IRC log of au on 2009-06-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:54:14 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #au
19:54:14 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/06/08-au-irc
19:54:21 [Jan]
Zakim, this will be AUWG
19:54:21 [Zakim]
ok, Jan; I see WAI_AUWG()3:00PM scheduled to start 54 minutes ago
19:54:27 [Jan]
Meeting: WAI AU
19:54:39 [Jan]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0051.html
19:54:55 [Jan]
Regrets: Roberto S., Tim B.
20:00:15 [jeanne]
jeanne has joined #au
20:01:11 [Zakim]
WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has now started
20:01:16 [Zakim]
+ +0208123aaaa
20:01:18 [Zakim]
+Jeanne
20:01:26 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
20:02:02 [Zakim]
+??P6
20:02:06 [Jan]
zakim, aaaa is really AnnM
20:02:06 [Zakim]
+AnnM; got it
20:02:21 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jan
20:02:21 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
20:02:36 [Jan]
zakim, ??P6 is really Jutta
20:02:36 [Zakim]
+Jutta; got it
20:02:43 [Jan]
zakim, who's here?
20:02:43 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Jeanne, AnnM, Jan, Jutta
20:02:44 [AnnM]
AnnM has joined #au
20:02:45 [Zakim]
On IRC I see jeanne, RRSAgent, Zakim, Jan, trackbot
20:02:55 [Jan]
Chair: Jutta Treviranus
20:05:22 [Jan]
A mechanism for encoding instructions to be rendered, played or executed by user agents. Web Content technologies may include markup languages, data formats, or programming languages that authors may use alone or in combination to create end-user experiences that range from static Web pages to multimedia presentations to dynamic Web applications. Some common examples of Web content technologies in
20:05:22 [Zakim]
+Greg_Pisocky
20:05:23 [Jan]
clude HTML, CSS, SVG, PNG, PDF, Flash, and JavaScript. An accessible technology is a technology that may be used in a way that is "accessibility supported" (For more information on "accessibility supported", see WCAG 2.0).
20:05:56 [Andrew]
Andrew has joined #au
20:06:10 [Zakim]
+ +1.970.349.aabb
20:06:26 [Greg]
Greg has joined #au
20:06:32 [Jan]
zakim, aabb is really SueannN
20:06:32 [Zakim]
+SueannN; got it
20:07:16 [jeanne]
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/AUWG-F2F-20090615/results
20:07:35 [Zakim]
+ +2
20:07:53 [Jan]
zakim, +2 is really AndrewR
20:07:53 [Zakim]
+AndrewR; got it
20:08:18 [Zakim]
-Jutta
20:08:59 [jeanne]
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/AUWG-F2F-20090615/
20:09:03 [Zakim]
+??P2
20:09:34 [Jan]
zakim, ??P2 is really Jutta
20:09:34 [Zakim]
+Jutta; got it
20:10:10 [Sueann]
Sueann has joined #au
20:10:10 [Jan]
Scribe: Andrew
20:10:36 [Jan]
Topic: Guideline B.1.1 Support Web content technologies....
20:10:46 [Jan]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009AprJun/0053.html
20:11:52 [Andrew]
JR: Requirement around the tool choosing technologies that are "accessibility supported"
20:12:06 [Andrew]
JR: Quite a subtle term that comes from WCAG
20:12:09 [Jan]
Rationale: The production of *accessible Web content* is only possible
20:12:11 [Jan]
if *authoring tools* make use of *Web content technologies* that can be
20:12:13 [Jan]
used in ways that are *accessibility supported*.
