W3C

ERT WG

14 Feb 2007

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Shadi, JohannesK, CarlosV, CarlosI
Regrets
Chair
Shadi
Scribe
CarlosI

Contents


Check-in on group reviews

SAZ: new comments on ATAG?

<shadi> ACTION: SAZ darft ATAG comments and send to ERT WG list for review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/14-er-minutes.html#action01]

JK: no new comments

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Feb/0008.html

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Feb/0020.html

SAZ: comments on Mobile OK basic from Johannes

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Feb/0021.html

JK: some more from CI

SAZ: let's discuss about CI comments and JK reactions

CI: think even if there is an error page response this shoulb be a not tested

SAZ: two separate cases, you can even don't reach the server or you can reach the server with an unexpected response

JK: if you have connection problems should be not tested
... error pages should be also M OK

CI: test cases are about concrete URI, error pages are different ones

JK: you ask for an URI and you get something, no matter what

CI: In 1.2 Applicablility they say "test apply to a URI. Passing the tests means that under ther RIGHT CIRCUNSTANCES..."
... error pages are not "right circunstances"

SAZ: we agree if there's a server error the test is not tested

JK: if you get a response you test whatever you get

SAZ: problem with the model, you can never have a M OK site if you fail whatever request

CI: if png or svg are not in DDC there's no discussion

JK: we can ask why thery're not in DDC

discussion about DDC

CI: not sure if CR is in the definition of whitespace

JK: thinks it's in their definition

CI: concerns about "oficial definition" of carriage return
... thinks they must be inline with an "official definition" if there's one

SAZ: they need to make clear what whitespace is
... additionally, what about CSS?

RESOLUTION: when not reaching the server it should be a not tested instead a fail
... When the server returns 4xx or 5xx the result of the test should not fail due to the response code because otherwise the website as a hole could never be M OK compliant
... clarify what definition is been used for whitespace characters
... consider CSS in the minimization

CI: javascript: is well formed URI but not valid
... javascript: protocol in not registered

JK: include # in the values of the test?

CI: thinks in a more generic solution but at least the # case should be included

RESOLUTION: to fail the # value in the 3.15 test

CI: thinks the wording at 3.19 it's not clear

discussion about the wording

<CarlosV> I need to take-off ...

RESOLUTION: 3.19 generate multiple warnings for each radio button in a group
... 3.19 algorithm doesn't check that the rest of input elements are also radio buttons
... the wording is complex and confusing
... why to refeer to "some value" where there's only one valid value since they're boolean attributes

CI: we should discuss on mailing list about the rest of issues

<scribe> ACTION: CI to summarize comments about mobile OK and send to the ERT mailing list to further discussion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/14-er-minutes.html#action02]

<shadi> ACTION: JK to send proposal for 3.19 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/14-er-minutes.html#action03]

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: CI to summarize comments about mobile OK and send to the ERT mailing list to further discussion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/14-er-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: JK to send proposal for 3.19 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/14-er-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ darft ATAG comments and send to ERT WG list for review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/14-er-minutes.html#action01]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
$Date: 2007/02/14 16:48:22 $