hey Bengt where is that?
08:58:09 [David_MacDonald]
I got it
09:08:09 [ben]
links in the form refer to the latest public draft (October)
09:11:00 [bengt]
nope it points to july version
09:11:28 [bengt]
the same that is linked at wai/gl
09:18:23 [ben]
oops, sorry you're right
09:18:36 [ben]
we're going to discuss - do you guys want us to dial in
09:18:56 [David_MacDonald]
09:19:34 [David_MacDonald]
I'm on phone
09:22:12 [wendy]
zakim, this is wcag
09:22:12 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; that matches WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM
09:22:17 [wendy]
zakim, call wendy-617
09:22:17 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; the call is being made
09:22:19 [Zakim]
09:22:33 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
09:22:33 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P0, Wendy
09:23:09 [wendy]
zakim, ??P0 is David_MadDonald
09:23:09 [Zakim]
+David_MadDonald; got it
09:25:55 [Zakim]
+ +98765aaaa
09:26:08 [ben]
09:26:10 [David_MacDonald]
I just submitted didn't answer the last few
09:26:35 [David_MacDonald]
hit refresh Michael
09:44:22 [wendy]
16.4 Auto submit combo boxes - a usability issue or accessibility issue?
09:44:43 [wendy]
you can make it work with the keyboard, but in testing, expert users did not know how to use.
09:44:47 [wendy]
or a user agent issue?
09:45:32 [wendy]
if you use the widget inconsistently, then users will get confused.
09:45:47 [wendy]
this is more debatable than the poll shows
09:47:03 [David_MacDonald]
I really like this voting machine. I would like to get the design :-)
09:47:29 [bengt]
coffee break ?
09:47:41 [ben]
yep, taking a 15 minute break now
09:48:14 [David_MacDonald]
wendy I noticed Zakim thinks I'm David MadDonald
09:48:41 [Zakim]
- +98765aaaa
09:48:41 [wendy]
yes, it was a typo, but i thought it was funny and kept it. ;)
09:48:58 [David_MacDonald]
yup its so true
09:49:01 [wendy]
we're hanging up the phone to take a break.
09:49:04 [Zakim]
09:49:11 [Zakim]
09:49:12 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has ended
09:49:13 [Zakim]
Attendees were Wendy, David_MadDonald, +98765aaaa
09:49:15 [wendy]
it's great you are getting up this early
09:49:37 [David_MacDonald]
yup Great time of day
10:01:56 [Michael]
Michael has joined #wai-wcag
10:05:08 [wendy]
hello, we're starting again
10:05:13 [wendy]
zakim, this is WCAG
10:05:13 [Zakim]
wendy, I see WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be WCAG".
10:05:21 [wendy]
zakim, this will be wcag
10:05:21 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; I see WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM scheduled to start 125 minutes ago
10:05:27 [wendy]
zakim, call wendy-617
10:05:27 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; the call is being made
10:05:28 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has now started
10:05:29 [Zakim]
10:06:23 [Zakim]
10:06:24 [Zakim]
10:06:25 [Zakim]
10:06:31 [wendy]
is that you david?
10:06:38 [David_MacDonald]
10:06:44 [wendy]
alistair is presenting. can you hear him?
10:06:52 [David_MacDonald]
10:07:09 [wendy]
the mic was covered by paper.
10:07:21 [wendy]
10:07:26 [David_MacDonald]
10:08:00 [David_MacDonald]
zakim, ??P0 is David_MacDonald
10:08:00 [Zakim]
+David_MacDonald; got it
10:08:17 [Zakim]
+ +98765aaaa
10:08:23 [wendy]
is that bengt?
10:08:31 [bengt]
zakim, 98765aaaa is bengt
10:08:31 [Zakim]
sorry, bengt, I do not recognize a party named '98765aaaa'
10:08:35 [bengt]
10:09:06 [bengt]
zakim, +98765aaaa is bengt
10:09:06 [Zakim]
+bengt; got it
10:09:19 [Zakim]
10:09:41 [David_MacDonald]
HI John Alistair is presenting
10:09:47 [mikba]
mikba has joined #wai-wcag
10:10:19 [David_MacDonald]
can the mike go closer to ALister.
10:10:47 [wendy]
hello, mike. we're back.
10:11:11 [Zakim]
10:11:20 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
10:11:20 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Wendy, David_MacDonald, bengt, John_Slatin, Mike_Barta
10:11:28 [David_MacDonald]
oops i meant can the microphone go closert alister
10:11:29 [mikba]
mikba is on phone :)
10:12:31 [wendy]
alistair showed us a document he is working on wrt evaluating wcag 1.0. he has mapped wcag 1.0 techniques to 2.0 techniques and looked at other resources to get the clearest interpretation possible.
10:12:44 [wendy]
yh how it is rendered depends on the user
10:12:47 [wendy]
ag and user agent
10:12:54 [wendy]
yh user may enlarge or make smaller. not just user agent.
10:13:18 [wendy]
ag the idea is to make sure that some understanding is put into techs in combining technologies to make sure there are no large blunders.
10:14:01 [wendy]
in the room: Matt May, Tom Croucher, Andi Snow-Weaver, Becky Gibson, Alistair Garrison, Gez Lemon, Wendy Chisholm, Makoto Ueki, Takayuki Watanabe, Yvette Hoitink, Michael Cooper, Ben Caldwell
10:14:58 [wendy]
tc authored units that are discreetly accessible when combined won't be accessible? not sure.
10:15:29 [wendy]
tc will stuff that works on its own create problems when combined?
10:15:34 [wendy]
tc can't think of any examples.
10:15:55 [wendy]
yh could have multiple images that when combined could cover more than 50% of page and cause the threshold to be combined.
10:24:10 [wendy]
discussion about general techniques - what direction makes sense. concern about how much content we have (over 200 pages in total) and some of the confusion with general techniques.
10:24:51 [MattDUB]
MM: We need to talk to O'Reilly about writing the web accessibility
10:24:51 [MattDUB]
O'Reilly book. The techniques are going to be in a relatively
10:24:51 [MattDUB]
disjointed flow. We need to present things in a way that shows
10:24:51 [MattDUB]
techniques interacting with one another. When you are writing a
10:24:51 [MattDUB]
standard on how to do things, there is an accompanying book that says
10:24:52 [MattDUB]
what it means
10:25:09 [MattDUB]
(from meeting minutes, 7 June 2001)
10:25:10 [MattDUB]
10:29:35 [wendy]
ag where to put the responsibility and uaag requirements.
10:29:57 [wendy]
tc questions of what people want from wcag.
10:31:02 [wendy]
tc do we take a hard line and say, "this is what is accessible." and refuse to provide techniques for anything else (that doesn't conform to uaag).
10:35:23 [David_MacDonald]
10:37:55 [David_MacDonald]
Is the irc going funny?
10:44:25 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
10:45:55 [wendy]
m3m there have been techs for using object and not embed (and valid) for over a year. it's just that embed what people do.
10:46:43 [wendy]
js what we ought to be doing in techs is doing our best to research and develop techs that are already out there that do work and only when we can't find anything should we consider including techs that we'd have to consider hacks or work arounds.
10:48:41 [Zakim]
10:54:14 [Zakim]
10:58:09 [wendy]
moving off into work groups
10:58:16 [wendy]
calling back in 1.5 hours
10:58:18 [Zakim]
10:58:22 [Zakim]
10:58:23 [Zakim]
10:58:23 [Zakim]
10:58:26 [Zakim]
10:58:27 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has ended
10:58:28 [Zakim]
Attendees were Wendy, David_MacDonald, bengt, John_Slatin, Mike_Barta
10:59:34 [MattDUB]
MattDUB has joined #wai-wcag
11:12:17 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
11:12:27 [wendy]
11:13:20 [wendy]
11:17:06 [wendy]
Gez's write-up plus comments:
11:30:04 [Michael]
Michael has joined #wai-wcag
12:24:53 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
12:27:05 [wendy]
zakim, this is wcag
12:27:05 [Zakim]
wendy, I see WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be wcag".
