See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 22 June 2012
<scribe> scribe: MaryJo
<Andi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN222012/
<Andi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/track/actions/open
<korn> Oops, seems I dropped off. Calling back...
AS: Action 14 ws not accepted by
the WCAG group. So we still need to deal with 4.1.1
... We are concerned about what gets to the AT. Whether the AT
is parsing, or the user agent is parsing and exposing something
different to the AT. Trying to head off that inconsistency.
<Pierce> +q
Al: For Web, some AT processes
pure HTML, but primarily is working on the DOM. AT's have an
easier time working with the DOM.
... This doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense in the
software world.
Pierce: We should say that the applicability is limited by the nature of software.
<Pierce> +q
<Pierce> -q
<Pierce> +q
AS: Our scope doesn't allow us to say it doesn't apply - it's in our charter. That's why we're trying to propose it as a note in WCAG. They just didn't like our wording.
Pierce: Maybe we can use the idea that the meaning is qualified only for the context where the markup is parsed. It would be a fundamental alteration to software to have this be supported.
Al: We've discussed what doesn't apply, but should concentrate on what does apply. Maybe we can just say this applies as written.
<Pierce> +q
Alex: But we still need to exclude any markup that doesn't have a negative effect on the AT's presentation of the accessibility information to the user.
<Pierce> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) and should not be construed as requiring conformance for SW that does not use or edit markup or SW that only uses markup through SW rules not normally exposed to end users.
<Pierce> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) and should not be construed as requiring conformance for SW that does not use or edit markup or SW that only uses or edits markup through SW rules not normally exposed to end users.
<korn> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) for content that is separately exposed and available to AT. It should not be construed as applying to markup used internally by software solely to encode its user interface.
<Andi> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) for content that is separately exposed and available to AT. It should not be construed as applying to markup used internally by software solely to encode its user interface and that is not exposed to AT.
<Pierce> +q
Pierce: Concerned about the term 'separately exposed' being misunderstood.
Andi: We can give an example and word it so that it is not construed as a technique.
<korn> Note: An example of markup that is separately exposed and available to AT is HTML, which can both be parsed entirely by AT through an http get request as well as commonly available as part of DOM APIs used by AT.
<Andi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN222012/results
<Pierce> +q
<korn> Note: The layout and structure of a variety of software UI frameworks are described and persisted in markup , where the markup is used internally and not available to AT. This criterion would not apply to the markup in these cases.
AS: 3.3.1 Error Identification
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN222012/results#xq2
<korn> Note: The layout and structure of a variety of software UI frameworks are described and persisted in markup , where the markup is used internally and not available to AT either directly or through a DOM. This criterion would automatically be met in such cases.
<Mike_P> +q
<Andi> Note: The layout and structure of a variety of software UI frameworks are described and persisted in markup , where the markup is used internally and not available to AT, either directly or through a DOM. In this type of software, this criterion would automatically be met.
<Andi> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) for content that is separately exposed and available to AT. It should not be construed as applying to markup used internally by software solely to encode its user interface and that is not exposed to AT.
<Andi> Note: An example of markup that is separately exposed and available to AT is HTML, which can both be parsed entirely by AT through an http get request as well as commonly available as part of DOM APIs used by AT.
<Andi> Note: The layout and structure of a variety of software UI frameworks are described and persisted in markup , where the markup is used internally and not available to AT, either directly or through a DOM. In this type of software, this criterion would automatically be met.
<korn> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) for content that is separately exposed and available to AT. It should not be construed as applying to markup used internally by software solely to encode its user interface and not exposed to AT.
<korn> Note: An example of markup that is separately exposed and available to AT is HTML, which can both be parsed entirely by AT through an http get request as well as commonly available as part of DOM APIs used by AT.
<korn> Note: The layout and structure of a variety of software UI frameworks are described and persisted in markup , where the markup is used internally and not available to AT, either directly or through a DOM. In this type of software, this criterion would automatically be met.
<Pierce> -q
<korn> So Alex: Note: An example of markup that is separately exposed and available to AT is HTML via an http get request, which can both be parsed entirely by AT as well as commonly available as part of DOM APIs used by AT.
<Pierce> +q
<Pierce> -q
<Pierce> I am ready for 3.3.1
<Zakim> David, you wanted to say "the INTENT"
<Andi> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) solely for content that is separately exposed and available to AT.
AS: Propose that the sentence about "It should not be construed as applying..." be removed.
<korn> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) solely for content that is separately exposed and available to AT. It should not be construed as applying to markup used internally by software solely to encode its user interface and not exposed to AT.
<Andi> Note: An example of markup that is separately exposed and available to AT is HTML, which can both be parsed entirely by AT through an http get request as well as commonly available as part of DOM APIs used by AT.