20:12:31 [Jan]
B.1.1.1 Automatic Technology Selection: If *Web content technologies*
20:12:33 [Jan]
are automatically selected by the *authoring tool* (e.g., for *automatic
20:12:35 [Jan]
content generation*, as the default technology for *author-generated
20:12:36 [Jan]
content*), then the *Web content technologies* can be used in ways that
20:12:38 [Jan]
are *accessibility supported*. (Level A)
20:13:07 [Jan]
B.1.1.2 Author Choice of Technologies: If *authors* are provided with a
20:13:09 [Jan]
choice of *Web content technology* options, any *Web content technology*
20:13:11 [Jan]
options that can be used in ways that are *accessibility supported* are
20:13:13 [Jan]
*at least as prominent* as any options that cannot. (Level A)
20:13:36 [Jan]
B.1.1.3 Technology Warning: If the *authoring tool* can *recognize* that
20:13:38 [Jan]
*authors* have chosen to use a *Web content technology* that may not be
20:13:40 [Jan]
able to be be used in ways that are *accessibility supported*, then the
20:13:41 [Jan]
*authoring tool* notifies the *authors* that this may result in *Web content
20:13:43 [Jan]
accessibility problems* in the output. (Level AA)
20:14:31 [Andrew]
JR: Next piece is quite large but thought about it a lot
20:15:04 [Greg]
+1 for using the same definition as WCAG
20:15:15 [Andrew]
JR: Thinking about bringing across the "accessibility supported" definition from WCAG
20:15:19 [Jan]
NEW DEF'N IN THE GLOSSARY:
20:15:21 [Jan]
accessibility supported [adapted from WCAG 2.0]
20:15:23 [Jan]
Supported by *end users'* *assistive technologies* as well as the
20:15:25 [Jan]
accessibility features in browsers and other *user agents*. To qualify
20:15:26 [Jan]
as an accessibility-supported use of a *Web content technology* (or
20:15:28 [Jan]
feature of a technology), both 1 and 2 must be satisfied for the *Web
20:15:30 [Jan]
content technology* (or feature):
20:15:32 [Jan]
1. The way that the *Web content technology* is used must be supported
20:15:33 [Jan]
by *end users'* *assistive technology* (AT). This means that the way
20:15:35 [Jan]
that the *Web content technology* is used has been tested for
20:15:36 [Jan]
interoperability with *end users'* *assistive technology* in the *human
20:15:38 [Jan]
language(s)* of the *Web content*,
20:15:40 [Jan]
AND
20:15:41 [Jan]
2. The *Web content technology* must have accessibility supported *user
20:15:43 [Jan]
agents* that are available to *end users*. This means that at least one
20:15:44 [Jan]
of the following four statements is true:
20:15:46 [Jan]
a. The *Web content technology* is supported natively in
20:15:48 [Jan]
widely-distributed *user agents* that are also accessibility supported
20:15:50 [Jan]
(such as HTML and CSS);
20:15:52 [Jan]
OR
20:15:54 [Jan]
b. The *Web content technology* is supported in a widely-distributed
20:15:56 [Jan]
plug-in that is also accessibility supported;
20:15:59 [Jan]
OR
20:15:59 [Jan]
c. The *Web content* is available in a closed environment, such as a
20:15:59 [Jan]
university or corporate network, where the *user agent* required by the
20:16:00 [Jan]
*Web content technology* and used by the organization is also
20:16:02 [Jan]
accessibility supported;
20:16:04 [Jan]
OR
20:16:06 [Jan]
d. The *user agent(s)* that support the *Web content technology* are
20:16:08 [Jan]
accessibility supported and are available for download or purchase in a
20:16:10 [Jan]
way that:
20:16:12 [Jan]
- does not cost a person with a disability any more than a person
20:16:14 [Jan]
without a disability and
20:16:16 [Jan]
- is as easy to find and obtain for a person with a disability as it
20:16:18 [Jan]
is for a person without disabilities.
20:16:20 [Jan]
Notes:
20:16:22 [Jan]
- The AUWG, WCAG Working group and the W3C do not specify which or how
20:16:24 [Jan]
much support by assistive technologies there must be for a particular
20:16:26 [Jan]
use of a *Web content technology* in order for it to be classified as
20:16:28 [Jan]
accessibility supported. (See “Understanding Accessibility Support” in
20:16:30 [Jan]
“Understanding WCAG 2.0” for more details).
20:16:32 [Jan]
- See also the *conformance profile* requirements for documenting
20:16:34 [Jan]
“accessibility supported”.
20:16:58 [Andrew]
JR: Conformance claims are optional in WCAG
20:17:36 [jtrevir]
jtrevir has joined #au
20:21:09 [Jan]
5(b) A list of the *Web content technologies* (including version
20:21:10 [Jan]
numbers) produced by the *authoring tool* that the Claimant is
20:21:12 [Jan]
*including* in the conformance claim.
20:21:13 [Jan]
- The list must include any *Web content technologies* identified in
20:21:15 [Jan]
Guideline B.1 as being able to be used in ways that are *accessibility
20:21:16 [Andrew]
JS: Like the idea of mirroring WCAG's process. Complicated process so we risk adding more confusion if we don't follow WCAGs lead.
20:21:16 [Jan]
supported*.
20:21:18 [Jan]
- For each *Web content technology*, specify the conditions under which
20:21:20 [Jan]
the *Web content technology* can be used in ways that are
20:21:22 [Jan]
*accessibility supported* (e.g., specify known *assistive technology*
20:21:24 [Jan]
support, *user agent* support, plug-in support, in what *human
20:21:25 [Jan]
languages*, in what closed environments, etc.). NOTE: It is the
20:21:27 [Jan]
responsibility of *authors* to decide whether these conditions for
20:21:28 [Jan]
*accessibility supported* are actually applicable in the context of the
20:21:30 [Jan]
*authors'* own circumstances (e.g., the *human language* of their *Web
20:21:32 [Jan]
content*, whether they develop in open vs. closed environment, etc.)
