IRC log of xhtml on 2007-07-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:49:17 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #xhtml
13:49:17 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/07/11-xhtml-irc
13:49:26 [Steven]: rrsagent, make log public
13:49:31 [Steven]: zakim, this will be xhtml
13:49:31 [Zakim]: ok, Steven; I see IA_XHTML2()10:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
13:49:49 [Steven]: Meeting: Weekly XHTML2 WG Teleconference
13:50:24 [Steven]: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jul/0010
13:50:31 [Steven]: Steven has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2007Jul/0010
13:50:41 [Steven]: Chair: Steve, Roland
13:50:46 [ShaneM]: ShaneM has joined #xhtml
13:53:33 [Tina]: Tina has joined #xhtml
13:53:40 [alessio]: alessio has joined #xhtml
13:54:08 [alessio]: hallo
13:56:25 [Steven]: hi there
13:56:32 [Steven]: rrsagent, make minutes
13:56:32 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/11-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
13:59:53 [Zakim]: IA_XHTML2()10:00AM has now started
14:00:00 [Zakim]: +Roland_
14:00:26 [Steven]: zakim, dial steven-617
14:00:26 [Zakim]: ok, Steven; the call is being made
14:00:27 [Roland_]: Roland_ has joined #xhtml
14:00:28 [Zakim]: +Steven
14:00:32 [OedipusWrecked]: OedipusWrecked has joined #xhtml
14:00:37 [Zakim]: +ShaneM
14:01:08 [Zakim]: +[IPcaller]
14:01:24 [markbirbeck]: markbirbeck has joined #xhtml
14:01:33 [alessio]: zakim, +[IPcaller] is alessio
14:01:33 [Zakim]: sorry, alessio, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller]'
14:01:42 [Zakim]: + +004670855aaaa
14:01:57 [Zakim]: -[IPcaller]
14:01:58 [Steven]: zakim, aaa is Tina
14:02:00 [Zakim]: sorry, Steven, I do not recognize a party named 'aaa'
14:02:00 [markbirbeck]: zakim, numbers?
14:02:03 [Zakim]: I don't understand your question, markbirbeck.
14:02:04 [Steven]: zakim, aaaa is TIna
14:02:04 [Zakim]: +TIna; got it
14:02:05 [markbirbeck]: (guessing)
14:02:13 [markbirbeck]: zakim, number?
14:02:13 [Zakim]: I don't understand your question, markbirbeck.
14:02:14 [Steven]: zakim, code?
14:02:14 [Zakim]: 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 [Zakim]: +Gregory_Rosmiata
14:02:42 [markbirbeck]: zakim, that was going to be my next try, but Steven got there first.
14:02:42 [Zakim]: I don't understand you, markbirbeck
14:02:43 [Rich]: Rich has joined #xhtml
14:03:02 [Rich]: Rich has joined #xhtml
14:03:41 [Zakim]: +[IPcaller]
14:03:44 [Steven]: zakim, who is here?
14:03:44 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Roland_, Steven, ShaneM, TIna, Gregory_Rosmiata, [IPcaller]
14:03:46 [Zakim]: On IRC I see Rich, markbirbeck, OedipusWrecked, Roland_, alessio, Tina, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Steven, krijnh
14:03:53 [Steven]: zakim IP is Alessio
14:03:59 [Steven]: zakim, IP is Alessio
14:03:59 [Zakim]: sorry, Steven, I do not recognize a party named 'IP'
14:04:00 [Zakim]: +??P7
14:04:03 [Zakim]: + +0208761aabb
14:04:05 [alessio]: thanks steven
14:04:14 [markbirbeck]: zakim, i am 02
14:04:21 [Zakim]: sorry, markbirbeck, I do not see a party named '02'
14:04:34 [markbirbeck]: zakim, i am aabb
14:04:34 [Steven]: zakim, [IP is Alessio
14:04:39 [Rich]: Zakim, ??P7 is Rich
14:04:45 [Zakim]: +markbirbeck; got it
14:04:53 [Zakim]: +Alessio; got it
14:04:56 [Rich]: Zakim, +??P7 is Rich
14:05:01 [Zakim]: +Rich; got it
14:05:09 [Zakim]: sorry, Rich, I do not recognize a party named '+??P7'
14:05:19 [Steven]: zakim, who is here?
