See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 06 April 2009
<AnnM> hi. just dialling in.
<Greg> would someone mind providing the dial in info please. Outlook is not cooperating
<Greg> I will then tatto it to the back of my hand
<Greg> thnks
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
<JR> Scribe: jeanne
<JR> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-cg/2009JanMar/att-0254/html-alt-resolution.html
JR: An ad-hoc group in WAI has been developing
a proposal for alt in HTML5 for the HTML5 WG. The link is to the consensus
reached by the ad-hoc group, they are looking for feedback and consensus from
the broader WAI groups
... It begins with the resolutions. [JR reads from link above]
JT: This is the compromise solution where we are raising awareness of the need to use alternative descriptions, but not requiring it for validity.
JR: With ARIA labeledby they can use it, and
not have it be invalid, as HTML4.
... Plus people are incorrectly using alt="" just to get validity. Adding
role="presentation" allows the User agent to get more information
AM: My concern is that the browser support and AT support won't keep up with it.
JR: Any objections outside that one area of concern? [no objections]
<JR> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0002.html
<JR> JT: Is trying to decide whether to give comments now or wait for next version req setting
<JR> JR: Right maybe better to just let v1.0 go ahead
<JR> JR: "8.3.1. Authoring Tools" is a little thin - maybe might mention
<JR> supporting toolkits with built-in ARIA support?
<JR> Glossary synchro with ATAG is mixed.
<JR> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0004.html
<Greg> Comments on the Draft
<Greg> ACTION: Change will not to may not in In the Introduction section, second paragraph after the first two [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Change
<Greg> > bullets: "As ATAG 2.0 guides authors in complying to WCAG 2.0, similar
<Greg> > to the constraints of WCAG 2.0, even content that conforms at the
<Greg> > highest level (AAA) will not be accessible to individuals with all
<Greg> > types, degrees, or combinations of disability …" --- "will not be
<Greg> > accessible" is a very strong statement provided that "individuals
<Greg> > with all types, degrees, or combinations of disability" is something
<Greg> > hard to be precisely measured. I suggest you say "may not be fully accessible"
<Greg> > or something along these lines.
<JR> ACTION: JS - Change "will not be accessible" to "may not" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-134 - - Change \"will not be accessible\" to \"may not\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-04-13].
<JR> ACTION: JS - in Auth tool defn "(e.g., a collaborative tool that archives the conversation as Web content)." [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-135 - - in Auth tool defn \"(e.g., a collaborative tool that archives the conversation as Web content).\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-04-13].
<JR> ACTION: JS to "wide range" to "varying range" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-136 - \"wide range\" to \"varying range\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-04-13].
[no disagreement]
"tools should promote discoverability of tools" too confusing.
JR: Recommend simplifying it to:
<JR> "Authoring tools should facilitate awareness and proper use of features that support accessible authoring practices, with a goal of incorporating accessibility into common practice."
<JR> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0004.html
<JR> ACTION: JS to "Authoring tools should facilitate awareness and proper use of features that support accessible authoring practices, with a goal of incorporating accessibility into common practice." [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-137 - \"Authoring tools should facilitate awareness and proper use of features that support accessible authoring practices, with a goal of incorporating accessibility into common practice.\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-04-13].
[agreement on the simplification]
<JR> Organization of the ATAG 2.0 Document - Part B: : 3rd bullet
<JR> Under each guideline there are success criteria that describe specifically what must be achieved in order to conform. They are similar to the "checkpoints" in ATAG 1.0. Each success criterion is written as a statement that will be either true or false when a specific authoring tool is tested against it. While all of the ATAG 2.0 success criteria are written to be testable and some test...
<JR> ...automation may be possible, human testing will usually be required. In order to meet the needs of different groups and different situations, three levels of conformance are defined: A (lowest), AA, and AAA (highest).
<JR> Notes:
<JR> - Any success criteria that are judged not applicable to a particular
<JR> authoring tool are treated as satisfied for conformance purposes, as
<JR> long as a rationale is provided.
<JR> - What are called "success criteria" in ATAG 2.0 correspond with what
<JR> were referred to as "checkpoints" in ATAG 1.0.
<JR> ACTION: JS to Remove "They are similar to the "checkpoints" in ATAG 1.0." [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-138 - Remove \"They are similar to the \"checkpoints\" in ATAG 1.0.\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-04-13].
JT: The document is confusing enough, I don't think we should add ot the confusion.
Issue: Reorganizing the Conformance Levels - see email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0004.html
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-175 - Reorganizing the Conformance Levels - see email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0004.html ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/tracker/issues/175/edit .
Issue: Impact of conformance of the three levels, A, AA, AAA. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0004.html
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-176 - Impact of conformance of the three levels, A, AA, AAA. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0004.html ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/tracker/issues/176/edit .
JR: Perhaps we want to change "developer" to
"tool developer" to make it less confusing.
... In response toAnna's comment on the Part A scope.
JT: If every instance of developer is linked to the definition that defines it as a tool developer.
AM: But "developer" is such a general term that people know, they would probably not look at the definition
JR: It is used 16 times, let's change them to "authoring tool developer"
<scribe> ACTION: JS to globally change "developer" to "authoring tool developer" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-139 - Globally change \"developer\" to \"authoring tool developer\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-04-13].
JR: No meeting next week. The following
meeting, Jan and Tim will present their proposal. We have the rest of these
comments to do.
... we may have missed the ARIA deadline, so anyone with ARIA thoughts
related to authoring tool, send them to the list.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/... In /... In response to/ Found Scribe: jeanne Found Scribe: jeanne Inferring ScribeNick: jeanne WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: AM Andrew AnnM Greg Greg_Pisocky Issue JR JT Jeanne JuttaT Notes P11 P9 au joined trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Regrets: Tim_B Robert_S Sueann_N. Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0000.html Found Date: 06 Apr 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/04/06-au-minutes.html People with action items: - accessible be change js not will[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]