See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 09 September 2010
<scribe> ScribeNick: adrianba
<scribe> Scribe: Adrian Bateman
<pimpbot> Title: {agenda} HTML WG Telecon 2010-09-09 - LC timeline, distributed extensibility, media accessibility from Maciej Stachowiak on 2010-09-08 (public-html-wg-announce@w3.org from July to September 2010) (at lists.w3.org)
<MikeSmith> adrian, you on?
yes
<janina> We don't seem to have any of the chairs?
<janina> O, good!
<paulc> So is Paul
<paulc> Paul is in Japan doing his best imitation of Mike S!
<MikeSmith> adrianba, can you scribe?
yep, ready to go
<MikeSmith> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2010JulSep/0022.html
<pimpbot> Title: {agenda} HTML WG Telecon 2010-09-09 - LC timeline, distributed extensibility, media accessibility from Maciej Stachowiak on 2010-09-08 (public-html-wg-announce@w3.org from July to September 2010) (at lists.w3.org)
<scribe> Chair: Sam Ruby
<scribe> Chair: Mike Smith
<MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda
<pimpbot> Title: Input for Agenda Planning for the HTML Weekly - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<plh> ACTION-29?
<trackbot> ACTION-29 -- Philippe Le Hégaret to follow up on the idea of a free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring -- due 2010-09-09 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/29
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-29 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
plh: first action is mine, doc
license
... PSIG proposed a draft which was rejected by FSF as not
compatible with GPL
... PSIG went to Director to ask for next steps, a survey was
prepared but was withdrawn because of some gaps in the PSIG
analysis
... we're fixing the PSIG document and how it maps to HTML WG
use cases
... after that we'll resubmit the survey
... don't expect any resolution before TPAC on this
... suggest check back in one month to make sure progress is
being made
<MikeSmith> action-29: plan is to put forward another survey to the W3C membership
<trackbot> ACTION-29 Follow up on the idea of a free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring notes added
MikeSmith: should we keep the action?
<MikeSmith> action-29 due 2010-10-09
<trackbot> ACTION-29 Follow up on the idea of a free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring due date now 2010-10-09
plh: keep it open - we'll check back in a month
ISSUE-118?
<trackbot> ISSUE-118 -- Specification breaks semantics of existing link relations "index" and "first" -- raised
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/118
<pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-118 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
MikeSmith: we don't have any other information on this, do we need to discuss anything on this today?
rubys: no, it's new - if people want to look at it then it is there
MikeSmith: this is related to an
action outside the group related to a registration I submitted
on behalf of the group
... it isn't purely internal - nothing we can do this week -
people should follow-up if they have anything to add
ISSUE-110?
<trackbot> ISSUE-110 -- Change Control for text/html-sandboxed media type -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/110
<pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-110 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
MikeSmith: we have one change
proposal here to change the owner to W3C
... this is closed and it seems like we have resolution on
this
MikeSmith: None
ISSUE-116?
<trackbot> ISSUE-116 -- provide reference and info about HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives in html5 spec -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/116
<pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-116 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
MikeSmith: this is for text
alternatives
... call for consensus closes on Sep 17
... we have until then to get in comments and have discussion
about it
ISSUE-85?
<trackbot> ISSUE-85 -- ARIA roles added to the a element should be conforming in HTML5 -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/85
<pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-85 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10066
<pimpbot> 1110066: faulkner.steve@gmail.com, P1, NEW, 13replace section 3.2.6 with the alternative spec text provided (ARIA)
MikeSmith: i think we have some more updates based on the mail Maciej sent
<MikeSmith> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0087.html
<pimpbot> Title: ARIA mapping status from Maciej Stachowiak on 2010-09-09 (public-html@w3.org from September 2010) (at lists.w3.org)
<MikeSmith> bug 10066
<pimpbot> 11http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10066 faulkner.steve@gmail.com, P1, NEW, 13replace section 3.2.6 with the alternative spec text provided (ARIA)
MikeSmith: that is Maciej's summary of the issues related to bug 10066
rubys: this points out who Maciej
thinks who owns which bugs
... i agree with the assessment - if anyone has comments they
should speak up
MikeSmith: next is issue 41
ISSUE-41?