14:05:31 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Roland_, Steven, ShaneM, TIna, Gregory_Rosmiata, Alessio, markbirbeck, Rich
14:05:39 [Zakim]: On IRC I see Rich, markbirbeck, OedipusWrecked, Roland_, alessio, Tina, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Steven, krijnh
14:06:30 [Steven]: Scribe: Gregory
14:06:44 [Steven]: ScribeNick: OedipusWrecked
14:08:49 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: announcements: questionaire for coming calls - which weeks people taking vacation;
14:08:58 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: please fill out form if not already
14:09:19 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: also questionaire about next Face2Face in Spain -- PLEASE fill in whether coming or not
14:09:40 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: possibility of remote attendance, but need a head-count A.S.A.P.
14:09:48 [OedipusWrecked]: topic: wiki
14:10:27 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: XHTML1 Basic assertions need to be explained -- why is one thing orange and the rest not?
14:12:53 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [Zakim]: -Alessio
14:13:46 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: possible to ignore, but not possible for us to ignore;
14:14:05 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: feature should be tested and excercised at least twice
14:14:46 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: that is fine - need test to try out and implementations that actually do what the feature specifies
14:15:18 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: putting stuff in mobile UAs that take a while; working on implementations here - perhaps can get implementation on our side
14:15:26 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: here?
14:15:42 [yamx]: yamx has joined #xhtml
14:15:45 [OedipusWrecked]: Mark: don't know
14:16:21 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: put the keyboard in a state so that you get particular characters by default -- capitals, alphanumeric characters
14:16:52 [ShaneM]: XHTML Basic editors draft has been updated and is at http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml-basic-20070711/
14:16:52 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: good point to bring up in XForms group; have mobile implementations there
14:17:33 [Zakim]: +??P33
14:17:38 [Zakim]: +??P37
14:17:53 [alessio]: zakim, +??P33 is alessio
14:17:53 [Zakim]: sorry, alessio, I do not recognize a party named '+??P33'
14:18:14 [yamx]: zakim+??P37 is yamx
14:19:07 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: does that seem likely in short time frame?
14:19:21 [OedipusWrecked]: Jan: i think so
14:19:39 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: do you have a feeling for when would be likely to exit CR (2 implementations for each feature)
14:19:44 [alessio]: Zakim, i am +??P33
14:19:44 [Zakim]: sorry, alessio, I do not see a party named '+??P33'
14:20:07 [OedipusWrecked]: Alessio: 1.0 and 1.1 test space;
14:20:16 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: by october?
14:20:31 [Zakim]: -ShaneM
14:21:02 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [Zakim]: +ShaneM
14:21:19 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: last test results you sent to list, most of tests not run; have to have more tests of the tests
14:22:01 [OedipusWrecked]: Alessio: test for mobile 1.1; in isreal have test for input mode; rest will be derrived from ARIA profile
14:22:17 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: need potential date for coordination call -- october or 3 months later
14:22:58 [OedipusWrecked]: RESOLVED: target to exit CR with completed tests: October 2007
14:23:17 [OedipusWrecked]: scribe's correction - not a coordination call, but a joint call
14:23:29 [yamx]: OMA has test fests in September (TestFest21) and November(TestFest22).
14:24:12 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: topic: role and access
14:24:48 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: access module - shane must send proposal; for role, were going to go to last call but...
14:25:20 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: ready to go as far as i am concerned - put a draft up and see what happens
14:25:37 [Steven]: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts/#xhtml-role
14:26:09 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: yes
14:26:31 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: would anyone object to us taking this to last call?
14:27:24 [OedipusWrecked]: RESOLUTION: take role module to last call; SP will set in motion after negotiating space and time with Hypertext CG;
14:28:04 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: six weeks reasonable?
14:28:16 [OedipusWrecked]: yes
14:28:37 [ShaneM]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: ACTION: SteveP - prepare last call draft for the role module
14:29:25 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: shane - interesting last call comment; could put on hold and give priority to getting modularization 1.1 out the door
14:29:40 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: no No NO!
14:29:49 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: then have to meet last call for roles
14:30:07 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: if don't have schema implementation, will get formal objection
14:30:13 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: i concur
14:30:50 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: modularization 1.1 is ready; made changes we are going to implement
14:31:06 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: add schema comments to database; then ask for transition call on modularization
14:31:19 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: going on holiday - can we wait until i get back?
14:31:37 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: yes, but just to be clear, next step is to add comments to schema
14:31:41 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: yes
14:32:05 [OedipusWrecked]: TOPIC: accessmodule and targetid
14:33:00 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: Shane: targetrole takes mulitple values; have them all do the same thing; need to resolve potential confusion
14:33:46 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: documentorder necessary
14:34:14 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: either way is implementable; let's not make decisions based on easiest for author, need it to be correct
14:34:49 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: can't replicate in any other way, already there
14:34:59 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: or using another feature, such as TABINDEX;
14:35:43 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: should be sure feature doesn't collide with next focus - default action key in a way
14:36:08 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: ??: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: pass over normal focus?