12:27:17 [wendy]
zakim, this will be wcag
12:27:17 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; I see WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM scheduled to start 267 minutes ago
12:29:06 [Becky]
Becky has joined #wai-wcag
12:29:50 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
12:29:59 [wendy]
zakim, call wendy-617
12:29:59 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; the call is being made
12:30:00 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has now started
12:30:01 [Zakim]
12:30:09 [wendy]
zakim, drop wendy
12:30:09 [Zakim]
Wendy is being disconnected
12:30:10 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has ended
12:30:11 [Zakim]
Attendees were Wendy
12:30:31 [wendy]
zakim, call wendy-617
12:30:31 [Zakim]
sorry, wendy, I don't know what conference this is
12:30:36 [wendy]
zakim, this will be wcag
12:30:36 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; I see WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM scheduled to start 270 minutes ago
12:30:39 [wendy]
zakim, call wendy-617
12:30:39 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; the call is being made
12:30:40 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has now started
12:30:41 [Zakim]
12:30:58 [nabe]
nabe has left #wai-wcag
12:31:04 [wendy]
david? bengt? we're back
12:31:49 [Michael]
Michael has joined #wai-wcag
12:32:13 [wendy]
present: Ben Caldwell, Gregg Vanderheiden, Yvette Hoitink, Takayuki Watanabe, Makoto Ueki,
12:32:42 [wendy]
Wendy Chisholm, Gez Lemon, Alistair Garrison, Michael Cooper, Kerstin Goldsmith, Becky Gibson, Andi Snow-Weaver, Tom Croucher, Matt May
12:32:52 [wendy]
michael summarizes issues discussed yesterday:
12:33:07 [wendy]
1. features that are not universally supported in all user agents
12:33:14 [wendy]
2. traditionally wcag requires alternatives to be provided
12:33:53 [wendy]
3. chicken and egg problem
12:34:01 [wendy]
why implement it if it won't be required?
12:34:35 [wendy]
we don't want to ban a technology, it will hurt innovation
12:34:48 [wendy]
people will innovate anyway, if we ban accessibiltiy will get left behind.
12:35:09 [wendy]
we don't want to require mandatory alternatives if the tech is widely available
12:36:02 [wendy]
no alternatives for techs widely supported by user agents
12:36:08 [wendy]
javascript and flash are the common examplse
12:36:33 [wendy]
tc didn't think it fair to ban techs b/c not supported rather than banning b/c not accessible
12:37:03 [wendy]
mc responsibility: content author responsibility or user agent responsibility?
12:37:11 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
12:37:12 [wendy]
don't want techniqeus to supercede guidelines requirements
12:38:18 [wendy]
upside down stools
12:38:50 [Zakim]
12:39:19 [Zakim]
12:40:21 [wendy]
12:41:05 [wendy]
gv however hard it is to effect the user agents, it is harder to affect the authors
12:41:22 [wendy]
mc we had a baseline "task force" which didn't get as far as we had hoped, but we have a proposal for today.
12:41:42 [wendy]
yh one leg of stool is the user - that they have to update their user agent
12:41:58 [wendy]
ben? can you display this image on the screen:
12:42:03 [wendy]
12:43:21 [wendy]
gv if some people must live in the lynx environment then let's look at how to get them the functionality
12:43:28 [Michael]
Reasonable Baselines: The concept of baselines necessarily means that not all user agents meet the requirements expected by the baseline. With most baselines, there will be some user agents used by people with disabilities that cannot render the site effectively. Although authors may choose to use any set of technologies that match the baseline criteria, they should choose technologies for which user agent support is widespread in their target audience.
12:43:51 [sh1m]
sh1m has joined #wai-wcag
12:43:57 [gregg]
gregg has joined #wai-wcag
12:44:01 [Andi]
Andi has joined #wai-wcag
12:44:16 [wendy]
Reasonable Baselines: The concept of baselines necessarily means that not all user agents meet the requirements expected by the baseline. With most baselines, there will be some user agents used by people with disabilities that cannot render the site effectively. Although authors may choose to use any set of technologies that match the baseline criteria, they should choose technologies for which user agent support is widespread in their target audience.
12:44:31 [wendy]
(repasting for those who joined after michael pasted in)
12:45:00 [Michael]
Fallbacks: To maximize accessibility, site implementation should take into account non-support for baseline technologies and provide fallback features when practical. Although not required for WCAG 2.0 conformance, this practice will increase the reach of the site.
12:46:13 [Michael]
Baseline criteria: A technology or document format must be capable of being rendered by available user agents in a manner consistent with WCAG 2.0.
12:46:14 [wendy]
gv a baseline or baselines?
12:46:23 [Michael]
Baseline: A set of technologies that meet the baseline criteria and are required for users to access the features of a site. Technologies that do not meet the baseline criteria are not part of the baseline and are subject to the WCAG 2.0 requirement to provide equivalent alternatives.
12:46:51 [wendy]
tc in a controlled environment (such as internal site) may have different baseline for internal vs higher for external.
12:47:03 [wendy]
ack john
12:47:10 [wendy]
js is baseline equivalent to system requirements?
12:47:45 [scribe]
scribe has joined #wai-wcag
12:49:04 [Michael]
12:49:07 [wendy]
gv we need to document our assumptions. e.g., we're assuming any player can play captions. those assumptions will change over time as technologies change. e.g., today alt-text for images of text is required b/c screen readers can't process.
12:49:52 [wendy]
tc our assumptions are different from assumptions of people in developing countries. banning scripting is too restrictive in some places and not in others.
12:51:02 [Kerstin]
There are always screenreaders like Gnopernicus that are free, opensource, run on Solaris and Linux, and will eventually be made to run on Windows, as well....
12:51:11 [wendy]
gv everyone could make different assumptions, at some point we will need a baseline for what we write.
12:51:20 [Michael]
q+ yvette
12:51:49 [wendy]
tc we have techniques that have a low baseline. we can supply a baseline and supply info for all.
12:52:09 [wendy]
ack michael
12:52:35 [wendy]
mc in additional to concept of baseline, an org can choose a baseline and can do so according to a recipe that we can develop.
12:52:50 [wendy]
tom? becky? can someone minute? i'm going to ask about the temperature.
12:52:54 [sh1m]
12:52:57 [wendy]
12:53:04 [sh1m]
reccomended baseline for most orgs
12:53:07 [gregg]
12:53:57 [wendy]
thx tom, got it
12:54:07 [sh1m]
update the baseline in the future as things change
12:54:31 [Michael]
Suggested baseline: The W3C recommends the following baseline for most organizations:
12:54:32 [Michael]
·Plain text
12:54:34 [Michael]
·HTML 4.0 or XHTML 1.0
12:54:35 [Michael]
·CSS 2.0
12:54:37 [Michael]
·ECMAScript (version?)
12:54:38 [Michael]
·SMIL (?)
12:54:46 [Michael]
The following technologies are known to provide accessibility features but are not sufficiently supported by user agents and should be excluded from the baseline. In the future these technologies may become part of the recommended baseline. Provide equivalent alternatives when using these technologies:
12:54:47 [Michael]
12:54:49 [Michael]
·PDF (? - support is limited to the Windows platform?)
