16:58:22 RRSAgent has joined #text 16:58:22 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/04/03-text-irc 16:58:37 Team_(text)16:58Z has now started 16:58:44 +??P0 16:59:00 chair: judy 16:59:01 JF has joined #text 16:59:42 +John_Foliot 17:00:05 +Judy 17:00:12 +David_MacDonald 17:01:21 +??P5 17:01:48 David has joined #text 17:01:54 zakim, ??P0 is Janina 17:01:54 +Janina; got it 17:01:56 zakim, ??P0 is Janina 17:01:56 I already had ??P0 as Janina, janina 17:02:16 zakim, ??P5 is Leif 17:02:16 +Leif; got it 17:02:28 agenda+ additional coordination update on several text-alternatives change proposals, and other pending issues 17:02:28 agenda+ issue 204: (a) response on aria 1.1 timeline in relation to html5, and (b) specific 204 response clarification needed 17:02:28 agenda+ issue 30: expected next longdesc steps 17:02:28 agenda+ checking status of other issues pending longdesc resolution: issue 203, possibly 202 17:02:28 agenda+ meta-name generator (a) next CP steps; (b) core argument; (c) discussing bugs 17:02:29 agenda+ HTML5 in-spec alt guidance bugs (a) gathering, explaining, rechecking whole doc; (b) getting resolution 17:02:31 agenda+ alt texts in HTML5 spec itself: (a) need checking 17:02:34 agenda+ confirm status up to date at http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Accessibility_Change_Proposal_Status 17:02:35 agenda+ other business? 17:02:37 agenda+ confirm next meeting; identify next scribe; adjourn 17:03:07 zakim, code? 17:03:07 the conference code is 2119 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), Joshue108 17:03:19 LeifHSilli has joined #text 17:03:32 scribe: JF 17:03:44 zakim, take up item 1 17:03:44 agendum 1. "additional coordination update on several text-alternatives change proposals, and other pending issues" taken up [from Judy] 17:04:37 +??P6 17:04:49 Joshue108 has joined #text 17:06:08 zakim, ??P6 is Joshue108 17:06:08 +Joshue108; got it 17:07:04 zakim, who's here? 17:07:04 On the phone I see Janina, John_Foliot, Judy, David_MacDonald, Leif, Joshue108 17:07:06 On IRC I see Joshue108, LeifHSilli, David, JF, RRSAgent, janina, Zakim, Judy 17:07:47 laura has joined #text 17:08:21 Janina: have determined a consensus with Objections of latest resolution 17:09:03 2 long-standing objections that were expected, and one comment about use of word "confirm" 17:09:10 +Laura_Carlson 17:09:32 word-smithing issue rather than substantive issues 17:09:50 Hi Josh 17:10:01 Judy: that was more related to Item 2 17:10:09 zakim, take up item 2 17:10:09 agendum 2. "issue 204: (a) response on aria 1.1 timeline in relation to html5, and (b) specific 204 response clarification needed" taken up [from Judy] 17:10:34 Judy: we had pressed the Chairs on what to do to move along issue 30 17:10:56 clarification on timing issue was critical to Chairs 17:11:22 thus janina's processing of the resolution (for Issue 204 - ARIA 1.1 timing) 17:12:40 Judy: with regard to Issue 204 17:13:07 we believed that what we need is a no change CP 17:13:21 but it seems that the HTML5 spec and the ARIA spec are out of alignment 17:13:33 so there is a requirement to re-sync of the 2 specs 17:14:10 Janina: Sam pointed out a section 5.1.2 (impact of @hidden in HTML5) that was out os sync 17:14:45 we are still working on these sections, so this is *hopefully* going to be an easy [sic] process 17:15:36 Janina: hope to get a sense from other groups meeting this week (UAAG, PF, etc.) 17:15:56 scribe: 17:16:02 Scribe: David 17:16:39 JF: The issue around this is that it all has to do with the way the a11y API is processing stuff thats not on screen. If we move stuff into a
offscreen, that can be processed as flat text. 17:17:06 JF: So if this is off screen, and flat as such you may not get the structural stuff, so we recommend that you don't do it. 17:17:17 scribe: Josh 17:17:19 jf has to do with the way accessibility api handles off screen...if we move to off screen... div... but it flattens... can use aria describedby to point offscreenbut it is flattened 17:17:54 JF: Can you rephrase that Janina? 17:18:18 JS What I hear is that relating to 204 doesn't talk about various aria described techs not working. 17:18:30 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/204 17:18:31 JF: If you look at that issue.. URL coming now 17:18:42 JF: Reads issue.. 17:18:56 JF: So I'm frustrated that they don't know what they are asking... 