See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 18 April 2013
<chaals> scribe: Chaals
<MarkS> scribe: Mark Sadecki
<scribe> scribe: chaals
<MarkS> scribeNick: MarkS
<chaals> SF: We are waiting on Leonie for bug triage.
SF: Leonie is currently switching jobs and is not a formal member of TF so she is currently experiencing some difficulty participating
<Steve> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2013Apr/0055.html
SF: Longdesc resolutions
chaals: resolve technical bug, asked for feedback. problem seems to be solved. suggest we resolve as closed.
SF: Agreed
<chaals> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21236
<chaals> -> reflects bug
<chaals> RESOLUTION: close bug 21236
chaals: one raised by leif and one raised by WG
…leif wanted to repair broken longdesc, WG says we shouldn't
…propose to take away "shouldn't repair", more important to help authors, reject both bugs not helpful for users to make it against the rules, reject leif's bug because the detailed rules are out of scope.
…we could submit techniques to ATAG
<Steve> +1 to close bug
… propose to reject both bugs.
<chaals> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21439 blocks https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21678
JS: not recalling i18n's initial involvement
chaals: author doesn't have motivation to solve problems. user agents should be allowed to help users. if we are going to put this anywhere it should go into advice for performance checking tools. That is already in the document.
JS: agree that this is not the place to be discoursing on correct techniques for repairs.
SF: this is an error case. WG says text shouldn't be in attributes.
chaals: problem is one group wants their statement positive and strong and the other negative and strong
JF: right, its a wash, canceling out each other.
JS: spec is not the place for corrective guidance
…if we were starting from scratch today we could attempt this, but this is not the time to be trying to remove it and go purist with markup.
RESOLUTION: wonTFix bug 21439 and 21678
PC: pretty controversial but there is a general consensus that there should be a way to notify the user without giving them an error
<chaals> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21437
chaals: request to say that it is a requirement to make longdesc accessible
…WCAG already says that, go look at that.
<Steve> +1
…image alone is not an accessible format, but make a reference to WCAG to define it in this context.
RESOLUTION: close bug 21437
<chaals> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21493
<JF> +1
chaals: describe link rot issue in the spec, risk bad maintenance. General page maintenance issue, but it is a problem with a lot of other things. Propose to not fix it.
<Steve> +1
<JF> +1
<chaals> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21571
RESOLUTION: wonTFix bug 21493
chaals: about how to refer to WCAG, fairly editorial. taken some of the advice and ignored the rest and leave it with what is currently in editors draft
<Steve> +1 to close
no objection
RESOLUTION: close bug 21571
<chaals> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21501
chaals: advice for conformance checkers. This one is tricky. Would like to add a reference to how you do repair. Can't find anything. Would love it if someone could make a suggestion. ATAG Techniques?
…don't want to put all the techniques into this document.
SF: no
JF: this type of advice would come from WCAG Techniques
chaals: this is specific to what conformance checking tools do.
…best reference I can find is in ATAG
SF: what do you have in there currently for advice
chaals: none currently.
<chaals> [best reference I can find is principle B3 of ATAG techniques - assist authors in improving the accessibility of content]
<Steve> +1 to close
chaals: propose to link to ATAG techniques. Out of scope to describe all answers in this doc.
s/prpse/propose
chaals: where do you go to find out how to make your conformance tool how to do a better job.
SF: should we ask Mike Smith?
chaals: this is not about what are we going to get implemented in a given tool. ITs more about tool makers looking for advice for the behavior of their tool.
…these are not requirements, it more about how can our tool do a good job.
SF: nothing normative about. A statement about how you might accomplish it. A sentence or two.
<LJWatson> +1 to close.
chaals: reference to ATAG for now and close it?
JS: not too late to ask ATAG to do more, esp if we provide language
chaals: realize there might be a better reference, invite comment, but don't plan to do anything unless a better reference comes in. Auto-timeout at LC
JS: NExt pub date is June 11
RESOLUTION: close bug 21501
<chaals> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21679
<janina> Minimum time for paten disclosure following FPWD discussed in the FAQ at:
<janina> http://www.w3.org/2003/12/22-pp-faq.html
chaals: Richard Ishida pointed out that the name of the image described was Vitruvian Man, which was missing the point. Solution was to make the text a little clearer.
JF: right the whole point is that we're not talking about the title, but the description of the work.
<Steve> <figure><figcaption>vitruvian man</figcaption><img></figure>
chaals: now the use case says you might not find the title helpful so the description might be better
RESOLUTION: close 21679
<scribe> ACTION: chaals will close bugs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/04/18-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-177 - Will close bugs [on Charles McCathie Nevile - due 2013-04-25].
<Steve> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2013Apr/0055.html
LW: there is one more that is not on that email: what is the TF approach when bugs are filed against things the TF is responsible for, like Image Description extension
…should we assign them to the editor?
SF: that should be fine
…we should still track it
PC: why would you bother?
…would have thought that the whole idea was to get our of the problem of an additional sub group tracking a bug
…it is owned by the task force, the bug triage team would just duplicate that work
…bug triage should just ignore them
chaals: put them on your list of bugs being tracked.
…useful to have it on your list of of things to follow up on so you can remind the editor at some point.
LW: looking at bugs with TF keyword have been moved to CSS and SVG and others. Suggest we remove a11yTF keyword.
JS: how does PF know we are tracking it.
PC: when those component changes were made, was it made on public-html-admin
<LJWatson> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13648
LW: this one was moved to SVG product
PC: was wondering how old these were. Seem to be very old. Has been reassigned correctly.
LW: happy to take a11yTF keyword off and let PF know?
no objection
LW: about bug 9280. bug has been cloned so we are tracking it there. moot.
<LJWatson> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21563
… next one is the removal of hgroup. wondering of the problem was something TF wanted to keep on the radar or look for alternative solutions.
SF: not until we get concrete proposals is there anything we can actually do. There have been a few proposals, but nobody has stepped forward to work on those proposals.
LW: any references to those?
SF: I will share them at a later point.
JF: is it worth taking a look at them and perhaps pursuing at the TF level?
<Steve> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/164
…if we start discussion on some of these, someone on the TF might take one of them up.
SF: I've put in the alt tracker issue because the start of it has various links to change proposal and various bugs associated (Semi change proposals). Those are all of the ideas that are out there currently.
LW: I'll take a look at those options to see if there is something to work with.
JF: should we put this on the agenda in a week or two? carve out 20 minutes or so in a few weeks to look at the proposals in depth? does that have value?
SF: that is reasonable, just make sure someone adds it to the agenda during the agenda request that week. People should take a look at them before the meeting.
PC: sort of hoping that the TF might discuss what items the TF would like to add to the agenda for the F2F
JS: I haven't had time to add them to the wiki. We do have one DRM related issue to bring up. So far we have not identified a use case which would require us to encrypt, so we would be well served to find a way to leave those unencrypted to avoid allowing developers to use it because it exists.
<JF> JF notes that currently the W3C is not working on a DRM system: http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/03/drm_and_the_open_web.html
PC: you could edit the agenda and make a sub-topic for this topic. I'll do it right now.
JS: encourage alternate media to stay in the clear when primary resource is encrypted under DRM
PC: done
JS: the other topic is on rich text editing. draft API in WebAPPS which raises some a11y issues. not sure if its timely for HTML yet, but would like to start people thinking about it now.
PC: what is the spec in WebAPPS called?
JS: API for ?? IME Spec. I will send in after the call
PC: I know there are a couple things that WebAPPS are doing that will override what the HTML5 spec does.
<Steve> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ime-api/raw-file/default/Overview.html
SF: its related to the use of canvas
PC: Do you think that might be related back to the canvas discussion then?
JS: This has come up for PF in an ARIA context. We have issues with the proposed API. It suggests that we do have some problems.
SF: I thought you were arranging to bring this up with WebAPPS at the F2F
PC: why would the HTMLWG need to worry about this.
JS: this is just the beginning of what will require a coordinated approach to dealing with rich text editing.
<JF> ISSUE-194: Provide a mechanism for associating a full transcript with an audio or video element. http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/194
<trackbot> Error adding notes to ISSUE-194 - the response from Tracker was missing data. Please contact sysreq with the details of what happened.
JF: would like to see discussion about ISSUE 194 at F2F
… currently marked as closed, but we don't have any resolution.
…never really got to consensus.
PC: assigning a transcript to a video (ISSUE 194)
<chaals> agendum
SF: There will be no meeting next week (F2F). I will write an email.