14:00:17 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 14:00:17 logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-irc 14:00:21 rrsagent, make log world 14:00:37 meeting: WCAG Techniques Teleconference 10 August 2005 14:00:43 chair: Michael Cooper 14:00:54 agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JulSep/0324.html 14:01:00 WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has now started 14:01:07 + +1.613.482.aaaa 14:01:22 Becky has joined #wai-wcag 14:01:45 +Becky_Gibson 14:01:57 +Don_Evans 14:02:17 +PaulC 14:02:18 +Wendy 14:02:39 zakim, who's on the phone? 14:02:39 On the phone I see +1.613.482.aaaa, Becky_Gibson, Don_Evans, PaulC, Wendy 14:02:46 +??P20 14:02:53 zakim, ??P20 is Ben 14:02:53 +Ben; got it 14:03:00 zakim, mute me 14:03:00 sorry, Christophe, I do not see a party named 'Christophe' 14:03:13 zakim, +1.613.482.aaaa is David_MacDonald 14:03:13 +David_MacDonald; got it 14:03:15 +Michael_Cooper 14:03:27 +??P21 14:03:42 zakim, PaulC is Christophe 14:03:42 +Christophe; got it 14:03:49 zakim, ??P21 is Lisa_Seeman 14:03:49 +Lisa_Seeman; got it 14:03:55 David has joined #wai-wcag 14:04:06 zakim, mute me 14:04:06 Christophe should now be muted 14:04:16 zakim, unmute me 14:04:16 Christophe should no longer be muted 14:04:19 leasa has joined #wai-wcag 14:04:25 DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag 14:04:56 DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag 14:04:59 hello 14:05:14 DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag 14:05:27 DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag 14:05:33 DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag 14:07:23 ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag 14:07:35 Don has joined #wai-wcag 14:09:06 +??P25 14:09:26 zakim, ??P25 is Chris_Ridpath 14:09:26 +Chris_Ridpath; got it 14:09:33 zakim, take up item 1 14:09:33 agendum 1. "Discuss Script techniques direction http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JulSep/0015.html" taken up [from Michael] 14:15:20 discussion - how much code should we include in scripting techniques? didn't seem to be a lot of support for david's proposal, although not much discussion on the list. 14:15:30 becky is working on an example that should be out today. 14:16:58 seems to be consensus that examples are good. clarify that "these are examples, not the only way it can be done." 14:22:20 for scripting, write functional outcomes that tie back to success criteria. 14:22:42 want to find a way forward to keep scripting at high priority since "selling point" for wcag 2.0 (addresses web apps). 14:23:09 http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/error.html 14:23:27 re: functional outcomes - a menu should be operable by keyboard (2.4), all items should be read (1.1), items in appropriate order (x.y) 14:26:09 discussion about providing techniques that only work in firefox 1.5 and ie 6 - advanced accessibility, but concerns that usable by small audience (future techniques). 14:26:20 scribe: wendy 14:27:02 if we do include future techniques, need to set expectations correctly. 14:28:18 zakim, mute me 14:28:18 Christophe should now be muted 14:28:32 going back to idea about "functional outcomes" - even if not providing complete techniques/worked examples, need some snippets of the pieces that we know how to do. 14:28:45 e.g., various ways of providing menus. 14:31:14 zakim, unmute me 14:31:14 Christophe should no longer be muted 14:31:36 action: becky start discussion of javascript url protocol on the list 14:36:18 resolution: scripting techniques assume basic level of javascript understanding and do not try to teach the basics of javascript. 