See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 10 June 2010
<MikeSmith> ah me
<MichaelC> action-28 due 1 July
<trackbot> ACTION-28 - prepare text for SteveF's guidance document about future of data-mining using RDFPic methodology outlined in post to list due date now 1 July
<MichaelC> action-44 due 1 July
<trackbot> ACTION-44 - monitor status of @alt in HTML5 spec; when SteveF's Alt Guidance is published, ensure that what is in SteveF's note supersedes or corrects HTML5 verbiage; propose changes to HTML5 based on SteveF's alt doc due date now 1 July
js: subteam reports: canvas
richardschwerdtfe: Proposal for canvas focus ready for straw poll. More coming, but do we want to wait?
janina: How much delay are we talking about?
<MichaelC> Survey on canvas proposal
<oedipus> Canvas Draft Straw Poll
richardschwerdtfe: HTML WG already working on part of it. Need another piece.
chaals: It should be clear that they all work together. Working on my part today.
<oedipus> Lastest 2D Canvas proposal from RichS
richardschwerdtfe: Propose we look at 2D context, and wait for chaals' proposal.
richardschwerdtfe: We can always take it to the TF with chaals' proposal.
<oedipus> isn't deadline 24 june 2010
janina: Would anyone here vote against it?
chaals: Should bring it to the
WG. The larger group is going to make a larger-group decision
better than the smaller group.
... The outcome of either proposal is basically the same. Question is what authors will find easier to work with.
<oedipus> current results of Canvas poll: 7 yes submit now as-is and 1 submit with following changes (references chaals' work)
janina: Not sure what the point is in waiting for your proposal.
oedipus: Do you see this as an either/or proposition?
chaals: Yes. If you have both, it's going to be confusing for authors.
oedipus: Like aria-describedby vs. longdesc
<oedipus> i can live with chaals' plan
chaals: Should plan to take Rich's proposal forward and expect me to make a different proposal, or not.
MichaelC: Proposal set to close tomorrow.
richardschwerdtfe: Can't get a proposal to the WG before next week then, anyway.
<oedipus> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: based on the results http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/20100610_canvas/results take RichS' proposal to HTMLWG; Chaals will continue work on IMAGEMAP proposal and propose to TF or not
chaals: We have 2 possible
approaches for ISSUE-74. They can work in concert, without
breaking things. It's best to choose one over the other.
Outcome would be better for HTML5.
... Which one is better should be left to the larger group.
... What matters is what authors are going to do.
<oedipus> GJR notes that most blind/VI devs and programmers and site maintainers have a preference for the IMAGEMAP approach
chaals: My proposal for ISSUE-74 automatically resolves ISSUE-105.
<oedipus> Chaals' Change Proposal for CANVAS
<oedipus> RichS proposal for CANVAS (7 june 2010)
chaals: If the current proposals are accepted, ISSUE-74 is resolved. If my proposal is accepted, it will resolve both 74 and 105.
richardschwerdtfe: I think chaals' proposal is going to need some of the canvas API from ours. Caret tracking, for example.
chaals: caret tracking should stay in there.
janina: we can vote a resolution
now and possibly vote on chaals' as a counterproposal
... What is 105 and what do we do with it?
richardschwerdtfe: If we have a counterproposal, do we leave 74 open?
MikeSmith: I think so. Just mention more info is coming.
richardschwerdtfe: Would be a change to the 2D API.
janina: So move ISSUE-74 by voting on the focus proposal, then work on closing 105 by saying there's a proposal on 74.
<oedipus> plus 1 to keep 105 open as HTML WG issue
chaals: If my proposal isn't accepted, 105 is still open.
<oedipus> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: based on the results http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/20100610_canvas/results take RichS' proposal to HTMLWG; Chaals will continue work on IMAGEMAP proposal to satisfy HTML WG ISSUE-150
<chaals> Proposed resolution: HTML-a11y taskforce supports the proposal ... as a resolution for ISSUE-74. Note that we *expect* a counter-proposal (based on image maps) which we would also support, but believe the wider working group should choose between them.
<oedipus> matt, Rich's CANVAS proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2010AprJun/att-0054/2dcontext10-June-7.html
RESOLUTION: HTML-a11y taskforce supports the proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2010AprJun/att-0054/2dcontext10-June-7.html as a resolution for ISSUE-74. Note that we *expect* a counter-proposal (based on image maps) which we would also support, but believe the wider working group should choose between them.
<oedipus> plus 1
janina: media group
JF: Got some good questions. At this point, there are technical questions we need to resolve, but we've captured requirements.
<oedipus> media group last meeting minutes: http://www.w3.org/2010/06/09-html-a11y-minutes.html
JF: We encourage people to
continue to point to the document. Open to additional
... Would still like to hear from a broader community, incl. deaf-blind.
JF: Laura has asked for clarification on how to apply a11ytf keyword.
<oedipus> plus 1 to JF's agendum addition
<oedipus> Laura's weekly bug report: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jun/0055.html
<janina> RESOLUTION: The TF reserves the right to assign the A11yTF keyword. However, the TF wishes Laura's guidance as to which bugs should receive that tag
<inserted> scribenick+ janina
<inserted> scribe: janina
RESOLUTION: The TF will assign the A11YTF keyword to any bugs deemed appropriate during its weekly teleconference meeting. However, the TF wishes Laura to advise it as to which bugs should be assigned that keyword.
<oedipus> plus 1
<inserted> scribenick: mattmay
<MikeSmith> no objection from me
<MikeSmith> I will be on
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: i/js: subteam reports/TOPIC: SubTeam Reports Succeeded: i/action-28 due 1 July/TOPIC: Action Item Review Succeeded: s/Issue-106 allow image/Issue-105 allow image/ Succeeded: s/element Zakim (canvas/element (canvas/ Succeeded: i/RESOLUTION: The TF will assign the A11YTF keyword/scribenick+ janina Succeeded: i/no objectino/scribenick: mattmay Succeeded: s/no objectino/no objection/ Succeeded: i/RESOLUTION: The TF will assign the A11YTF keyword/scribe: janina Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Found ScribeNick: mattmay ScribeNicks: mattmay, janina Default Present: Michael_Cooper, John_Foliot, Gregory_Rosmaita, Janina, Matt_May, +49.179.103.aaaa, kliehm, Rich, MikeSmith, chaals-, Cynthia_Shelly Present: Chaals Cynthia_Shelly Gregory_Rosmaita Janina Janina_Sajka John_Foliot Jon_Gunderson Matt_May Michael_Cooper MikeSmith Rich Richard_Schwerdtfeger kliehm Regrets: Laura_Carlson Marco_Ranon Steven_Faulkner Denis_Boudreau Ben_Caldwell Silvia_Pfeiffer Eric_Carlson Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jun/0126.html Found Date: 10 Jun 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/06/10-html-a11y-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]