20:21:33 [Jan]
5(c [was d]) A list of the *Web content technologies* produced by the
20:21:35 [Jan]
the *authoring tool* that the Claimant is *excluding* from the
20:21:36 [Jan]
conformance claim. *Web content Technologies* may only be excluded that
20:21:38 [Jan]
are not automatically selected by the *authoring tool* (See Success
20:21:39 [Jan]
Criterion B.1.1).
20:28:37 [Andrew]
AM: My concern is the people who are making the tools don't know all the "technical ways" web content technologies can be made accessible
20:29:26 [Andrew]
JT: In an ideal world there would be a guide to accessible web content technologies for tool developers to refer to
20:32:45 [Zakim]
-Jutta
20:33:43 [Zakim]
+??P2
20:34:33 [Zakim]
-AndrewR
20:35:15 [Zakim]
+??P0
20:38:11 [Jan]
Accessibility Support Statements
20:38:11 [Jan]
Examples of ways in which a conformance claim might document its accessibility support include:
20:38:13 [Jan]
1.This conformance claim meets the accessibility support requirement based on testing content in language(s) of the content with User Agents A, B, and C, and Assistive Technologies X, Y, and Z. This means that we were able to pass all of the success criteria for level A of WCAG 2.0 using these products.
20:38:14 [Jan]
2.This conformance claim meets the accessibility support requirement for the language(s) of the content based on the use of techniques and user agent notes documented in Techniques for WCAG 2.0. It is also based on the accessibility support documentation for the technologies (that we relied upon for conformance), which is available in " XYZ Organization's Documentation of Accessibility Support."
20:38:16 [Jan]
3.This conformance claim meets the accessibility support requirement for the language(s) of the content based on the use of technology Z as documented in "Technology Z accessibility supported techniques for WCAG 2.0."
20:38:18 [Jan]
4.This conformance claim meets the accessibility support requirement for the language of the content based on the use of Accessibility Guidelines for Technology A and Accessibility Guidelines for Technology B. User agent and assistive technology support information can be found in "Product XYZ Accessibility Support Requirements", which are documented in these guidelines.
20:40:56 [Andrew]
JR: How can you tell what is a more accessible choice?
20:41:22 [Andrew]
GR: If you choose to produce Flash for example, the tool should facilitate creating accessible Flash
20:41:40 [Andrew]
GR: This shouldn't become a debate about one format over another
20:42:04 [Andrew]
JR: We used to have the "accessibility benchmark" concept
20:43:41 [Zakim]
-??P0
20:44:20 [Zakim]
+ +2
20:45:58 [Andrew]
JR: All formats can be used in an accessible or inaccessible way
20:46:21 [Andrew]
JR: Even if the tools are capable of producing accessible output
20:52:08 [Zakim]
- +2
20:52:50 [Zakim]
+??P0
20:53:32 [Zakim]
-??P2
20:53:57 [Zakim]
+??P2
21:02:18 [Greg]
Action GP Intermediate and evaluating accessibility of formats w/o pitting them against each other
21:02:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-153 - Intermediate and evaluating accessibility of formats w/o pitting them against each other [on Greg Pisocky - due 2009-06-15].
21:02:19 [Jan]
Action: GP to writeup applicability ideas around "intermediate formats"
21:02:19 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-154 - Writeup applicability ideas around "intermediate formats" [on Greg Pisocky - due 2009-06-15].
21:03:32 [Jan]
Action JR: Take another look at simplifying B.1 and the formats issue
21:03:32 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-155 - Take another look at simplifying B.1 and the formats issue [on Jan Richards - due 2009-06-15].
21:06:16 [Zakim]
-Greg_Pisocky
21:06:17 [Zakim]
-??P2
21:06:17 [Zakim]
-SueannN
21:06:18 [Zakim]
-Jeanne
21:06:21 [Zakim]
-Jan
21:06:26 [Zakim]
-AnnM
21:06:28 [Zakim]
-??P0
21:06:29 [Zakim]
WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has ended
21:06:30 [Zakim]
Attendees were +0208123aaaa, Jeanne, AnnM, Jan, Jutta, Greg_Pisocky, +1.970.349.aabb, SueannN, AndrewR, +2
21:06:42 [Jan]
RRSAgent, make minutes
21:06:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/06/08-au-minutes.html Jan
21:06:45 [AnnM]
AnnM has left #au
21:06:48 [Jan]
RRSAgent, set logs public
21:06:54 [Jan]
Zakim, bye
21:06:54 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #au
21:07:13 [Jan]
RRSAgent, bye
21:07:13 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/08-au-actions.rdf :
21:07:13 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: GP to writeup applicability ideas around "intermediate formats" [1]
21:07:13 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/08-au-irc#T21-02-19
21:07:13 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: JR to Take another look at simplifying B.1 and the formats issue [2]
21:07:13 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/08-au-irc#T21-03-32