IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-12-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:59:10 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:59:17 [bcaldwell]
RRSAgent, make log world
15:00:04 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has now started
15:00:05 [Zakim]
15:00:34 [bcaldwell]
zakim, [Microsoft] Jenae
15:00:34 [Zakim]
I don't understand '[Microsoft] Jenae', bcaldwell
15:00:39 [Zakim]
+ +000012aaaa - is perhaps [IPcaller]
15:00:42 [Zakim]
15:00:43 [Zakim]
15:00:50 [Zakim]
+ +1.267.983.aabb - is perhaps Neil?
15:00:52 [bcaldwell]
zakim, [Microsoft] is Jenae
15:00:52 [Zakim]
+Jenae; got it
15:01:19 [Becky_Gibson]
Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
15:01:27 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
15:01:34 [Zakim]
15:01:38 [Zakim]
15:01:43 [bcaldwell]
zakim, ?P28 is Ben
15:01:43 [Zakim]
sorry, bcaldwell, I do not recognize a party named '?P28'
15:01:45 [Zakim]
15:01:51 [bcaldwell]
zakim, ??P28 is ben
15:01:51 [Zakim]
+ben; got it
15:01:57 [Zakim]
15:01:59 [bcaldwell]
zakim, I am ben
15:01:59 [Zakim]
ok, bcaldwell, I now associate you with ben
15:02:11 [wendy]
ben? chris? becky? i'm not feeling well, so am not going to make the meeting this morning. could you pass word to michael?
15:02:15 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log world
15:02:24 [bcaldwell]
sure thing
15:02:30 [Becky_Gibson]
sure, Wendy, feel better
15:02:35 [bcaldwell]
zakim, who is here?
15:02:35 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Jenae, [IPcaller], Neil?, ben, Becky_Gibson, Alex_Li, Tim_Boland
15:02:37 [Zakim]
On IRC I see wendy, Becky_Gibson, RRSAgent, ChrisR, Zakim, bcaldwell
15:02:43 [wendy]
If there are any questions for me, please send me email and I'll get back to you later today.
15:02:58 [wendy]
15:02:59 [Zakim]
15:03:05 [Zakim]
15:03:17 [Michael]
Michael has joined #wai-wcag
15:03:24 [bcaldwell]
zakim, ??P34 is Allistair
15:03:24 [Zakim]
+Allistair; got it
15:03:28 [Zakim]
15:03:44 [bcaldwell]
zakim, ??P36 is David
15:03:44 [Zakim]
+David; got it
15:04:08 [ken]
ken has joined #wai-wcag
15:04:29 [bcaldwell]
zakim, [IPcaller] is Chris
15:04:29 [Zakim]
+Chris; got it
15:04:46 [Zakim]
15:05:27 [David]
David has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:37 [David]
15:05:45 [Zakim]
15:08:37 [AliG]
AliG has joined #wai-wcag
15:08:46 [bcaldwell]
agenda + "Review results straw polls"
15:08:46 [AliG]
AliG has left #wai-wcag
15:09:12 [AliG]
AliG has joined #wai-wcag
15:09:15 [bcaldwell]
agenda + "XHTML compliance of test cases
15:09:15 [bcaldwell]
15:09:37 [nms]
nms has joined #wai-wcag
15:09:45 [bcaldwell]
agenda + "Review more test files -"
15:10:28 [bcaldwell]
agenda + "Work on holes in mapping success criteria to techniques -"
15:11:12 [Tim]
Tim has joined #wai-wcag
15:12:39 [bcaldwell]
next agendum
15:13:04 [bcaldwell]
meaning of optional?
15:13:29 [bcaldwell]
js - not absolutely required for conformance, right?
15:14:38 [bcaldwell]
if test is optional, does that mean they have satisfied an optional req. in the wcag spec beyond basic conformance?
15:15:03 [bcaldwell]
mc - in theory, an optional test might be the result of an optional requirement, but not yet clear
15:15:16 [bcaldwell]
js - no such thing as an optional requirement
15:15:52 [bcaldwell]
QA - requires that specs describe what is required and what is optional
15:16:40 [Michael]
First batch:
15:18:41 [bcaldwell]
Test 3 - Alt text must be short
15:18:49 [bcaldwell]
? how to define/quantify short
15:19:06 [bcaldwell]
jw - JAWS default line length -- 150 characters
15:19:09 [Tim]
need to quantify what 'short' means (so that it's testable)
15:20:15 [bcaldwell]
chris is keeping tests up to date with status
15:20:24 [bcaldwell]
no decision yet on test 3
15:21:01 [bcaldwell]
what is the difference between optional and kill?