17:19:15 JF: I'm explaining the issue, lots of hidden content that you cant reference. 17:19:34 JS: Ok, but our responses on 204 need to focus on aria-hidden etc. 17:19:37 +q 17:19:51 JF: Is this aria-hidden or @hidden? 17:20:13 JS: aria-hidden, this relates to an expemption for aria in 204 17:20:49 scribe: David 17:20:58 scribe: David 17:20:59 -Leif 17:21:11 zakim, mute me 17:21:11 Joshue108 should now be muted 17:21:35 +[IPcaller] 17:21:39 jf the issue with 204 is it says that as an h2 on the page, aria-hidden... aria is out of scope... for html group 17:21:55 -[IPcaller] 17:22:03 John's CP: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ARIA_Can_Only_Refer_To_Hidden_Content_With_Specific_Restrictions 17:22:14 janina: same is looking for html to say something different from what aria says... that's it... nothing more 17:22:27 s/same/Sam 17:22:41 +??P5 17:23:10 zakim, unmute me 17:23:10 Joshue108 should no longer be muted 17:23:24 jf: i understand that 204 rerers to aria described by offscreen... no distinction... both @hidden, aria-hidden supposed to map to the same accessibility api.. 17:24:15 q+ 17:24:25 ack josh 17:24:31 q+ 17:24:46 josh... as WCAG-PF ARIa techniques group... we talked about techniques relating to this... for WCAG technique... could john and laura put something together, because you are familiar what you want... we don't know as well what you want... 17:25:51 josh... maybe we're over reaching a bit... originally longdesc... just for blind, now it's extanding, risk being poorly helping everybody 17:26:50 judy: important question.. right now would not spend a lot of effort on details of techniques... need to get it right in the spec first before elaborating on it. applies to 204 and meta etc.. 17:26:52 +1 to Judy 17:27:30 Scribe: JF 17:28:04 q+ 17:30:28 +q 17:30:43 agenda? 17:34:12 Janina: We need to stick to simple things to say 17:34:37 Issue 204 is a distraction, but needs to be answered 17:34:47 David, I think this is described in our minutes from last Tuesday's call 17:34:57 Judy: JF and Janina to take Issue 204 off list for further discussion 17:35:21 may need to find an author to write that, to deal with the process issue 17:36:18 Judy: to a comment from Josh - if people have techniques ideas for HTML5/WCAG please send contributions to that group 17:36:26 zakim, take up item 1 17:36:26 agendum 1. "additional coordination update on several text-alternatives change proposals, and other pending issues" taken up [from Judy] 17:36:47 Please send tech ideas etc to the html-techs-tf list and/or ping me 17:36:55 zakim, mute me 17:36:55 Joshue108 should now be muted 17:37:08 Judy: coordination meetings with 2 of the Chairs (1 on vacation), to discuss when things got confusing (re: Process) 17:37:24 met for the past 2 weeks on Mondays (1 hour) 17:37:46 looking at sequence of issues in depth, including @longdesc and the Issue 204 survey 17:38:03 also meta name generator, and how @alt text is dealt with 17:38:13 then 17:38:45 outcomes are very specific actions (clarifications, CP's etc.) so that they (the chairs) can process their work queue 17:39:26 this may seem counter intuitive at times, but helps get clarity 17:39:39 zakim, close item 1 17:39:39 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, JF 17:39:47 Q? 17:39:52 -q 17:39:59 ack ja 17:40:01 ack ju 17:40:10 zakim, close Item 1 17:40:10 agendum 1, additional coordination update on several text-alternatives change proposals, and other pending issues, closed 17:40:12 I see 9 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 17:40:12 2. issue 204: (a) response on aria 1.1 timeline in relation to html5, and (b) specific 204 response clarification needed [from Judy] 17:40:25 zakim, close item 2 17:40:25 agendum 2, issue 204: (a) response on aria 1.1 timeline in relation to html5, and (b) specific 204 response clarification needed, closed 17:40:27 I see 8 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 17:40:27 3. issue 30: expected next longdesc steps [from Judy] 17:40:34 zakim, take up item 3 17:40:34 agendum 3. "issue 30: expected next longdesc steps" taken up [from Judy] 17:40:53 Judy: due to Issue 204, it must be closed before we can take up Issue 30 17:41:18 so next step time-wise is to address 204 as simply as possible, after which Issue 30 will be taken up 17:41:25 so request is to "hang on" 17:41:47 JF: any indication of a date at all? 17:41:54 Judy: is directly tied to Issue 204 17:42:03 th eonly way out is through... 