20:08:54 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 20:08:54 logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/08/31-wai-wcag-irc 20:09:13 Gregg has joined #wai-wcag 20:09:19 RRSAgent, do not start a new log 20:09:23 RRSAgent, make log world 20:09:29 Meeting: WCAG Weekly Telecon 20:09:33 scribe: Andi 20:09:34 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2006JulSep/0166.html 20:09:41 Chair: Gregg_Vanderheiden, Loretta_Guarino_Reid 20:09:44 topic: Team C Survey 20:09:46 ScribeOptions: -scribeOnly 20:09:53 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20060824-teamc/results 20:10:21 Team B: LC-980, LC-1113, LC-1293 20:10:24 +[IPcaller] 20:10:31 Editors: LC-996, LC-694 20:10:52 zakim, IPcaller is Sorcha_Moore 20:10:52 +Sorcha_Moore; got it 20:11:25 resolution: accept LC-980, LC-1113, LC-1293, LC-996, LC-694 as proposed by unanimous consent 20:11:32 zakim, who is on the phone? 20:11:32 On the phone I see David_MacDonald, Bengt_Farre, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Gez, Becky_Gibson, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Bruce_Bailey, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Sofia_Celic (muted), Alex_Li, 20:11:36 ... Sorcha_Moore 20:11:38 topic: LC-788 20:11:41 Sorcha has joined #wai-wcag 20:11:51 resolution: accept LC-788 with edits 20:12:24 topic: LC-789 20:13:00 resolution: accept LC-789 with edits 20:14:22 q+ 20:15:22 topic: LC-816 20:16:46 +Tim_Boland 20:17:21 -Alex_Li 20:17:35 +Alex_Li 20:18:12 Tim has joined #wai-wcag 20:21:03 resolution: accept LC-816 as amended (SC 1.3.3. When the sequence in which content is presented affects its meaning, a correct reading sequence can be programatically determined.) and revise LC-1159 to match 20:21:10 topic: LC-1174 20:21:23 topic: LC-1074 20:24:40 -Bruce_Bailey 20:24:58 resolution: accept LC-1074 as amended 20:25:11 topic: LC-1075 20:25:37 +Bruce_Bailey 20:26:50 regrets: Roberto_Ellero, Luca_Mascaro, Roberto_Castaldo, Alex_Li, Christophe_Strobbe 20:26:55 zakim, who is on the phone? 20:26:55 On the phone I see David_MacDonald, Bengt_Farre, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Gez, Becky_Gibson, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Sofia_Celic (muted), Sorcha_Moore, Tim_Boland, 20:26:58 ... Alex_Li, Bruce_Bailey 20:27:16 regrets- Alex_Li 20:30:14 On one page a checkmark is used to indicate that an item should be ordered and and another page it is used to indicate that a step has been completed. The same alt text "checked" could be used but since they serve differnt purposes, different alt text may make it easier to understand. 20:31:52 resolution: accept LC-1075 as amended with to add this example " On one page a checkmark is used to indicate that an item should be ordered and and another page it is used to indicate that a step has been completed. The same alt text "checked" could be used but since they serve differnt purposes, different alt text may make it easier to understand." 20:32:39 topic: LC-1155 20:33:07 q+ 20:36:28 ack l 20:43:51 -Bruce_Bailey 20:45:10 action: Gez to explore captchas to see if we can come up with a sufficient technique for people with multiple disabilities 20:46:23 action: Gregg and Ben to find out what happened to the captcha sufficient techniques 20:46:36 resolution: accept LC-1155 20:48:21 s/LC-1155 as proposed/LC-1155/ 20:48:41 Topic: LC-1158 20:53:47 action: Gregg to clarify his concern 20:53:54 Topic: LC-1251 20:55:37 zakim, who is making noise? 20:55:54 ben, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gregg_Vanderheiden (17%) 20:55:56 q+ 20:56:37 q- 20:58:36 "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-frameset.dtd"> 21:05:53 If your baseline includes frames, then you can use them and noframes is not required. If frames are not in your baseline, then you can still use them but in this case, you would have to use noframes. Even if it is not in the baseline - it is good to include NOFRAMES. We will be adding an advisory technique that recomends its use. 21:05:53 Note: We're no longer considering frames as non-text content and assistive technology support for frames has improved considerably. In XHTML, frames are addressed in a separate DTD. 21:06:52 q+ 21:07:07 q- 21:08:26 If the baseline you are using includes frames, then you can use them and noframes is not required. If frames are not in the baseline, then you can still use them but in this case, you would have to use noframes. Even if it is not in the baseline - it is good to include NOFRAMES. We have an advisory technique (to be drafted) that recomends its use. 21:08:26 Note: We're no longer considering frames as non-text content and assistive technology support for frames has improved considerably. 