See also: IRC log
<LeifHS> Hi. I will try to present at 16:30. Leif
<scribe> scribe: Joshue
JS: Lets get the agenda going
<janina> agenda: this
JS: I suggests skipping ACTION
... We are getting good feedback from the wider group re:canvas etc
RS: We made some progress re:boolean att in HTML 5
RS: This is a proposal we have,
there is good feedback. We have modified to nonav as a boolean
@. Its not written as a conformance statement, but advice for
authors. Well recieved by wider HTML group.
... We still are working on Chaals proposal and some API mods to 2D.
JS: So this is a perfecting
amendment to what we agreed last week? Unless anyone
... Is it largely editorial.
... The next step is the 2D focus change proposal
RS: There are diffs in the way
Apple implement things vs Windows
... For example, the blink rate, we have to be careful about triggering seizures etc, am busy with SXSW and CSUN etc
JS: Yes, there is a lot of traffic about his, excellent.
RS: I have a question for the HTML WG chairs, how do we position Issue 72?
MS: No one on call at the mo.
JS: I said last week that this is
a partial resolution.
... There will be three parts, Focus, 2D and Chaals proposal
... The subteam thought the first two would be acceptable and then enhanced by Chaals
<oedipus> agree with JS' synopsis
RS: I would agree with that
JS: This is a strong proposal in
... Anything else?
<oedipus> GJR: chaals' suggestion involves changing HTML5 definition of imagemap in order to work properly -- the prognosis for that is not very good
RS: Its a lot of work for an attribute!
JS: We spoke on this last
... We talked about media in the PF call yest, also in WAI CG call. We are a little blocked, we discussed what may be resolutions and the result was..lets take another look at the wiki requirements doc. We assigned some action items etc, put out a call for changes and edits etc and or ommissions.
... That should take a couple of weeks, may not resolve but will help.
Is this time stamps or media codecs?
JS: We didn't talk codecs
... We tried to understand everyones positons.
... If we do too little, it could be a prob
... We need the right balance, the media group, PF , HTML so we have some extra people looking.
... On the API there was a chance to move this a little, I wasn't fully up to speed and some of us may not be, but we have some actions to remedy this.
<oedipus> GJR has action item to reveiw API and solicit review from DAISY
JS: We are not delaying by much
to ask for people to look at this for us, based on past
experience it is useful.
... Is there more to say JF?
JF: Not that I am aware of, the
biggest issue seems to be time stamp. I am a little out of the
loop but I don't see a lot of action.
... Dick is working on a proposal, don't know where to go from here.
... Sylvias idea also needs to be worked on.
JS: As Mike pointed out the big
issue may be styling.
... There are some disagreements.
JF: There is not structure to SRT time etc, we need something extensible. So the question is what can we do to provide one?
JF: We need something beside SRT but we don't know what it is.
<oedipus> GJR still maintains that SRT is a non-starter
JS: Also worried that we can save in extra features, it is a reasonable idea but may be an issue with standards developement. If experience is correct.
... DFXP has some appeal, as with profiles we can evolve greater support.
<oedipus> GJR whatever is used needs to meet a11y requirements NOW -- SRT would need an add-on / work to integrate what one gets with SMILText for free
JF: There are issues, this would be a good start that we can build upon.
<MikeSmith> a couple points: the styling mechanism in DFXP -- even if it is profiled -- is not compatible with browsers; and it is imaginable that SRT could be extended to include styling
JF: So the standard can be the W3C DFXP format.
<Zakim> oedipus, you wanted to say SRT extension is a non-starter
JS: Sounds like a possibilty, any comments?
GJR: I am against SRT (strongly)..if implemented there is no a11y capabilities like with SMIL
MS: Yes, but if everyone takes a strong position then we won't reach agreement.
<Zakim> MikeSmith, you wanted to comment
MS: So it is not prudent to say that SRT is a non-runner, we won't reach agreement.
JF: We have to provide an extensible mechanism from the get go.
MS: If we agree to start with a
profile DFXP, we will not get that implemented.
... The browser maker say that is not the ideal soltuion for them
<oedipus> MikeSmith, if SRT is used it has to meet the a11y requirments identified by the TF BEFORE it is implemented in HTML5 -- otherwise, we are codifying a less-than-accessible alternative with only the promise of future work on SRT to support a11y features/requirements
JF: We can't just have one, this is a standard. We are writing a standard.
GJR: John and I are saying of SRT gets into HTML, SRT itself must be tweaked to support a11y
<LeifHS> @oedipus Chaals has said that it is *not* /necessary/ to change the HTML5 definition of image maps
GJR: SRT can create a black hole
JF: There is a lot of stuff in
HTML that is not implemented.
... We need to ensure that an extensible format is locked in.
<LeifHS> oedipus: I think he said so 2 weeks ago, in this meeting.
<LeifHS> (I will call in if the @summary comes up ...)
SH: We have an implementation of
DFXP, that is almost complete and would be happy to put it in
the spec. So I don't see it as a non starter.