12:54:50 [Michael]
·SVG (support is not widespread)
12:54:52 [Michael]
·MPEG/Quicktime/Real/AVI (accessibility features exist but are not sufficiently standardized or universally supported [note SMIL is one method of providing alternatives, so these formats can be used in combination with SMIL])
12:54:53 [Michael]
·Java (accessibility features exist, but VM?s capable of using them are not sufficiently widely distributed)
12:54:56 [Michael]
The following technologies do not provide accessibility features and are not capable of being meaningfully transformed by user agents:
12:54:57 [Michael]
·Images (gif/jpeg/png/etc.)
12:54:59 [Michael]
·Audio-only formats (.au, .aiff, etc.)
12:55:01 [Michael]
·Director / Shockwave
12:55:11 [wendy]
gv i had been assuming that you can't write the guidelines w/out knowing the baseline. now that we have the checklist outside of the guidelines are you thinking that you could have different checklists and you would change the baseline w/out effecting the guideliens?
12:55:40 [Michael]
q+ alistair
12:55:43 [sh1m]
ack john
12:56:33 [sh1m]
already making baseline assumptions on guidelines and techniques
12:56:38 [wendy]
js when we write guidelines/techs we're already basing those on assumptions. we should first tease those out - what we already assume - and then determine if we should or not.
12:56:42 [Kerstin]
John: when we are writing guidelines and techniques, there is already an assumption about baseline ..
12:57:47 [Zakim]
12:58:01 [sh1m]
??P18, is David
12:58:03 [wendy]
zakim, ??P18 is David_MacDonald
12:58:03 [Zakim]
+David_MacDonald; got it
12:58:24 [wendy]
ack yvette
12:58:51 [sh1m]
12:58:55 [wendy]
yh this has parallels to the scoping discussion. we said at the last f2f, it is not up to us to decide where the guidelines should apply. i think the same applies here.
12:58:58 [sh1m]
Zakim, I am Tom
12:58:58 [Zakim]
sorry, sh1m, I do not see a party named 'Tom'
12:59:08 [wendy]
yh it is not up to us to decide what a company should select as a baseline.
12:59:32 [sh1m]
q+ Tom
12:59:42 [sh1m]
q- sh1m
12:59:44 [wendy]
yh if you use a tech, this is when you use it accessibly
13:00:24 [wendy]
yh could recommend that you don't need this type of content to conform at level 1.
13:00:34 [wendy]
gv want to differentiate between public internet and private intranet
13:00:50 [wendy]
gv our guidelines will be used to assess if something is good enough.
13:02:10 [jslatin]
jslatin has joined #wai-wcag
13:04:14 [jslatin]
Title of the Section 508 Web standards: § 1194.22 Web-based intranet and internet information and applications.
13:05:29 [Michael]
q+ yvette
13:05:58 [Michael]
ack gregg
13:06:02 [Michael]
ack alistair
13:06:07 [wendy]
ag baseline has to have some correlation to UAAG
13:06:28 [Kerstin]
Kerstin has joined #wai-wcag
13:06:34 [gregg]
13:07:28 [wendy]
ag based on an updated UAAG
13:07:37 [wendy]
m3m it is not on the table for discussion
13:08:27 [wendy]
wac what needs updating are the user agents
13:08:41 [Kerstin]
13:08:47 [wendy]
ack tom
13:08:52 [Kerstin]
13:09:36 [jslatin]
A baseline assumption we make: that WCAG, ATAG, & USAG are interdependent.
13:09:47 [wendy]
tc we can have some flexibility w/out endless flexibility.
13:09:57 [Michael]
q- yvette
13:11:11 [wendy]
ag if you look at a country like china, with many different industrial zones, they may have a variety of policies within one country.
13:11:20 [wendy]
tc different places have different needs.
13:11:38 [Kerstin]
q+ to say that half an hour has gone by, can we summarize where we are right now, possibly list issues, see where to go next?
13:11:55 [wendy]
q+ to say, "perhaps we should document our baseline first...perhaps a poll? and then discuss if we can create a recipe from that."
13:12:04 [sh1m]
ack gregg
13:12:21 [wendy]
gv the guidelines will have to make some assumption of baseline and then others can always be more restrictive.
13:12:22 [Kerstin]
13:13:58 [wendy]
gv then countries with less support could make the baseline more restrictive (a lower baseline)
13:14:17 [wendy]
tc a specific exception for closed environments (intranets)
13:14:22 [wendy]
gv yes, you can make different assumptions.
13:14:29 [wendy]
gv but, we are working on the general internet
13:14:58 [wendy]
tc but the title is "web content..." guidelines
13:15:07 [wendy]
gv can't make assumptions about a closed environment
13:15:46 [ben]
13:16:04 [wendy]
gv they could have their own user agent
13:16:06 [wendy]
ack wendy
13:16:06 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say, "perhaps we should document our baseline first...perhaps a poll? and then discuss if we can create a recipe from that."
13:18:09 [wendy]
ack ben
13:18:54 [wendy]
bc allowing countries to lower the bar creates a problem for authors. e.g., if one country says "scripts are ok" and another says "scripts not ok" then the author has 2 baselines to hit.
13:19:18 [wendy]
bc can we create a way for authors to state what their baseline is and then provide guidance about a reasonable baseline.
13:20:04 [wendy]
bc if i make a baseline that requires only browsers in the last year and screen readers that cost $1000, then that baseline won't hold water. they can make a claim for their intranet that might be really high...
13:20:11 [wendy]
mc seems to solve the testability problem.
13:20:19 [gregg]
13:20:25 [wendy]
bc authors have implied baseline when making content. they know if they want to support netscape 4 or not.
13:20:35 [wendy]
bc we can solve objectc/embed problem for everyone but netscape 4.
13:20:55 [Michael]
q+ alistair
13:21:03 [wendy]
bc if i want a certain type of backward compatibility...we need to leave room for that possibility in the baseline
13:21:06 [wendy]
ack gregg
13:21:15 [sh1m]
q+ Tom
13:21:27 [wendy]
gv the last example is an example of WCAG having a baseline and an author wanting a lower baseline.
13:22:00 [wendy]
gv the wcag baseline would be max/min others could be more restrictive
13:22:18 [wendy]
gv either wcag or author decides, we are deciding who will take up the slack.
13:22:26 [wendy]
gv if leave it up to the author, the user has to get new equipment.
13:23:32 [Andi]
13:24:16 [wendy]
gv thought the formula was not for authors, but so that over time whatever the universal baseline would crawl up. don't want the same baseline for wcag 2.0 for the next 5 years.
13:24:17 [wendy]
ack alistair
13:24:46 [Michael]
q+ to say a universal baseline that increments is better than nothing, but brings up commitment to maintain (techniques)
13:24:55 [gregg]
13:25:35 [sh1m]
ack John
13:27:18 [wendy]
js there was a provision in 4.1 to allow for documented departures from specifications to allow backward compatibility.
13:28:20 [Kerstin]
wouldn't it be great to get major UA creators, Assistive Technology creators, WCAG WG, and AT creators into a long working session together -- find out WHY people are not meeting UAAG, what is hard/impossible about ATAG .... and therefore make changes to the TRIAD (UAAG, WCAG, ATAG) to satisfy all -- and also maybe even create an API that Asst. Technologies could write to to support their piece of UAAG, as well ..... utopia?
13:29:22 [wendy]
kerstin - that seems to be the goal of the PFWG and the roadmap.
13:29:28 [David_MacDonald]
Hal says,
13:29:53 [sh1m]
ack Tom
13:30:09 [Kerstin]
if that's the goal of the PFWG, how does WCAG fit into it?
13:30:24 [jslatin]
Tom's breaking up now..
13:30:38 [David_MacDonald]
you guys need to talk normal speed because the limiter shuts off in the spaces. Only us on the phone should talk slow
13:30:40 [sh1m]
13:30:46 [jslatin]
They say that breaking up is hard to do. They're wrong.
