13:49:17 RRSAgent has joined #xhtml 13:49:17 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/07/11-xhtml-irc 13:49:26 rrsagent, make log public 13:49:31 zakim, this will be xhtml 13:49:31 ok, Steven; I see IA_XHTML2()10:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes 13:49:49 Meeting: Weekly XHTML2 WG Teleconference 13:50:24 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jul/0010 13:50:31 Steven has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jul/0010 13:50:41 Chair: Steve, Roland 13:50:46 ShaneM has joined #xhtml 13:53:33 Tina has joined #xhtml 13:53:40 alessio has joined #xhtml 13:54:08 hallo 13:56:25 hi there 13:56:32 rrsagent, make minutes 13:56:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/11-xhtml-minutes.html Steven 13:59:53 IA_XHTML2()10:00AM has now started 14:00:00 +Roland_ 14:00:26 zakim, dial steven-617 14:00:26 ok, Steven; the call is being made 14:00:27 Roland_ has joined #xhtml 14:00:28 +Steven 14:00:32 OedipusWrecked has joined #xhtml 14:00:37 +ShaneM 14:01:08 +[IPcaller] 14:01:24 markbirbeck has joined #xhtml 14:01:33 zakim, +[IPcaller] is alessio 14:01:33 sorry, alessio, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller]' 14:01:42 + +004670855aaaa 14:01:57 -[IPcaller] 14:01:58 zakim, aaa is Tina 14:02:00 sorry, Steven, I do not recognize a party named 'aaa' 14:02:00 zakim, numbers? 14:02:03 I don't understand your question, markbirbeck. 14:02:04 zakim, aaaa is TIna 14:02:04 +TIna; got it 14:02:05 (guessing) 14:02:13 zakim, number? 14:02:13 I don't understand your question, markbirbeck. 14:02:14 zakim, code? 14:02:14 the conference code is 94865 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Steven 14:02:19 +Gregory_Rosmiata 14:02:42 zakim, that was going to be my next try, but Steven got there first. 14:02:42 I don't understand you, markbirbeck 14:02:43 Rich has joined #xhtml 14:03:02 Rich has joined #xhtml 14:03:41 +[IPcaller] 14:03:44 zakim, who is here? 14:03:44 On the phone I see Roland_, Steven, ShaneM, TIna, Gregory_Rosmiata, [IPcaller] 14:03:46 On IRC I see Rich, markbirbeck, OedipusWrecked, Roland_, alessio, Tina, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Steven, krijnh 14:03:53 zakim IP is Alessio 14:03:59 zakim, IP is Alessio 14:03:59 sorry, Steven, I do not recognize a party named 'IP' 14:04:00 +??P7 14:04:03 + +0208761aabb 14:04:05 thanks steven 14:04:14 zakim, i am 02 14:04:21 sorry, markbirbeck, I do not see a party named '02' 14:04:34 zakim, i am aabb 14:04:34 zakim, [IP is Alessio 14:04:39 Zakim, ??P7 is Rich 14:04:45 +markbirbeck; got it 14:04:53 +Alessio; got it 14:04:56 Zakim, +??P7 is Rich 14:05:01 +Rich; got it 14:05:09 sorry, Rich, I do not recognize a party named '+??P7' 14:05:19 zakim, who is here? 14:05:31 On the phone I see Roland_, Steven, ShaneM, TIna, Gregory_Rosmiata, Alessio, markbirbeck, Rich 14:05:39 On IRC I see Rich, markbirbeck, OedipusWrecked, Roland_, alessio, Tina, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Steven, krijnh 14:06:30 Scribe: Gregory 14:06:44 ScribeNick: OedipusWrecked 14:08:49 SP: announcements: questionaire for coming calls - which weeks people taking vacation; 14:08:58 SP: please fill out form if not already 14:09:19 SP: also questionaire about next Face2Face in Spain -- PLEASE fill in whether coming or not 14:09:40 SP: possibility of remote attendance, but need a head-count A.S.A.P. 14:09:48 topic: wiki 14:10:27 SP: have an action item to ask for a wiki; told that w3c is going to transfer / migrate to mediawiki, which is probably preferable; put action item on hold until migration complete 14:11:30 topic: transition call for XHTML1; don't anticipate problems, but for those of you interested in basic, look at draft of spec for obvious editorial errors; shane & i looked it over yesterday 14:12:25 SP: XHTML1 Basic assertions need to be explained -- why is one thing orange and the rest not? 14:12:53 SP: next step is CR -- assuming tomorrow's call goes well, will be in CR in a few days; need to ping jan -- need to discuss pattern for testing 14:13:24 SP: had comment from W3C team that should have