IRC log of wai-wcag on 2005-04-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:59:48 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
13:59:48 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:59:55 [ben]
RRSAgent, make log world
14:00:21 [ben]
Topic: WCAG Techniques Weekly Meeting
14:00:27 [ben]
agenda+ Categories of Scripting Techniques from Becky (30 min.)
14:00:33 [mcmay]
mcmay has joined #wai-wcag
14:00:39 [ben]
agenda+ Work plan and processing techniques and test suite issues (30 min.)
14:00:48 [ben]
agenda+ Update on issues with <object> and discussions of using <link> for navigation (15 min.)
14:00:57 [ben]
agenda+ Guide Doc and structure (15 min.)
14:01:18 [mcmay]
zakim, call matt-bos
14:01:18 [Zakim]
ok, mcmay; the call is being made
14:01:19 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has now started
14:01:21 [Zakim]
14:01:25 [jslatin]
that should keep us off the streets and out of trouble for a couple hours
14:01:27 [Becky_Gibson]
Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
14:01:41 [ChristopheStrobbe]
ChristopheStrobbe has joined #wai-wcag
14:01:50 [wendy]
wendy has joined #wai-wcag
14:02:03 [Zakim]
14:02:10 [Zakim]
14:02:13 [Zakim]
14:02:17 [ben]
zakim, ??P17 is Ben
14:02:17 [Zakim]
+Ben; got it
14:02:23 [wendy]
zakim, who's on the phone?
14:02:23 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Matt, Wendy, Becky_Gibson, Ben
14:02:30 [Zakim]
14:02:34 [jslatin]
zakim's giving me a hard time, hang on...
14:02:48 [wendy]
14:02:58 [Zakim]
14:04:14 [Zakim]
14:04:17 [Michael]
zakim, ipcaller is Michael_Cooper
14:04:17 [Zakim]
+Michael_Cooper; got it
14:04:28 [ben]
scribe: Ben
14:04:56 [wendy]
zakim, take up item 1
14:04:56 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Categories of Scripting Techniques from Becky (30 min.)" taken up [from ben]
14:05:04 [Zakim]
14:05:30 [ben]
bg: from baseline discussion, how do we organize techs. to provide baseline info?
14:05:30 [wendy]
14:05:46 [Tim]
Tim has joined #wai-wcag
14:05:59 [ben]
bg: wanted to come up with a list of techniques for diff. categories, one of them was for no script at all
14:06:08 [Zakim]
14:07:24 [ben]
(techs that worked with or without scripting). Now that we're removing requirement for alternatives to script, we needed a category for scripts that improve the accessibility of the site without harming access.
14:07:46 [David_]
David_ has joined #wai-wcag
14:07:49 [David_]
14:07:54 [ben]
third category was if you are using script in your baseline, then here's how to do it so it meets UAAG and is directly accessible
14:08:01 [ben]
bg: do these categories make sense?
14:08:38 [ben]
Jim Ley posted some comments to list in response to proposed techniques. We also need to work on mapping for most of these techniques.
14:09:16 [ben]
wc: am wondering how we explain this to people in a document that isn't normative - need to be careful about creating techniques that are more restrictive than guidelines
14:10:00 [ben]
js: seems to me that if we have a req. like 2.1 (make interface elements keyboard operable), then there are diff. techs for doing that depending on what you're doing. (if your assuming script or not)
14:10:10 [ben]
14:10:47 [Tim]
Have script techniques been designed with testability in mind?
14:10:53 [ben]
js: important to map these back to GL and SC so we can say that techniques are for satisfying something in the guidelines and which technique you choose will depend on baseline assumption
14:11:28 [ben]
bg: maybe some of these are best practices and could live in another doc
14:11:51 [ben]
mc: I would say the first and third categories are needed for WCAG, some of the second category might not be
14:12:50 [ben]
js: is that because 2nd category is things that can be done to improve accessibility where first is things that work in the absence of scripting and third is if scripts are used, making them accessible? (so middle category becomes optional)?
