See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 07 November 2013
<scribe> scribe: chaals
CN: SOrry, no access to mail so no agenda sent. May mean we don't get the people we wanted here...
CN: I'm fine with the CfC, nothing to really say...
CS: Think the Microsoft position is clear
DM: Think FocusRing stuff is good.
CN: Hope it makes the timing...
CS: May only be in 5.1 ...
CN: Let's wait for results of CfC.
<scribe> ACTION: chaals to talk to HTML chairs about canvas CfC. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/11/07-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-214 - Talk to html chairs about canvas cfc. [on Charles McCathie Nevile - due 2013-11-14].
CN: Matt argues that search engines don't need longdesc - don't know where he gets that idea, given that I work for one, and we would like it.
<MarkS> just sent an email to TF with link and instructions to canvas focusRing demos
<MarkS> do we need to address matts comments in this context? the CfC?
DM: Mat says "No implementor has added support for universal access to longdesc, and Firefox won't..."
… "Spec should be updated to reflect reality"
LW: Reality is that it works for poeple who need it.
AA: Don't understand qwhat he wants
CN: My proposed response is that a. He is incorrect, browsers and extensions and AT have implemented universal discuovery, and b. his request to "match reality" isn't actionable.
… (Since he fails to deomnstrate what "reality" is)
DM: Jan has some comments on editorial stuff.
… Matt says discoverability is solved by normal links. No use case has been provided requiring description to be different from a normal link.
CN: Proposed response is a. that doesn't work if the image is inside a link that isn't a description, b. use case has been presented (search).
DM: Also says spec should say when a longdesc should and shouldn't be used.
LW: There's a matter of programmatic association if you have a separate image, so cannot programmatically associate the two.
… cannot find a designer willing to stick every image into a link to a descritpion.
DW: And will confuse people who believe links from images are "normal" (e.g. navigation icon) and when it is a description.
CN: Agree, and that should be part of the response.
CS: We could provide more authoring guidance in WCAG.
AA: Said the spec needs to define the conditions. Authoring guidance is the only thing we need to address his concern.
CN: I think his concern is not valid. As David says, adding a link to every image that needs description, with no differentiation between "normal" and descrition links, is a terrible idea.
<LJWatson> +1
DM: Has anyone ever seen a *request* to have images linked to descripitions on their own?
LW: Have met it before, Not in a good way...
CN: When I get access to mail agin ( probably next week :( ) I'll write the proposed responses and set up a CfC.
… It would also be useful to get more people replying to the original, so we may re-open it.
<MarkS> +1 for reopening
AA: Will anyone be available for HTML WG call today?
CN: Not me :(
DM: Could do it - just lookign for someone to listen?
CN: And report this meeting.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: i/AA: Will anyone/Topic: Someone for HTML WG call today? Found Scribe: chaals Inferring ScribeNick: chaals Present: Chaals David Aardrian Cynthia Leonie WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 07 Nov 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/11/07-html-a11y-minutes.html People with action items: chaals WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]