<trackbot> ISSUE-41 -- Decentralized extensibility -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/41
<pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-41 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
MikeSmith: few items listed in the agenda
rubys: we have three proposals
left from the original 5 or so
... of those one is fully formed, the other two need
updating
... we have volunteers for one but not the other - if someone
would like to do that they should speak up
... if they are not updated then they may fall away (i expect
one to be updated)
MikeSmith: hope everyone has seen the significant announcement from Maciej on behalf of the chairs
<rubys> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0074.html
<pimpbot> Title: Timeline to Last Call from Maciej Stachowiak on 2010-09-08 (public-html@w3.org from September 2010) (at lists.w3.org)
MikeSmith: this is a breakdown of
the time line for getting to last call with milestones and
consequences for missing the milestones
... everyone in the group should read and provide
feedback
... first deadline is oct 1 for bugs to be filed
... to be considered before last call, bugs after this will be
treated as last call comments
... bottom line is if you have bugs you want to file you should
get them in now
adrianba: how will we make sure that work is done through the milestones?
<MikeSmith> adrianba: how are the chairs going to make sure that work happens during the time between the milestones instead of everybody waiting until just befor the milestone deadlines?
<paulc> Adrian: How do we spread out the work over each work period so it does not all occur near the end?
rubys: i don't have a specific answer right now - we're working with ian on how bugs will be processed - we also need to focus on other issues too
<paulc> We need feedback from spec Editors on their readiness to accept this timeline:
<paulc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0094.html
<pimpbot> Title: RE: Timeline to Last Call from Eliot Graff on 2010-09-09 (public-html@w3.org from September 2010) (at lists.w3.org)
MikeSmith: comments and questions to the milestones and time line are welcome on public-html
paulc: i'm not sure how many
editors of specs we have on
... we also asked other editors if this was an acceptable time
line
... there is a message from Eliot but we need to follow-up with
other editors to see how many specs will follow this plan
<mjs> hi all
MikeSmith: i think part of the point is that the other editors have the opportunity to speak up and say that they want their specs to progress at the same rate
ISSUE-9?
<trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- how accessibility works for <video> is unclear -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/9
<pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-9 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<janina> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Requirements
MikeSmith: meant to do this last week but had some technical issues
<pimpbot> Title: Media Accessibility User Requirements - HTML accessibility task force Wiki (at www.w3.org)
Janina: this is the user reqs doc
that has come out of the media subteam in the a11y TF
... this is not an inventory of what is or isn't
supported
... it is what kind of resources and control are needed by
people with a11y reqs
... it is a user requirements not a user agent requirements
doc
<MikeSmith> mjs, can you take over on chairing for the remainder of the call?
<mjs> MikeSmith, yes
Janina: we need to engineer solutions but as was pointed out in a recent conversation we should not assume that the full WG has agreed on thes reqs
<MikeSmith> chair: Maciej
Janina: so before we get down to
engineering solutions it seems prudent to ask the group if we
agree that the reqs are accurate
... if something is missing we need to add it
... equally if something is here that shouldn't be now is the
time to discuss that
<rubys> did we lose janina again?
<paulc> Did we lose Janina?
Janina: this way when we get to
technologies to build with we've agreed on what we need to
support
... section 1 is a crash course on what the different issues
are for people and media
... all the tech requirements are section 2 and 3
... in section 2, describe video
... this has been around since the 80s, used in analog and
digital broadcast
... uses the silences to add description by voice of what is
happening
... in section 2.2 you also have the ability to do textual
description rather than the expensive addition of a recorded
voice
... 2.3 if you can do text and audio you may not need to be
limited to the timeframe of original video
... in education situations you may need more time than is
available in pauses or silences
... which can be supported in a computer environment in a way
that couldn't be done in traditional broadcast
... concept of extended time where you pause and restart to
allow a longer description
... 2.4 concept implemented primarily in the UK - clear audio -
for people losing their hearing
... probably only used in a professional situation - create an
additional audio track with most of the incidental sounds
removed
... only main sounds like speech remain - people can use their
remaining hearing more effectively
... removing less essential sounds improves recognition
... being done with digital broadcasting at least in the uk
2.5 comes from electronic book publishing - make content available for people who can't read a book
janina: the idea is that if you
can map the DOM structure to next / previous you make it more
accessible
... getting the balance between all and only high-level is
hard
... in real time you could adjust the level of detail
... moving forward to captioning - it is the word most often
thought of as making video accessible
... also can be used in a noisy environment so most
familiar
... very close to subtitles but not the same
... important events may also be mentioned in captioning
... traditionally from broadcast but because this is computer
mediated we can support additional capabilities
... 2.8 sign language translation - oldest that predates
something electronic
... often prefer whatever is happening signed for them
... but for people who became deaf later in life learning a new
language is harder
... also different locales have different signing
... so we've had text tracks, additional audio tracks,
etc.
