IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-11-03

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:55:36 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:58:53 [ChrisR]
ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
14:59:10 [ken]
ken has joined #wai-wcag
15:00:16 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has now started
15:00:23 [Zakim]
15:00:57 [Zakim]
15:01:23 [Zakim]
15:02:04 [Zakim]
15:02:15 [Becky]
Becky has joined #wai-wcag
15:02:37 [Zakim]
15:02:38 [Zakim]
15:02:44 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
15:03:32 [Zakim]
15:05:05 [Andi]
Andi has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:23 [Andi]
Andi has left #wai-wcag
15:07:50 [ben]
ben has joined #wai-wcag
15:07:51 [Zakim]
15:09:09 [ken]
ken email =
15:13:26 [wendy]
oracle has an internal tool that covers a combination of 508 and wcag. ken has a series of tests. chris and ken will discuss.
15:13:41 [wendy]
next week: talk about how tests are evolving
15:15:08 [Michael]
15:15:25 [Michael]
15:18:47 [wendy]
html issues which were (per straw poll) identified as contentious (i.e., differences in opinion about priority): 1.3 (address element to i.d. author), 2.4 (collection info - link element), 3.1 (section headings), 5.2 (abbr), 5.3 (acronym)
15:19:14 [wendy]
5.4 (blink), 5.5 (marquee ), 5.7 (blockquote)
15:19:40 [wendy]
5.9 (title attribute), 5.10 (supp meaning cues - also title)
15:20:04 [wendy]
5.13 (inline struct elements)
15:20:17 [wendy]
5.15 (relative size)
15:20:37 [wendy]
7.2 (title on table element)
15:21:08 [wendy]
7.3 (summarizing data tables)
15:21:56 [wendy]
7.4 (abbr attribute in table headers)
15:22:05 [wendy]
7.5 (i.d. row groups)
15:22:14 [wendy]
7.6 (colgroups)
15:22:27 [wendy]
7.7 (scope attribute)
15:22:36 [wendy]
[this numbering is from the 8 october draft]
15:22:43 [wendy]
7.8 (headers and ids)
15:22:53 [wendy]
most of the table techniques were contentious.
15:23:01 [wendy]
7.9 layout tables
15:23:31 [wendy]
15:23:41 [wendy]
9.4 image and txt links
15:23:50 [wendy]
9.5 link groups
15:24:02 [wendy]
9.6 tabindex to skip link groups
15:24:09 [wendy]
9.7 skipping link groups
15:24:14 [wendy]
9.9 link separation
15:24:33 [wendy]
9.13 anchors and targets (opening new windwos w/links)
15:24:39 [wendy]
9.14 frames
15:24:59 [wendy]
15:25:11 [wendy]
15:25:13 [wendy]
15:25:24 [wendy]
15:26:16 [wendy]
of the ones just listed, let's look at those where some people wanted to "kill"
15:26:34 [wendy]
1.3 4 kills, 3 p2, 3 optional
15:26:50 [wendy]
15:27:07 [wendy]
is it an accessibility issue? is it a semantic element that we want to encourage people to use?
15:27:26 [wendy]
cr does it increase accessibility?
15:27:52 [wendy]
cr people want to avoid using to avoid getting spam
15:28:03 [wendy]
js typically seen it used to label email address
15:28:36 [wendy]
js if you want semantic markup, better in metadata
15:30:14 [wendy]
mc it is a semantic element. do we have a unique technique for each semantic element or do we have one technique for all semantic elements that links to the spec?
15:30:18 [wendy]
15:31:34 [wendy]
bg don't see an accessibilty benefit in knowing who the author is.
15:31:48 [wendy]
mc "here are other semantic elements..."
15:31:54 [wendy]
bg that's part of follow spec
15:33:02 [wendy]
js it's semantically confusing. the address and name of the author are 2 very different things.
15:37:21 [wendy]
general technique about following specs/standards (link to WaSP). 1 html technique for "other elements" that don't have clear accessibility benefit. 1 html technique for other elements that in theory have accessibility benefit (but not well supported now)
15:37:55 [wendy]
js if have techniques that don't benefit accessibility, it will dilute our suggestions that are accessibility related
15:39:42 [wendy]
js a good rationale for a general technique for principle 4 - why it is important to use tech according to spec and points people to the specs
15:43:05 [wendy]
wac which spec? list accessiblity benefits of xhtml 2.0 in attempt to help the chicken/egg. encourage use of xhtml 1.1 to help transition to 2.0 once available. keeping in mind not widely supported yet, but help build demand for
15:43:49 [wendy]
js if a general tech about semantic markup, we could talk about what elements are considered semantic elements
15:44:44 [wendy]
wac list in html techniques for wcag 1.0 and xag has info about benefits of semantic elements
15:45:13 [wendy]
create semantically-rich languages -
15:45:29 [wendy]
document and export semantics -
15:46:11 [wendy]
index of html elements and attributes (from HTML Techniques for WCAG 1.0) -
15:46:16 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log world
15:47:00 [wendy]
action: michael propose techniques based on this discussion
15:47:48 [wendy]
15:47:53 [wendy]
says to use summary and caption
15:47:57 [wendy]
(not title)
15:48:11 [wendy]
straw poll results: p1, p2, and kill
15:48:44 [wendy]
js perhaps clearer for readers ifhad a tech that said "use summary or caption" and in that said, "don't use title"
15:48:57 [wendy]
mc 7.1 is use caption (optional), 7.3 summary (optional)
15:49:11 [wendy]
js put a line in each of those that says, "don't use title to do this purpose"
15:50:14 [wendy]
action: michael remove technique 7.2, moving the info to both 7.1 and 7.3
15:50:31 [wendy]
15:50:39 [wendy]
p2s, optionals, kill
15:55:21 [wendy]
js already listed as optional. no reason to kill if people can find reason to use it.
