23 Jun 2005


See also: IRC log


Matt, chaals, JRG, Judy, Cathy
Jon Gunderson (JRG)




<scribe> scribe: chaals

JRG: We have a testing tool hosted at UIUC
... JB wants to have a version hosted at W3C, but there is a software issue with the move.
... it could be done with wget, proxying the results into W3C webspace.
... need to talk to people who know more about wget. But we made that work with the issue list.

JB: Issue on moving it is having a team member to maintain it. Shadi has some experience with what you have been using, but he was not available today. Expect him to look at it later this week.

JRG: Seems W3C systems don't want to support Postgres, so proxying results out might be easier.

JB: Want to wait and see what happens when Shadi talks to Ted.

JRG: Chaals, what is your interest in implementation reporting and test suites?

Chaals: Would like to have time to do SVG test suites in particular, and interested in doing an implementation report for Opera. But having trouble finding time :-(

JRG: implementation reports take a couple of days, so it is a fair piece of work.

Cathy: You'll still have someone looking after testing tool...

JB: Well, that's what we are working on at the moment

JRG: This is Matt's last UA teleconf. Thanks Matt!!

all: Thanks Matt!

JRG: Looking towards the future...

XHTML 2 and accesskeys has been coordinated through P/F group.

JRG: There is general consensus that accesskey is broken in HTML 4 spec.
... in XHTML 2 there is a new model being proposed, where the author says the element needs an access key, and suggests a key binding, but the user agent has responsibility for deciding what the binding is, and letting the user know

CMN: We are having an internal discussion in Opera to try and ensure we think carefully and get this sorted, so that we can implement the result across phones, voice systems, etc.

Cathy: Is something being rendered by the user agent?

JRG: In UAAG there are requirements for the user interface to make it clear what the key bindings are.
... 11.2 is the checkpoint.

CL: Talking about the new recommended way to specify this. How would the user agent render this, according to the proposal

JRG: There is no suggestion as far as I know.

CL: It suggests that the key get underlined. what key?

CMN: Like XAML (which is really horrednously broken)

JRG: There are other techniques such as Mozilla

CL: Are they expecting that the title is rendered and the key is underlined? What if the key isn't a letter in the label?

JRG: Right.
... will come down to whether people build test suites. If nobody bothers to do that it is unlikely to come out right.

CL: Know why it is an element. It is to get to a section of the document. Don't understand how a browseer should render the key.

JRG: There are a number of ways it could be done. Which one is likely to vary between user agents - a pop-up list, table of contents at the beginning of the page, ...

could have a single link that turns on the list...

scribe: could be some kind of extension.
... Opera is trying to provide some extensibility.

CMN: Yeah.. we have userjs. See http://userjs.org for a couple of examples of using this to extend accessibility functionality...
... don't think that the rendering question is going to be difficult - we have several possible approaches to look at. The real question is which one we choose.
... but what is important is that the spec makes it clear who is responsible for what - if they suggest that the author underline something, then it just won't work still.

JRG: In terms of UAAG, allowing the user to override bindings is required by 11.3 - this is important in the cases like screen readers that have caused trouble in the past.
... allowing user to have profiles. The idea of the browser having final say, providing the information on the bindings that are actually in use, allowing the user to configure the bindings and save teh configuration sounds like whhat PF has been trying to get into the spec.
... the question is how that gets communicated to end up in the XHTML 2 spec.

CMN: It is a shame that it didn't get fixed in SMIL 2.1, but there you go...

JRG: That wraps my agenda for today.

CMN: Looking at how to get back into the UAAG group and find out how I can better get involved....

<JRG> http://cita.rehab.uiuc.edu/wai-eval/evals.php?eval_id=7

JRG: draft evaluation for O7.5

CMN thanks Jon - that will be helpful.

CL: Is anyone talking to MS before they close the door on IE 7?

JB: Can't guarantee results, but yes we are chasing it...

CL: My focus has shifted a bit, to be more in the area of Linux accessibility at the system level.

Grr. Got hung up :-(

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.126 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/06/23 18:55:09 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.126  of Date: 2005/05/16 16:49:48  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: chaals
Inferring ScribeNick: chaals

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Default Present: Matt, chaals, JRG, Judy, Cathy
Present: Matt chaals JRG Judy Cathy

WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting

Agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/d0b5e397.109c1366.8233600@expms1.cites.uiuc.edu
Got date from IRC log name: 23 Jun 2005
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2005/06/23-ua-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]