14:13:07 [ben]
bg: I viewed it as third category as more optional, but didn't think those mapped to GL as well
14:13:36 [ben]
dm: have we decided that we're only going to map back to SC, not to guidelines?
14:13:41 [ben]
js: think we have to map to SC
14:14:12 [ben]
wc: interesting question that's come up before. GL usually is the "sprit" of something and SC is more specific. Question is whether we can map to the more general things.
14:14:22 [ben]
js: think those come under category of advisory techniqeus
14:14:35 [ben]
14:14:53 [ben]
dm: would have to add a bunch of SC to include techniques
14:16:00 [ben]
wc: seems to me that application/widget related techniques map back to basic set of SC, which are they need a label (1.1), keyboard access (2.1), and role and state info depending on what the widget does. Is anything else missing? 4.2 group is working on role and state.
14:16:48 [ben]
bg: I also found that a fair number mapped to 2.4 (ex. using onload to set focus to a form element on a page). Some issues with this came up on the list, but technique can be helpful.
14:17:15 [ben]
js: also an issue with phone number focus issue
14:17:26 [ben]
bg: yes, some like that, some hate it...
14:18:36 [ben]
bg: 2.4 L2 SC2 is where I mapped it, thought about 2.5 because it generally applies to errors, but couldn't find a SC that actually maps
14:19:00 [ben]
wc: is next step to do more work on these techniques?
14:19:25 [ben]
bg: need feedback about this direction, guess my next action item would be to propose a guideline mapping for each of these
14:19:39 [ben]
bg: need feedback to know if these are the right types of techniques
14:20:41 [ben]
js: for me, I don't know enough scripting to be able to give good feedback on details, but outline seems right to me and I liked what wendy said about where SC might be - may all map to 1.1, 2.1 and whatever emerges from 4.2 work and maybe also to some other things like 2.4.
14:22:05 [ben]
wc: think I'm close to proposing that 1.1 require at least a label so you know that "within this window, this is what this is" ... widgets need labels
14:22:47 [ben]
wc: also an idea of grouping things into a unit that is functional (ex. date selector widget in Flickr)
14:23:35 [ben]
wc: another thing is that Derek Featherstone is doing a session on accessible javascripting in Austin, might be good to ask him to give us some feedback.
14:24:55 [ben]
action becky: propose guideline mapping
14:25:18 [ben]
action wendy: send email to Derek and Becky for feedback
14:25:52 [ben]
js: one piece of feedback on guide doc was links to tutorials and articles
14:26:37 [ben]
wc: part of what I heard you saying becky was that we don't need to rewrite these things because they already exist. can we link to external resources and annotate instead of recreating other work
14:26:52 [ben]
bg: think that's a good idea, wasn't sure if we could do that and what to do about permissions
14:27:28 [ben]
wc: good question, other question is (from W3C process) do we really want to rely on something that might change.
14:28:29 [ben]
js: but part of the reason we want techs. to be non-normative is that we can rely on other things and repair links over time and update them. another strategy is to include "date retrieved" info with links to external resources
14:29:07 [ben]
wc: tim asked about testability - I'd like to see techniques and test suites developed together, needs development
14:29:44 [wendy]
zakim, close this item
14:29:44 [Zakim]
agendum 1 closed
14:29:46 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:29:47 [Zakim]
2. Work plan and processing techniques and test suite issues (30 min.) [from ben]
14:29:51 [wendy]
zakim, take up item 2
14:29:51 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Work plan and processing techniques and test suite issues (30 min.)" taken up [from ben]
14:29:58 [ChristopheStrobbe]
zakim, Christophe_Strobe is ChristopheStrobbe
14:29:58 [Zakim]
+ChristopheStrobbe; got it
14:30:06 [ben]
scribe: Michael
14:30:26 [wendy]
14:30:54 [Michael]
wc: plan to staggar work based on what guidelines doing
14:31:13 [Michael]
wc: concern how much we can do in a given week, given how many techniques some guidelines will have
14:31:33 [Michael]
wc: hopefully most work is tweaking, though some technique generation will come up
14:32:11 [Michael]
wc: next FtF week of June 13 in Europe, still working on venue
14:33:07 [Michael]
wc: Monday town hall, Tue / Wed Techniques, Thur / Fri GL
14:33:16 [Michael]
wc: close all Bugzilla issues in June
14:34:12 [Michael]
js: what has to change about how TTF works to meet objectives?