... these need to be in sync and are not always the same
length
... 2.9 sometimes only having a transcript is useful
... section 3 - we need controls that are device independent so
that what ever device is connected can
stop/start/forward/rewind/etc
... real time ability to control the dom depth of
next/previous
... 3.3 fortunately this is in the spec already - need to be
able to speed up or slow down
... great that this is already in spec - is required
... 3.4 most of this is not new - older than the web
itself
... generally going to be in authoring guidance
... discovery and activation important - need to be able to
choose what is available
... 3.6 what kinds of properties need to be available
... 3.7 need to be able to control placement on screen and some
of the styling needs to be under user control
... 3.8 the need to be able to control which output device
audio is pointed at - various reasons why you want the
described video audio to go to a different device than the
primary resource
... that's the walkthough - any questions?
mjs: thanks for covering all
that, any questions or comments?
... i hope everyone takes a closer look at the document and
reviews and follows up on the mailing list
... would be good to have discussion of the document
judy: janina, we had talked about
mentioning some of the next steps in the media sub-team - could
you outline those so people know what to expect?
... also wanted to mention that if people are interested they
are welcome to join
<pimpbot> bugmail: [Bug 10481] Default role of <IMG> should be "img" <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2010Sep/0414.html> 4** [Bug 9817] Details element Focus problem <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2010Sep/0413.html> 4** [Bug 10066] replace section 3.2.6 with the alternative spec text provided (ARIA) <11http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/2010Sep/0412.html>
janina: i can provide a pointer here
<janina> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Media_Accessibility_Checklist
<pimpbot> Title: Media Accessibility Checklist - HTML accessibility task force Wiki (at www.w3.org)
janina: this is what we are
currently focusing on - if you look at the table we are mapping
the user requirements into the types of technology to support
them
... from that we expect to prioritise on which technologies
still need attention
... that's what the MUST, SHOULD, MAY is for - they start as
MUST but probably don't all stay that way
... next we look at different technologies (e.g. TTML or
WebSRT) to see what capabilities there are and what might be
missing
... can we use existing things - they may be almost everything
there already
mjs: thanks, any other questions?
mjs: Julian sent an item ahead of time
<plh> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10399
<pimpbot> 1110399: julian.reschke@gmx.de, P2, RESOLVED INVALID, 13base64 def in algorithm for put to data URI
julian: this issue i raised an
small editorial issue - it seems the editor agrees with the
issue but chose not to fix because he doesn't agree with the
way i raised the issue
... i'm not sure how to proceed
... perhaps someone else can pick this up?
mjs: i haven't had chance to
study this - it looks like two different mutually exclusive
changes
... the editor took this as two issues and rejected the
first
... i would be happy to take this on and see what i can do to
move this forward
... i will contact you offline if i have any questions
... any other business or comments on this item?
mjs: volunteers?
... next week sam is chairing
... i will volunteer to scribe
mjs: see you all next week
<MikeSmith> Mike, drop Mike
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 ScribeNick: adrianba Found Scribe: Adrian Bateman Default Present: Judy, dsinger, Sam, Matt_May, paulc, Plh, dpenkler, Mike, Janina, Eric_Carlson, [Microsoft], adrianba, Julian, Laura_Carlson, eliot, Cynthia_Shelly, mjs Present: Judy dsinger Sam Matt_May paulc Plh dpenkler Mike Janina Eric_Carlson [Microsoft] adrianba Julian Laura_Carlson eliot Cynthia_Shelly mjs Regrets: Gregory_Rosmaita Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2010JulSep/0022.html Found Date: 09 Sep 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/09-html-wg-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]