HTML-A11Y telecon

16 Feb 2011

See also: IRC log


Judy, John_Foliot, +29374aaaa, Silvia


<janina> agenda: this

<scribe> scribe: JF

Identify Scribe

Actions Review http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open

Janina: still not have had a chance to address Action 99

Issue-152 Multitrack API http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2011Feb/0079.html

Silvia: concerned that we cannot reach any agreement in the next 2 days - worried about schedule slippage

Discussion on the various option in http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Multitrack_Media_API

> Discussion on the various option in http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Multitrack_Media_API

(Concern about minuting and whether Zakim is capturing)

Silvia: we have not heard from Microsoft nor Mozilla

and Google isn't really active in the design phase

Janina: this is an importan issue for not only a11y, but also i18n

Silvia: for high-quality content producers as well

also the WebTV WG

many others have started to discuss this issue in other forums as well

really feels wrong to propose 3 or 4 CPs and then they might be trumped later by a better solution

feels it is premature at this time

Silvia: not up to this group to come up with the technical solution given the size and overlap of this issue

<judy_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0074.html

<judy_> it is feb 23 not feb 21

- Feb 23, 2011 - every issue has at least one Change Proposal

Consequences of missing this date: issues will be closed without prejudice and marked POSTPONED; can be reconsidered during LC or for a later version of HTML.

+1 to Judy

<silvia> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jan/0198.html <- Feb 21st on this issue

we have 7 possible change proposals, we should get them entered into the Issue queue so that we meet the stated deadline

<judy_> judy sees two different timelines at play -- seeing sylvia's note above, i think that the feb 21 day should be flexible by reasoned appeal, but there is a separate deadline for feb 23, that is not changeable.

<silvia> http://www.w3.org/2010/Talks/1102-html-plh/#%284%29

<silvia> ^the timeline of the WG

judy: want to ensure that we have the best "package" by the 23 Feb.

[Discussion] concern about timelines and associate risk

Silvia: what has changed is that within the larger WG, many others have become involved in this discussion, and starting to realize the impact on their work

this is good

Janina: is it the same people, or is it new people getting involved

Silvia: a whole new group of people who have just realized how this will impact them

Judy: if we move this to another group, we take it out of the advanced implementations of HTML5, and give it to an interest group (Web and TV) that has a timeline and horizon further out than what serves a11y issues
... we should be realy convinced that the engineering to do multi-track well should be deferred to another group

<Zakim> judy_, you wanted to wonder though what the implications are for addressing accessibility needs in html5 if this is moved to web and tv

Silvia: one way to look at this is that "Option 1" is needed (and requires JavaScript)

silvia, we seem to have lost you

<silvia> ups

Silvia: believes that Option 1 is the default solution, but concerned that if we propose other solutions, and the WG needs to pick one, concerned about the relationship with other WGs

Janina: believe we might be getting somewhere

perhaps we can determine with others if this is going to be problematic to them down the road

Silvia: not the easiest to implement, but the easiest to specify

actually one of the hardest to implement and is why the browsers are pushing back on it

Silvia: if we want 1 & 7, we need to ensure the JS API is the same

MPEG DASH file is being proposed for the Manifast file

we don't want more than one codec in each manifest file

for example

Judy: can we, by next week, develop a clear plan and a timeline for reaching something so that we can get it into the spec before lastCall

Silvia: likes the idea of setting up a road-map

Chairs have already said the wiki page needs to exploded out to 8 CPs

For next week we will work up some time lines for what we think it would take to specify multiple binary track support for HTML5

Janina: suggest that we move forward with a proposal,option 1, and then wait to see what others put forward

Judy: can we also try to confirm participation of others who should be on the call next week

rrrsagent, make minutes

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2011/02/16 23:48:16 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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: s/asks for a re-paste of link please//
Found Scribe: JF
Inferring ScribeNick: JF
Default Present: Judy, John_Foliot, +29374aaaa, Silvia
Present: Judy John_Foliot +29374aaaa Silvia
Got date from IRC log name: 16 Feb 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/02/16-html-a11y-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]