<Jan> Scribe: Greg

Guideline B.1.1 Support Web content technologies

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0049.html

WCAG Guidelines do not address levels in their definition of accessibility supported

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#new-terms

<Jan> Accessibility Supported

<Jan> Using a technology in a way that is accessibility supported means that it works with assistive technologies (AT) and the accessibility features of operating systems, browsers, and other user agents. Technology features can only be relied upon to conform to WCAG 2.0 success criteria if they are used in a way that is "accessibility supported". Technology features can be used in ways that are...

<Jan> ...not accessibility supported (do not work with assistive technologies, etc.) as long as they are not relied upon to conform to any success criterion (i.e., the same information or functionality is also available another way that is supported).

<Jan> The definition of "accessibility supported" is provided in the Appendix A: Glossary section of these guidelines. For more information, see Understanding Accessibility Support.

Essentially a declaration that technology should be used in a manner that is accessible and that it works with assistive technology

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibility-support-head

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibility-support-head

Following the links to understanding reveals that the success criteria require using assistive technology or special features

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0041.html

<Jan> TB: "can be used in an accessible supported way"

<Jan> JT: Accessibility-supportive technologies

<Jan> JT: What about just using the WCAG term

<Jan> JR: I was trying to use shorthand....but I'm ok

<Jan> JS: Pref "accessibility SUpported"

<Jan> JT: Consistent strategy

<Jan> JT: In terms of b111, b112, b113 it does follow same pattern

<Jan> JR: Do people like the div. of responsibility

<Jan> JT: Follows the pattern of the rest of the doc

<Jan> JR: Othersd?

<Jan> TB: Don't have in front of me.

<Jan> JT: Does still work Accessible Technologies->Accessible-Supported Technologies

<Jan> SN: Nuance of "possible to work with AT"...there may be places it wouldn't work....

<Jan> SN: We need to be inclusive of fact that some techs are ok in some situs but not others

<Jan> ACTION: JR to Work on terminology to replace "Accessibile Technologies" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/01-au-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-150 - Work on terminology to replace "Accessibile Technologies" [on Jan Richards - due 2009-06-08].

<Jan> Topics: Responses to comments from WAI IG members:

<Jan> First comment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0044.html

<Jan> JT: Maybe we can support web-based/desktop views

<Jan> ACTION: JS and JR to look at generating different views of the techniques [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/01-au-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-151 - And JR to look at generating different views of the techniques [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-06-08].

<Jan> Second comment http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0045.html

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG20/#principle-operable

<Jan> GP: hard to do, might be CSS

<Jan> SN: agree that would be difficult

<Jan> JT: Offer of additional example is fine

<Jan> JS: Likes the added example

<Jan> Resolution: To propose the addtional example text in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0045.html and clarify that this is covered to some extent

<Jan> Third Comment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0046.html

<Jan> SN: Let's not reevaluate

<Jan> JT: Right the Rel. pri caused bigger probs

<Jan> GP: Agree

<Jan> JS: Fine with the

<Jan> Resolution: Keep the priorities separate (not rel. priority)

<Jan> Fourth Comment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0047.html

<Jan> ACTION: JS to Talk to Michale C about handling of many defn links [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/01-au-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-152 - Talk to Michale C about handling of many defn links [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-06-08].

<Jan> Fifth comment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0048.html

<Jan> Resolution: Keep response at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0048.html

<Jan> Next meeting June 8

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)

Found Scribe: Greg
Inferring ScribeNick: Greg

WARNING: 4 scribe lines found (out of 95 total lines.)
Are you sure you specified a correct ScribeNick?

Default Present: Greg_Pisocky, Jeanne, Jan, Jutta, SueAnn, Tim_Boland
Present: Greg_Pisocky Jeanne Jan Jutta SueAnn Tim_Boland
Regrets: Ann M.
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0049.html
Got date from IRC log name: 01 Jun 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/06/01-au-minutes.html
People with action items: jr js

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