See also: IRC log
<AllanJ> http://www.zacbrowser.com/
zacbrowser for cognitive disabilities/autism
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
Pre-meeting discussion of Nintendo Wii and Xbox as user agents.
KF: How do we increase participation - a Call for Participation?
JR: It's part of rechartering.
KF: will talk to people in XBox team to see if they are interested in participating.
Veteran's Administration would be interested in accessible game boxes.
JS: We need cell phone contributers.
JA: Talk to Google mobile applications. They are accessible.
July 4th is a Thursday.
KF: Will be around most of the summer
JA will be out June 19, 26 and 4.
JS will be out July 31 to Aug 7.
JR has nothing planned yet.
<KFord> As an fyi here's the link for are talk about IE8 beta 2. http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/06/03/ie8-beta-2-coming-in-august.aspx
JA: Found all the parts of UAAG that mention
the @alt.
... there should be no ambiguity in what is the correct alternative content
to present to the user.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008AprJun/0126.html
JR: the meaning of alt="" is overloaded, but perhaps UAAG should take a stand that is should be required.
KF: It's fine to deal with the overload, but we
have to take a position that there must be alternative text and it is
mandatory.
... otherwise it will go away.
JA: Xtech and HTML5 have 2 thousand messages on
this topic.
... use cases and edge cases on both sides.
<Jan> 2.7 in UAAG 1.0: Allow configuration to generate repair text when the user agent recognizes that the author has not provided conditional content required by the format specification.
JR: UAAG 1.0 uses @alt in repair (see above)
... uses that as a trigger for repair text, like use the name of the
image.
JA: We were documenting current practice. We have similar guideline in UAAG 2.
JR: There could be no repair if every site that currently ignores @alt put it in as alt="".
<KFord> Off topic, how to get get the spelling error in accessibility under the wai list corrected in http://www.w3.org/Mail/Lists
<AllanJ> in UAAG 20 - 3.5.1 Repair Missing Alternatives: The user has the option of receiving generated repair text when the user agent recognizes that the author has not provided alternative content required by the technology specification (e.g., short text alternative for an image).@@2.7 in UAAG10@@
JR: Should alt="" be decorative image or should
it be "I don't care about accessibility"?
... I think it should be alt="" for the people who don't care about
accessibility and have a different delimiter for a decorative image.
... We want to make sure that there is a difference between decorative, or
alternative content missing.
JS: because that would trigger the repair function.
JR: we need to present that fork to the user agent developers.
JA: there needs to be an unambiguous
relationship between the alternative content and the image
... and there needs to be an unambiguous relationship between the decorative
and the needing repair.
JR: Browser developers need a clear distinction
between where there is no information value of the image, and when the
information value of the image is unclear.
... There is no alternate content for a sound.
... If there were, it would want to have alternative content.
JA: Our job is to display alternative content, whatever the language says it is, and if it isn't. we would have to generate repair.
JR: People will complain that we forcing a
change to the status quo. They will have to repair their sites to conform.
... but the developer who doesn't care about accessibility will just put
alt="" to pass validation.
JA: for a while, we were training developers to put summary="" on layout tables.
JR: It was a bad idea in the beginning to use alt="", because it doesn't mean "decorative image".
JA: May need a whole new attribute set. There is also the idea that all content should be within elements, not in attributes.
JR: Should we have a "defending the status quo" position for the browsers?
KF and JA: No.
JA: if something is identified as alternative
text is should be presented to the user without requiring the user discover
it.
... and if it is missing, it should trigger a repair condition.
JR: And if it is missing?
JA: then it should trigger repair, the way browsers do repair for all kinds of conditions for sloppy developers.
<Jan> ACTION: JR to Try to formulate the UAWG position out of this discussion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-ua-minutes.html#action01]
<scribe> ACTION: Jan will write it up and email Jeanne who will put it in a survey and send it out. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-ua-minutes.html#action02]
<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne will turn Jan's write up on printing and make it a survey and send it out. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-ua-minutes.html#action03]
JA: JS said that we have a Techniques document
due in December
... We have open issues and JR has made it into a wiki page.