HTML-A11Y telecon -- 22 Sep 2010

<janina> agenda: this

Identify Scribe

<janina> scribe: John_Foliot

Actions Review

<JF> JS: Judy may be joining us later

<JF> JS: TPAC F2F group have asked Janina to do a presentation at TPAC

<JF> believes this work here is important

<JF> also looking at integration of HTML5, HTML5 media and a11y also with regard to digital TV

<JF> upcoming events: PL has arranged for janina to particpate at a conference next week on Open Sub Titles

<JF> Silvia will be at the same conference

<JF> may impact on call next week

<JF> Silvia: also good to discuss the integration of the spec text at TPAC

<JF> JS: if that hasn't happened by then we can address

<JF> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open

<JF> zakim: Action 2

<JF> Action 54

<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax

<JF> JS: working on that with Judy, asking for whatever we can get our hands on

<JF> JF struggling with IRC today

<JF> :(

Additional Bugs for the Last Call Deadline?

<JF> JS: we absolutely must get bugs in by October 1

<JF> if there are any other items we need to get them in now

<JF> Red letter date for Change Proposals is Feb. 28th

<JF> JS: Silvia had a proposal to add a bug

<JF> Judy: wants to verify if there are other opportunities to submit other bugs down the road, believes not

<JF> +q

<JF> Judy: with W3C Last Call there are general processes that are addressed

<JF> if substantial issues arise during last Call, then possible that a 'second' last Call would emerge

<JF> we don't have a guarantee for open season for new bugs

<JF> JF: asks about new issues that emerge after Oct. 1

<JF> Judy: no the issue is that there is a dead-line on fresh bugs

<JF> Judy: the uncovering of issues is supposed to be complete by Oct. 1

<JF> JS: Is shopping the phrase of First Call

<JF> \but Judy is correct that there is no guarantee of a fresh round of bug issues

<JF> Judy: stress that we should get bugs in by next week

<janina> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Sep/0435.html

<JF> Silvia has suggeste one new bug

<JF> Silvia: have reviewed all of the requirements

<JF> to ensure that all of our issues are addressed somewhere

<JF> there are some existing bugs already

<JF> there is a proposed solution for a bug re: Handling of additional tracks of a multitrack audio/video resource

<JF> technical discussion should include Eric and Philip (mailing list)

<JF> there are a few others related to WebSRT

<JF> which is interesting as it is not in our working group

<JF> but there are discussions going on in the bug tracker which we are sharing with WHAT WG

<JF> however this is one glaring omission: content navigation by Content navigation by content structure

<JF> suggest that we get this into the bug tracker ASAP

<JF> JS: wonder if there are any others, for example "packaging" - if multiple reasons are being specified do we need to look at that?

<JF> Silvia: the only reason this would be an issue is for download issues, likely not an a11y issue

<JF> this has already been discussed elsewhere

<JF> we really should focus on our key areas in our requirements

<JF> however if anyone believes this is an issue then feel free to file a bug

<JF> Eric: agrees with Silvia that we should stay focused

<JF> JS: concurs

<JF> JS: In Section 3 in our requirements, do we need anything for device independence / control access?

<JF> Silvi: believes that this is mostly addressed via JS and other areas of the spec

<JF> Doesn't believe we have a gap

<JF> Judy: Is there any possibility of the bugs we have on record (re: media) does it make sense to review to be sure that they sufficiently capture what we mean?

<JF> i.e. should we review the quality of bugs

<JF> JS: what we need to make sure is that later down the road we don't get stung by us assuming things are sufficiently covered in existing bugs

<JF> ACTION: file a bug re: Content navigation by content structure [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/09/22-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - file

<JF> ACTION: create a bug on Content navigation by content structure to Silvia [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/09/22-html-a11y-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - create

<JF> I give up!

<silvia> ACTION: silvia to create a bug on Content navigation by content structure [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/09/22-html-a11y-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Create a bug on Content navigation by content structure [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2010-09-29].

<JF> (thanks janina)

<janina> ACTION: Silvia to file a bug on HTML 5 for Content Navigation by Content Structure due 20101001 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/09/22-html-a11y-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - File a bug on HTML 5 for Content Navigation by Content Structure due 20101001 [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2010-09-29].

