23:01:19 RRSAgent has joined #html-a11y 23:01:19 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/11/10-html-a11y-irc 23:01:24 zakim, this will be WAI_PFWG(A11Y) 23:01:24 ok, janina, I see WAI_PFWG(A11Y)6:00PM already started 23:01:30 zakim, call janina 23:01:30 ok, janina; the call is being made 23:01:32 +Janina 23:02:01 + +1.408.823.aabb 23:02:02 zakim, who's here? 23:02:03 On the phone I see +44.154.558.aaaa, Janina, +1.408.823.aabb 23:02:04 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, Sean, silvia, MikeSmith, oedipus_away, sideshow, trackbot 23:02:39 zakim, +44.154.558.aaaa is Sean_Hayes 23:02:39 +Sean_Hayes; got it 23:03:33 + +1.650.468.aacc 23:03:40 zakim, +1.408.823.aabb is Eric_Carlson 23:03:40 +Eric_Carlson; got it 23:03:50 JF has joined #html-a11y 23:04:24 zakim, +1.650.468.aacc is John_Foliot 23:04:24 +John_Foliot; got it 23:04:45 Meeting: HTML-A11Y telecon 23:04:45 Chair: Janina_Sajka 23:04:45 agenda: this 23:04:45 agenda+ Identify Scribe 23:04:45 agenda+ Actions Review 23:04:45 agenda+ Status Updates & Brief Reports: TPAC; User Reqs; 23:04:48 agenda+ Categorization of Media A11y Requirements 23:04:50 agenda+ Technical Requirements Prioritizations and Dependencies 23:04:51 agenda+ Handling Multiple Tracks http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Oct/0520.html 23:04:53 agenda+ Candidate Formats Review Preparation: WebSRT; TTML; Others? 23:04:55 +Judy 23:04:56 agenda+ Other Business? 23:04:57 agenda+ next meeting 23:05:00 agenda+ be done 23:05:21 + +61.2.801.2.aadd 23:05:37 zakim, aadd is me 23:05:37 +silvia; got it 23:05:52 zakim, +61.2.801.2.aadd is Silvia_Pfiefer 23:05:52 sorry, janina, I do not recognize a party named '+61.2.801.2.aadd' 23:05:52 zakim, mute me 23:05:53 silvia should now be muted 23:05:54 frankolivier has joined #html-a11y 23:06:03 zakim, +61.2.801.2.aadd is Silvia 23:06:03 sorry, janina, I do not recognize a party named '+61.2.801.2.aadd' 23:06:29 zakim, who's here? 23:06:29 On the phone I see Sean_Hayes, Janina, Eric_Carlson, John_Foliot, Judy, silvia (muted) 23:06:31 On IRC I see frankolivier, JF, RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, Sean, silvia, MikeSmith, oedipus_away, sideshow, trackbot 23:06:55 zakim, take up item 1 23:06:55 agendum 1. "Identify Scribe" taken up [from janina] 23:07:11 scribe: John_Foliot 23:07:25 scribe: jf 23:07:41 scribe: JF 23:07:57 scribe: John 23:08:12 zakim, next item 23:08:12 agendum 2. "Actions Review" taken up [from janina] 23:08:50 JS - suggest we skip over Action items so that we can focus on heavy agenda 23:08:59 zakim, next item 23:08:59 agendum 2 was just opened, janina 23:09:04 zakim, next item 23:09:04 agendum 2 was just opened, JF 23:09:06 zakim, close item 2 23:09:06 agendum 2, Actions Review, closed 23:09:08 I see 8 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 23:09:10 3. Status Updates & Brief Reports: TPAC; User Reqs; [from janina] 23:09:13 zakim, next item 23:09:13 agendum 3. "Status Updates & Brief Reports: TPAC; User Reqs;" taken up [from janina] 23:09:33 JS - will be brief on status updates 23:09:44 TPAC was very eventful, managed to move things forward 23:10:00 key thing was thursday meeting on media 23:10:29 Frank categorized the requirements into 4 different buckets 23:10:40 many were UX issues 23:11:15 others related to 'tracks' - the time text format issue 23:11:23 perhaps spin that off to another WG 23:11:30 or handle seperately 23:12:08 despite wide concern of user reqs prior to TPAC, things seem to be less of a concern 23:12:21 categorization helped to defuse this 23:13:14 JF - is the splitting off of time text format a done deal? 23:13:28 JS- not yet, is a priority discussion for this group 23:14:01 Judy - has had several assurances that there was no pre-empting of this discussion/decision 23:14:20 the discussion was about modularizing how a11y / media is handled 23:14:59 however the decision has not been made 23:15:21 JS- providing a wiki of the discussions at TPAC 23:15:49 judy_ has joined #html-a11y 23:16:16 subtext of meetings showed a stron affinity for webSRT 23:17:04 number of reasons why some don't like TTML (XML issues) 23:17:20 however we should still do the gap analysis 23:17:33 need to do this soon - within the next week or 3 23:18:13 JS - 2 key decisions - are we comfortable with splitting off the discussion on time formats, and logistics around gap analysis 23:19:49 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Minuteszakim, next item 23:19:59 agenda? 23:20:07 zakim, next item 23:20:21 agendum 4. "Categorization of Media A11y Requirements" taken up [from janina] 23:20:31 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Nov/0066.html 23:20:42 JS - review Franks report 23:20:55 zakim, who's here? 23:20:55 On the phone I see Sean_Hayes, Janina, Eric_Carlson, John_Foliot, Judy, silvia (muted) 23:20:58 On IRC I see judy_, frankolivier, JF, RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, Sean, silvia, MikeSmith, oedipus_away, sideshow, trackbot 23:21:09 take on the bigger issue first - how do people feel about splitting the time text format into a seperate group 23:21:17 SH - thinks it is a good idea 23:21:34 believes that Frank agrees - so can be taken as MS position 23:21:45 EC - I think it is a good idea as well 23:22:00 JB - think it may be good for development of the issue 23:22:28 one of the tricky things is whether the media format that is tied to HTML5 does end up being specified as a full feature baseline 23:22:42 if we don't have that, there are multiple risks for accessibility 23:22:51 not sure if they have all been documented 23:23:11 when we built out the user reqs we didn't consider spliting out at that time 23:23:31 if media format changes over time, we may have discontinuity 23:23:40 zakim, unmute me 23:23:40 silvia should no longer be muted 23:24:04 q? 23:24:12 may be very good to have the flexibility to recognize multiple formats, but if we have a baseline we need to have additional care/caution in doing that 23:24:31 zakim, mute me 23:24:32 silvia should now be muted 23:25:03 Judy notes there was some discussion of 'plugins' at a lunch-table discussionat TPAC 23:25:19 however plugins don't scale well for many users with a11y needs 23:25:35 EC - not all browsers support the same plugins 23:25:51 zakim, unmute me 23:25:51 silvia should no longer be muted 23:25:54 we are already in a situation where we don't have baseline for video and audio files (codec issue) 23:26:16 SP - this shouldn't stop us for trying for a baseline format for the text formats 23:26:27 see this as a goal to arrive at a baseline format 23:26:40 EC - agrees as well 23:26:44 [judy notes that doesn't think that modularizing is a problem by itself, but that it requires extra consideration for a number of interoperability issues] 23:26:44 JF +1 23:27:16 JB: agree that this is an issue, but can we get out of that "well" 23:27:32 there was general agreement that modularization is a good way forward 23:27:33 zakim, mute me 23:27:33 silvia should now be muted 23:28:07 SH: has already found instances of in the wild, and using JavaScript to process it 23:28:39 JB: can we continue to discuss this? need to have a better understanding of this. how does this handle the interop issues? 23:29:39 SH: haven't done extensive research, but from what have seen there is an ability to detect events in the video and associate it to timestamp file 23:30:04 relies on JS to do the processing 23:30:13 +q 23:30:36 +q 23:31:05 q? 23:31:48 ack me 23:31:55 ack JF 23:32:08 SP: concerned that the track element alone is sufficient 23:32:26 if it can read the files, and expose the cues 23:32:53 plan is to go beyond libraries to do the track implementation 23:32:56 q? 23:33:09 since the browser is the only thing that can do the time alignment properly 23:33:14 q+ 23:33:18 and it should be implemented in the browser 23:33:46 so having an abstract JS API is good, we really need a baseline format that all browsers support 23:33:55 JF: +1 23:34:07 q+ 23:34:48 JS: seems that it is important as it's not just captions, especially given some of the other user requirements 23:35:12 q? 23:35:36 zakim, mute me 23:35:36 silvia should now be muted 23:36:42 john: i would like to see more stable and predictable behavior than just relying on the javascript library 23:37:21 SH: clarification - not saying that browsers shouldn't have native support, but simply that with JS today we can do most of it now 23:37:30 q+ 23:37:40 ack j 23:37:44 q+ 23:37:45 q? 23:37:57 ack sh 23:38:10 ack sh 23:38:22 JB: suggest that if we give feedback to larger WG, that we also note that we will be wanting to lookl very carefully at the interop issues 23:38:26 ack se 23:38:32 ack ju 23:38:37 q+ 23:38:46 that we believe that the track element handles a lot of it, but we want to ensure that interop is handled correctly 23:39:55 ack me 23:40:03 ack sil 23:40:30 SP: thinks it is simple. we need a sentence in the track element that states this is the baseline format for text-time format 23:41:47 zakim, mute me 23:41:47 silvia should now be muted 23:42:16 zakim, unmute me 23:42:16 silvia should no longer be muted 23:42:18 EC: clarification - the things that Sean is talking about works now 23:43:17 +q 23:44:03 zakim, mute me 23:44:03 silvia should now be muted 23:44:31 q? 23:44:36 ack jf 23:46:09 q+ 23:46:41 JS: the concern is not how/where the baseline time format is defined, but how it is included in the HTML5 spec 23:46:50 q? 23:46:55 ack ju 23:47:06 q+ 23:47:31 JB: learned today that possibly PF would take on the time-format/WebSRT WG 23:48:20 thinks that even though there seems to be a inference that WebSRT will be the baseline format, need to confirm that 23:48:43 thinks that while PF is a good place for this to happen, PF is already overloaded 23:49:15 important to ensure charter is done right, so that right people are included, and that it is done in accordance with IP rules, etc. 23:49:23 q- 23:49:27 q? 23:51:19 JB: suggests that we try to go through the where and who questions before we tackle the 'what' but at the same time the gap analysis on WebSRT should start 23:52:15 (discussion on timelines) 23:53:22 JS: next question is, did Frank get the 'buckets' right - are there any questions/concerns 23:53:49 do we need more specificity re: chapters 23:53:58 do we need to tweak this document 23:54:14 JB: has everyone had a chance to read through Franks note 23:54:35 EC - did a fairly quick read, happy to see it happened - seemed good 23:54:54 JS: my sense is that it is generally right 23:55:05 but we should take the time to ensure it is right 23:55:12 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Nov/0066.html 23:55:16 zakim, unmute me 23:55:16 silvia should no longer be muted 23:55:46 SP: a few questions - do we have bugs in the bugtracker for all of these issues 23:55:50 there were a few questions 23:57:35 +1 to silvia's suggestion to be sure to capture the user &/or tech requirements that are indeed directly needed in the spec 23:58:47 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Nov/0080.html 23:59:09 asks that others review and comment on her email 00:00:12 JS: with panning - if there is stereo sound it is very important not to have the description in the same pan location 00:01:32 SP: thinks that this should be handled by the a11y API 00:02:14 as long as the descriptive track is a separate track, it becomes an OS/user agent issue 00:02:41 SP: might be able to remove it from the html5 spec and into the operating system spec 00:03:17 there will be a lot of things coming from this work that will need to be addressed in the a11y API moving forward 00:03:25 perhaps we should be capturing this as well 00:03:47 zakim, mute me 00:03:47 silvia should now be muted 00:04:15 zakim, unmute me 00:04:15 silvia should no longer be muted 00:04:22 zakim, next item 00:04:22 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, JF 00:04:30 q? 00:04:38 ack jan 00:05:25 SP: suggest that Franks matrix supersedes the checklist. suggest that we include Franks data into the checklist, and remove the technology column 00:05:27 q? 00:05:37 EC - agrees with silvia 00:05:48 zakim, mute me 00:05:48 silvia should now be muted 00:05:53 q+ 00:05:56 zakim, unmute me 00:05:56 silvia should no longer be muted 00:06:32 q? 00:06:37 zakim, mute me 00:06:37 silvia should now be muted 00:06:38 ack j 00:07:01 JB: would like to ask a different question 00:07:15 we've talked about gap analysis, but is this on the agenda 00:07:32 JS: are we agree to remove the technology column and replace with Franks work? 00:07:40 (seems to have objections) 00:08:06 correction - *no* objections 00:08:25 resolved: We will remove the technology column in our matrix, replacing it with Frank's categorizations. 00:08:54 zakim, unmute me 00:08:54 silvia should no longer be muted 00:09:13 zakim, mute me 00:09:13 silvia should now be muted 00:09:24 action: Silvia to replace the technology column in our matrix with Frank's categorizations 00:09:25 Created ACTION-76 - Replace the technology column in our matrix with Frank's categorizations [on Silvia Pfeiffer - due 2010-11-18]. 00:10:01 zakim, next item 00:10:01 agendum 5. "Technical Requirements Prioritizations and Dependencies" taken up [from janina] 00:10:06 zakim, unmute me 00:10:06 silvia should no longer be muted 00:10:27 SP: belives that this is an ongoing discussion on email 00:10:30 different ideas 00:10:32 zakim, mute me 00:10:32 silvia should now be muted 00:10:41 zakim, next item 00:10:41 agendum 5 was just opened, JF 00:11:02 zakim, unmute me 00:11:02 silvia should no longer be muted 00:11:06 q+ 00:11:11 zakim, next item 00:11:11 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, JF 00:12:07 SP: have been working on the gap analysis on WebSRT - may be able to present on this next week 00:12:14 JB: thinks that this is a very good idea 00:13:03 suggest that a qualitative factor be considered: not only what is the gap, but are there any issues that the architecture would not be able to support a particular requirement 00:13:26 (or complexity issue) 00:13:39 SP: can have that readyby next week 00:14:21 SH: has already done the gap analysis on TTML, can discuss next week 00:14:24 as well 00:14:25 zakim, mute me 00:14:25 silvia should now be muted 00:14:47 zakim, unmute me 00:14:47 silvia should no longer be muted 00:15:04 JS: mindful that we are in a rush to get this done, but don't want to unduly restrict time/discussion 00:15:19 +1 to an interleafed session 00:15:33 SP: suggests we do this as an interleaved way, requirement by requirement, so that we all arrive at the same understanding 00:15:41 +1 to ath 00:16:26 SH: likes this approach as well, but do we also want a brief overview of each format? 00:16:52 JB: 2 weeks from now is US thanksgiving 00:17:13 and concerned that we lose an opportunity 00:18:07 SP: if we move the call 2 hours earlier than it makes it easier on the europeans 00:18:18 JB: could we do this in 2 hours next week? 00:18:37 +q 00:20:18 ack ju 00:20:23 SP: if we move the call forward 2 hours next week, can we perhaps do a "workshop"? 00:20:28 ack JF 00:20:39 and then make it longer 00:21:06 JS: inclined to say that those on the call have first call on time 00:21:41 SH: agrees that if we have a larger workshop, we should do it separately from what we want to achieve next week 00:22:03 JB: 2 issues - extending next weeks call, and having a broader discussion 00:22:27 JS: proposal is thta we not meet in 2 weeks (US Thanksgiving eve) 00:22:38 (no objections) 00:23:26 JS: is there any objection to starting 2 hours earlier and extending beyond 90 minutes to try and go through the entire gab analysis? 00:23:37 JB: thinks this is very good idea, but may be late 00:24:04 JS: with no objections, will make those arrangements for next week 00:24:35 q+ 00:25:05 SH: moving the meeting an hour earlier would be better, but 2 hours forward (on a regular basis would be less preferable) 00:26:04 JS: next week we will move the meeting 2 hours earlier, then after US Thanksgiving we will resume our 90 minute meetings 1 hour earlier 00:26:20 JB: will work on getting Geoff on the call next week 00:26:41 SP: hopes everyone is good for next week 00:28:03 zakim, mute me 00:28:03 silvia should now be muted 00:28:10 JF to take the Action assigned to Silvia 00:28:36 JS: thanks to all. meeting adjourned 00:28:40 -Eric_Carlson 00:28:41 -Judy 00:28:46 -silvia 00:28:47 zakim, bye 00:28:47 Zakim has left #html-a11y 00:28:47 leaving. As of this point the attendees were Janina, Sean_Hayes, Eric_Carlson, John_Foliot, Judy, +61.2.801.2.aadd, silvia 00:29:10 rrsagent, make_log 00:29:10 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make_log', JF. Try /msg RRSAgent help 00:29:22 rrsagent, make log public 00:29:35 rrsagent, make minutes 00:29:35 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/11/10-html-a11y-minutes.html JF 00:35:57 MikeSmith has joined #html-a11y 00:40:12 s/has had several assurances that there was/had had several assurances that there would be/ 00:41:08 MikeSmith_ has joined #html-a11y 00:41:49 rrsagent, make minutes 00:41:49 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/11/10-html-a11y-minutes.html judy_ 00:50:34 MikeSmith_ has joined #html-a11y 01:47:43 MikeSmith_ has joined #html-a11y 03:05:31 MikeSmith_ has joined #html-a11y