W3C

- DRAFT -

WAI AU

02 Mar 2009

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
JR, Jeanne, AndrewR, Tim_Boland
Regrets
Jutta_T., Anne_M.
Chair
Jan Richards
Scribe
JR

Contents


 

 

technology (Web content)

All: Agree with "No Change"

checking (accessibility) [harmonized with EARL 1.0]

technology (Web content) [harmonized with WCAG 2.0]

<jeanne> ACTION:js to update glossary with new <dt> for technology :technology (Web content) [harmonized with WCAG 2.0] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action01]

template

All: Agree with "No Change"

template selection mechanism

All: Agree with "No Change"

transformation

All: Agree with "No Change"

Video

All: Agree with "No Change"

A customary sequence of steps or tasks authors follow to produce a content deliverable.

Topic; Workflow

Workflow

<jeanne> Group works on word smithing to add the recommended changes to "workflow"

A customary sequence of steps or tasks authors follow to produce a content deliverable. If an authoring tool is comprised of multiple software components then the workflow may include use of one or more of those components.

A customary sequence of steps or tasks authors follow to produce a content deliverable. If an authoring tool is composed of multiple software components then its workflows may include use of one or more of the components.

http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20090227/results

<jeanne> JR: It isn't adding a demand to simpler tools, it's just opening it to more collaborative tools and complex situations.

TB: Agree with new wording

Andrew?

<AndrewR> yes this is better

<jeanne> +1 to new wording

<jeanne> ACTION: js to update glossary with new definition of Workflow. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-122 - Update glossary with new definition of Workflow. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-03-09].

Assistive technology

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JanMar/0052.html

assistive technology (as used in this document)

hardware and/or software that acts as a user agent, or along with a mainstream user agent, to provide functionality to meet the requirements of users with disabilities that go beyond those offered by mainstream user agents

Note 1: functionality provided by assistive technology includes alternative presentations (e.g., as synthesized speech or magnified content), alternative input methods (e.g., voice), additional navigation or orientation mechanisms, and content transformations (e.g., to make tables more accessible).

Note 2: Assistive technologies often communicate data and messages with mainstream user agents by using and monitoring APIs.

Note 3: The distinction between mainstream user agents and assistive technologies is not absolute. Many mainstream user agents provide some features to assist individuals with disabilities. The basic difference is that mainstream user agents target broad and diverse audiences that usually include people with and without disabilities. Assistive technologies target narrowly defined populations...

scribe: of users with specific disabilities. The assistance provided by an assistive technology is more specific and appropriate to the needs of its target users. The mainstream user agent may provide important functionality to assistive technologies like retrieving Web content from program objects or parsing markup into identifiable bundles.

Example: Assistive technologies that are important in the context of this document include the following:

screen magnifiers, and other visual reading assistants, which are used by people with visual, perceptual and physical print disabilities to change text font, size, spacing, color, synchronization with speech, etc. in order to improve the visual readability of rendered text and images;

screen readers, which are used by people who are blind to read textual information through synthesized speech or braille;

text-to-speech software, which is used by some people with cognitive, language, and learning disabilities to convert text into synthetic speech;

speech recognition software, which may be used by people who have some physical disabilities;

alternative keyboards, which are used by people with certain physical disabilities to simulate the keyboard (including alternate keyboards that use head pointers, single switches, sip/puff and other special input devices.);

alternative pointing devices, which are used by people with certain physical disabilities to simulate mouse pointing and button activations.

<jeanne> ACTION: Js to put definition of assistive technology in next weeks survey. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-123 - Put definition of assistive technology in next weeks survey. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-03-09].

Prominent

prominence

A heuristic measure of how likely users are to notice items in a user interface that they are operating. In ATAG 2.0, prominence considers both visual and non-visual (keyboard-only) modes of operation. Some of the factors that contribute to prominence include:

1. order: items that occur early in the reading order are usually more prominent,

2. grouping: items that occur early in the reading order of each grouping are usually more prominent (e.g., the early items in nested menus),

3. steps required: items that require more navigation steps to operate, usually have less prominence (e.g., items on "advanced" property dialogs),

4. size: larger items are usually more visually prominent,

5. spacing: items surrounded by extra white space are usually more visually prominent,

6. highlighting: items that are highlighted using icons, color, styling, etc. are usually more visually prominent.

<scribe> ACTION: JR to Try to increase the testability of Prominence [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-124 - Try to increase the testability of Prominence [on Jan Richards - due 2009-03-09].

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: JR to Try to increase the testability of Prominence [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Js to put definition of assistive technology in next weeks survey. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: js to update glossary with new <dt> for technology :technology (Web content) [harmonized with WCAG 2.0] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: js to update glossary with new definition of Workflow. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html#action02]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/03/02 22:01:02 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: JR
Inferring Scribes: JR
Default Present: JR, Jeanne, AndrewR, Tim_Boland
Present: JR Jeanne AndrewR Tim_Boland
Regrets: Jutta_T. Anne_M.
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JanMar/0053.html
Got date from IRC log name: 02 Mar 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/03/02-au-minutes.html
People with action items: jr js

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]