17:42:29 s/th eonly/the only 17:42:43 zakim, close item 3 17:42:43 agendum 3, issue 30: expected next longdesc steps, closed 17:42:44 I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 17:42:44 4. checking status of other issues pending longdesc resolution: issue 203, possibly 202 [from Judy] 17:42:49 zakim, take up item 4 17:42:49 agendum 4. "checking status of other issues pending longdesc resolution: issue 203, possibly 202" taken up [from Judy] 17:43:09 q+ to ask whether we have a non-ARIA alternative for 203? 17:43:12 Judy: Issue 203 - this is a quick thing (I think) which was missed Monday 17:43:56 zakim, who's on the phone? 17:43:56 On the phone I see Janina, John_Foliot, Judy, David_MacDonald, Joshue108 (muted), Laura_Carlson, ??P5 17:44:12 zakim, ??P5 is Leif 17:44:12 +Leif; got it 17:46:44 but it close(d) midnight Monday 17:47:41 scribe: David 17:48:37 jb: process wise.. we haven't broached idea of dependency delay but is worth talking about (dependent on Issue 30) 17:50:47 jf: can we move forward without an aria solution.... need an accessible name to the video ... traditional was the alt but can't put that on video... but aria provides short description... need a long text image for the poster... would look like described at 17:51:54 jf: dsome want to put transcript and desciption of the poster together... no native solution in html5... we can do aria label, labeled by... long term onscreen could use described by 17:52:45 q+ 17:53:00 ack janina 17:53:00 janina, you wanted to ask whether we have a non-ARIA alternative for 203? 17:53:04 janina: if we get longdesc back , we couldn't put 2 longdewc on the same element there fore need another attribute 17:53:07 ack ju 17:53:19 jb: needs to depend on longdesc 17:54:15 jb: i couldn't give details on 203 because of dependencies, chairs did not accept that... 17:54:42 s/jb/jf 17:54:45 s/depend on longdesc/depend on longdesc for now, and then queue this up for aria 1.1 for more evolved version/ 17:55:09 I have to drop off the call. Bye. 17:55:21 -Laura_Carlson 17:55:25 s/longdewc/longdesc 17:55:49 scribe: JF 17:55:52 I also have to drop off, good call. Bye. 17:55:55 jb: let's follow this up offline... we'll raise the issue of dependency delay 17:56:02 -Joshue108 17:56:10 zakim, close Item 4 17:56:10 agendum 4, checking status of other issues pending longdesc resolution: issue 203, possibly 202, closed 17:56:12 I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 17:56:12 5. meta-name generator (a) next CP steps; (b) core argument; (c) discussing bugs [from Judy] 17:56:23 zakim, take up item 5 17:56:23 agendum 5. "meta-name generator (a) next CP steps; (b) core argument; (c) discussing bugs" taken up [from Judy] 17:56:57 Judy: a) meta name generator - want to thank Laura for setting up a wiki for working on that issue 17:57:18 have a bunch of details in "my head" which will be added by this time next week 17:57:42 there were comments w.r.t. weighting of arguments, were as others wer flat wrong 17:58:00 so a new CP will focus on core argument, and focus on the larger issue 17:58:13 some of the assertions of the original CP are unverified themselves 17:58:49 so we need to assert that despite what others might think, you *can* add @alt text inside of a CMS, and the need for sensible @alt text has never gone away 18:00:31 Judy: hope to review 2 open bugs, to see if 1 of the bugs might derail or cause damage 18:00:34 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16572 18:00:41 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16126 18:00:44 better to address now rather than later 18:01:14 Leif: think that both are essentially the same, however the first is/was filed against the validator 18:01:46 the idea is that the validator should be able to notify the author, despite the metagenerator string, alt text is not checked 18:01:49 q+ 18:02:41 Judy: on the validator bug, if the problem is that it should be addressed in the valdiator warning that @alt text was not checked, isn't that making an excuse? 