14:40:16 prioritize on those things that are most frequently asked about. maybe if we cover only the top 5 - 10 issues/questions, we're 80% or more of the way to Last Call. 14:42:33 where we know things are broken address, even if we don't know the answers, maybe encourage someone else to do so. 14:44:59 resolution: we will include code in scripting techniques 14:45:51 top priorities for scripting: 14:46:22 drop down menus - http://www.brothercake.com/dropdown/ 14:47:59 form validation 14:48:01 show/hide 14:48:52 list at http://www.webaim.org/techniques/javascript/ 14:49:19 focus - setting it automatically either in form control when page load, or auto move when fill it out 14:50:09 focus - moving to a non-form element (e.g., have a left menu that's javscript, moving focus to right navigation panel. ala in an email product) 14:51:04 understanding when content has changed 14:51:15 and can get to the change 14:51:30 difference between visual focus and screenr eader focus 14:52:05 complete keyboard and mouse support - e.g., can open a menu w/a keybaord, as soon as tab "into" it closes b/c menu item no longer receiving focus 14:52:10 pop-ups 14:52:25 some discussion on list re: help text 14:52:43 relates to "knowing content is there" issue 14:57:26 action: wendy add this list to plan for scripting techniques 14:57:51 zakim, next item 14:57:51 agendum 2. "Script techniques / baseline proposals http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0767.html" taken up [from Michael] 15:02:50 if javascript not in baseline, refer to html techniques (note instead of grid)? 15:04:25 when using complex javascript on other technologies (e.g., svg 1.2 - input on a set of lines and turn into an editing field), lack of semantics. 15:05:48 agenda+ if time, check in on work statement edits 15:06:44 is "relies upon" necessary? need "usable without" 15:06:55 discuss how to categorize techs for each technology 15:07:16 "not applicable" 15:07:33 which was primary related to CSS 15:13:00 "works in" 15:13:11 e.g., this tech only works if the following techs are in your baseline 15:13:42 instead of table, simplify to 2 bullets? 15:14:03 1. if script in baseline, sufficient for SCx 15:14:09 2. if not, refer to technique xyz 15:16:43 javascript available and enabled... 15:16:55 javascript available and disabled...optional technique... 15:17:05 is enabled part of baseline assumption? 15:17:12 zakim, who's making noise? 15:17:22 wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: David_MacDonald (9%), Becky_Gibson (80%) 15:17:38 if not technique to refer to, state that 15:17:49 or "requires server-side valiation" 15:17:52 zakim, mute me 15:17:52 David_MacDonald should now be muted 15:18:05 title: baseline implications 15:19:56 action: becky include this idea in upcoming mock-up 15:20:57 add to agenda for next week - 2 issues re: becy's proposal 1. baseline 2. testing 15:21:02 zakim, next item 15:21:02 agendum 3. "Testing http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JulSep/0042.html" taken up [from Michael] 15:21:16 skipping since tim's not here 15:21:18 zakim, next item 15:21:18 agendum 3 was just opened, wendy 15:21:24 zakim, unmute me 15:21:24 David_MacDonald should no longer be muted 15:21:29 zakim, close item 3 15:21:29 agendum 3, Testing http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JulSep/0042.html, closed 15:21:31 I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 15:21:32 4. Test case reviews http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JulSep/0326.html [from Michael] 15:21:34 zakim, next item 15:21:34 agendum 4. "Test case reviews http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JulSep/0326.html" taken up [from Michael] 15:22:37 andrew disagreed: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JulSep/0330.html 15:23:58 some agreement with andrew's statement, it's a user agent repair test 15:24:27 modify test - ok to do as long a have for and id? 15:24:43 a test associated with a repair technique? 15:25:04 move existing html tech into "repair" category 15:26:02 test 57 allows implicit association 15:26:19 this test contradicts 57 15:26:27 add it as a UA issue? include it at the technique level? 15:26:55 current html techs, "don't use label implicitly" and is marked as deprecated. 15:27:33 intention, this tech to be deprecated. now saying it's ok, as long as use for and id. therefore, both tech and test case need to be fixed. 15:27:43 can do this w/out for and id? 15:27:49 just put input in label? 15:28:08 some user agents have a problem with that 15:30:02 test 186 - label can contain input but also have for and id? 15:30:19 should be a repair technique that explains the user agent problems 15:30:37 tech 15.2 (30 june 2005 draft) - move to repair techs. reference using for/id as solution. 