13:30:50 [Kerstin]
13:31:12 [bengt]
get closer to mic
13:31:15 [David_MacDonald]
just talk normal an loud over there in Ireland
13:31:17 [nabe]
nabe has left #wai-wcag
13:31:58 [jslatin]
OK I'll hang up
13:32:04 [sh1m]
we are going to call you back
13:32:06 [sh1m]
just us
13:32:08 [wendy]
you don't need to hang up
13:32:10 [sh1m]
we are going to dial back in
13:32:12 [jslatin]
i'll stay!
13:32:13 [wendy]
just we'll call back
13:32:24 [Zakim]
13:32:46 [wendy]
we aren't getting a dialtone.
13:32:47 [wendy]
one moment.
13:33:12 [jslatin]
I love it when JAWS reads MIRC saying "ping?" and slomthing answers "pong"
13:33:14 [David_MacDonald]
May day Maday we have lost contact :-)
13:33:54 [jslatin]
"Houston, we have a problem..."
13:34:01 [sh1m]
almost there
13:34:14 [sh1m]
here we go
13:34:22 [Zakim]
13:34:23 [sh1m]
13:34:34 [sh1m]
zakim, ??p5 is F2F
13:34:34 [Zakim]
+F2F; got it
13:34:42 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
13:34:42 [Zakim]
On the phone I see John_Slatin, bengt, David_MacDonald, F2F
13:34:44 [sh1m]
zakim, who's making noise?
13:34:54 [Zakim]
sh1m, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: F2F (60%), David_MacDonald (65%)
13:35:30 [David_MacDonald]
zakim, who's making noise?
13:35:39 [wendy]
tc in the case of javascript, you can use it to make accessible applications.
13:35:41 [Zakim]
David_MacDonald, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: F2F (94%), David_MacDonald (62%)
13:35:47 [wendy]
tc if people want to choose it, we should let them.
13:36:33 [sh1m]
ack andi
13:36:33 [ben]
13:37:04 [wendy]
asw if we create a baseline, aren't we banning technologies that aren't on that list?
13:37:14 [wendy]
gv if we base it on uaag, then no.
13:37:45 [wendy]
q+ to say, "uaag is very desktop/html/multimedia specific"
13:38:59 [wendy]
gv if you say you can use any technology that meets uaag, however, how many technologies meet uaag?
13:39:23 [wendy]
yh there is no screen reader in dutch, they use braille.
13:39:46 [wendy]
correction: there is not a *good* screen reader in dutch
13:40:25 [Michael]
ack michael
13:40:25 [Zakim]
Michael, you wanted to say a universal baseline that increments is better than nothing, but brings up commitment to maintain (techniques)
13:40:47 [Zakim]
13:41:26 [ken]
ken has joined #wai-wcag
13:41:45 [jslatin]
Even the analog is breaking up
13:41:55 [David_MacDonald]
but much better
13:42:13 [Kerstin]
q+ yvette
13:42:22 [wendy]
1.2 Target user agents
13:42:24 [wendy]
This document was designed specifically to improve the accessibility of user agents with multimedia capabilities running in the following type of environment (typically that of a desktop computer):
13:42:26 [wendy]
* The operating environment includes a keyboard (or keyboard equivalent)
13:42:28 [wendy]
* Assistive technologies may be used in the operating environment and may communicate with the conforming user agent
13:42:39 [wendy]
13:42:54 [wendy]
ack gregg
13:42:55 [sh1m]
ack gregg
13:43:10 [David_MacDonald]
q+ David
13:43:52 [wendy]
gv industry would be much happier w/us defining a baseline rather than courtrooms decide what it is. as much as industry wants it to be easy to meet, the worst thing is to have a baseline that is different in different countries.
13:44:04 [David_MacDonald]
q- david
13:45:37 [Kerstin]
do we want to do uaag before we do straw poll vote on baseline issues?
13:46:02 [wendy]
yh provide a document for policy makers - what the baseline would be.
13:46:03 [jslatin]
cant hear yvette
13:46:46 [Kerstin]
what about a document that just addresses current combinations of ua, at, and wc -- didn't janae put together something like this?
13:46:56 [wendy]
gv how would a company do business in that country?
13:47:16 [wendy]
gv if you want to do business in a developing country,then have to go with their baseline
13:48:48 [wendy]
13:50:10 [jslatin]
so different baselines for desktop and wireless devices?
13:50:10 [Becky]
Becky has joined #wai-wcag
13:50:31 [ben]
13:50:34 [ben]
ack wendy
13:50:34 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say, "uaag is very desktop/html/multimedia specific"
13:50:37 [ben]
ack yvette
13:51:39 [sh1m]
13:52:01 [sh1m]
q+ Yvette
13:52:09 [sh1m]
ack sh1m
13:52:17 [gregg]
13:52:31 [wendy]
m3m limiting factor are test cases.
13:52:54 [sh1m]
ack Yvette
13:53:19 [sh1m]
yh For which techs are their UAAG compliant UAs?
13:53:21 [wendy]
yh conformance to uaag?
13:53:31 [wendy]
m3m major browsers are 90%+ the way there.
13:53:39 [wendy]
m3m that 10% is different for each browser
13:54:13 [wendy]
also note that UAAG 1.0 relies on WCAG 1.0
13:54:21 [sh1m]
ie, opera, mozilla are substantially compatable with UAAG. It's either they are mostly complete, or are missing sections
13:54:36 [wendy]
we could get a conflict if we require something different in WCAG 2.0, e.g., "Ensure that users have access to all content, notably conditional content that may have been provided to meet the requirements of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 [WCAG10]."
13:54:36 [sh1m]
All of them are aware of UAAG and are intergrating in successive version.
13:54:59 [sh1m]
There is still not a browser that are HTML 4.01, the browsers don't do things in lots of little ways.
13:55:30 [sh1m]
The specifications are conform or not, they don't have A, AA, AAA.
13:55:45 [Kerstin]
nobody claims conformance to anything else that W3C does -- Matt.
13:55:51 [sh1m]
gvh: UAAG is more a regulartory standard
13:56:18 [sh1m]
gvh: Tech supported, talk about the three browsers
13:56:35 [sh1m]
bc: 90% of lvl A or 90% of all lvls?
13:57:03 [sh1m]
mc: We have tested this on around 8 browsers. We have a matrix of conformance
13:57:29 [MattDUB]
13:57:31 [sh1m]
gvh: Wendy's two points. Firstly the intro, the second part seems more a problem
13:57:49 [sh1m]
"It was designed to work with user agents of multimedia capabilities"
13:58:03 [sh1m]
gvh: Would think that with no multimedia capability it would still work
13:58:12 [sh1m]
gvh: Our guidelines work without multimedia
13:58:38 [sh1m]
gvh: We don't always require alt for multimedia sometmes just that it is accessible
13:58:45 [sh1m]
"Should work with a keyboard"
13:59:00 [sh1m]
gvh: we require kb usable pages
13:59:20 [sh1m]
"Target is one designed for the general public, for use in general operating conditions"
13:59:31 [sh1m]
gvh: Well that seems ok, just worry about multimedia
13:59:55 [sh1m]
gvh: Wendy cited MathML do user agents support that?
14:00:16 [sh1m]
gvh: If you put MathML on your page it could be like ascii art
14:00:19 [sh1m]
ack John
14:00:52 [sh1m]
js: About the MathML support, Moz has partial support, Opera too. Plugin called "Math player" which works with JAws and window eyes.
14:01:13 [sh1m]
js: Right now you have to have the math player plugin to use MathML in Jaws.
14:01:23 [sh1m]
js: Plugin for IE
14:01:38 [sh1m]
gvh: What does jaws do when it runs into MathML?