14:34:49 [Michael]
wc: recently more work has been done as proposals, by Mon for Wed call and by Tue for Thur call
14:34:59 [Michael]
wc: look for increase in proposals so calls can just review
14:35:30 [Michael]
wc: 2 week process, harvest issues in first week (re Techniques & test cases for HTML, CSS, Script), tweak and close second week
14:35:56 [Michael]
wc: need to close A) requirements and B) testing matrix
14:36:39 [Michael]
js: held off on requirements until we had clearer sense of where we were going with guide doc and structure
14:36:55 [Michael]
mc: also had open action items
14:38:07 [Michael]
js: nervous because work on guide doc prototypes noted it took longer than anticpated, may have been new format but may have been tougher task than anticipated
14:38:11 [Michael]
js: was it in the plan?
14:38:25 [Michael]
wc: idea was guide doc would be wrapped up in issue summaries
14:38:55 [Michael]
wc: package guidelines and guide doc as one task type, and techniques and test cases as another task type
14:39:03 [Michael]
js: but does add to time so we need to factor it into plan
14:39:24 [Michael]
wc: first week can be identifying issues, and clarifies issues for guide doc which can be part of second week
14:39:34 [Michael]
js: questions also become part of agenda for guide doc
14:40:10 [Michael]
js: writing "intent" section has been very useful - if I can't state intent, can't expect anyone else to understand it
14:40:31 [Michael]
wc: most of issues with GL 1 related to clarifications for guide doc
14:40:55 [Michael]
wc: modify placeholders to have at least intent and example
14:40:58 [Michael]
js: and definitions
14:41:53 [wendy]
action: john and wendy in future discussions with ppl doing guidelines summaries, draft some of the guide doc content (intent, definitions (clean up if needed or pull in from glossary), examples - minimum)
14:42:16 [Michael]
wc: also need to figure out who is available when so we can schedule around power outages
14:43:20 [Michael]
wc: for next week need to sort out what techniques relate to guideline 1.1 under discussion
14:43:48 [wendy]
action: wendy and michael determine set of techniques and test cases for discussion for the next few weeks (1.3, 2.4, 4.2, 1.1)
14:44:44 [Michael]
js: develop "assignment template" so when people assigned a guideline to review, they know what sort of stuff they need to produce
14:45:25 [wendy]
action: john draft "assignment templates" by Monday 25 April
14:45:46 [wendy]
zakim, close this item
14:45:46 [Zakim]
agendum 2 closed
14:45:47 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:45:49 [Zakim]
3. Update on issues with <object> and discussions of using <link> for navigation (15 min.) [from ben]
14:45:58 [wendy]
zakim, take up item 3
14:45:58 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Update on issues with <object> and discussions of using <link> for navigation (15 min.)" taken up [from ben]
14:46:37 [Michael]
js: action to follow up on our discussion of problems with <object> and challenge of explict, useful, text alternatives
14:47:16 [Michael]
js: message to CG list with example and query
14:47:33 [Michael]
js: Al Gilman response was that he would respond
14:47:46 [Michael]
js: John Gunderson said "just create a link"
14:47:48 [Michael]
dmd: d-link
14:48:05 [Michael]
js: philosophical discussion about longdesc
14:48:20 [Michael]
js: sounds like repair technique, not ultimately desirable
14:48:26 [Michael]
bc: UAAG needs to be fixed to address
14:49:09 [Michael]
js: Gregg suggested definition for "explicitly associated" that permits explicit text reference within same page
14:49:54 [Michael]
bc: e.g., alt text of image says "description below"
14:50:39 [Michael]
js: IMS site has a potential technique
14:51:59 [Michael]
link in
14:53:22 [Michael]
js: re DHTML roadmap, discussion of making XHTML 2.0 features available in earlier versions of HTML, by using <link> and custom values e.g., rel="navigation" targeting id'd stuff on page
14:53:33 [wendy]
summary of discussion from last week re: link/nav technique:
14:54:20 [Michael]
js: various parties working on the navigation challenge, and global vs. secondary nav
14:54:55 [Michael]
wc: were our concerns raised to CG?