15:56:21 [wendy]
leave as is
15:56:38 [wendy]
15:56:43 [wendy]
had votes in every category
15:57:55 [wendy]
js a candidate for a fallback technique?
15:58:29 [wendy]
js in the main body of the techs doc, don't want to recommend using tables for layout (want to promote css), but we have been thinking about fallback techniques to addrss today's reality
15:59:26 [wendy]
bc these aren't fallback techniques for user agents. more of a fallback technique for authoring tools.
15:59:33 [Zakim]
16:00:03 [wendy]
js also until user agents, b/c had been problem in screen readers reading multiple column layout. how many copies are in active use?
16:00:50 [wendy]
bg ag said that if we don't draw a line in the sand, auth and user tools will not be motivated to fix. however, so ingrained, we have to provide the alternative techniques.
16:01:09 [wendy]
js if it is ingrained, then why do we provide techs?
16:01:16 [wendy]
bg there are techs that make it better for the screen reader
16:01:32 [wendy]
bc don't misuse structure, etc.
16:01:37 [Zakim]
16:03:05 [wendy]
js instead of doing the negative technique, focus on "use css for layout" and move layout table info to fallback
16:04:07 [wendy]
cr if we leave it in general, will they miss it?
16:07:31 [wendy]
bc we're deprecating a technique that says not to do something. can we roll this into the intro?
16:14:19 [wendy]
16:14:36 [wendy]
looking at uaag and atag suggestions for layout tables. what do they do and how do they reference wcag?
16:15:18 [wendy]
Some examples of transformations include [T0432] - HTML: table-based layout into CSS. [T0212]
16:15:37 [wendy]
two options: 1. move to intro 2. move to fallback techniques
16:15:58 [wendy]
bc a combination of the 2? add an ednote about fallback techs?
16:17:52 [wendy]
js issues w/cms
16:18:20 [wendy]
bg easy to create a tabe that someone could plunk into content, more difficult to create content w/css. either have to give them a separate file or ...??
16:18:34 [wendy]
bg or provide in the head of the document.
16:19:33 [wendy]
mc cms techs needed
16:19:37 [wendy]
wac that's atag
16:20:33 [wendy]
action: michael move layout table to intro, ednote for repair techniques and ednote about css issue
16:21:13 [Zakim]
16:21:25 [wendy]
16:21:45 [wendy]
it's not technology specific. belongs in general not html
16:21:53 [Zakim]
16:22:29 [wendy]
bc needs to includes title. link text could be obscure and supplemented by title.
16:22:35 [wendy]
bc how do you test what is useful?
16:22:45 [wendy]
bc it is unnecessarily restrictuve.
16:22:52 [wendy]
js distinguish between screen text and ...
16:22:58 [wendy]
mc conditional content (ala uaag)
16:24:31 [wendy]
16:24:40 [wendy]
js combine 9.1 and 9.2?
16:24:55 [wendy]
bc don't object to either tech being there. objecting to 9.1 being a p1.
16:25:38 [wendy]
bg is this where the "click here" example goes?
16:26:04 [wendy]
bg that would be a "don't do this" (negative technique) and we are moving away from
16:26:28 [wendy]
bg there is nothing html-specific about this as written
16:32:12 [wendy]
bc either occur in the link or can be programmatically determined
16:34:33 [wendy]
mc primarily addrsesed in general techniques, ednote here
16:36:04 [ChrisR]
ChrisR has left #wai-wcag
16:36:15 [Zakim]
16:36:16 [Zakim]
16:36:16 [Zakim]
16:36:17 [Zakim]
16:36:18 [Zakim]
16:36:19 [Zakim]
16:36:20 [Zakim]
16:39:04 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
16:39:05 [Zakim]
Attendees were [Microsoft], Michael_Cooper, Jenae_Andershonis, Ken_Kipness, Wendy, Becky_Gibson, Chris_Ridpath, Ben_Caldwell, John_Slatin, Chris_Ridpath.a
16:39:17 [RRSAgent]
I see 3 open action items:
16:39:17 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael propose techniques based on this discussion [1]
16:39:17 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:39:17 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael remove technique 7.2, moving the info to both 7.1 and 7.3 [2]
16:39:17 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
16:39:17 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael move layout table to intro, ednote for repair techniques and ednote about css issue [3]
16:39:17 [RRSAgent]
recorded in