<David> scribe: David

<jamesn> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120319techs/

issue: Using the track element to provide captions

LGR: Considering track element language vs captions, a subtitle in the same language as video, vs, caption... as an edge case...
... Sylvia pffifer read it over no red flags

DM: concerned about confusion between subtitles and captions.

LGR: if you only provide other languages subtitles it wouldnot conform

<Loretta> This techique would go into the list under item 3 in the Understanding document, that is, Impleenting G87 using the one of the following technology-specific techniques.

JN: would G87 be a good place to talk about when Subtitles are OK...

DM: should we leave out subtitles... from description

LGR: will rewrite... not forbidding subtitles, for a talking head...

JN: BBC talks about subtitles for the deaf... (previously mentioned)

<jamesn> notes www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/guides/subtitles/

<Loretta> Adam, did you have other questions about the test procedure?

LGR: accessibility support... coming, not there yet... one of the goals of HTML5, we want to make sure that if everything is implemented... Access support affects whether there will be sufficient vs. advisory..

JN: Accessibility support a minor discussion...

LGR: Concern about accessbility of controls of the video

JN: is it a UA issue

LRG: constantly shifting accessibility support, which guidelines UA, vs. WCAG.. any controls not accessible would affect inclusion as sufficient...

LGR: HTML5 UA support changing fast... just move forward and go over them before publication.

Adam: is there a way to keep our surveys for that time

lgr: status section of theechniques good place...

jn: open issues section of technique... stuff that needs to be resolved before publication...

lgr: we should provide links to surveys...

mc: will add the section to the template to link to techniques... to the status section...

jn: need to provide a bit of text with link to describe why were linking

Landmarks techiques

<Loretta> Scribe:Loretta

<jamesn> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120319techs/results#x4000

<marcjohlic> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_ARIA_landmarks

"Using ARIA Landmarks"

Walking through the comments. David will add versions to user agents, fix somequoting problems in examples.

Looking at James' suggestion to split this into 2 techniques, for 1.3.1 and 2.4.1.

Adam: we would need to see how keyboard support is implemented, to decide whether 2.4.1 is satisfied.

David: splitting the techniques will have a lot of redundancy.

LGR: Our conversations will be less confused if we split into 2 techniques.

David: have we done this before?

Loretta: for headings, but we also received pushback from people who thought it was confusing.

H69 is for 2.4.1 and H4? was for 1.3.1

David: will rework based on these comments.
... blog discussions are finding the WCAG work confusing, propose setting up other centers of expertise.

<marcjohlic> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#kbd_layout

MJ: also include generic regions?

David: how do we feel about this?

Adam: in techniques, we usually relate to a particular element rather than a set of them.

Loretta: you can mix landmarks and headings.

David: does the use of landmarks require that no content be orphaned?

<jamesn> pinging MichaelC

MJ: probably shouldn't go into the test procedure that all content is contained within a region.

David: what was the intent?

JN: there will be cases where some things aren't in a landmark. e.g. maybe your page with landmarks is included in a page without landmarks
... also could have combinations of implicit and explicit landmarks.
... there may be some sections that don't need keyboard access via a landmark.

David: sounds like best practice rather than requirement.

JN: nothing in the spec requires that everything be covered by a landmark.

Loretta: suggest making technique title more specific, 'Using ARIA landmarks to ...'

Using ARIA landmarks to identify regions of a page

<David> Using ARIA landmarks to identify the regions of a page.

Adam: will be postpone the discussion of plugins and user agent support.

David: we'll go forward, assuming UA support, and revisit the question at publication time.

JN: we have a long way to go and things may have changed by the time we publish

Loretta: We should identify what UA support we are expecting.

JN: I looked at David's FF extension. it is cool.

Daivd: can I install it today?

JN: yes. It takes some work, but I'll submit some changes to it.
... check the github page

Loretta: Adam's question is about how much user agent support is needed.

<David> how bout now

David: our historical requirement was if some ua support was available and free, that was sufficient.

Loretta: yes, we had a very low bar for techniques, but then need to provide lots of information to authors about how to decide whether it works in their target environment.

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)

Succeeded: s/:GR/LGR/
Succeeded: s/pride/provide/
Succeeded: s/for techniques/to link to techniques/
Found Scribe: David
Inferring ScribeNick: David
Found Scribe: Loretta
Inferring ScribeNick: Loretta
Scribes: David, Loretta
ScribeNicks: David, Loretta
Default Present: James_Nurthen, Loretta, Adam, David_MacDonald, Marc_Johlic, adam_solomon, Cooper, Cooper.a
Present: James_Nurthen Loretta Adam David_MacDonald Marc_Johlic adam_solomon Cooper Cooper.a
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2012JanMar/0100.html
Got date from IRC log name: 19 Mar 2012
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/03/19-html-techs-tf-minutes.html
People with action items: 

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