See also: IRC log
<scribe> Scribe: Henny
<scribe> ScribeNick: Henny
Shawn: We want to publish these
as first public working draft (for the technical document).
This does not need to be complete, just want to make sure
wording os ok.
... Draft would remain in the title.
... Alan do you have any questions from Wayne or Henny's comments.
Alan: Have worked through
comments from Wayne, some need discussion.
... I sent a message to the group with the status section text saying it was not complete.
Wayne: I felt funny sending feedback to the group.
Shawn: it's ok if there are a lot of comments as this is a draft.
Wayne: I'll keep going.
Alan: Single messages is better.
Shawn: I think the response from
Doyle was that it does publish.
... Make it more prominant.
... Any other input on being incomplete?
Shawn: Is there anything else about the technical document?
Alan: there are long winded lists and these are perhaps not clear that they are in progress. I put in @@ to indicate items moving.
Wayne: So you are starting at AAA then going up.
Alan: I am moving from A.
Shawn: Look at a draft of WCAG from 2 years ago and see the editors note. You can change "everything" to "list of criteria to be catagorised" with an editors note of what is to be addressed.
Jack: Which document?
Shawn: the one after C
... Any questions Alan?
Alan: No, just read it and see if it is clear and you can understand what it's about.
Wayne: When talking about going from MWBP to WCAG you have to list everything, needs a sentence to explain it.
Alan: if you've done MWBP this is what you need to do.
Wayne: It's helpfull.
Alan: What is the procedure for transition to a public draft.
Shawn: The mobile web folks will
manage that. I will send an email saying it's ready to
... The only othe rthing is on the Overview page if you could take another pass at fine tuning what is relevant to this as a technical document versus what should go elsewhere.
... I would suggest making sure there is a link to teh intro document quite high up.
Alan: yes, it's a bit lost at the bottom.
Shawn: It should be in how to use this document as people should have read it by then.
Wayne: One thing on MWBP doc itself they really are defining a mobile web. Unlike WCAG where they're making accessibility transparent on existing web.
Alan: it assumes you start from basic mobile phone. They define an abstract ficticious device which is the minimum.
Shawn: So we approve these for publication with the parametres I've mentioned before?
<andrew> Andrew: yes
<shawn> ACTION: shawn in Experiences document - perhaps add a review note about whether people woudl find it better as table or linear. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/11-eo-minutes.html#action01]
<shawn> Wayne: Yes
Shawn: we are going to review linearising the table, leave it for now but try linearising.
Wayne: Amaya has a list maker. It blows up well
Judy: It is the Tablin tool that converts.
Andrew: The conversion is not great.
<shawn> any objections to publishing these?
Shawn: I want to get stuff to
WCAG WG now as they are in a lull before other comments come
... Last week I sent proposed replies to each comment and we came up with replies to all but 2.
... These are comment 19 and 23
... The distinction between blinking and flashing is not clear.
Jack: Wasn't the issue to do with
the testability of some of the definitions.
... A flash can be a bink and a blink a flash. It's a semantic issue.
Shawn: 2.2.2 talks about pausing.
That's the only use of "blinking" in the guidelines.
... Flash is in 2.3.1
... This is one concerened with siezues where as blink is not. So one of the differences is the potential to cause siezures.
Jack: There are two things, one to avoid siezures and the other to minimise distractions.
Shawn: how do we weave that so
that the definition can be put in place of teh word - this is
how they have intended to write them. What you are saying is
right but how do we make it work.
... there's two guidelines the word siezure has to be in the SC.
Jack: William is saying they don't need two words as it is characteristics of one thing.
William: yes because each can include the other.
Shawn: WCAG 2 is well along the way we want it done is there a sufficient suggestion that we can make that would alow then to keep the structure with two definitions.
William: I don't think so.
Judy: This sounds a disagreement on e technical point rather than an EO one on if it is clear. WCAG WG have debated this over time, if this is a disagreement on technical points then this could go in as an individual comment.
Wayne: Does the difinition make
clear that one creates siezure and the other distraction?
... What does 508 say?
... This may be a subset thing...
Justin: can we not link flash to flash?