tests for input mode and should have at least 2 implementations that ACTUALLY do something with it 14:13:25 -Alessio 14:13:46 SP: possible to ignore, but not possible for us to ignore; 14:14:05 SP: feature should be tested and excercised at least twice 14:14:46 SP: that is fine - need test to try out and implementations that actually do what the feature specifies 14:15:18 Shane: putting stuff in mobile UAs that take a while; working on implementations here - perhaps can get implementation on our side 14:15:26 Shane: here? 14:15:42 yamx has joined #xhtml 14:15:45 Mark: don't know 14:16:21 SP: put the keyboard in a state so that you get particular characters by default -- capitals, alphanumeric characters 14:16:52 XHTML Basic editors draft has been updated and is at http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml-basic-20070711/ 14:16:52 MB: would they be available by themselves -- can have braille; build for what's available and switch to that mode when necessary 14:17:10 SP: good point to bring up in XForms group; have mobile implementations there 14:17:33 +??P33 14:17:38 +??P37 14:17:53 zakim, +??P33 is alessio 14:17:53 sorry, alessio, I do not recognize a party named '+??P33' 14:18:14 zakim+??P37 is yamx 14:19:07 SP: traditional call tomorrow at regular time - link in the agenda, please pass an editorial eye over it; had a comment from within w3c team to exit CR need tests that test optional features -- in particular input mode -- 2 implementations that do input mode 14:19:16 SP: does that seem likely in short time frame? 14:19:21 Jan: i think so 14:19:39 SP: do you have a feeling for when would be likely to exit CR (2 implementations for each feature) 14:19:44 Zakim, i am +??P33 14:19:44 sorry, alessio, I do not see a party named '+??P33' 14:20:07 Alessio: 1.0 and 1.1 test space; 14:20:16 SP: by october? 14:20:31 -ShaneM 14:21:02 Alessio: next february was target, but have 1 to 1.1 tests; new tests will use mobile profile 1.1 will already be published by then 14:21:15 +ShaneM 14:21:19 SP: last test results you sent to list, most of tests not run; have to have more tests of the tests 14:22:01 Alessio: test for mobile 1.1; in isreal have test for input mode; rest will be derrived from ARIA profile 14:22:17 SP: need potential date for coordination call -- october or 3 months later 14:22:58 RESOLVED: target to exit CR with completed tests: October 2007 14:23:17 scribe's correction - not a coordination call, but a joint call 14:23:29 OMA has test fests in September (TestFest21) and November(TestFest22). 14:24:12 SP: replied to schema group - posted proposed reply; if anyone knows modularization PLEASE take a look at my comments and make sure that you agree -- looking for help, especially shane and mark and anyone else who knows schemas and modularization 14:24:29 topic: role and access 14:24:48 SP: access module - shane must send proposal; for role, were going to go to last call but... 14:25:20 Shane: ready to go as far as i am concerned - put a draft up and see what happens 14:25:37 http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts/#xhtml-role 14:26:09 SP: have public draft and new editor's draft from this month (july 2007); is everyone happy with us taking it to last call 14:26:18 Rich: yes 14:26:31 SP: would anyone object to us taking this to last call? 14:27:24 RESOLUTION: take role module to last call; SP will set in motion after negotiating space and time with Hypertext CG; 14:28:04 SP: we have a face2face where can deal with last call issues at face2face; if we suggest a last call that ends on the last day of august, gives SP time to chase down people and collect all comments? 14:28:10 SP: six weeks reasonable? 14:28:16 yes 14:28:37 Note that the spec does NOT have a schema implementation in it. My last call comment will be that it needs one, but that we need M12N 1.1 ready first. 