14:01:46 [wendy]
mathml implementation report:
14:02:00 [wendy]
mathml software:
14:03:22 [jslatin]
NCAM educational guidelines have refereences for speaking math- reading order, chunking expressions, etc.
14:03:26 [sh1m]
yh: Houw would you do it with a braille reader?
14:03:42 [sh1m]
gvh: If it could be spoken you can do it with words
14:03:50 [sh1m]
js: You can use math braille
14:04:52 [Kerstin]
q- Jo
14:04:58 [Kerstin]
q- John_Slatin
14:05:12 [jslatin]
Mozillaa supports SVG (most of it, not all)
14:05:32 [jslatin]
No widely available screen reader support for SVG, some experiments
14:05:44 [sh1m]
gvh: What about something, say SVG. That is an image?
14:06:18 [jslatin]
no screen reader support for current SVG viewers (Adobe, etc.)
14:06:28 [sh1m]
mcm: No SVG encapsulates text and other information as a format, you can include alternates inside
14:06:47 [sh1m]
wc: My concern was that SVG wouldn't be supported by UAAG
14:07:56 [jslatin]
mozilla svg project:
14:09:42 [sh1m]
gvh: So I see that no browser has full text support
14:10:04 [sh1m]
mcm: Right Mozilla for example doesn't support keyboard access to the tool bards
14:10:20 [sh1m]
14:12:06 [sh1m]
mcm: on 1.1 we have nothing that says complete, that one checkpoint has 22 different tests. Ie for example does all but too
14:12:33 [sh1m]
mcm: The only ones are access key can't actuate a label and checkboxes was only partially implemented to our standard
14:13:24 [jslatin]
Hmmm. Can't get the URL, Tom.
14:13:55 [sh1m]
still sending
14:13:57 [sh1m]
14:14:03 [sh1m]
did you get that?
14:15:50 [jslatin]
Damn JAWS & MIRC! I can *hear* the URL going by but when I try to arrow to it all I get is the pane that lists who's on IRC!
14:16:28 [MattDUB]
HPR review:
14:17:12 [David_MacDonald]
Bengt still there?
14:17:20 [bengt]
14:17:30 [David_MacDonald]
14:17:43 [bengt]
how long break ???
14:17:50 [MattDUB]
15 min
14:17:56 [David_MacDonald]
should we call back?
14:18:05 [wendy]
we'll be back in 15
14:18:10 [bengt]
14:19:04 [bengt]
14:19:06 [Zakim]
14:19:07 [Zakim]
14:19:08 [Zakim]
14:19:09 [Zakim]
14:19:10 [Zakim]
14:19:11 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has ended
14:19:12 [Zakim]
Attendees were Wendy, John_Slatin, bengt, David_MacDonald, F2F
14:32:39 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
14:34:57 [sh1m]
We are back again!
14:35:25 [sh1m]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:35:25 [Zakim]
I notice WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has restarted
14:35:26 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P7, John_Slatin
14:35:42 [sh1m]
Zakim, ??P7 is f2f
14:35:42 [Zakim]
+f2f; got it
14:36:26 [Zakim]
14:36:54 [David_MacDonald]
zakim, ??P18 is David_MacDonald
14:36:54 [Zakim]
+David_MacDonald; got it
14:37:00 [Andi]
starting to discuss Jason's recipe proposal
14:37:04 [wendy]
jason's post:
14:37:40 [Andi]
recipe that varies by time, technology, etc.
14:38:27 [Zakim]
14:38:53 [bengt_]
bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
14:39:11 [Andi]
gv> but don't we need a target baseline assumption in order to write the guidelines?
14:39:28 [Andi]
techniques are heavily dependent on baselines
14:39:32 [Kerstin]
Andi -- just let me know when you need/want a break from minuting ...
14:41:11 [Andi]
gv> text is totally inaccessible to someone who is blind unless it is read to them by something.
14:41:27 [Andi]
gv> assuming user agent can render it in a form that makes it accessible to users who are blind
14:42:09 [Andi]
gv> because part of our population is blind and doesn't read Braille, we are assuming that some technology exists that can render it in audio
14:43:01 [Andi]
gv> another assumption is that all multimedia players can display closed captions
14:43:18 [Andi]
mc> debatable point - either require captioning or separate transcript
14:43:46 [Andi]
gv> alternate transcript not required at Level 1, only at Level 2
14:44:56 [Andi]
js> caught up in whether or not the baseline is something that developers target or whether they are built in assumptions in the guidelines
14:45:45 [Andi]
mc> lot of discussion brought us to thinking about techniques in bottoms up approach and then see if it works with the guidelines.
14:45:59 [Andi]
mc> if doesn't work, then determine if problem is with the technique or the guideline
14:47:26 [Andi]
gv> additional things it's good to do but are not required by the guidelines - Level 4
14:47:50 [Andi]
mc> we've gone top down with the guidelines, started with the techniques about halfway down
14:48:13 [Andi]
mc> need to do bottoms up approach with the techniques
14:48:52 [Zakim]
14:50:40 [Kerstin]
q+ kerstin to ask to repeat all three possibilities for what baseline is
14:50:50 [jslatin]
suggest different vocabulary: "working-group assumptions" vs "system requirements"
14:51:32 [Andi]
mc> need a proposal to help frame further discussion
14:52:28 [Kerstin]
baseline could be one of three things:
14:52:29 [Kerstin]
1)what we use to write the guidelines
14:52:29 [Kerstin]
2)what a developer uses to build accessible content
14:52:29 [Kerstin]
3)what would be used to guide the evolution of the checklists
14:52:38 [Andi]
thanks Kerstin
14:52:44 [Kerstin]
14:53:10 [Kerstin]
q- kerstin
14:53:33 [Andi]
mc> believes the baseline is for the author and the checklists.
14:53:59 [Andi]
mc> The guidelines should be agnostic to a particular baseline but not to the concept of a baseline
14:54:34 [Andi]
js> look at the voting on HTML techniques exercise - might be a way to get at the assumptions the WG is making
14:55:19 [Andi]
js> might help us come up with a way of talking about baselines
14:55:50 [Andi]
alli> whatever we come up with has to be simple
14:55:55 [Michael]
q+ to mention evaluate vs benchmark
14:56:07 [Kerstin]
q- J
14:57:06 [Andi]
tc> have a number of recommendations that have flexibility - such as picking JavaScript or not picking JavaScript - would be sufficient for Tom
14:57:38 [Andi]
tc> having a number of recommendations for a set of circumstances
14:58:13 [Andi]
tc> don't think we can come up with formula that will be robust enough to last over time
14:58:39 [gregg]
14:59:02 [Andi]
tc> need a scheme that is flexible enough to let you choose technologies but the technologies you choose have have accessibility capabilities
14:59:16 [Andi]
have have = have to have
15:00:08 [Andi]
mc> benchmarking is difficult if sites use different baselines
15:00:37 [Andi]
gv> have to remember socio-economic status
15:00:41 [Michael]
ack michael
15:00:41 [Zakim]
Michael, you wanted to mention evaluate vs benchmark
15:00:43 [Michael]
ack gregg
15:01:04 [Andi]
gv> have to set the baseline at something that is reasonable to assume that a consumer will have
15:01:33 [Andi]
gv> could assume users will have something that meets UAAG and go push vendors to support UAAG.
15:01:52 [Andi]
gv> not reasonable to assume the latest version of XP and JAWS - sets the bar too high
15:01:56 [Kerstin]
q+ yvette
15:02:23 [Andi]
gv> could set the baseline at what is available in a user agent that is below a certain cost.