14:55:07 [Michael]
js: not all
14:55:24 [Michael]
js: haven't heard anything deeply problematic
14:55:34 [Michael]
bg: user agents will have to make changes to support all this
14:56:15 [Michael]
js: UIUC accessibility extension might take some of that
14:56:48 [Michael]
js: actual behaviour still undetermined
14:57:17 [ben]
14:57:33 [Michael]
dmd: unclear if roadmap is present day or future
14:57:44 [Michael]
js: it's a road map to get us somewhere we aren't now
14:58:41 [Michael]
js: starts with XHTML 2.0 functionality, works backwards to find ways to incorporate that functionality in earlier versions of HTML back to 4.01, but it's not all fully working yet
14:59:40 [Michael]
js: question of recommending techniques that work today and not tomorrow and vice versa
14:59:54 [Michael]
dmd: what's timeline wrt WCAG 2?
15:00:30 [Michael]
bg: working to make sure WCAG 2 doesn't handcuff steps of roadmap
15:01:56 [Michael]
js: if UA builds automatic toc, how does it know what to call it? need a technique e.g., a title on list
15:02:30 [Michael]
js: no UA support for this now but wouldn't cost much to developers to do
15:03:28 [wendy]
ack ben
15:03:52 [Michael]
bc: is "role" going to be required in valid XHTML 2?
15:04:21 [Michael]
bc: will backward-walking techniques be part of sufficient / necessary for WCAG 2, or just advisory?
15:04:36 [Michael]
js: more advisory for now
15:05:34 [Michael]
bg: don't know if role for navigation is required
15:05:41 [Michael]
bc: if it is GL 4.1 could kick in
15:06:13 [Michael]
bg: roadmap steps in particular not required, but have to check for endpoint
15:06:43 [Michael]
wc: don't see "role" in XHTML 2 draft, but no draft since 2004
15:06:48 [Michael]
js: they've hit a wall
15:07:11 [wendy]
action: becky investigate if role for nav will be required in XHTMl 2
15:08:25 [Michael]
mc: connection to dmd test file work?
