See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 05 January 2012
<MikeSmith> hmm
<scribe> scribe: janina
ms: Good starting point might be recap from Bug Triage
cs: Also have an agendum--Have sent in bug update
<MikeSmith> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Jan/0002.html
mc: Looked at needsinfo bugs,
still need relevant info
... Categorized the won'tfix bugs (approx 80) into 12
categories
... Each category contains related bugs
<MikeSmith> detailed bugs summary from Cynthia on Dec 23
mc: Some issues are closed,
wondering whether to reopen? or create new issue?
... Currently believe there might be 8 to 10 issues to
escalate
rs: Concern about how decisions reached can be vacated under WG process
js: Think it's worth discussing, but orthagonal to current discussion
ms: We were discussing existing, unescalated bugs, whether we need to escalate in order to make January 15 deadline
cs: Any we can review now?
mc: No.
js: Are we OK on work load?
mc: Yes on the won'tfix set that
we categorized
... Unsure about the needsinfo
... Approx 30-40 needsinfo ones
... Also some marked fixed which we haven't verified, and may
not be able to verify, or verify that we agree with the fix
<MichaelC> Bugs as needsinfo
<MichaelC> Bugs marked won't fix
ms: Was asking about the categorizations ...
<MichaelC> Bugs marked as fixed
<MichaelC> Potential issues to escalate:
<MichaelC> Text alternatives
<MichaelC> ARIA mapping
<MichaelC> Canvas
<MichaelC> Conformance
<MichaelC> Media
<MichaelC> Keyboard Access
<MichaelC> Tooltip vs title
<MichaelC> Contenteditable
<MichaelC> Drag and Drop
<MichaelC> ... and some misc ones that might be new issues
ms: I posted a comment re drag
and drop, and want to note that I haven't seen any new info
relating to keyboard issues on it.
... We went around on this a year ago
... Gez re-reviewed following the editor's changes approx
November 2010, and found no remaining issues
... Looking through everything since, I see nothing new to
identify problem
jf: I think Everett filed comments and bugs around this recently
mc: I think there were some drag
and drop bugs we verified in December.
... We're triagging for a closer look
ms: Important to identify what
specific issues are if we go forward with a new dnd bug
... Possible to get Gez on this briefly?
mc: Both Gez and Everett participate in Bug Triage, Everett more
ms: Seems we're OK on bugs
rs: So, going back to the issue
I've raised
... Concerned W3C doesn't have control of this spec, because
lacking process
sf: Some of the needsinfo have to
do with adding role attrib
... Seems these should be a priority
mc: won'tfix we'll be covering on Tuesday, needsinfo we've assigned
<Stevef> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11891
mc: Our expectation is to create
tracker items for escalated issues, then associated parts of
particular bugs to those
... So, the TF will be following the tracker issues
... So, for ARIA, perhaps something like "Make sure ARIA is
completely mapped"
sf: Agree, but also have the concern that we follow process and not be at risk for changes that come out of the blue
rs: Because if our time and resolutions are at risk, we're wasting our time here
cs: Leonie sent me needsinfo, and I also looked at any I had previously touched
<MichaelC> Spec review wiki page
<cyns> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Spec_Review/All
<cyns> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13512
cs: First one I thought needed discussion
mc: We triagged this as a feature request
cs: Pretty significant issue for
web apps, don't see it as a feature request, think it's
underspecified
... If moving to another spec, that's fine
... AT's have hacked around this, but a resolution would be
better
mc: Maybe that we could agree this should be worked on in Web Apps
cs: Don't feel qualified to say that
ms: Willing to have an opinion, but don't know we have a consensus
cs: Who does Anna speak for on this?
ms: Nobody speaks for the wg in
bugzilla
... So, as an editorial assistant, he speaks on behalf of the
editor on this
cs: Is there wg consensus on this?
js: Should we ask for wg consensus on this?
ms: As of now this is outside of html
mc: So our interest may be to insure there's a normative ref to DOM in the html specs
cs: OK. Will move bug to Web
Apps
... OK, next ... 13659
<cyns> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13659
cs: duplicate of 13599
... not really a11y, inclined to drop from our radar
... 13662
... I suggest we verify
[agreement]
cs: 13656
<cyns> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13656
cs: Anyone have examples?
... Help appreciated on this
ms: Suggest an email on list for this one
mc: Also possibly John Gunderson
cs: 13528
... I verify
[agreement]
cs: 13531
<cyns> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13531
cs: there are examples in the
spec that aren't best practice, though editor doesn't
agree
... It's allowed, but not the best example
sf: Did a study of this recently, and there are issues
<Stevef> http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/form-labels.html
ms: Meta question here is is this
something to escalate to an issue?
... Perhaps to update the bug with comments
sf: Basically, this doesn't work with crome and safari
js: What about the invalids?
mc: I see about 15, and I'll make sure triage looks at them
ms: Suggest Triage should also
look at Cynthia's remaining items, about 7 more bugs
... So let's talk about the issue Rich raised
... Agree with Janina that this isn't specifically a TF issue,
but something that should be discussed in the WG
... My concern is whether the chairs even have control over the
W3C spec
... Well, they do about the WG process
... Clearly, the HTML-WG is in many ways different from other
W3C
... The chairs are making decisions, and have made a decision
in this case
rs: Based on their assessment
that browsers would not implement, but we're not in CR
... It's premature to use that as a yardstick
ms: PLH also involved in the discussion on this as was I
RS: I'm not wed to the API we
created, ncesarrily
... people are using canvas to do text
... seems their decision is based on issues that have
persisted, and we have no a11y support or the ability,
ms: reminds that our process is
edit and then discuss
... pointing out the separate canvas spec
rs: but the changes are not tracking
<Stevef> HTML Canvas 2D Context Extensions
<Stevef> http://dev.w3.org/html5/canvas-extensions/Overview.html
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Default Present: Janina_Sajka, Michael_Cooper, Mike, Rich, John_Foliot, Steve_Faulkner, Cynthia_Shelly Present: Janina_Sajka Michael_Cooper Mike Rich John_Foliot Steve_Faulkner Cynthia_Shelly Regrets: Laura_Carlson Marco_Ranon Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Jan/0012.html Found Date: 05 Jan 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/01/05-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]