15:02:57 [sh1m]
q+ Tom
15:03:11 [Michael]
q+ to say gregg just mentioned things that would be in the recipe
15:03:26 [sh1m]
ack yvette
15:04:04 [Andi]
yh> confused - some people talk about the baseline in terms of technologies. others talk about it in terms of user agents.
15:04:18 [Andi]
gv> baseline is what technologies user agents can handle
15:04:22 [ben]
15:04:49 [Andi]
gv> question is what technologies do user agents support
15:04:57 [sh1m]
ack David
15:05:00 [Andi]
gv> what is it reasonable to assume that users can get
15:05:27 [Andi]
dm> in Guatemala - using IE 5 and 6, have JAWS 3.7 in Spanish.
15:06:20 [Andi]
dm> except for languages for which there is no assistive technology, everybody seems to be fairly current
15:06:41 [Andi]
dm> consumers may not own individually but have access to AT centers
15:06:42 [sh1m]
acl Tom
15:06:48 [MattDUB]
ack tom
15:06:53 [wendy]
proposal: pick a year(s) and geo region(s) for user agent and asst tech development (e.g., Americas, Europe, Japan, 1998+ = IE5,6, etc.) pick a list of specs to conform to (e.g., HTML 4.01, CSS Level 2, etc.), list exceptions to specs (e.g., yes - embed, no - accesskey), pick audience (e.g., all web, private intranet).
15:07:36 [wendy]
15:07:38 [Andi]
tc> is it reasonable for us to try to define a completely holistic world wide web baseline
15:07:55 [wendy]
why does ( s ) show up as a bubble in ben's irc client
15:08:20 [wendy]
q+ to say, "proposal"
15:09:03 [Andi]
tc> if we set the baseline really low are we doing a disservice to people using AT because their AT won't step up to newer technologies
15:10:02 [Andi]
gv> we will probably end up choosing a baseline which includes technologies that some will not be able to access
15:10:29 [sh1m]
15:10:29 [Michael]
ack michael
15:10:29 [Zakim]
Michael, you wanted to say gregg just mentioned things that would be in the recipe
15:11:05 [Andi]
mc> Gregg listed some requirements that could go into the recipe for the baseline anyway
15:11:59 [sh1m]
q+ Tom to ask can we define a 'technology' baseline in addition to an 'economic' baseline, and aim at one and use the other
15:12:18 [Kerstin]
ack ben
15:12:21 [Andi]
bc> as user agents are widely available that support a technology, checklist items that are restrictions can go away
15:12:24 [Kerstin]
ack wendy
15:12:24 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say, "proposal"
15:12:36 [wendy]
proposal: pick a year(s) and geo region(s) for user agent and asst tech development (e.g., Americas, Europe, Japan, 1998+ = IE5,6, etc.) pick a list of specs to conform to (e.g., HTML 4.01, CSS Level 2, etc.), list exceptions to specs (e.g., yes - embed, no - accesskey), pick audience (e.g., all web, private intranet).
15:12:48 [Michael]
Tom's suggestion is embedded in Jason's proposal already
15:13:20 [Andi]
wc> reads proposal above
15:14:02 [Andi]
wc> need to figure out what we have for a baseline and then say how we're going to apply it
15:14:03 [Kerstin]
q+ allistair
15:14:05 [Michael]
q+ alistair
15:14:15 [Michael]
q- allistair
15:14:38 [MattDUB]
ack tom
15:14:38 [Zakim]
Tom, you wanted to ask can we define a 'technology' baseline in addition to an 'economic' baseline, and aim at one and use the other
15:15:47 [Andi]
tc> Level 1 should only be concerned with technical requirements, Level 2 can be concerned with economic requirements
15:16:12 [Michael]
ack alistair
15:16:17 [Andi]
alli> looking at Wendy's proposal - how does that help with techniques
15:17:47 [Andi]
gv> checklists can change over time if it keeps getting easier for authors
15:18:14 [Michael]
q+ yvette
15:18:53 [Andi]
alli> don't understand how you could write techniques that are dependent on different baselines in different regions
15:20:01 [Andi]
gv> companies will not create more stringent rules for themselves because then they have to follow them in order to be ISO 9000 compliant
15:20:05 [Michael]
q+ to say if we don't have concept of different baselines, we'll only create a single set of techniques and techniques for other baselines won't exist (from us), therfore hurting overall adoption
15:21:37 [Andi]
gv> will have to answer how the checklists can be non-normative and change over time but be the basis for determining compliance with the guidelines which are normative
15:22:26 [Andi]
gv> break into two groups - 1. UAAG analysis and 2. formula recipe
15:22:31 [Michael]
15:22:36 [Michael]
q- yvettee
15:22:40 [Michael]
q- yvette
15:22:43 [Michael]
ack john
15:23:44 [Zakim]
15:23:56 [Zakim]
15:25:13 [ben]
15:25:38 [wendy]
15:25:49 [wendy]
15:25:54 [wendy]
15:26:01 [wendy]
15:27:44 [MattDUB]
15:28:35 [David_MacDonald]
The phone hung up
15:28:43 [David_MacDonald]
I'm back
15:28:58 [Becky]
sorry just a microphone "issue"
15:29:09 [David_MacDonald]
Hey I ddon't want to become hearing impaired as well as paraplaegic
15:30:48 [David_MacDonald]
are we just reading UAAG
15:33:09 [bengt_]
15:38:38 [sh1m]
David yahoo has a drop down list box on their frontpage
15:43:41 [Makoto]
Makoto has joined #wai-wcag
15:50:43 [David_MacDonald]
are you reading
16:16:05 [bengt_]
have to go its soon 6.30 for me
16:16:50 [Zakim]
16:19:09 [ben]
16:47:13 [shawn]
shawn has joined #wai-wcag
17:03:37 [Kerstin]
Kerstin has joined #wai-wcag
17:03:50 [Kerstin]
wendy, can I get the URI for the poll this morning?
17:04:10 [wendy]
17:04:12 [wendy]
17:14:51 [Zakim]
17:14:52 [Zakim]
17:14:53 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(f2f)4:00AM has ended
17:14:54 [Zakim]
Attendees were John_Slatin, f2f, David_MacDonald, bengt
17:16:34 [ben]
ben has left #wai-wcag
17:50:00 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag
17:57:42 [shawn]
shawn has left #wai-wcag
18:21:22 [bengt_]
bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
18:40:15 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
18:45:25 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
18:45:43 [nabe]
nabe has left #wai-wcag
19:06:11 [Andi]
Andi has joined #wai-wcag
19:09:49 [nabe]
nabe has joined #wai-wcag
19:10:53 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
19:12:10 [wendy]
group 1: looked at uaag 1.0
19:12:16 [wendy]
for homer page reader
19:12:30 [wendy]
there were 2 items: 1.2 and 2.3 (?)
19:12:45 [wendy]
you could use uaag- as a reference design
19:13:24 [Makoto]
Makoto has joined #wai-wcag
19:13:34 [wendy]
1.2 activate event handlers - you can't activate mouseon in a couple browsers
19:14:06 [ben]
ben has joined #wai-wcag
19:14:09 [wendy]
there are techniques to use to meet that
19:14:35 [wendy]
2.3 render conditional content - there are strategies to get around
19:14:39 [wendy]
but then we couldn't recommend object
19:15:13 [wendy]
looked like a baseline browser that was close to uaag could
19:15:17 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #wai-wcag
19:15:24 [wendy]
zakim, this is will be wcag
19:15:24 [Zakim]
sorry, wendy, I do not see a conference named 'will be wcag' in progress or scheduled at this time
19:15:25 [sh1m]
Zakim, this is WAI_WCAG
19:15:26 [Zakim]
sh1m, I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be WAI_WCAG".