15:31:30 the practice is valid html (label in input). issue is that screen readers don't always recognize. 15:31:59 remove test 186? 15:32:21 then in 57 - say ok, but not recommended? 15:33:44 action: chris review discussion on test 57, make proposal re: 57 and 186 15:34:41 action: michael make edit and send w/rest of proposed revised structure of html techs 15:36:25 test 187 - david suggested to keep it 15:36:30 some push back on the list 15:36:46 andrew said it's a valid technique 15:37:24 lisa had questions 15:39:00 related to "required" mark - way to associate that w/form control 15:39:43 Don has left #wai-wcag 15:40:02 DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag 15:40:10 while ago, proposal for "no more than one label per control" not in the current draft. believe that we rejected the technique. therefore, reject the test? 15:40:11 DonFEvans has joined #wai-wcag 15:40:29 as long as it's legal html, no reason to limit? 15:40:49 testing showed it was legal, unpredictable about which label "you get" (read by screen reader?) 15:41:02 it's legal: www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/interact/forms.html#edef-LABEL 15:41:20 "forms mode" in general, seems to be an issue. only get info from labels and inputs, no other info (issue we've seen w/wbs forms) 15:41:45 resolution: reject test 187 15:43:03 test 188, test 189 15:44:17 test 189 - similar issues to 187 15:44:20 ? 15:44:31 -Michael_Cooper 15:45:11 +Michael_Cooper 15:46:04 concern that there are some things could do to increase accessibility that would fail this test (related to descriptions or additional information about form controls, e.g., characteristics such as "required") 15:46:50 current wording: Test 189 - label must describe its associated control. 15:47:42 perhaps: text of the label directly relates to the associated control OR text of label is associated with the control OR "conceptually relate" 15:48:29 be careful about using "must" in the text of the test - ala john's suggestion 15:48:31 -Lisa_Seeman 15:49:19 action: david propose wording of test 189 15:49:25 is alt-text considered? 15:49:47 addressed in test 188 15:50:37 zakim, next item 15:50:37 agendum 5. "if time, check in on work statement edits" taken up [from wendy] 15:51:39 http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2003/12/wttf.html 15:53:11 -Don_Evans 15:57:20 minor edits made to clarify a couple things. edits made as we discussed. 15:57:28 resolution: TTF work statement ready for thursday's discussion 15:58:45 -Becky_Gibson 15:58:47 -Chris_Ridpath 15:58:47 -Michael_Cooper 15:58:49 -Ben 15:58:49 -Christophe 15:58:50 ChrisR has left #wai-wcag 15:58:51 -Wendy 15:59:05 zakim, who's on the phone? 15:59:05 On the phone I see David_MacDonald 15:59:19 zakim, drop David 15:59:19 David_MacDonald is being disconnected 15:59:21 WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended 15:59:23 Attendees were Becky_Gibson, Don_Evans, Wendy, Ben, David_MacDonald, Michael_Cooper, Christophe, Lisa_Seeman, Chris_Ridpath 15:59:26 RRSAgent, generate minutes 15:59:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-minutes.html wendy 16:01:33 zakim, bye 16:01:33 Zakim has left #wai-wcag 16:01:35 RRSAgent, bye 16:01:35 I see 6 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-actions.rdf : 16:01:35 ACTION: becky start discussion of javascript url protocol on the list [1] 16:01:35 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-irc#T14-31-36 16:01:35 ACTION: wendy add this list to plan for scripting techniques [2] 16:01:35 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-irc#T14-57-26 16:01:35 ACTION: becky include this idea in upcoming mock-up [3] 16:01:35 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-irc#T15-19-56 16:01:35 ACTION: chris review discussion on test 57, make proposal re: 57 and 186 [4] 16:01:35 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-irc#T15-33-44 16:01:35 ACTION: michael make edit and send w/rest of proposed revised structure of html techs [5] 16:01:35 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-irc#T15-34-41 16:01:35 ACTION: david propose wording of test 189 [6] 16:01:35 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/10-wai-wcag-irc#T15-49-19