15:21:30 [bcaldwell]
bg - sometimes used optional because the test needs work
15:22:06 [bcaldwell]
tim - is there a test for meaningful alt text?
15:22:21 [bcaldwell]
js - yes, discussion on list
15:23:21 [bcaldwell]
test 6
15:24:53 [bcaldwell]
test 16 - bg - need to define decorative that mirrors the language in the SC
15:25:41 [bcaldwell]
sc - need to clarify different ways to define null alt in test files - suggest we be more restrictive to define null as "" (nothing between quotation marks)
15:26:32 [bcaldwell]
HTML/XHTML specs use "empty string ("")"
15:26:59 [ChrisR]
alternate text should be the empty string ("").
15:27:08 [bcaldwell]
action Chris - replace "null alt" with "empty string ("")."
15:27:23 [Zakim]
15:27:25 [bcaldwell]
action Chris: replace "null alt" with "empty string ("")."
15:27:46 [bcaldwell]
test 178 - everyone votes for priority 1
15:28:30 [bcaldwell]
al - proposed correction to test
15:28:54 [Zakim]
+ +1.267.983.aacc - is perhaps Neil?
15:28:55 [bcaldwell]
action Chris: correct 178-2.html per Alex's comments
15:29:13 [bcaldwell]
ag - is priority 1 - priority 3 really relevant for tests?
15:29:45 [bcaldwell]
mc - we didn't define things very well - mtg. in Dublin was context - what I did was take priorities to mean the same thing they did in WCAG 1.0
15:30:36 [bcaldwell]
ag - relevancy rating needed to identify whether the test is useful as well?
15:31:01 [bcaldwell]
tim - recommend define it on the straw polls, my assumption was that these priorities related to WCAG 2.0
15:32:38 [bcaldwell]
mc - intended to be a straw poll only, not formal, just gathering ideas - by polling this way, we've had issues with tests inheriting priority from 2.0 guidelines - prioritization is a useful way of helping us to understand the test and helps identify problems
15:32:53 [bcaldwell]
ag - useful to then vote on whether the test actually supports the technique
15:33:13 [bcaldwell]
mc - identifying a test as "kill" suggests that it doesn't support a technique
15:34:52 [bcaldwell]
tim - testing guidelines not techniques
15:35:16 [bcaldwell]
al, bc - agree
15:35:37 [bcaldwell]
js - assigning priority 1 implies necessary and sufficient for testing the criteria?
15:35:46 [bcaldwell]
mc - not necessarily sufficient
15:36:32 [bcaldwell]
js - need to get clear about what the terms in straw polls mean
15:36:47 [bcaldwell]
mc - agree, if we continue using this process, we should address these issues
15:37:15 [bcaldwell]
ag - each test is designed to support some part of a technique
15:38:08 [Zakim]
15:38:17 [bcaldwell]
cr - each test has a testable statement in it, it is the expected results
15:38:46 [DonFEvans]
DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag
15:38:56 [DonFEvans]
DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag
15:39:23 [DonFEvans]
DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag
15:39:41 [bcaldwell]
tim - formalize use of "must" "should" "may"
15:40:17 [DonFEvans]
DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag
15:40:37 [bcaldwell]
js - test 178, remove "must" from test
15:41:43 [bcaldwell]
js - can we agree that removing must is what we want to do?
15:42:03 [bcaldwell]
tim - needs to be quick and easy for an author to determine whether the test has been passed
15:42:16 [bcaldwell]
ag - agree that we should remove musts and shoulds
15:43:04 [bcaldwell]
bc - shoulds may indicate optionality
15:43:28 [bcaldwell]
ns - ex. test 10 "image must not flicker" should be "image does not flicker"
15:44:23 [Zakim]
15:44:28 [bcaldwell]
should be specific about whether true or false outcomes are required
15:44:49 [Zakim]
15:45:10 [bcaldwell]
phrase all questions so that answer is true?
15:46:17 [bcaldwell]
zakim, who is making noise?
