See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 11 March 2010
<AllanJ> scribe: Sharper
trackbot, start meeting
<scribe> chair: Ford_Kelly, Allan_James
<trackbot> Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 11 March 2010
<scribe> scribe: Harper_Simon
<scribe> ScribeNick: sharper
This weeks Survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/
Please monitor your open Action Items: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/actions/open
Open Issues: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/issues/open
Current editors draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/ED-UAAG20-20100308/
Current Techniques Document: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/ED-IMPLEMENTING-UAAG20-20100308/
resolved: DST starts in the USA next week - Harmonisation with UK by 28th March
RESOLUTION: Congratulations to everyone - well done all and Jeanne especially for the editing job.
JA: who can attend if we have one?
SH: I could make it possibly
GL: Possibly
JS: I'll probably be going
KF: Not sure yet
KP: not sure either
JA: Not sure either
... deadlines JS: next couple of weeks
... sounding like not...
... Lets come back to this in couple of weeks
RESOLUTION: Lets come back to this in couple of weeks (Deadline: April 16th to decide)
<AllanJ> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/draft_uawg_charter_08mar10.html
Location: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/draft_uawg_charter_08mar10.html
General Discussion Regarding Charter
JS: Any objections to it
KF: Can it be amended?
JS: Can be changed in 3 years when we renew.
<AllanJ> The mission of the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (UAWG), part of the WAI Technical Activity, is to produce guidelines for the development of accessible user agents (e.g., browsers, media players, etc.) and their interoperability with assistive technology. A user agent is software that retrieves and renders Web content, including text, graphics, sounds, video, images, etc.
RESOLUTION: Change
first sentence as per JA above - then approved.
... Approved regardless, change first sentence if possible.
GL: Now 3.3.3
JA: Thoughts?
GL: Not really relationships
JA: Agrees?
No-one wishes to keep it in 3.3.3?
JA: 3.5.1?
All: Agrees
SH: Scratch that 3.5.1 - 5.1
RESOLUTION: 5.1 is agreed
<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to Move 3.3.3 to 5.1.x [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-330 - Move 3.3.3 to 5.1.x [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].
<scribe> ACTION: Greg to rewrite the new 5.1.x [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-331 - Rewrite the new 5.1.x [on Greg Lowney - due 2010-03-18].
RESOLUTION: Actions created
<kford> Adding seems fine to me.
JA: Gregs changes seem fine? Agree
<scribe> ACTION: AllanJ on Make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - AllanJ
<scribe> ACTION: member:AllanJ on Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
<AllanJ> > ACTION: jAllan to Make Greg's changes to 3.4.1
<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-332 - Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].
<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 from http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq8 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-333 - Make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 from http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq8 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].
<kford> Scribe: kford
<scribe> Scribe: SHarper
<jeanne> close action-332
<trackbot> ACTION-332 Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 closed
<scribe> scribe: sharper
Discussion re PL's comments
GL: sounds like when it's not
require the UA should still do repair - should be under 3.4.2
or some such based on the kind of rep[air
... could say supported by teh technology spec.
... wordsmithing on the fly
<Greg> Could replace "required" by "supported", but don't want to make it so broad that UA is required to craft longdesc for every image.
<AllanJ> add link to ERT to Resources for 3.4.1
GL: maybe too broad for Level A if required
<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to 'add link to ERT to Resources for 3.4.1' [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-334 - 'add link to ERT to Resources for 3.4.1' [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].
<Greg> In discussion, we find that "repair text" is defined so it is only applicable where alt content is required (not just supported).
RESOLUTION: Lets wait for PL to elaborate
<kford> /me I need to step out for one second
General discussion as to the meaning of 'enabled elements'
GL: Scoping the possible miss-interpretations
<Greg> E.g. if there's a graphical button which is currently disabled, the user can still benefit from finding out info about it. That argues for not limiting this to enabled elements.
GL: proposes remove the 'for enabled elements'
<kford> /me apologies and I'm back
KP +1
KF +1
SH +1
JA: +1
JS +1
<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to 'remove the word enabled from 3.4.2' [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-335 - 'remove the word enabled from 3.4.2' [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].
JA: could be generalized for all users. right click on an image to get a context menu, then choose properties to get available information about the image without have to find the image in the source code.
<AllanJ> add an example. A user wanting addional information on an image could right click on an image to get a context menu, then choose properties to get available information about the image without have to find the image in the source code.
<jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne to update 3.4.2 with the results from the survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/ from Kim, Greg and Jim. Jim has a complete example in the minutes. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-336 - Update 3.4.2 with the results from the survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/ from Kim, Greg and Jim. Jim has a complete example in the minutes. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].
RESOLUTION: Accept JA changes + KP edits + GL Minor Changes (all from survey) + remove enabled.
KP: Minor wording changes
GL: As written it doesn't make clear that these four classes must be highlighted in distinct ways. If, for example, a user agent highlighted selected text, visited links, and unvisited links identically, it would comply with the letter but not the intent of the criterion. Perhaps instead of "highlight" it could read "visually distinguish" or "highlight...so that each is uniquely distinguished, within the limits of the output technology". The last caveat is need
for cases such as pure text browsers, which may only have one or two methods of highlighting text. Add this discussion to the Intent section as well.
GL: Also, 3 minor changes
KP: should look at the document for highlight and visually distinguish
<Greg> "3.5.1 Highlighted items: The user has the option to highlight the following classes of information so that each is uniquely distinguished, within the limits of the output technology (Level A)"
<Greg> We may be able to leave off the "within the limits of the output technology" if we agree, for example, that a purely text browser can use characters like *, **, and _ to highlight ranges of text.
<AllanJ> proposed: 3.5.1 Highlighted items: The user has the option to highlight the following classes of information so that each is uniquely distinguished.
JA: Objections?
All: None.
<jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne to update document with above discussion of 3.5.1 and the editorial items from the Survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq10 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action10]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-337 - Update document with above discussion of 3.5.1 and the editorial items from the Survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq10 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].
RESOLUTION: return to 3.5.2 + other items from the survey.
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: Sharper Inferring ScribeNick: sharper Found Scribe: Harper_Simon Found ScribeNick: sharper Found Scribe: kford Inferring ScribeNick: kford Found Scribe: SHarper Inferring ScribeNick: sharper Found Scribe: sharper Inferring ScribeNick: sharper Scribes: Sharper, Harper_Simon, kford ScribeNicks: sharper, kford Default Present: [Microsoft], AllanJ, Greg, sharper, KimPatch, Jeanne Present: [Microsoft] AllanJ Greg sharper KimPatch Jeanne Harper_Simon Allan_James Ford_Kelly Lowney_Greg Patch_Kim Spellman_Jeanne Regrets: Hakkinen_Mark Mark_H Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010JanMar/0110.html Found Date: 11 Mar 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html People with action items: allanj greg jeanne member WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]