15:08:38 [Michael]
js: some of that discussion was what went to CG
15:08:53 [Michael]
dmd: big issue of what spec understands as alt vs. what we do
15:08:57 [Michael]
js: that's why it was a CG issue
15:09:29 [Michael]
wc: all of this is related go GL 1.1, so it's all good timing
15:10:25 [Michael]
js: bg had mentioned getting UA to look inside <object> for text alternatives, but CG didn't pick that up
15:11:05 [Michael]
bc: best model is there is a way in UA for user to query the object for "what's there" and "give it to me if I want it"
15:11:59 [Michael]
mcm: world-dominant browser doesn't even allow that right now
15:12:27 [wendy]
zakim, close this item
15:12:28 [Zakim]
agendum 3 closed
15:12:28 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:12:30 [Zakim]
4. Guide Doc and structure (15 min.) [from ben]
15:12:41 [wendy]
zakim, take up item 4
15:12:41 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Guide Doc and structure (15 min.) " taken up [from ben]
15:13:06 [wendy]
15:13:12 [wendy]
15:13:13 [Michael]
js: discussion on guide doc last thur mainly involved people who had been drafting, so they pulled aside
15:14:29 [Michael]
js: high-level structure is 1: guidelines 2: guide doc 3: techniques, possibility including general techniques 4: checklists 5: test cases
15:15:37 [Michael]
js: people with various needs should be able to come in at the right point to meet their needs
15:15:47 [Michael]
js: that's a separate conceptual problem from that of structure
15:16:12 [Michael]
js: we can satisfy 2.4 to provide different ways to navigate
15:17:04 [Michael]
js: for guide doc, we each took different approach in prototypes, that group needs to converge and get the best
15:17:14 [Michael]
js: return with more drafts and a template so people with assignments can complete
15:18:21 [Michael]
js: feedback on bare outline was most confusing areas were "technology-independent techniques", not solved by calling "general techniques"
15:18:33 [Michael]
js: either had no idea what to find or expected code examples
15:18:52 [Michael]
js: so need a better lable
15:19:02 [Michael]
15:19:29 [Michael]
js: thought "understanding this sc" section redundant with "benefits"
15:19:46 [Michael]
js: found useful exercise to write sentences beginning with "the intent of this sc is..."
15:20:24 [Michael]
js: get guide doc task force (GDTF) to do next round, then send around to reveiwers again
15:20:43 [wendy]
action: john send msg to "guide doc task force" (michael, ben, wendy, john) and restart/finish guide doc work
15:21:38 [wendy]
note: this isn't a formal task force....just short hand to identify those folks who were working on guide doc.
15:21:49 [wendy]
action 7= john send msg to "guide doc task force" (michael, ben, wendy, john, david) and restart/finish guide doc work
15:22:21 [wendy]
15:23:10 [Zakim]
15:23:12 [Michael]
15:23:13 [Zakim]
15:23:14 [Zakim]
15:23:15 [Zakim]
15:23:17 [Zakim]
15:23:19 [Zakim]
15:23:20 [Zakim]
15:23:21 [Zakim]
15:23:22 [Zakim]
15:23:23 [wendy]
ben and michael - thanks for scribing!
15:23:24 [Zakim]
WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
15:23:25 [Zakim]
Attendees were Matt, Wendy, Becky_Gibson, Ben, John_Slatin, [IPcaller], Michael_Cooper, Tim_Boland, Dave_MacDonald, ChristopheStrobbe
15:23:33 [wendy]
RRSAgent, make log world
15:23:40 [wendy]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:23:40 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wendy
15:23:53 [jslatin]
wendy, i'll send a WG update to the CG list...
15:24:01 [wendy]
thanks, john
15:24:15 [jslatin]
welcome! hasta luego
15:24:18 [ChristopheStrobbe]
ChristopheStrobbe has left #wai-wcag
15:24:28 [jslatin]
oooh, jaws butchered that spanish.
15:26:20 [ben]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:26:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ben
15:27:20 [ben]
Meeting: WCAG Techniques Task Force Weekly Meeting
15:27:47 [ben]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:27:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ben
15:28:05 [ben]
Chair: Wendy
15:28:13 [ben]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:28:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ben
15:29:30 [ben]
RRSAgent, bye
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
I see 7 open action items:
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: becky to propose guideline mapping [1]
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wendy to send email to Derek and Becky for feedback [2]
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john and wendy in future discussions with ppl doing guidelines summaries, draft some of the guide doc content (intent, definitions (clean up if needed or pull in from glossary), examples - minimum) [3]
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wendy and michael determine set of techniques and test cases for discussion for the next few weeks (1.3, 2.4, 4.2, 1.1) [4]
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john draft "assignment templates" by Monday 25 April [5]
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: becky investigate if role for nav will be required in XHTMl 2 [6]
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john send msg to "guide doc task force" (michael, ben, wendy, john, david) and restart/finish guide doc work [7]
15:29:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:29:38 [ben]
Zakim, bye
15:29:38 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wai-wcag