15:46:30 [Zakim]
bcaldwell, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 13 (4%), Don_Evans (15%), ben (4%), Tim_Boland (15%), Allistair (56%), Michael_Cooper (24%), John_Slatin (0%)
15:46:54 [bcaldwell]
zakim, mute Allistair
15:46:54 [Zakim]
Allistair should now be muted
15:47:37 [bcaldwell]
js - my understanding of what we see as a page may be multiple delivery units
15:47:45 [Tim]
What level of granularity of content are we talking about for conformance (re:
15:48:09 [Tim]
preciseness of "delivery unit" term)?
15:48:18 [bcaldwell]
js - conformance claim for authored unit can only be as high as the lowest authored unit on the page
15:49:19 [ChrisR]
test status:
15:50:13 [bcaldwell]
mc - stop here, review group 2 of tests next meeting?
15:50:57 [bcaldwell]
next agendum
15:51:38 [bcaldwell]
zakim, take up agendum 2
15:51:38 [Zakim]
agendum 2. ""XHTML compliance of test cases" taken up [from bcaldwell]
15:52:55 [bcaldwell]
which version? XHTML 1.0?
15:53:02 [bcaldwell]
cases where XHTML 1.1 would be needed?
15:54:35 [bcaldwell]
neil - server type - HTML or XHTML?
15:55:19 [bcaldwell]
mc - almost certainly text/html due to issues with application/xhtml
15:55:44 [bcaldwell]
js - issues with "lang" attribute and "xml:lang"?
15:56:39 [Tim]
I need to sign off now..bye
15:56:50 [bcaldwell]
resolved: use XHTML 1.0 for the test files unless there is a specific reason to use a different DTD - server as text/html unless reason to do otherwise
15:56:50 [Zakim]
15:57:01 [Tim]
Tim has left #wai-wcag
15:57:21 [bcaldwell]
next agendum
15:58:22 [bcaldwell]
zakim, take up agendum 3
15:58:22 [Zakim]
agendum 3. ""Review more test files -"" taken up [from bcaldwell]
15:58:37 [bcaldwell]
test 15 -
15:59:54 [bcaldwell]
discussion on list about role of "title" attribute and description of destination of a link
16:01:25 [bcaldwell]
js - concern is that this applies to both AT and non-AT users
16:02:38 [DonFEvans]
DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag
16:03:03 [bcaldwell]
mc - link text should identify destination of link
16:04:43 [bcaldwell]
guideline 3.2, level 2, item 6 - The destination of each link is identified through words or phrases that either occur in the link or can be programmatically determined.
16:05:13 [bcaldwell]
js - as someone who uses a screenreader, the user experience where what you hear, is "link, graphic, drawing of a house" would make you crazy.
16:06:00 [ChrisR]
16:06:15 [bcaldwell]
Test 135 - Use MathML not images for math.
16:06:39 [bcaldwell]
16:07:22 [bcaldwell]
ns - test currently includes text someone would say if they looked at the image -- both tests are redundant
16:07:55 [bcaldwell]
ns - title is use MathML, not images.
16:08:05 [bcaldwell]
js - so if you have an image of math, it should fail the test
16:09:13 [bcaldwell]
mc second test - should remove both the image and the text because when a screenreader hits it it would read that math.
16:09:43 [bcaldwell]
js - is match scalable for low vision?
16:09:47 [bcaldwell]
ns - yes
16:10:25 [bcaldwell]
mc - technique level, we may want to keep some redundancy to illustrate
16:12:12 [bcaldwell]
bc - what is fallback for MathML when UA can't render it?
16:12:43 [Zakim]
16:13:33 [bcaldwell]
back to test 15
16:14:52 [David_]
David_ has joined #wai-wcag
16:15:56 [bcaldwell]
test should be consistent with language of success criterion
16:16:49 [bcaldwell]
criterion says, "For all non-text content that is functional, such as graphical links or buttons, text alternatives serve the same purpose as the non-text content."
16:19:24 [bcaldwell]
bc - 2 tests? one for level 1, guideline 1.1 that tests "serve the same purpose" and one for guideline 3.2, level 2, item 6 about describing the link destination
16:20:31 [Zakim]
16:20:57 [Zakim]
16:22:52 [bcaldwell]
need additional tests around this, recc. we associate link destination test with guideline 3.2
16:23:15 [bcaldwell]
do we also need a test for guideline 1.1?
16:24:45 [Zakim]
16:24:52 [bcaldwell]
need to clarify what process for determining difference between functional and decorative non-text content
16:25:59 [bcaldwell]
mc - continue to have test for 1.1 about alt text in image links, then need tests around quality of links in general (incl. from alt text in images, link text itself, etc.) that relates to 3.2.