19:15:37 [sh1m]
Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
19:15:37 [Zakim]
ok, sh1m; I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM scheduled to start in 45 minutes
19:16:21 [wendy]
zakim, room for 3?
19:16:22 [Zakim]
ok, wendy; conference Team_(wai-wcag)19:16Z scheduled with code 83261 (TEAM1) for 60 minutes until 2016Z
19:21:32 [wendy]
8.2 conform to w3c recs or non-w3c specs that enable creation of content to wcag 1.0...some adjust needed.
19:21:49 [wendy]
not sure what to do about uaag if it will never be revised
19:22:33 [wendy]
can publish as an edited rec
19:23:43 [wendy]
group 2
19:24:02 [wendy]
explored several pieces, main idea was that the baseline would be set on user's requirements (that's what drives the baseline)
19:24:28 [jslatin]
jslatin has joined #wai-wcag
19:24:34 [jslatin]
anybody home?
19:24:46 [wendy]
hello john. we're here
19:24:48 [sh1m]
hey john
19:24:52 [sh1m]
new conference code
19:25:06 [sh1m]
19:25:10 [jslatin]
OK, I'll call in with the new passcode
19:25:23 [sh1m]
We haven't got a phone at the moment
19:25:38 [sh1m]
So please bear with us if we take a few minutes to join
19:25:42 [Zakim]
Team_(wai-wcag)19:16Z has now started
19:25:49 [Zakim]
19:26:01 [Kerstin]
Kerstin has joined #wai-wcag
19:26:25 [jslatin]
Sure/ You're going late tonight!
19:26:38 [sh1m]
Actually this is early for me ;)
19:26:45 [Kerstin]
time is money on a trip like this ....
19:26:48 [sh1m]
The rest of them aren't used to it though
19:27:38 [Zakim]
19:27:44 [wendy]
zakim, ??P9 is f2f
19:27:44 [Zakim]
+f2f; got it
19:29:20 [wendy]
the developers will want to know what tech pwd will be accessing the site with. if you are told to produce a site, you'll want to know what people are using.
19:29:41 [wendy]
however, not possible to state what people will be using, except in some cases like sweden where they give out the asst. technologies.
19:30:19 [wendy]
you could end up with content that works well for people in sweden but not for people with other asst tech. it forces you to come up with a generic browser specification to design to.
19:30:23 [wendy]
which leads you clearly to uaag
19:30:54 [wendy]
the other advantage is with a specification like that you can use it to corral the thinking on the technjiqeus and work within something.
19:31:02 [wendy]
(in terms of bottom up approach)
19:31:47 [wendy]
by framing your thinking, can provide better feedback to the guidelines.
19:32:31 [wendy]
take the whole thing and work with it in the perfect world, by the time people are adopting wcag 2.0, that world is more likely to exist.
19:34:16 [wendy]
by raising the bar, it encourages people to achieve that standard within the next period of time.
19:34:25 [Kerstin]
john: difficult but possible is good
19:34:41 [Kerstin]
q+ jez
19:35:21 [Kerstin]
uaag has some history behind it -- it's not new at this point = TOM
19:35:42 [Kerstin]
q+ kerstin
19:35:43 [wendy]
gv we're not arguing with the user agent manufactures, we'll be arguing with authors
19:35:58 [wendy]
gv if we create a gap, the users will fall into it.
19:36:11 [wendy]
q+ to say "wcag 1.0 can help bridge the gap"
19:36:34 [wendy]
q+ yvette
19:36:35 [Kerstin]
q+ kerstin to say, we are never saying 'there is nothing that meets this' -- in reality we are already saying 'there are ua's that meet only 90% and we are working on getting them to meet that last 10%"
19:36:43 [wendy]
ack jez
19:37:10 [wendy]
gl not convinced about the need for baseline. why can't we aim for standards and go forward from there?
19:38:20 [wendy]
tom? i'm going to play with the ac/heat again - can yo minute?
19:39:21 [Kerstin]
jez is trying hard to understand why, since specs are written with interoperability in mind, we need to go beyond.
19:39:33 [ben]
ack Kerstin
19:39:33 [Zakim]
kerstin, you wanted to say, we are never saying 'there is nothing that meets this' -- in reality we are already saying 'there are ua's that meet only 90% and we are working on
19:39:36 [Zakim]
... getting them to meet that last 10%"
19:40:06 [sh1m]
kg: we aren't saying to people wo have set these guidelines with this baseline, where UAAG is this guidelines but nothing exists. We are talking about a delta where a lot meet most of it.
19:40:31 [sh1m]
kg: Take that energy and push people towards people finishing off the last little bit
19:40:39 [sh1m]
asw: it's not black and white
19:41:32 [sh1m]
gvh: if we focus a lot of that attension on the UA makers
19:42:17 [sh1m]
yh: We don't allow people to say an A- minus for WCAG
19:42:25 [jslatin]
mood is definitely different post-dinner...
19:42:36 [wendy]
ha - it is
19:42:38 [Michael]
Michael has joined #wai-wcag
19:42:54 [sh1m]
kg: we are drawing lines of responsibility
19:42:59 [Michael]
q+ alistair
19:43:04 [wendy]
ack wendy
19:43:04 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say "wcag 1.0 can help bridge the gap"
19:43:31 [sh1m]
wc: talked about in our group, WCAG not being out til 1q next year, another cycle of development
19:43:51 [sh1m]
wc: been talking about scripting uaag does a good job of talking about scripting
19:44:11 [Andi]
19:44:14 [sh1m]
q+ Tom to say can we 'warn' the UA developers about this idea to give them warm up time
19:44:44 [sh1m]
wc: dont forget 1.0 still exists and can help with the gap before wcag 2.0 comes in
19:45:14 [sh1m]
gvh: aren't there some things in scripting we still dont even know how to make accessible
19:45:31 [sh1m]
wc: there is a dhtml roadmap to get this fixed
19:46:02 [sh1m]
asw: there aren't enough sematnics at the moment but Rich is working with PF and the HTML group to try and resolve this
19:46:12 [Kerstin]
ack Y
19:46:16 [sh1m]
ack yvette
19:46:27 [ben]
q+ gregg
19:46:28 [wendy]
6.2 and 6.3 cover scripting appropriately wrt the roadmap:
19:46:33 [wendy]
19:46:51 [sh1m]
yh: gvh worried about a gap, but people will also be worried if we dont move forward
19:46:52 [gregg]
gregg has joined #wai-wcag
19:47:00 [gregg]
19:47:05 [sh1m]
yh: we cant lower our standards which will leave people in the cold as well
19:47:33 [wendy]
yh rather have a gap in the next 2 years rather than lower our standards that might last past that
19:47:37 [wendy]
tc future proofing
19:47:43 [sh1m]
ack alistair
19:47:52 [wendy]
gv a temporary bridge discourages a permanent bridge
19:47:55 [ben]
19:48:22 [sh1m]
ag: concerned with using a standard and then taking a 'tiny bit' off to correct, because you end up with until user agents, again!
19:48:48 [sh1m]
gvh: what if in three years those things still aren't done?
19:49:04 [Kerstin]
if it's not there in 3 years, noone will be able to sell accessible solutions, and courtcases will abound.
19:49:16 [sh1m]
gvh: first thing that will happen in review
19:49:19 [Kerstin]
which will force solutions.
19:49:35 [wendy]
q+ to say, "if wcag pushes wcag 2.0, and atag pushes atag 2.0, and uaag pushes uaag 1.0 and html wg pushes xhtml 2.0...they hold their breath with wcag 1.0, html 4.01/xhtml1.1...."
