IRC log of au on 2013-02-04

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:57:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #au
19:57:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:57:36 [Jan]
Zakim, this will be AUWG
19:57:36 [Zakim]
ok, Jan; I see WAI_AUWG()3:00PM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
19:57:44 [Jan]
Meeting: WAI AU
19:58:10 [Jan]
19:58:17 [Jan]
Chair: Jutta Treviranus
19:58:57 [Jan]
Regrets: Alex L., Sueann N.
20:01:11 [Jan]
zakim, code?
20:01:11 [Zakim]
the conference code is 2894 (tel:+1.617.761.6200, Jan
20:01:13 [Zakim]
WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has now started
20:01:20 [Zakim]
20:01:24 [Zakim]
20:01:58 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jutta
20:01:58 [Zakim]
+Jutta; got it
20:02:15 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller.a] is really Jan
20:02:15 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
20:04:25 [Zakim]
20:05:39 [Greg_Pisocky]
Greg_Pisocky has joined #au
20:07:53 [Jutta]
Jutta has joined #au
20:16:39 [Zakim]
20:16:40 [Jan]
Topic: New survey results
20:16:41 [Jan]
20:17:53 [Jan]
Topic: A.3.1.4 Keyboard Access
20:17:55 [Jan]
20:21:11 [Jan]
20:21:44 [Jan]
1. Web Content Accessibility Test Procedure (Level A, AA, AAA):
20:21:45 [Jan]
Many ATAG 2.0 success criteria refer to meeting WCAG 2.0 success criteria. In order to test these success criteria, you will need a Web Content Accessibility Testing Procedure that is: (a) specific to the "included" web content technology (e.g. HTML, CSS, SVG, etc.) produced by the authoring tool and (b) designed to test WCAG 2.0 conformance to at least the target level (e.g., Level AA)....
20:21:46 [Jan]
...Such a test procedure may include:
20:21:48 [Jan]
Manual tests: These are the most complete tests and should follow How to Meet WCAG 2.0. Even if semi-automated or fully automated tests are available to test certain WCAG 2.0 success criteria, manual tests may be required to test others.
20:21:50 [Jan]
Semi-automated or fully automated accessibility checkers: Some testers choose to use semi-automated or fully automated web content accessibility checkers as part of this procedure. Free automated tools that accept URIs or pasted HTML code include:
20:21:51 [Jan]
WebAIM Wave
20:21:53 [Jan]
20:21:54 [Jan]
20:21:56 [Jan]
Web content markup examination tools: These tools (e.g. Firebug) can help testers discover and visualize the markup that gave rise to a particular onscreen rendering.
20:21:57 [Jan]
Keyboard navigation test: Testing whether the web content is fully operable with a keyboard interface.
20:21:59 [Jan]
Screen reader test: Testing the accessibility of the user interface with a screen reader such as NVDA (Windows), Jaws (Windows), Orca (GNOME), or VoiceOver (Mac OSX, iOS).
20:25:29 [Jan]
Topic: A.3.1.4 Keyboard Access
20:25:36 [Jan]
20:28:44 [Jan]
alex's comment: If the SC only ask for keyboard to work, then the test should not test for visible focus. WCAG 2.0 has SC 2.4.7 for focus visibility. If we need to solve the same problem, then we need an SC for that. We cannot add extraneous test per 4.2 for A.3.1.4 above just to pluck a hole in ATAG. That goes the same for A.3.1.1. Step 4.2 is not acceptable.
20:29:33 [Jan]
GP: Feel that they are samwe
20:29:46 [Jan]
TB: Agree that they are combined
20:30:02 [Jan]
CE: Not saying its separate, just saying SC has to mention it
20:30:45 [Jan]
JR: OK with it being separate and level A
20:31:12 [Jan]
WCAG2 says 2.4.7 Focus Visible: Any keyboard operable user interface has a mode of operation where the keyboard focus indicator is visible. (Level AA)
20:31:57 [Jan]
JT: OK that seems fairly clear
20:32:16 [Jan]
JR: in wcag it is separate and AA
20:32:56 [Jan]
JR: I think it needs to be an A
20:33:45 [Jan]
JT: Any objections to adding an SC like this at level A?
20:34:14 [Jan]
GP: OK with this
20:34:23 [Jan]
TB: Isn't this a major change?
20:34:55 [Jan]
JT: Should not be a major change since the group had intended it.
20:35:32 [Zakim]
20:35:49 [Greg_Pisocky]
This is Greg I can type
20:36:37 [Greg_Pisocky]
General agreement to add a success criteria ;that explicitly addresses visible focus
20:36:47 [Greg_Pisocky]
20:43:05 [Greg_Pisocky]
AI Greg to develop alternative language for 3.1.5
20:44:04 [Greg_Pisocky]
Make distinction for system wide alternative commands
20:44:45 [Greg_Pisocky]
Can't change Ctrl P but can define an alternative sequence that does the same. One handed typist for example.
20:45:06 [Zakim]
20:46:06 [Greg_Pisocky]
3.2.1 Roberto's comments and Jan's modifications
20:46:35 [Greg_Pisocky]
No objections to Jan's addition
20:47:26 [Greg_Pisocky]
3.2.2 Jan's modification accepted
20:47:50 [Greg_Pisocky]
A.3.2.3 More discussion
20:52:51 [Greg_Pisocky]
3.2.3 Issue regarding separation of Content from Control of the Action
20:54:33 [Greg_Pisocky]
GP Examples are fine but they may not be sufficient
20:55:41 [Greg_Pisocky]
Jutta proposes adding to the example (animatiion or script used as a user interface component)
20:56:46 [Greg_Pisocky]
Jutta recommends see pheg(?)
20:57:35 [Greg_Pisocky]
AI - Better examples with clarification for 3.2.3 to be provided
20:57:43 [Greg_Pisocky]
20:58:18 [Greg_Pisocky]
Jan has provided language to address Alex's objections at least partially
20:59:28 [Greg_Pisocky]
Consensus seems to be that Jan's modification address's Alex's concern
21:00:04 [Greg_Pisocky]
Next week, will proceed with the remainder. Bridge issues also will be investigated.
21:00:23 [Zakim]
21:00:45 [Zakim]
21:00:46 [Zakim]
WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has ended
21:00:46 [Zakim]
Attendees were Jutta, Jan, Greg, Tim_Boland
21:02:38 [Jutta]
RRSAgent, make minutes
21:02:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Jutta
21:02:55 [Jutta]
RRSAgent, set logs public
21:03:07 [Jutta]
Zakim, bye
21:03:07 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #au
21:03:18 [Jutta]
RRSAgent, bye
21:03:18 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items