14:37:14 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: yes
14:37:20 [OedipusWrecked]: ??: id or role?
14:37:39 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: didn't know if could have multiple ids; one roll gives many
14:38:23 [OedipusWrecked]: ??: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: want multiple accesskeys for each role
14:38:47 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: next in sequence is any one of the following
14:38:50 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: rule for id
14:39:52 [OedipusWrecked]: ??: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: ??: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: next focus redefines what document order is
14:42:45 [markbirbeck]: s/??/MB/
14:43:20 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: when end of document wraps around standard?
14:43:35 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: yes
14:44:07 [OedipusWrecked]: ??: some browsers, go off the document into the chrome; actually a bug; we defined it in XHTML2
14:44:22 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: should declare going to chrome in tabnavigation is invalid
14:44:28 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: incorrect behavior
14:44:29 [markbirbeck]: s/??:/MB:/
14:44:33 [OedipusWrecked]: GJR: +1
14:45:27 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: so treat tab navigation to the chrome as abberant behavior?
14:45:32 [OedipusWrecked]: MB: what next?
14:46:42 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: only 1 ID per element
14:48:19 [OedipusWrecked]: MB: do we not have a concept of navigation order?
14:48:27 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: not as such - should introduce concept
14:49:02 [Zakim]: -TIna
14:49:09 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: MB: could allow both attributes at the same time
14:49:23 [Tina]: I'm having a REAL bad line.
14:49:27 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: yes,
14:49:49 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: id main and any element that have corresponding roles; couple of menues with IDs some with roles
14:50:17 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: sub-sets of navigation order
14:50:33 [OedipusWrecked]: shane: just don't know what to do next
14:51:12 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: in HTML4 context, TABINDEX
14:51:39 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: in XHTML2 will be tabindex plus document order
14:51:55 [markbirbeck]: ...plus nextfocus.
14:52:52 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: topic: longdesc
14:55:16 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: like what done in XHTML2
14:55:59 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: MB: image as container fallback text
14:57:46 [OedipusWrecked]: MB: text might say "you have image loading turned off, please turn on
14:58:08 [OedipusWrecked]: SP: something that performs the image if not there -- that's fallback -- alternative content
14:58:40 [OedipusWrecked]: MB: longdesc implies this is a description of this item; 2 exist at same time; not same thing if multiple fallbacks
14:59:13 [OedipusWrecked]: 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 [OedipusWrecked]: Rich: like XHTML2 and describedby what need to push
15:01:35 [OedipusWrecked]: GJR: will add links to minutes to wiki page on longdesc; and point to describedby URI test page
15:01:42 [Zakim]: -Roland_
15:01:43 [OedipusWrecked]: meeting adjourned
15:01:46 [Zakim]: -??P33
15:01:50 [Zakim]: -Rich
15:01:54 [Zakim]: -Steven
15:01:59 [Tina]: Who is 'MB' again?
15:02:00 [Zakim]: -??P37
15:02:06 [Zakim]: -ShaneM
15:02:16 [OedipusWrecked]: MB is Michael Birbeck (sp?)
15:02:24 [Zakim]: -Gregory_Rosmiata
15:02:30 [Steven]: Mark Birbeck
15:02:54 [Steven]: zakim, who is here?
15:03:18 [Zakim]: On the phone I see markbirbeck
15:03:34 [Steven]: zakim, drop mark
15:03:39 [Zakim]: On IRC I see Rich, markbirbeck, OedipusWrecked, Roland_, alessio, Tina, ShaneM, RRSAgent, Zakim, Steven, krijnh
15:03:58 [markbirbeck]: 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 [Zakim]: markbirbeck is being disconnected
15:04:11 [Zakim]: IA_XHTML2()10:00AM has ended
15:04:11 [OedipusWrecked]: URI for HTML Wiki discussion of longdesc: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/LongdescRetention
15:04:13 [Zakim]: Attendees were Roland_, Steven, ShaneM, [IPcaller], +004670855aaaa, TIna, Gregory_Rosmiata, +0208761aabb, markbirbeck, Alessio, Rich
15:04:29 [Steven]: I agree Mark, good idea
15:04:37 [Steven]: rrsagent, make minutes
15:04:37 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/11-xhtml-minutes.html Steven
15:16:09 [Roland_]: Roland_ has left #xhtml
17:15:18 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #xhtml
17:27:33 [ShaneM]: ShaneM has left #xhtml
19:44:25 [ShaneM]: ShaneM has joined #xhtml
21:08:23 [myakura]: myakura has joined #xhtml
23:12:06 [sbuluf]: sbuluf has joined #xhtml