19:50:14 [sh1m]
mcm: based on the latest test suites we don't have the level of coverage as the previous test suites
19:50:52 [sh1m]
mcm: everything that is in uaag as of an early draft has two interoperable checkpoints
19:51:09 [wendy]
19:51:35 [Kerstin]
how big of an impact is the delta on ua's that don't meet 100%
19:51:36 [sh1m]
gvh: we need to go back on a more thorough analysis and look at priorities of things not supports, and how substantial those issues are
19:51:56 [Kerstin]
how big of any impact on the usability for disabled users ....
19:52:04 [sh1m]
gvh: we do know the UAAG is pretty close to what we could assume, but we need to do more analysis on that
19:52:19 [sh1m]
gvh: would be great to have UAAG as the target and have industry meet it.
19:52:25 [sh1m]
ack adni
19:52:28 [sh1m]
ack andi
19:53:02 [Kerstin]
q+ kerstin to ask Matt, what is industry currently saying in roadmap discussions about either meeting uaag, or why they are not meeting/don't want to meet uaag.
19:53:07 [sh1m]
asw: I was thinking earlier, re: scripts. We can have it as a lvl 1 requirement, that these are the things you can do at this time, and then have something harder that you must have an alternate
19:53:12 [sh1m]
ack tom
19:53:12 [Zakim]
Tom, you wanted to say can we 'warn' the UA developers about this idea to give them warm up time
19:54:02 [wendy]
asap (our next public draft?) send specific request to the UAWG and AC reps of organizations who build browsers
19:54:10 [wendy]
request for review
19:54:22 [Kerstin]
good point, Wendy
19:54:59 [sh1m]
q+ matt
19:55:14 [wendy]
tc what if no one implements uaag in 1 year, we'll be in the same situation where people have stop gaps.
19:55:24 [Kerstin]
tom: what happens if noone implements in 3 years? well, we will be in the same situation, where developers are getting around the problems -- we just don't want to have
19:55:40 [Kerstin]
to constantly adapt to the whims of industry
19:56:03 [sh1m]
ack gregg
19:57:11 [sh1m]
gvh: the guidelines might be able to do UAAG but add the other strategise to help users
19:57:23 [sh1m]
tc: this is the problem gez said
19:57:48 [sh1m]
gvh: which takes us back to the problem with noone taking it seriously
19:58:13 [sh1m]
kg: the baseline should be UAAG
19:58:23 [Makoto]
Makoto has joined #wai-wcag
19:58:28 [Michael]
ack wendy
19:58:28 [Zakim]
wendy, you wanted to say, "if wcag pushes wcag 2.0, and atag pushes atag 2.0, and uaag pushes uaag 1.0 and html wg pushes xhtml 2.0...they hold their breath with wcag 1.0, html
19:58:31 [Zakim]
... 4.01/xhtml1.1...."
19:58:54 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has now started
19:59:01 [Zakim]
19:59:19 [wendy]
ack wendy
20:01:37 [Zakim]
+ +20622aaaa
20:01:42 [Zakim]
- +20622aaaa
20:01:46 [Kerstin]
suing is not an EU thing .... so we change the term to "enforcement", due to loss of business
20:02:12 [Zakim]
20:02:28 [Zakim]
20:02:31 [Michael]
ack ben
20:02:58 [sh1m]
bc: UAAG is a good baseline, how much does that mean that authors need to know about AT and UA?
20:03:13 [sh1m]
bc: how much knowledge on the part of the developers
20:03:24 [Zakim]
20:03:29 [Zakim]
20:03:35 [Zakim]
20:03:36 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
20:03:37 [Zakim]
Attendees were Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Wendy, [Microsoft]
20:03:51 [sh1m]
20:04:10 [Michael]
q+ alistair
20:04:33 [sh1m]
ack matt
20:05:10 [sh1m]
kg: what is it that current UA makers are saying about meeting UAAG?
20:05:38 [sh1m]
mcm: moz are working with UAWG on a week by week basis, and I am meeting MS in a couple of weeks
20:05:48 [sh1m]
mcm: we have people comming to us to talk about UAAG
20:06:05 [sh1m]
mcm: we don't have something that doesn't meet 100% of HTML 4.01 7 years later
20:06:36 [sh1m]
mcm: if they don't meet some small point is that the end of the world for accessiblity? no
20:06:57 [sh1m]
mcm: if we use UAAG as a baseline we have to be worried about holes.
20:07:12 [sh1m]
mcm: there aren't any really gaping holes in any of the major browsers at the momemt
20:07:21 [sh1m]
mcm: yes I approve
20:07:57 [sh1m]
gvh: AT is also part of the UA picture
20:08:27 [sh1m]
tc: you have talked about UAs but less AT
20:09:09 [sh1m]
mcm: a bunch of the AT vendors have us on speed dial
20:09:45 [sh1m]
mcm: aside from the screen reader side, apple are also working on browsers. they are comming a long way in safari and thats part of UAAG too
20:10:05 [sh1m]
js: what about on screen keyboards?
20:10:32 [sh1m]
gvh: as far as the software is concerned the onscreen keyboard is a keyboard
20:10:34 [sh1m]
ack John
20:10:43 [sh1m]
js: quick response to ben's commment
20:11:12 [sh1m]
js: good point, having talked to hundred's of devs over the last couple of years, refering them to UAAG they would know a lot more about what aT could do than almost anyone now
20:13:17 [sh1m]
ag: as a response to ben. you expect the author of a web page to read the WCAG techniques
20:13:25 [sh1m]
ag: they realyl shouldn't need to read any more
20:13:41 [sh1m]
bc: this is why I am asking, I want to make sure we aren't going to force developers to read UAAG
20:14:08 [jslatin]
ask eo to publish an "AT Watch" like the old browserwatch site?
20:14:16 [sh1m]
bc: good place philosphoically, but I worry that we are creating a gap
20:15:45 [jslatin]
does anyone know what becomes of IE in Longhorn?
20:16:43 [wendy]
q+ yvette
20:16:44 [Michael]
ack alistair
20:16:50 [sh1m]
gvh: worried about building a dridge, and stopping in the middle not keeping going until we meet
20:17:00 [sh1m]
mcm: 14:1 on the rap vs 10:1 you are still going to loose people on that curve but you still got the line there, you are going to have these little quirks
20:17:10 [Michael]
q- alistair
20:17:17 [sh1m]
gvh: for a while the ramp my be a little steeper, we need to do some analysis
20:17:48 [sh1m]
ack alistair
20:19:20 [sh1m]
ack yvette
20:20:47 [Michael]
gvh quoth alistair: authors shouldn't have to worry about UAAG - though _we_ will most certainly have to, to make sure everything fits together properly
20:22:07 [sh1m]
yh: people without disabililties are coping with nonstandard complient browsers everyday
20:22:15 [sh1m]
yh: I don't think it's a problem
20:22:29 [jslatin]
a new motto: Making the World WOrse for Everyone!
20:23:09 [wendy]
20:23:09 [RRSAgent]
sees no action items
20:24:07 [wendy]
action: ben and matt - do a gap analysis of uaag implementations as relates to wcag techniques
20:25:09 [wendy]
action: matt, tom, andi, kerstin, michael, alistair, gez, wendy, makoto, takayuki, yvette, gregg, ben - drink at least one beer this evening
20:26:32 [wendy]
action 2 = matt, tom, andi, kerstin, michael, alistair, gez, wendy, makoto, takayuki, john, gregg, ben - drink at least one beer this evening, yvette have one sip
20:26:41 [nabe]
nabe has left #wai-wcag
20:27:33 [ben]
ben has left #wai-wcag
20:27:39 [Zakim]
20:27:52 [Zakim]
20:27:53 [Zakim]
Team_(wai-wcag)19:16Z has ended
20:27:54 [Zakim]
Attendees were John_Slatin, f2f, +20622aaaa
23:28:58 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag