See also: IRC log
Sctibe: Jan
<AleMiele> Hi all
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011JanMar/0019.html
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results
proposal is here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011JanMar/0013.html
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq2
A.2.2.2 Access to Rendered Text Properties: If a text property is both rendered and editable by an editing-view and the property can be communicated by the supported platform accessibility service, then the property can be programmatically determined. (Level A)
is programmatically determibable
drop "by an editing-view "
A.2.2.2 Access to Rendered Text Properties: If a text property is both rendered and editable and the property can be communicated by the supported platform accessibility service, then the property is programmatically determineable. (Level A)
Resolution: No objections to "A.2.2.2 Access to Rendered Text Properties: If a text property is both rendered and editable and the property can be communicated by the supported platform accessibility service, then the property is programmatically determineable. (Level A)"
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq1
Resolution: All accept proposal http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq1
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq3
B.2.3.1 Alternative Content is Editable (WCAG): Authors are able to modify programmatically associated text alternatives for non-text content. (Level A) @@including types of alternative content that may not typically be displayed on screen by user agents
<scribe> ACTION: JR to To clarify where we are on tools that are just checkers [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/01/24-au-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-318 - Clarify where we are on tools that are just checkers [on Jan Richards - due 2011-01-31].
Resolution: All accept proposal http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq3
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq4
Importantly, from the perspective of authoring tools, alternative content may or may not be:
* @@programmatically associated: Alternative content whose location and purpose can be programmatically determined from the original content for which it is serving as an alternative. For example, a paragraph might serve as a text alternative for an image, but it is only programmatically associated if this relationship is properly encoded (e.g. by "aria-labeledby").
Resolution: Accept new defn with Greg's grmmar fix http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2011/ED-ATAG20-20110105/#def-Alternative-Content
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2011/ED-ATAG20-20110105/#def-Authoring-Permission
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq5
author permission: Authorization that allows modification of given web content. Some authoring tools are capable of managing authoring permissions in order to prevent unauthorized modifications.
Multiple author roles: Some authoring tools include multiple author roles, each with different views and content editing permissions (e.g. a content management system may separate the roles of designers, content authors, and quality assurers). In these cases, the Part B success criteria apply to the authoring tool as a whole, not to the view provided to any particular author role. Accessible...
scribe: content support features should be made available to any author role where it would be useful.
Resolution: "author permission: Authorization that allows modification of given web content. Some authoring tools are capable of managing authoring permissions in order to prevent unauthorized modifications."
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq7
content (web content)
Information and sensory experience to be communicated to the end user by means of a user agent, including code or markup that defines the content's structure, presentation, and interactions. In ATAG 2.0, the term is primarily used to refer to the output that is produced by the authoring tool. Content produced by authoring tools may include web applications, including those that act as...
scribe: web-based authoring tools. Content may or may not be:
* accesible content (WCAG): Content that meets the WCAG 2.0 success criteria (Level A, AA, or AAA).
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ATAG20-20091029/
web content [adapted from WCAG 2.0]
Information and sensory experience to be communicated to the end user by means of a user agent, including code or markup that defines the content's structure, presentation, and interactions. In ATAG 2.0, "web content" is primarily used to refer to the output that is produced by the authoring tool. "Web content" may include web applications, including those that act as web-based authoring...
scribe: tools. Accessible web content is web content that conforms to a particular level of WCAG 2.0 .
Resolution: to accept http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2011/ED-ATAG20-20110105/#def-Web-Content with Alessandro's correction"accesible"
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq8
content rendering
User interface functionality that authoring tools present if they render, play or execute the web content being edited. ATAG 2.0 recognizes several types of content renderings:
* conventional renderings (or "WYSIWYG"): @@When content is rendered in a way that is similar to the default rendering a user agents would create from the same content. While "WYSIWYG", standing for "What-you-see-is-what-you-get" is the common term, it is problematic in terms of accessibility because reinforces the assumption that there is one end user experience; or
* unconventional renderings: When content is rendered differently than it would be in a typical user agent (e.g. rendering an audio file as a graphical wavefront); or
* partial renderings: When some aspects of the content are rendered, played, or executed, but not others (e.g. a frame-by-frame video editor renders the graphical, but not the timing aspects, of a video).
* conventional renderings (or "WYSIWYG"): @@When content is rendered in a way that is similar to the default rendering a user agent would create from the same content. While "WYSIWYG", standing for "What-you-see-is-what-you-get" is the common term, it is problematic in terms of accessibility because reinforces the assumption that there is one end user experience; or
conventional renderings (or "WYSIWYG"): When content is rendered in a way that is similar to the default rendering a user agents would create from the same content. While "WYSIWYG", standing for "What-you-see-is-what-you-get" is the common term, differences between user agents and end user settings mean that in reality there is no single typical end user experience; or
conventional renderings (or "WYSIWYG"): When content is rendered in a way that is similar to the default rendering a user agent would create from the same content. While "WYSIWYG", standing for "What-you-see-is-what-you-get" is the common term, differences between user agents and end user settings mean that in reality there is no single typical end user experience; or
Resolution: All accept defintion
of content rendering with "conventional renderings (or
"WYSIWYG"): When content is rendered in a way that is similar
to the default rendering a user agent would create from the
same content. While "WYSIWYG", standing for
"What-you-see-is-what-you-get" is the common term, differences
between user agents and end user settings mean that in reality
there is no...
... single typical end user experience; or"
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq9
content transformations
Processes that takes as input, content in one web content technology or non-web content technology (e.g. a word processing format) and produces as output, content that has been either:
* @@optimized: e.g. removing whitespace, re-compressing images; or
* restructured: e.g. linearizing tables, splitting a document into pages; or
* re-coded: e.g. HTML to XHTML, a word processing format to HTML.
Processes that take as input, content in one web content technology or non-web content technology (e.g. a word processing format) and produce as output, content that has been either:
Processes that content in one web content technology or non-web content technology (e.g. a word processing format) as input and produce as output, content that has been either:
Processes that content in one web content technology or non-web content technology (e.g. a word processing format) as input and produce content that has been either:
Resolution: All agree to content transformations rewording with change "Processes that content in one web content technology or non-web content technology (e.g. a word processing format) as input and produce content that has been either:"
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20110113/results#xq10
Default Option: A setting or value for an option that is assigned automatically by the authoring tool and remains in effect unless canceled or changed by the author.
Resolution: All accept "Default Option: A setting or value for an option that is assigned automatically by the authoring tool and remains in effect unless canceled or changed by the author."
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) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: Jan Inferring Scribes: Jan WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: AleMiele AlessandroMiele AlexLi Cherie Greg Jan Jeanne Jutta Microsoft P0 P3 P5 Sctibe Sueann SueannN aaaa aabb gpisocky ssnichol trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Regrets: Alastair C. Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011JanMar/0019.html Got date from IRC log name: 24 Jan 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/01/24-au-minutes.html People with action items: jr[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]