18:03:01 if ALT isn't there, it sholdn't conform 18:03:05 +Q 18:03:14 ack Judy 18:03:23 David: it would be totally against WCAG 2 18:03:37 can't see how we can endorse something like that 18:03:59 we represent people with disabilities, and this is counter to their needs 18:04:25 Leif: HTML5 already says that if there is a metagenerator, and if alt is not used correctly, then the document is not conforming 18:05:10 The problem is not that the doc isn't non-conforming, it is that the Validator is not issuing a failure notice 18:05:44 David" we want to make it as "Painful" as possible when authors don't provide alt text 18:05:55 Leif: not sure difference between warning and error 18:06:19 what I am proposing is that the validator is weak - it doesn't impact on anything 18:06:32 Judy: the metagenerator shouldn't affect the error message 18:06:37 scribe: David 18:07:26 agenda? 18:08:21 jf: the problem is... errors are more substantive than warning... errors are a STOP... warnings are not as strong... a validator is a user agent...it's living a pass... theyshould get validator fixed 18:08:32 Judy: I think I better understand where Leif's comments are coming from 18:08:42 would like to look at the second bug 18:08:46 jb: appreciate that there is a validator tie in... let's look at the next bug... 18:08:56 s/jb/jf 18:09:17 scribe: JF 18:09:50 Second bug sounds like a complete excuse to the author 18:11:04 Leif: if the editor inserts a generator string, then the validator must indicate that @alt conformance was not checked 18:11:24 I don't completely agree with Judy's perspective 18:11:56 David: want to refocus on why we exist as a group, to make the web more accessible 18:12:23 others can argue against accessibility, we want to make sure that conformance checkers make things accessible 18:12:42 if a validator skips a chunk of code, webmasters will not go check 18:12:55 it is unhelpful to creating a good culture 18:14:28 q+ 18:14:46 ack JF 18:15:08 Judy: if we are attempting to fix the core issue, why present "fallback" ideas? 18:15:56 meta name generator shouldn't stop a conformance checker, and so suggesting that if it does, it should warn the author presumes that a conformance checker might not be checking for @alt 18:16:06 which is what is broken 18:16:36 Leif: do you plan to say that if a Validator does not warn the author then nothing be said? 18:17:20 Judy: we could provide advice on what the Validator messages would be appropriate 18:18:45 David: we seem to be arguing against ourselves with these 2 bugs 18:21:14 Leif: this is a compromise proposal if we don't succeed 18:21:23 Judy: we cannot accept for a compromise here 18:21:38 this is the needs of specific users 18:23:19 laura has joined #text 18:24:26 I'm sorry, I need to go now 18:24:54 David: concern that we are having a discordant voice here 18:25:06 -Janina 18:25:12 Leif: I will need to reflect on this, I did not realize it was such a problem 18:31:37 zakim, close item 5 18:31:37 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, JF 18:31:43 Q? 18:31:47 ack j 18:31:54 agenda? 18:31:54 zakim, close item 5 18:32:04 agendum 5, meta-name generator (a) next CP steps; (b) core argument; (c) discussing bugs, closed 18:32:07 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 18:32:10 6. HTML5 in-spec alt guidance bugs (a) gathering, explaining, rechecking whole doc; (b) getting resolution [from Judy] 18:32:19 I have withdrawn my bygs. 18:32:24 Judy: thanks all, we didn't get to everything, but we are scheduled to meet next week 18:32:25 zakim, who's here? 18:32:25 On the phone I see John_Foliot, Judy, David_MacDonald, Leif 18:32:27 On IRC I see laura, LeifHSilli, David, JF, RRSAgent, janina, Zakim, Judy 18:32:46 -Leif 18:32:47 -John_Foliot 18:32:49 -Judy 18:32:53 -David_MacDonald 18:32:54 Team_(text)16:58Z has ended 18:32:54 Attendees were John_Foliot, Judy, David_MacDonald, Janina, Leif, Joshue108, Laura_Carlson, [IPcaller] 18:34:18 zakim, make minutes public 18:34:18 I don't understand 'make minutes public', JF 18:34:43 rrsagent, make minutes public 18:34:43 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', JF. Try /msg RRSAgent help 18:35:01 rrsagent, make log public 18:35:38 rrsagent, make minutes 18:35:38 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/03-text-minutes.html JF 18:37:11 meeting: a11y TF Text sub-team 18:37:24 rrsagent: Make minutes 18:37:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/03-text-minutes.html JF 18:38:12 zakim, please part 18:38:12 Zakim has left #text 18:38:40 RRSAgent, draft minutes 18:38:40 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/03-text-minutes.html JF 18:39:00 rrsagent, please part 18:39:00 I see no action items