See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 10 May 2012
<MikeSmith> trackbot, start
<trackbot> Sorry, MikeSmith, I don't understand 'trackbot, start'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
<MikeSmith> trackbot, start meeting
<trackbot> Meeting: HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 10 May 2012
<janina> scribe: janina
Thanks, John!
<JF> scribe: JF
Janina: status update - Text subteam review the new changes and agree that they ere good changes
PF reviewed yeteday and voted a resolution to support
have put out an advanced 48 hour consensus call with a deadline of Friday midnight Boston
have one objection to date from Ben H-L reiterating his concerns
Laura, after initial concerns, seems to feel that these are improvements - she had concerns over V2 and V3 tracking
based on progress on other issues, the chairs asked if we could try for amicable resolution of Issue 204 at the F2F last week
it became obvious to remove restrictions on future development was a no-brainer, and the new V3 now has stronger conformance language, which was a win in our eyes as well
JF: any other changes were grammatical in nature
MS: what we should try for today is to seek a TF resolution today, are we ready to do so now?
JS: unless there are further questions or comments
MS: will make the proposal now
<janina> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Correct_Hidden_Attribute_Section_v3
<MikeSmith> proposed RESOLUTION: TF supports the CP at http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Correct_Hidden_Attribute_Section_v3 as written
+1
<janina> +1
MS: are there any objections to this?
<MikeSmith> anybody on IRC who objects to that resolution?
<MikeSmith> RESOLUTION: TF supports the CP at http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Correct_Hidden_Attribute_Section_v3 as written
<janina> RESOLUTION: TF supports the CP at http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Correct_Hidden_Attribute_Section_v3 as written
MS: not seeing any objections
RESOLUTION: TF supports the CP at http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Correct_Hidden_Attribute_Section_v3 as written
<janina> scribe: janina
RESOLUTION: TF supports the CP at http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Correct_Hidden_Attribute_Section_v3 as written
<Stevef> +1
<JF> JS: thankful for the great discussion last week, this was a great consensus building exercise
<JF> scribe: JF
JS: have been meaning to surface this for some time
would like to move the user requirements from a Draft note
thought it might be useful to annotate this in the HTML5 spec to link technologies to techniques (etc.)
Silvia offered to do this and felt it would be easy to do
so, do we want to take that document in that direction?
PF thought this was a good idea on their call yesterday
should we pursue?
(JF says +1)
SF: Is this annotating the HTML5 spec or the User Reqs document?
JS: the user reqs doc
MS: question seems does anyone
thing this is a good idea. If Silvia has offered to do this,
and it has no direct changes to HTML5 spec, then are there
objections?
... seems like a useful bit of work
... guessing that Silvia wanted to ensure that others saw the
value, and agreed before she undertook the effort
JF: +1 for Silvia improving things - with thanks
<Stevef> +1 for Silvia improving things - with thanks
JS: I will discuss this with Silvia - worth noting that the media team are re-convening on short notice - actually meeting later today
JS: looking to come to grips with Issue 194 - but will discuss this with Silvia then
<janina> scribe: janina
Thanks, John!
ms: Good in person participation
from the TF at the F2F
... Good canvas discussion and agreement
... With Ted and Frank -- melding their two proposals
rs: I'm starting on that
... Elipses included in Ted's proposal, but perhaps for
html.next
judy: Should we ask Paul's help pinging for Frank's active participation here as we're on a tight timeframe?
paul: If Rich sends a note cc'ing me, I'll make sure there's a response.
rs: Pointing out that I'm on holliday late next week and want to get as much of this done before that as possible
<MikeSmith> minutes from HTML WG 03 May 2012 f2f meeting
paul: Just so everyone knows, Microsoft is currently trying to get Windows 8 out the door, and this takes people's attention
rich: Just want to make sure that we all agree that elipses
<Judy> judy: Rich cc me too, on your response request
rich is not to be included at this time
janina: apologizing that I can't spell!
paul: pointing out no agreement yet to add the shape for hit testing
rich: correct
paul: so need to make this more visible
cyns: please also cc me
paul: at some point we need this visible--to the list
rich: believe we resolve first with ted and frank
<Stevef> email with questions sent last week to HTML WG - no response http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012May/0008.html
sf: question of focus
rich: need to see how, don't have
the answer yet
... we also need a way to map lightweight objects to a11y apis
-- discuss that in the uaig
... it's all achievable, but will take some time
ms: text?
judy: in addition to 204 above we
talked about alt--alts on images in the spec, and buggy alt
guidance in the spec
... we're evolving our documentation of these
... also issue-31c meta generator exemption
... now a comprehensive reopen request cp forwarded to chairs
last week
... we're expecting feedback or a reopen from the h5ccs
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to update on media sub-team
jf: Noting that I194 has a foot
in each camp, want to add good discussion on i194 at the
F2F
... And, it's the basis of us resuming media telecons
... Silvia is working up another proposal, a new h5 element
transcript
... Meanwhile, I'm under the gun to put out a i194 proposal by
Friday
paul: where's the dialog on this?
jf: On the TF list
<JF> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposal/Issue194_SP
janina: our concern is that i194 not expire in the wg while direct discussion on approaches is active
jf: exactly, we need some lattitude from the chairs
paul: I see Silvia's CP pointer
... looking at the thread
... can you summarize where we are?
jf: at the f2f we agreed i would
rewrite my cp to propose using track, and ted to propose
idref
... now we have this additional approach from silvia
janina: I'm concerned that we
really should consider these proposals from the perspective of
user experience
... a single way to get whichever alternate media
paul: noting that this is all post the due date for cps
sf: wanted an update on hgroup?
paul: reviewed all 5 proposals and will be sending reviews shortly
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/of the User/or the User/ Succeeded: s/docuemtn/document/ Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Found Scribe: JF Inferring ScribeNick: JF Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Found Scribe: JF Inferring ScribeNick: JF Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Scribes: janina, JF ScribeNicks: janina, JF WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: JS Judy MichaelC MikeSmith SF Stevef cyns davidb html-a11y inserted janina jf joined left ms paul paulc rich richardschwerdtfe rs tm trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012May/0054.html WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 10 May 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/05/10-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]