Shawn: it's in the notes. Thay
have not fixed it yet, not sure if for a reason or if they
... The other question was in the definition of blink "in a way that's meant to draw attention" Liam had an objection. What was the issue?
... It can't be determined?
Shawn: the difinition of blinking may need to explicitly state the opposit of Flash
William: ...there are a lot of people easily distracted by these.
Shawn: we're saying that it
"drawing attention" can not be determined.
... anything else for this one?
... Comment 23: Please clarify [SC 3.1.4] (The "A mechanism is available..." issue)
... Our original comment was on the specific SC
... we had suggested they simplify it.
... we should say this is not substantial in terms of chaging technical content but is important
Wayne: I read all the other ones
and i think mechanism is the right word.
... It's not something you can fo via an attribute, there are lots of ways that you can provide that mechanism.
Shawn: whay can't they say "users can"...rather than mechanism. Id say that if it wasn't a standards document.
Wayne: the term mechanism says you must encode a mechanism that makes it possible, it has to be added.
Justin: It's also the technique which is why they are broadening it out.
Shawn: So what would you suggest Justin.
Juston: I agree with Wayne. A mechanism a process or how you do it rather than an end result.
Shawn: Is it still important to
suggest an edit to 3.4?
<shawn> the expanded form or meaning of abbreviations can be programmatically determined or is available in text
<shawn> A mechanism for identifying the expanded form or meaning of abbreviations is available.
Wayne: Maybe one of us should submit this individually as this is a technical change.
Shawn: If we don't have strong feelings in EO then it does not have to go to comment.
Justin: I'm ok with how it is.
Shawn: anyone else have any thoughts on the use of a mechanism?
William: the difinition means needs?
Shawn: Our proposed reply is we accept their definition?
Shawn: There is wording that needs tweaks on 19? Are you happy with me to send to the WG or do you want to review it?
William: Go for it.
<shawn> Any objections to sending WCAG WG?
Shawn: Any objections to sending
these comments to WCAG?
WCAG 2.0 Quick Reference http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/
Shawn: We talked before about this looking at the Quick Ref rather than the navigation between the documents. Any comments on the user interface for the quick reference.
William: It's doing what I
expect. If I click on checkboxes I can't see changes in the
... "Your customised Quick reference list" should be dynamic.
Justin: It would help if techniques were organised by CSS and HTML techniques.
Wayne: This page is hard to read linearised. The introduction and table of contents is there every time. It's a lot.
Shawn: You can hide the introduction.
William: there is a link after the heading Introduction.
Shawn: The big issue is if somebody customises it, saves settings then comes back to it after 3 months. They have to be able to see what they saved.
Jack: the same if you pass it on.
Justin: But you can't due to URL configurations.
Shawn: It's a request for later on.
Wayne: maybe they need to have
show hide techniques. This is done one way then the
Introduction is hidden using another mechanism it's
... Easy to miss visually
William: And coceptually.
Shawn: should the "show/hide" be with the introduction or elsewhere.
William: Once I knew it was there it was easy to do.
Wayne: Have a look at this with style sheets removed (colour too). You see the introduction hidden problem gets easily lost.
Shawn: I see it.
William: I just didn't see the hide introdution, before.
Justin: I think the Introduction should be like I Terms of Reference that you click through.
<andrew> Andrew: I see it in firefox 2 with/without CSS
Shawn: I've been continually
asking them to shorten the introduction. In testing no ones
... If on a different page people wont read it Justin.
Justin: I don't think people will read it on here either.
Wayne: I have to page 9 pages to
get to the first guidline...you can't kill teh table of
... There probably be a show hide table of contents button.
Shawn: We asked but they said it was too complex.
Wayne: But I have low vision and can't use it.
William: They need to test it and
this is what is happening here.
... Can we report this?
Shawn: This could be personal preference not an issue that everyone would have.
Wayne: I'm not saying this as a
personal preference but something that we should change.
... The document is not usable.
Shawn: Your suggestion is a hide table of contents?
Wayne: You could do heading navigation to there...
William: we need to look at this without style sheets and in large print. It seems that there are navigations q's that are not coming about in the linearised version.