14:28:57 ACTION: SteveP - prepare last call draft for the role module 14:29:25 SP: shane - interesting last call comment; could put on hold and give priority to getting modularization 1.1 out the door 14:29:40 Shane: no No NO! 14:29:49 SP: then have to meet last call for roles 14:30:07 Shane: if don't have schema implementation, will get formal objection 14:30:13 Rich: i concur 14:30:50 Shane: modularization 1.1 is ready; made changes we are going to implement 14:31:06 SP: add schema comments to database; then ask for transition call on modularization 14:31:19 Shane: going on holiday - can we wait until i get back? 14:31:37 SP: yes, but just to be clear, next step is to add comments to schema 14:31:41 Shane: yes 14:32:05 TOPIC: accessmodule and targetid 14:33:00 SP: are we happy with "next id in target area"? more sensible to say, yes, next one of those in order; take list in attribute order, of take list and find first one in document order; need to agree which is best 14:33:33 Shane: targetrole takes mulitple values; have them all do the same thing; need to resolve potential confusion 14:33:46 Rich: documentorder necessary 14:34:14 SP: either way is implementable; let's not make decisions based on easiest for author, need it to be correct 14:34:49 SP: can't replicate in any other way, already there 14:34:59 SP: or using another feature, such as TABINDEX; 14:35:43 SP: should be sure feature doesn't collide with next focus - default action key in a way 14:36:08 SP: if i have target = a and land on a which has next focus of b, follow document order in that route? 14:36:54 ??: document order not order of the list -- order that one navigates, should be plusNextFocus; other possiblity list of icons to be cycled through using a key definition 14:37:11 Rich: pass over normal focus? 14:37:14 SP: yes 14:37:20 ??: id or role? 14:37:39 SP: didn't know if could have multiple ids; one roll gives many 14:38:23 ??: understand your arguments, but if have doc with roles a b & c - TargetRole a b c - when activate access key, where does it go -- to all the As and then the Bs or movev onto the Bs 14:38:33 Rich: want multiple accesskeys for each role 14:38:47 Rich: next in sequence is any one of the following 14:38:50 SP: rule for id 14:39:52 ??: just wanted consistency -- people have discussed mapping in different fora - can always come back to it; like a flag that says these items qualify for focus, then provide option to go down list of As or tab to next set of Bs 14:40:44 SP: example i used to show NextFocus working: in a table want to navigate in different order than UA; specifying with NextFocus is something that overrides document order 14:41:42 ??: good example - if have table, can go to any row or column, set an accesskey for SeekTheCell -- knock off the head, just have the cell, should still do in row order or column order 14:42:18 SP: default document order; if redifine using NextFocus to do column order navigation - using accesskeys should honor that route through the table 14:42:33 SP: next focus redefines what document order is 14:42:45 s/??/MB/ 14:43:20 SP: allows author to skip non-navigatable sections - but non-navigatable section still available; tab from one table to next table without interspersed text 14:43:34 Rich: when end of document wraps around standard? 14:43:35 SP: yes 14:44:07 ??: some browsers, go off the document into the chrome; actually a bug; we defined it in XHTML2 14:44:22 SP: should declare going to chrome in tabnavigation is invalid 14:44:28 Rich: incorrect behavior 14:44:29 s/??:/MB:/ 14:44:33 GJR: +1 14:45:27 SP: so treat tab navigation to the chrome as abberant behavior? 14:45:32 MB: what next? 14:46:42 SP: where the definition should go - module is independent of NextFocus; could have lang with accesskey but not next focus; put in access module what happens when have NextFocus like mechanism, or put into NextFocus module, say this redefines concept of document order; should we use the term "navigation order"? -- perhaps that is the answer 14:47:45 Rich: should be "navigation order"; have a flowto mechanism in ARIA - if there is one id, go to next id, can skip the order -- this is Assisstive Tech, not UAs; if multiple IDs, user should be given a choice of which to navigate to 14:48:01 SP: only 1 ID per element 14:48:19 MB: do we not have a concept of navigation order? 