21:09:32 resolution: accept LC-1251 as amended 21:09:43 Topic: Team B Survey 21:10:25 +Bruce_Bailey 21:14:26 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/teamb083106/results 21:27:51 Topic: LC-497, LC-510, LC-573, LC-1110, LC-1142, LC-1290: Success Criterion 2.4.4 21:34:14 Refer LC-1251 back to Team B 21:34:20 Topic: LC-625, LC-626, LC-1105, LC-1141, LC-1291: Descriptive titles 21:37:15 s/LC-497, LC-510, LC-573, LC-1110, LC-1142, LC-1290: Success Criterion 2.4.4/LC-1251/ 21:42:17 -Tim_Boland 21:42:36 action: Loretta to add language to the appropriate responses that explains why we are not adding "unique" 21:43:14 resolution: accept LC-625, LC-626, LC-1105, LC-1141, LC-1291: Descriptive titles as amended 21:43:22 Topic: LC-971 21:46:27 resolution: accept LC-971 as proposed 21:46:33 Topic: LC-1109 21:48:48 resolution: accept LC-1109 as amended 21:49:05 Topic: LC-1113 21:52:45 resolution: accept LC-1113 as proposed 21:53:19 LC-1293 21:54:38 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20060831editorz/results 21:54:44 No need for a resolution - this was already accepted by unanimous consent 22:01:20 Topic: Editor's Survey 22:01:26 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20060831editorz/results 22:01:43 Topic: LC-683 22:01:53 resolution: accept LC-683 as amended 22:02:33 Topic: LC-693 22:02:43 resolution: accept LC-693 as amended 22:03:38 zakim, mute me 22:03:38 David_MacDonald should now be muted 22:04:19 zakim, unmute me 22:04:19 David_MacDonald should no longer be muted 22:04:36 Topic: accept LC-871 as proposed 22:05:25 s/Resolution:/Topic:/ 22:05:43 Topic: LC-1199 22:05:54 Resolution: Accept LC-1199 as amended 22:08:33 Present: David_MacDonald, Bengt_Farre, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Gez, Becky_Gibson, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Ben_Caldwell, Sofia_Celic, Sorcha_Moore, Tim_Boland, Alex_Li, Bruce_Bailey 22:08:41 RRSAgent, pointer? 22:08:41 See http://www.w3.org/2006/08/31-wai-wcag-irc#T22-08-41 22:12:29 -Sofia_Celic 22:12:31 -Alex_Li 22:12:32 -Becky_Gibson 22:12:34 -Bruce_Bailey 22:12:35 -Loretta_Guarino_Reid 22:12:36 -Gez 22:12:36 -Gregg_Vanderheiden 22:12:37 -Bengt_Farre 22:12:39 -Andi_Snow_Weaver 22:12:40 -David_MacDonald 22:13:05 zakim, bye 22:13:05 leaving. As of this point the attendees were David_MacDonald, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Bengt_Farre, +1.978.399.aaaa, Becky_Gibson, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Bruce_Bailey, Gez, 22:13:05 Zakim has left #wai-wcag 22:13:08 ... Gregg_Vanderheiden, Sofia_Celic, Alex_Li, Sorcha_Moore, Tim_Boland 22:13:20 bengt has left #wai-wcag 22:13:24 RRSAgent, bye 22:13:24 I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/31-wai-wcag-actions.rdf : 22:13:24 ACTION: Gez to explore captchas to see if we can come up with a sufficient technique for people with multiple disabilities [1] 22:13:24 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/31-wai-wcag-irc#T20-45-10 22:13:24 ACTION: Gregg and Ben to find out what happened to the captcha sufficient techniques [2] 22:13:24 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/31-wai-wcag-irc#T20-46-23 22:13:24 ACTION: Gregg to clarify his concern [3] 22:13:24 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/31-wai-wcag-irc#T20-53-47 22:13:24 ACTION: Loretta to add language to the appropriate responses that explains why we are not adding "unique" [4] 22:13:24 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/08/31-wai-wcag-irc#T21-42-36