<Andi> Note: The layout and structure of a variety of software UI frameworks are described and persisted in markup , where the markup is used internally and not available to AT, either directly or through a DOM. In this type of software, this criterion would automatically be met.
<korn> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) specifically for content that is separately exposed and available to AT. It should not be construed as applying to markup used internally by software solely to encode its user interface and not exposed to AT.
judy: Want to make sure the use of the word 'solely' nor 'specifically' is not misconstrued.
<Andi> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) for content that is separately exposed and available to AT. Where markup languages are used to describe UI frameworks internally and are not available to AT, either directly or through a DOM, this criterion would automatically be met.
<Andi> Note: An example of markup that is separately exposed and available to AT is HTML, which can both be parsed entirely by AT through an http get request as well as commonly available as part of DOM APIs used by AT.
<korn> +1
<Pierce> +q
<Mike_P> +1
<Andi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN222012/results
RESOLUTION: Accept the wording for 4.1.1 as proposed in the meeting.
<Pierce> +q
AS: Back to discussion on 3.3.1.
<Andi> Note: The WCAG 2.0 definition of "input error" says that it is "information provided by the user that is not accepted" by the software. Some reasons for not accepting user information may be formatting errors and syntax errors.
RESOLUTION: Accept Loïc proposal for 3.3.1 as amended in the meeting.
AS: 3.3.3 Error Suggestoin
s /Suggestoin/Suggestion/
<Andi> Note: The WCAG 2.0 definition of "input error" says that it is "information provided by the user that is not accepted" by the software. Some reasons for not accepting user information may be formatting errors and syntax errors.
RESOLUTION: Accept Loïc's proposal for 3.3.3 as amended in the meeting.
AS: 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN222012/results#xq4
<Pierce> +q
Pierce: Objects to the use of 'development toolkits' in general. Some platforms you have choices and some you don't. Don't want anyone to have an out because their toolkit doesn't support it.
<Pierce> +1 on Al's comments on sustaining TEITAC
<Pierce> +q
<AWK> the platform services list from ANPRM: http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/draft-rule.htm#_Toc310327598 (502.2)
<korn> Andi - a suggested edit orthogonal to this discussion that better matches the SC: Most platforms accessibility services go beyond programmatic exposure of name and role, and programmatically setting the states, properties and values (and notification of same), and specify additional things that could or should be exposed.
Al: Wants to capture a list of
information that is available through platform services should
be exposed in addition to name, role, and value.
... One example is a software interface with a table and need
to associate headers with the cells.
PK: Table is covered by SC 1.3.1 which covers that the structure and relationships conveyed through presentation can be programmatically determined.
<Pierce> +q
MP: These things are ennumerated in M376
Pierce: Not sure if Section 508 will be ennumerating this list.
Alex: Don't want a list that is too restrictive to make sure it doesn't become outdated over time.
AS: We're behind schedule and wanted to get a draft out the week after next week. Can we send the first draft without several success criteria not having consensed text.
<korn> Most platforms accessibility services go beyond programmatic exposure of name and role, and programmatic setting the states, properties and values (and notification of same), and specify additional things that could or should be exposed.
<Pierce> Can we add row column and header
<korn> Pierce - perhaps as a note to 1.3.1 (which we have already otherwise consensed on)
Judy: There are several approaches we can take. Need to have intro and framing portion completed. Will have to send something out in July. We should discuss further next week.
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/'solely'/'solely' nor 'specifically'/ Succeeded: s/Thankis MichaeK// FAILED: s/Oops, seems I dropped off. Calling back...// Succeeded: s/Having problems accessing the Google site...// Succeeded: s/Yes it is Mike joining// Succeeded: s|s/Oops, seems I dropped off. Calling back...//|| FAILED: s|Oops, seems I dropped off. Calling back...|| Succeeded: s/s|Oops, seems I dropped off. Calling back...||// Found Scribe: MaryJo Inferring ScribeNick: MaryJo Default Present: +1.540.373.aaaa, Cooper, Al_Hoffman, David_MacDonald, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Alex_Li, Andrew_Kirkpatrick, Peter_KOrn, Pierce_Crowell, Judy, Mike_Pluke, Bruce_Bailey Present: +1.540.373.aaaa Cooper Al_Hoffman David_MacDonald Andi_Snow_Weaver Mary_Jo_Mueller Alex_Li Andrew_Kirkpatrick Peter_KOrn Pierce_Crowell Judy Mike_Pluke Bruce_Bailey Regrets: Janina_Sajka Loïc_Martínez_Normand Kiran_Kaja Shadi_Abou-Zahra Gregg_Vanderheiden Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2ict-tf/2012Jun/0081.html Found Date: 22 Jun 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-wcag2ict-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]