Helle: What is teh relation
between the Table of Contents and the customised reference
list. I get a long thin document. The table of contents is for
the whole document all the time regardless of
... If I customise I still get the whole table of content including guidelines not in my customised list.
... It's confusing to have a table of contents with more than the content you have on the page.
Judy: Wayne I think we should send comments noting the problems you started to talk about. If you just say try tirning off styles and increasing the fonts is good. Getting people to carry out tasks as you are would help in getting this right.
<Zakim> LiamMcGee, you wanted to note that the show/hide reloads the page. and to ask whther this is as far as showing/hiding elements is intended to extend
<andrew> kbd = keyboard
<scribe> ACTION: Wayne to feedback specific issues he has found accessing the document. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/11-eo-minutes.html#action02]
Liam: I expected to expand any part of the document. Is that going to happen?
Shawn: It's on the wish list for later.
Liam: In that case the show/hide is a little confusing for the introduction.
<Zakim> andrew, you wanted to suggest a keyboard link to skip over "customise options"
Andrew: The keyboard navigatin, it would be good to have the ability to skip over the start would be good.
Wayne, William, Doyle, Helle, Henny: For.
<andrew> andrew: to skip over the 'cutomise' options when tabbing
Wayne: That would be good.
Andrew: you might want two
<shawn> ACTION: shawn, Quick Ref: link to skip customization options (displayed only on focus), go to Table of Contents [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/11-eo-minutes.html#action03]
Liam: Difficult to see when a checkbox is focused.
Shawn: Can you send suggestions for that?
<shawn> ACTION: Liam, Quick Ref: send suggestions for increased visibility of focus on checkboxes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/11-eo-minutes.html#action04]
William: Can the overall header be hidden or not.
Shawn: No it can't be hidden.
<shawn> Understanding WCAG 2.0
Shawn: what do you think of the navigation?
William: Fine I assume.
Wayne: I imagin that the use of this page is to jump quickly, maybe we need an internal address so you go straight to the H1
Shawn: Understanding used to be one HTML page. Now it sections off. One bit, one SC..
Wayne: I'd suggest that when you jump to the H1...
Andrew: but you lose the
... From a Google search you will come in sideways.
... the main concerns are people may not know what they've missed.
Justin: Can the skip be made visible?
Shawn: Maybe this should be available on focus.
William: Why not just make it available.
<shawn> ACTION: all - consider if linking from WCAG or the Quick Reference, then go the anchor at the H1 (bypassing the front links) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/11-eo-minutes.html#action05]
Shawn: Anything else about navigating back and forth, understanding where you are? If you are at the Quick Reference you click through on Live-Audio for example. You want to go back to the Quick refernce, what are your thoughts?
Andrew: I reckon you just hit the back button.
Henny: Plus 1 on that.
Shawn: Is it useful to have a link to teh quick reference here.
Liam: if the Quick Refernece is the overal starting point it may be useful.
Wayne: Don't you also get to this document from WCAG 2.0 itself?
Shawn: So you've got here from
Google or you've been sent the link - what are the
... WCAG 2.0 comments due on Friday Feb 1st. Please do review of WCAG next week and forwward to the list.
... From an EP perspective we want to look at understandability and readability. Also want to look at the conformance section and accessibility supporting technologies.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128 of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Shawn wed had/Shawn: we had/ Found Scribe: Henny Inferring ScribeNick: Henny Found ScribeNick: Henny Default Present: +1.512.797.aaaa, Wayne_Dick, Shawn, Shadi, Sharron, Loughborough, Jack, Henny, achuter, doyle, Judy, Justin, Andrew, +45.36.4.aabb, Helle, Liam Present: +1.512.797.aaaa Wayne_Dick Shawn Shadi Sharron Loughborough Jack Henny achuter doyle Judy Justin Andrew +45.36.4.aabb Helle Liam Alan William Doyle Wayne Liam_and_Henny Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2008JanMar/0023.html Got date from IRC log name: 11 Jan 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/01/11-eo-minutes.html People with action items: all liam link quick ref shawn wayne WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]