Technical Requirements Prioritizations and Dependencies

<silvia> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Checklist

<JF> 3 particular views on this matrix

<JF> that was me

<JF> Diving into details

<JF> curious to know how the WCAG Mapping is going

<JF> Sean: Quite interesting

WCAG Mapping

<JF> seems to be a bit more difficult than first thought

<JF> there are a number of details taht aren't covered in WCAG

<JF> for example, it says you need to do captions, but doesn't define that further

<JF> however we are defining what captions mean

<JF> so hasen't been able to do a complet mapping

<JF> so navigation issues are coming out quite clearly

<JF> audio contrast (which we call Clear audio) WCAG specifies a binary on-off, while we have a graduation requirement

<JF> not sure if there is an equiv. doc to WCAG that covers i18n issues

<JF> might need to have an additional column to track i18n issues in our matrix

<JF> Sean has some vague notes but this is not ready to add to the table

<JF> possible bug around the time-limit issue for extended captions - we rquire an ability to turn audio on and off

<JF> +Q

<JF> perhaps labeling on language

<silvia> +q

<JF> we need to think about things that are not directly covered by WCAG, but are implied

<JF> we do have some holes

<JF> JF to take an email from Sean and get into bugzilla

<JF> 1 possibley 2 other bugs

Spec Text Implications

<JF> Judy: still investigating issues around Ip

<JF> provisional answer is use the text that is in WHAT WG as a base

<JF> that we can then re-work to remove WebSRT

<JF> at this time

<Judy> judy but had not fully been able to check this yet

<JF> Silvia: we want to take ian's text and remove references to WebSRT

<Judy> +1

<JF> issue is that WebSRT is sliding in as a default standard, so we want to avoid premature inclusion as it has not been discussed

<JF> JS: concern about how easy it was to use the text

<JF> Sean: hixie uses a build system to make the edits

<JF> so it's not as simple of copy and paste, then edit and repost

<JF> so we need to have him to do that

<JF> so concern that the only person who can make changes is ian

<JF> and his impending vacation

<JF> Silvia: there are others who can make the changes, although ian should be the one to make the changes

<JF> so, we need to approach ian to remove the references to WebSRT

<JF> JS: are we hearing the beginning of a request to forward on, which is to have specific sections of the WHAT spec into the HTML WG spec, but technology neutral

<JF> +Q

<JF> Sean: there are 2 mains sections that we need to address, plus 1 which is a bit more controversial

<JF> so the first two are pretty simple and we could easily construct a request based on that

<JF> Judy: recommends we check proces with the chairs first

<JF> Janina will send an email to the chairs to follow up on the process - URGENT

<JF> it appears then that should Ian's text be sanitized minus WebSRT (plus Sean's comments) that would be helpful

<JF> Rendering - issues?

<JF> Sean; suggest that we insert a placeholder at this point

<JF> Silvia: without the rendering we have no way of implementing what we are talking about

<JF> JF suggests that we get a place holder in, then file a bug for further discussion

<JF> Judy: has a response from MikeSmith

<JF> we are free to take what hixie has written and modify as we choose

<JF> so seems we can go ahead and use hixies text

<janina> Mike, can you be on the phone with us for a few minutes?

<MikeSmith_> janina, sure -- gimme 2 minutes

<MikeSmith_> please

<silvia> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Sep/0236.html <- meets with Sean's proposal

<MikeSmith> hallo

<JF> Hey mike, welcome

<JF> MikeSmith:agrees that we should get bugs files ASAP

<JF> Get the track element mention in, minus any particular caption format

<JF> ask the chairs to help manage the logistics - how to do this without bringing in the text tath we are not resolved on

<JF> Mike: track is currently only for timed text

<JF> but specifically not for secondary other types of tracks (ig sigh-language tracks or alt audio tracks)

<JF> Eric: has a vague recollection that there is a bug there already

<JF> that track mechanism needs to be expanded to accommodate other types of files

<janina> scribe: janina

jf: done with first pass on must/should/may
... interested in interesection with WCAG
... please raise any issues on list

janina: recalling that we agreed to resolve disagreements in email, with media and bullet number in the subject field

<JF> JS: thanks to all - likely that she and Silvia will be missing next week

<JF> Eric; will likely be missing for the next 2 weeks

<JF> Judy:feels that we are very close to key recommendations, wants to be sure that Eric is comfortable with where we are and where we are headed

<JF> Eric: email is best way to track him down if anything is pressing

<JF> will prefix emails with [media]

<JF> bye

<JF> zakim. bye

<JF> \zakim, bye

- DRAFT -

HTML-A11Y telecon

22 Sep 2010

Attendees

Contents