16:27:25 [bcaldwell]
action Chris: modify test 15 fo consistency with guideline 1.1 SC (serves same purpose) and create new tests for quality of link text
16:28:01 [bcaldwell]
16:28:07 [bcaldwell]
next agendum?
16:28:09 [Zakim]
+ +000012aadd - is perhaps [IPcaller]
16:28:27 [bcaldwell]
zakim, take up agendum 4
16:28:27 [Zakim]
agendum 4. ""Work on holes in mapping success criteria to techniques -"" taken up [from bcaldwell]
16:28:56 [bcaldwell]
action john: draft techniques for 3.1
16:31:52 [Zakim]
16:31:53 [Zakim]
16:31:55 [ChrisR]
ChrisR has left #wai-wcag
16:32:00 [bcaldwell]
criterion with no techniques: 1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4
16:32:35 [bcaldwell]
zakim, who is here?
16:32:35 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ben, Becky_Gibson, Michael_Cooper, David, Ken_Kipnes, John_Slatin, Don_Evans, Alex_Li, [IPcaller]
16:32:37 [Zakim]
On IRC I see David_, nms, AliG, ken, Michael, wendy, Becky_Gibson, RRSAgent, Zakim, bcaldwell
16:34:24 [Becky_Gibson]
I'm back
16:36:50 [bcaldwell]
questions about format of general techniques - why is it different than the other techs. documents
16:38:50 [bcaldwell]
ag - is there information in HTML techniques that parallels the advice in general
16:39:02 [bcaldwell]
bc - need to do a better job of cross-referencing
16:39:20 [bcaldwell]
at this point in time, there are gaps in HTML techniques
16:42:28 [bcaldwell]
action john: talk to wendy about candidates for authoring 1.2 techniques
16:44:03 [bcaldwell]
action ben: write techniques for
16:44:23 [bcaldwell]
action david: write techniques for
16:45:14 [bcaldwell]
action david: write up a test for
16:50:26 [bcaldwell]
table 2.3 techniques
16:51:20 [bcaldwell]
action editors: include mappings to 2.4, item 1 for 1.3, item 1 techniques
16:51:50 [bcaldwell]
action michael: html techniques for
16:55:39 [bcaldwell]
action michael: HTML techs for
16:55:53 [bcaldwell]
action michael: HTML techniques for
16:56:16 [bcaldwell]
action Michael: HTML techniques for
17:01:26 [bcaldwell]
ag - quite a few negative techniques (use x, not y) makes it difficult to write testable statements
17:01:35 [bcaldwell]
no mtgs. for next 2 weeks
17:01:51 [bcaldwell]
action everyone: work on action items and drafting techniques if possible
17:02:15 [Zakim]
17:02:16 [Zakim]
17:02:17 [Zakim]
17:02:20 [Zakim]
17:02:21 [Zakim]
17:02:23 [Zakim]
17:02:25 [Zakim]
17:02:30 [bcaldwell]
RRSAgent, bye
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
I see 14 open action items:
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Chris to replace "null alt" with "empty string ("")." [1]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Chris to correct 178-2.html per Alex's comments [2]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Chris to modify test 15 fo consistency with guideline 1.1 SC (serves same purpose) and create new tests for quality of link text [3]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john to draft techniques for 3.1 [4]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john to talk to wendy about candidates for authoring 1.2 techniques [5]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: ben to write techniques for [6]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: david to write techniques for [7]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: david to write up a test for [8]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: editors to include mappings to 2.4, item 1 for 1.3, item 1 techniques [9]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael to html techniques for [10]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael to HTML techs for [11]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: michael to HTML techniques for [12]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Michael to HTML techniques for [13]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: everyone to work on action items and drafting techniques if possible [14]
17:02:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:02:35 [Zakim]
17:02:37 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
17:02:41 [Zakim]
Attendees were +000012aaaa, +1.267.983.aabb, Jenae, Becky_Gibson, Alex_Li, ben, Tim_Boland, Michael_Cooper, Allistair, David, Chris, Ken_Kipnes, John_Slatin, +1.267.983.aacc,
17:02:44 [Zakim]
... Don_Evans, +000012aadd
17:03:16 [bcaldwell]
zakim, bye
17:03:16 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag