IRC log of ua on 2009-10-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:48:56 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ua
16:48:56 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-irc
16:48:58 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:48:58 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ua
16:49:00 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WAI_UAWG
16:49:00 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_UAWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
16:49:01 [trackbot]
Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
16:49:01 [trackbot]
Date: 01 October 2009
16:49:23 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:49:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-minutes.html kford
16:49:36 [Greg]
Greg has joined #ua
16:49:50 [kford]
regrets:Jim, Mark,Kim,David
16:50:02 [kford]
Chair:Jim_Allan
16:58:23 [kford]
Agenda+ Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)?
16:58:24 [kford]
Agenda+ Meeting survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20090930/
16:58:26 [kford]
Agenda+ Face to face – sign up and book hotel - http://www.w3.org/2009/11/TPAC/
16:58:27 [kford]
Agenda+ Talk about Guideline 4.9 Provide control of content that may reduce accessibility.
16:58:29 [kford]
Agenda+ review any new proposals sent to list
16:58:30 [kford]
Agenda+ Think about techniques in preparation for F2F.
16:58:32 [kford]
- UAAG10 Techniques
16:58:33 [kford]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-UAAG10-TECHS-20021217/
16:58:35 [kford]
- ATAG Techniques
16:58:36 [kford]
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2009/ED-ATAG20-TECHS-20090814/#gl-Web-based-accessi
16:58:38 [kford]
ble
16:58:39 [kford]
- WCAG20 Techniques http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/
16:58:49 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has now started
16:58:56 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
16:59:20 [kford]
zakim, microsoft is kford
16:59:20 [Zakim]
+kford; got it
17:00:25 [sharper]
sharper has joined #ua
17:02:12 [Jan]
Jan has joined #ua
17:02:20 [Jan]
zakim, code?
17:02:20 [Zakim]
the conference code is 82941 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Jan
17:02:59 [Zakim]
+??P4
17:03:11 [Jan]
zakim, ??P4 is really Jan
17:03:11 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
17:03:30 [Zakim]
+Jeanne
17:03:33 [jeanne]
jeanne has joined #ua
17:04:08 [Zakim]
+??P9
17:04:11 [sharper]
zakim, ??P9 is sharper
17:04:11 [Zakim]
+sharper; got it
17:04:35 [Zakim]
+ +1.425.895.aaaa
17:05:07 [Jan]
zakim, aaaa is really Greg
17:05:07 [Zakim]
+Greg; got it
17:05:40 [kford]
Present:Kelly, Gregg, Jan, Simon, Jeanne
17:06:24 [kford]
regrets+Henny
17:08:31 [kford]
zakim, take up item 1
17:08:31 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)?" taken up [from kford]
17:08:52 [kford]
zakim, close item 1
17:08:52 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)?, closed
17:08:53 [Zakim]
I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:08:54 [Zakim]
2. Meeting survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20090930/ [from kford]
17:09:07 [kford]
zakim, take up item 2
17:09:07 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Meeting survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20090930/" taken up [from kford]
17:09:29 [Greg]
We'll discuss the first item, "proposal for adding test conditions to the Definition of User Agent".
17:10:52 [Greg]
Kim voted accept, Kelly was neutral, Jan had one suggested change, and Greg had three questions.
17:11:21 [Greg]
If XML is stored as a text file, read by a text editor and rendered as text for the user, would that trigger part 1 because it is "using…a w3c specified technology" (XML)?
17:13:07 [Greg]
Simon says it should be limited to when the w3c technology is used to present or render content.
17:15:23 [kford]
Greg and Simon discussing issue.
17:16:14 [kford]
Simon: Javascript isn't a W3C technology.
17:16:34 [kford]
Simon: If the user interface is generated using HTML that's fine.
17:17:11 [Jan]
q+
17:19:46 [Jan]
ack Jan
17:20:12 [Jan]
JR: THinks saying W3C tech is not necessary - since what about Flash etc
17:25:53 [Greg]
Greg suggests that the older wording, although longer, was easier for him to understand. Simon replied perhaps we should keep 1 and 2 from the previous version and replace 3 with the two new lines.
17:26:26 [Greg]
Simon noted that in a previous conference call people seemed to find the older, original proposal more confusing, leading him to create the new proposed wording.
17:28:08 [sharper]
1) If the user interface is generated by the interpretation of either
17:28:08 [sharper]
a procedural or declaritive language; and
17:28:08 [sharper]
2) If this interpretation is by a Primary User Agent, User Agent
17:28:09 [sharper]
Extension or Plug-In; and
17:28:20 [sharper]
3) If the generated interface, intentionally or unintentionally, hides its interaction from the technology used to generate it.
17:29:23 [Greg]
Greg says, as per my written comment, that I find the term "technology used to generate" much more ambiguous than the earlier terminology of "the primary user agent, user agent extension or plug-in".
17:34:33 [sharper]
Now it seems that from my mail:
17:34:33 [sharper]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2009JulSep/0082.html
17:34:34 [sharper]
It is possible to capture keystrokes and not pass them on AND
17:34:34 [sharper]
make changes to the DOM without forcing a DOMMutationEvent.
17:34:34 [sharper]
I now want to get this sorted so I can move on to my other 2
17:34:34 [sharper]
(dependant) action items. So I'd like to make another proposal for
17:34:36 [sharper]
part 3, thus:
17:36:21 [kford]
Discussion continues.
17:41:07 [kford]
Greg: Revisitng comments from a 9/3 meeting around this.
17:41:57 [Greg]
On the 9/3 conference call we disucssed the possibility of using more general guidance for purchasing agencies as to what would need to comply.
17:43:26 [Greg]
Simon says we keep revisiting this through the history of the project, people questioning what would be a UA. He finds it's difficult to word SC without knowing what components would need to comply with them.
17:46:50 [Jan]
scribe: Jan
17:47:22 [Jan]
SH: Let's take eg web app created in Javascript
17:47:30 [Jan]
SH: Going to create interface using JS
17:47:52 [Jan]
SH: Or they have created interface in HTML but program logic and screen updates using JS
17:48:31 [Jan]
SH: I was trying to say if they capture inpout and don't pass it on to the rendering...just use internally
17:49:03 [Jan]
SH: Or they decide they are not going to put things into the DOM....
17:49:28 [Jan]
SH: Or they decide they will remove DOM event mutation listeners...
17:49:39 [Jan]
SH: Will cause updates of screen but not DOM...so
17:49:52 [Jan]
SH: Assitive techs won't know there are changes
17:50:20 [Jan]
SH: So...if they are doing this...they are pretending to be a user agent...so they need to conform to our guidelines.
17:50:57 [Jan]
SH: They are a user agent that needs to communicate independently with ATs
17:51:51 [Jan]
SH: But if they are passing things along properly to the accessibility APIs and DOM they are actually web content and only WCAG would apply
17:52:25 [Jan]
KF: New recent release - Chrome plugin that runs inside IE....
17:52:43 [Jan]
KF: Like Chrome browser inside IE frame
17:53:03 [Jan]
SH:L Not covered by part 3...but is covered by part 2...
17:53:23 [Jan]
SH: which is UA extension or UA plugin...
17:53:37 [Jan]
SH: And should conform
17:53:50 [Jan]
SH: So that example should conform
17:54:23 [Jan]
SH: But what I'm tryoing to get to with Part 3...web app not passing info must conform too
17:54:37 [Jan]
JS: What may help is an an example
17:54:48 [Jan]
SH: OK give me an example
17:55:11 [Jan]
SH: Chrome plugin example already done
17:55:22 [Jan]
JS: Want example to be vendor neutral
17:55:51 [Jan]
SH: e.g. Silverlight, Adobe Air
17:56:08 [Jan]
SH: Both fall into the extensions/plugin category
17:56:19 [Jan]
GL: Are there things we want to exclude?
17:56:38 [Jan]
SH: I've tried to think of all the possibilities
17:56:59 [Jan]
KF: So we are trying to think of something that wouldn't
17:57:23 [Jan]
GL: Right - so e.g., text editor used to edit HTML would not be a user agent
17:58:23 [Jan]
SH: first thing...is a stand alone app
17:58:52 [Jan]
Sh: But doesn't interprt technology
17:59:11 [Jan]
GL: Highlighting syntax?
17:59:16 [Jan]
SH: That's a diff thing
17:59:36 [Jan]
SH: THen isn't a extension or plugin
18:00:29 [Jan]
SH: Then the last part is the hiding of input/output
18:00:34 [Jan]
q+
18:01:24 [Jan]
GL: OK so take Adobe Acrobat reader plugin
18:01:33 [Jan]
GL: It's Part 2
18:02:37 [jeanne]
scribe: jeanne
18:02:39 [Jan]
SH: If new PDF window it's outside of UAAG if it's in viewport its coverd
18:03:31 [jeanne]
JR: That example, practically, if IE was making a conformance claim, they would not include pdf, it would be up to Adobe to make a conformance claim for pdf.
18:04:51 [jeanne]
JR: If we take the example of the text editor, take an authoring tool like Dreamweaver. The difference between user Agents and Authoring Tools is rather arbitrary for WAI to organize the documents. We should have a note that refers people to the authoring tool guidelines.
18:05:21 [kford]
kford has joined #ua
18:05:54 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:05:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-minutes.html kford
18:07:19 [jeanne]
JR: If they were producing HTML, they would be covered by ATAG. If you are web based and your UI is displayed by a browser, you have to follow WCAG. If you aren't web based, then you need to find out the platform accessibility requirements and follow them.
18:07:52 [Jan]
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2009/ED-ATAG20-20090909/#def-Authoring-Tool
18:08:25 [jeanne]
Any software, or collection of software components, that authors can use to create or modify web content for use by other people.
18:09:09 [jeanne]
JR: For use by other people, doesn't refer to things like Firebug, because it is not changing the experience for other people.
18:10:20 [jeanne]
SH: The authoring tool is very clear that it is for authoring. User agent is less precise.
18:10:38 [kford]
q+
18:11:08 [jeanne]
JR: Where that matters is with the accessibility APIs. We should be encouraging standard APIs.
18:11:36 [jeanne]
... it's got to communicate down through the user agent in a standard way.
18:12:21 [jeanne]
SH: HTML5 Canvas worries me. Something could be drawn there that looks like a user agent but is really a graphic that doesn't update the DOM.
18:13:22 [jeanne]
... Looking at the HTML5 specification, many things could be implemented that look like browsers and user agents in a really superficial way that doesn't pass information tothe DOM.
18:13:37 [jeanne]
JR: But that would mean that there is a gaping hole in WCAG. Is there?
18:13:54 [jeanne]
SH: I'm trying to future-proof it.
18:14:37 [jeanne]
JR: The line between authoring tools and user agents is pretty fine.
18:15:51 [jeanne]
SH: I think this is far simpler when it is applied. If someone takes a javascript form, is that a web application? How do we define web application? Or is it just a form?
18:17:21 [jeanne]
JR: Features have been added to meet UAAG. If this application is running in the base browser, and the web application is hiding the information that the UAAG features need, then those features need to be implemented on the addin side.
18:19:06 [Jan]
JR: Proposed test of whether a web application is also a user agent: Given a user agent conforming to uaag (ie with "uaag features"), if a web app is running/rendered by the user agent and the web app hides information required for the uaag features to operate, the web app is a user agent and needs to replicate the uaag features
18:21:03 [Greg]
Looks pretty good but may be better to say "the web apps needs to" rather than "the web pass is a user agent and needs to".
18:21:32 [Jan]
e.g., an app that takes SVG, converts them to gifs and sends down to browser as HTML+gifs
18:23:02 [sharper]
If the following condition is met then it is a Web-based User Agent and Must Conform to UAAG:
18:23:06 [sharper]
1) if a web app is running/rendered by the user agent and the web app hides information required for the uaag features to operate
18:23:31 [Greg]
If it's on the client, the SVG viewer would count as UA under Simon's second definition, since it renders within the browser window.
18:25:40 [sharper]
GL: Needs to be evaluated in the context within which it runs.
18:26:29 [kford]
ation: Simon to update User Agent test.
18:26:48 [kford]
Action: Simon to update user agent test.
18:26:48 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Simon
18:26:48 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. sharper, spieters)
18:27:09 [sharper]
Action: sharper to update User Agent Wording
18:27:10 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-234 - Update User Agent Wording [on Simon Harper - due 2009-10-08].
18:28:53 [Zakim]
-Jan
18:28:56 [Zakim]
-sharper
18:28:58 [Zakim]
-kford
18:29:07 [jeanne]
zakim, who is still here?
18:29:07 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Jeanne, Greg
18:29:08 [Zakim]
On IRC I see kford, jeanne, Jan, sharper, Greg, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot
18:30:08 [Greg]
rrsagent, create minutes
18:30:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-minutes.html Greg
18:30:33 [Greg]
zakim, please part
18:30:33 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were kford, Jan, Jeanne, sharper, +1.425.895.aaaa, Greg
18:30:33 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ua
18:34:47 [jeanne]
present- Gregg
18:34:54 [jeanne]
present+ Greg
18:34:54 [Greg]
Present- Gregg
18:35:14 [Greg]
rrsagent, create minutes
18:35:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-minutes.html Greg
18:38:25 [Greg]
rrsagent, please part
18:38:25 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-actions.rdf :
18:38:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Simon to update user agent test. [1]
18:38:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-irc#T18-26-48
18:38:25 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: sharper to update User Agent Wording [2]
18:38:25 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/01-ua-irc#T18-27-09