14:48:27 SP: not as such - should introduce concept 14:49:02 -TIna 14:49:09 MB: if conflict in navigation order - sequence defined in explicit way; role and ids allow to stop if matches role in list, if not hop over it 14:49:20 MB: could allow both attributes at the same time 14:49:23 I'm having a REAL bad line. 14:49:27 SP: yes, 14:49:49 SP: id main and any element that have corresponding roles; couple of menues with IDs some with roles 14:50:17 SP: sub-sets of navigation order 14:50:33 shane: just don't know what to do next 14:51:12 RESOLUTION: targetrole and targetid can take multiple values; accessvalue can have one or more; defines subset of navigation order, which is something we must define; 14:51:26 Rich: in HTML4 context, TABINDEX 14:51:39 SP: in XHTML2 will be tabindex plus document order 14:51:55 ...plus nextfocus. 14:52:52 SP: may have seen email to MB; question about multiple ids on single element; XML Schema group has decided to allow multiple IDs on an element; don't know when that behavior will be defined, so can do what we need without breaking rules 14:53:40 SP: no reason for single ID restriction; nothing really breaks if something has 2 names; sent comment to XML WG answered, yes, this is a bug, needs to be fixed; resolved to change it, so heads up 14:53:53 topic: longdesc 14:55:16 Rich: like what done in XHTML2 14:55:59 SP: discussed endlessly and came up with solution; HTML5 case - allow image to have content - not to be empty element, but element with children; if source fails, image not available, image loading off, can use content of the image element 14:57:19 Rich: image shows can't navigate content, so where going to get description? ATs can get text for you; description relative to an item on same page -- describedby; objection to longdesc is someone has to create whole new web page and maintain it 14:57:30 MB: image as container fallback text 14:57:46 MB: text might say "you have image loading turned off, please turn on 14:58:08 SP: something that performs the image if not there -- that's fallback -- alternative content 14:58:40 MB: longdesc implies this is a description of this item; 2 exist at same time; not same thing if multiple fallbacks 14:59:13 SP: the whole point of fallback in XHTML2 is to say these 2 things are equivalent, end of story; move longdesc into document 15:01:05 Rich: like XHTML2 and describedby what need to push 15:01:35 GJR: will add links to minutes to wiki page on longdesc; and point to describedby URI test page 15:01:42 -Roland_ 15:01:43 meeting adjourned 15:01:46 -??P33 15:01:50 -Rich 15:01:54 -Steven 15:01:59 Who is 'MB' again? 15:02:00 -??P37 15:02:06 -ShaneM 15:02:16 MB is Michael Birbeck (sp?) 15:02:24 -Gregory_Rosmiata 15:02:30 Mark Birbeck 15:02:54 zakim, who is here? 15:03:18 On the phone I see markbirbeck 15:03:34 zakim, drop mark 15:03:39 On IRC I see Rich, markbirbeck, OedipusWrecked, Roland_, alessio, Tina, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Steven, krijnh 15:03:58 Steven--if we were to give special status to text used in fallbacks then we could cover all use-cases. We could simply say in XHTML 2 that the UA should make fallback text 'available' regardless of which of the items is actually used. Then it really does become like @longdesc, and it also means that Rich doesn't need to have a separate area for his descriptive text. 15:04:09 markbirbeck is being disconnected 15:04:11 IA_XHTML2()10:00AM has ended 15:04:11 URI for HTML Wiki discussion of longdesc: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/LongdescRetention 15:04:13 Attendees were Roland_, Steven, ShaneM, [IPcaller], +004670855aaaa, TIna, Gregory_Rosmiata, +0208761aabb, markbirbeck, Alessio, Rich 15:04:29 I agree Mark, good idea 15:04:37 rrsagent, make minutes 15:04:37 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/11-xhtml-minutes.html Steven 15:16:09 Roland_ has left #xhtml 17:15:18 Zakim has left #xhtml 17:27:33 ShaneM has left #xhtml 19:44:25 ShaneM has joined #xhtml 21:08:23 myakura has joined #xhtml 23:12:06 sbuluf has joined #xhtml