... The biggest thing is to get something in the spec, we are against shipping deadlines.
MS: I agree
... I asked JF, what styling mech does it use?
<JF> Adobe is already supporting DFXP today
SH: It is a self contained system. DFXP has an advantage as it doesn't rely on browser components.
JS: So Microsoft would be ok with a spec that relied on DFXP.
SH:Yes, I can't speak for the people at IE, but in my conversations with them it seems our main issue is getting something concrete into the spec.
JS: What about SMIL?
SH: We would prefer DFXP.
SH: SMIL is huge, I would have to
look at it.
... DFXP is based a lot on SMIL, it is a subset.
JS: This is important info.
... Any other comments?
... We will talk about his in B'mingham.
... Also on the phone
... We need a resolution that works on many levels.
<LeifHS> @oedipus Here is what Chaals said 4th of march: "Chaals: HTML5 imagemap model actually can support Chaals"
JF: I will be on the phone
<MikeSmith> expensive because of Easter holiday, I think
SH: I will be back for the next media installment.
I'll be there
<MikeSmith> I will be there
<oedipus> GJR will remotely participate
<JF> JF remotely attending
JS: Who is coming?
... We need people who are participating here, we needs champs, we'll do that via mail.
... I don't know if he is.
<LeifHS> @oedipus But he added that "HTML5 spec doesn't yet work, HTML4 does". (Me: May be both could need some tuning ...)
JS: Lets look at Lauras latest bug report
GJR: I got it.
JS: We need to look at Bug 7721: "Drag and Drop is not keyboard accessible" reported by Rich
<oedipus> drag and drop: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7721
JS: Can some tag these as we
<oedipus> audio and video syncronization: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5758
They seem to be all tagged btw
<oedipus> canvas needs a11y fallback: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7011
<oedipus> title where alt ommited: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7362
<oedipus> @summary not obsoltete: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7539
MS: Whats happening, along with some others, discussed this with Maciej. There are a lot of bugs that have changed to verify status and there is a note saying that a response is requested in two weeks. That is why this is on the list.
<oedipus> encourage use of @summary: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7633
JS: We should just re-open?
MS: Yes, just re-open them.
... What Laura is saying the other bugs were re-opened by Maciej?
MS: I will check them one by one
<oedipus> closed bug progress element should be labelable with label: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8554 (Maciej)
MS: 7011 is the same, am
... 7632, 7539 same
MS: What about 8554, we need someone to evaluate?
MS: Is there much more that needs
to be done with this?
... Seems to be resolved.
... Lets leave that one.
... Now, re-opened bugs, lets jump to Cat 5 and see if we agree with tagging them.
JF: 9231 and 9233 are somewhat linked.
sorry John, I got the second bug wrong, please edit
<kford> Zakim/me can someone post the bug link again, my IRC lost the buffer
JS: In the W3C schema should come from WAI and WCAG, authoring tools etc. We are missing techniques for other things.
MS: These are a little different,
as JF said.
... Lets take that to the list
JS: The consensus seems to be
lets just link to the appropriate document as required.
... Would you do that?
MS: There is a non trivial cost
to taking up these issues with the TF.
... We need to agree criteria for our descisions to take on issues.
Is that not just based on importance?
MS: Could you take that to the list, that would be great?
I get ya
JS: Yes, it takes time
MS: At one extreme we just take
them all on.
... But we should decide where and how to draw the line.
JS: Michael did try to group them to make it easier.
MS: It is a matter of cycles
JF: We are all going to be very busy for the next few weeks.
RS: the new 508 draft came out yest
MS: 9216 has been discussed a lot lately, that is a priority. What do people think?
9216: "Provide a CAPTCHA example that is in accord with WCAG 2 or
Defer to "HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives'"
JS: We can tag it as an issue and take it up with the group.
<oedipus> laura's email delineating process on CAPTCHA: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0391.html
JF: Laura mailed me on
... Would it be useful to do a survey?
MS: If Laura has done the work..
JF: The questions are there.
MS: Ok, I can do this
MS: Should we wait a
... Or do it today?
JF: Late next week may be better
<MikeSmith> so I will get a WBS survey drafted up, using Laura's message as the basis, with plan to get it out at the end of next week
JS: We are at the hour, no
meeting next week. Tune in on 1st April.
... Anything else?
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/@!/attribute!/ Succeeded: s/great/create/ Succeeded: s/9243/9233/ Found Scribe: Joshue Inferring ScribeNick: Joshue Default Present: +1.650.862.aaaa, Gregory_Rosmaita, +0154558aabb, Janina, Ben_Caldwell, Rich, John_Foliot, kford, Joshue, Sean_Hayes, Mike Present: +0154558aabb Ben_Caldwell Gregory_Rosmaita Janina John_Foliot Joshue Mike Rich Sean_Hayes kford Regrets: Denis_Boudreau Dick_Bulterman Eric_Carlson Geoff_Freed Laura_Carlson Sylvia_Pfieffer Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0379.html Got date from IRC log name: 18 Mar 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/03/18-html-a11y-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]