See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 16 January 2014
<janina> Meeting: HTML-A11Y Task Force Teleconference
<janina> alias bzw
<janina>
<janina> alias bzw
<janina> alias bzg
<janina> cat ~/bin/bzw
<janina> bugzilla --bugzilla=https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/xmlrpc.cgi
<chaals1> scribe: chaals
JS: Status - chaals?
… MarkS has been putting test results together, waiting on CfC outcome...
CN: The call for consensus passed - to be announced as I catch up from an unexpected 2 weeks offline
MS: Making progress on exit criteria, publication calendar. Hope to have that done tomorrow to have to TF maybe next week.
JS: Quick summary / status?
MS: productive meeting, will rename drawSystemFocusRing to drawFocusIfNeeded - more accurate.
… resolved all accessibility bugs that could prevent canvas exiting CR. Bugs to close, but plan is in place.
… Preliminary feedback from implementors is that they do not foresee any problems.
… Implementors expect to be working on tests for the new features.
… (Ensuring they work for accessibility)
JS: Had discussion of remaining bugs, there were 3 bugs we focused on.
… all 3 are now closed in PF.
… Expect they will stay closed.
PC: Yesterday we were down to 7 HTML5 CR bugs.
JS: Two discussions going - one on usemap which seems to have clear consensus on call but different from email discussion emerging.
… asked people to put their views into email, not sure how many people did and if we are ready for Call for Consensus. Steve, what do you think we should do next?
SF: Only response i saw was John Foliot, still no clarity on what the appropriate alternative is.
… I need to revisit and respond to some stuff.
… seems to be a lack of understanding still.
JF: I have more to put into the discussion too...
JS: Conversation will keep going,
expect we will get to a resolution. Since HTML is getting
closeto closing its other bugs, we'd like to reach our
consensus son too.
... I still have to respond on a bug too.
… hopefully today.
SF: Was a related bug to yours asking for indications of chart types, which is done - that part closed. What is outstanding is general advice on when indications should be used e.g. to say that an image is a pie chart. Have done itin the examples but haven't provided authoring guidance - the "why"...
JS: There is a joint task force between PF and WCAG working on this.
… If there are things that need authoring guidance, the WCAG techniques for HTML5 group should be dealing with it - so they'd appreciate being told if there is something they should be looking at
<scribe> ACTION: SteveF to tell James Nurthen about the outstanding issues on imagemaps [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/01/16-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-226 - Tell james nurthen about the outstanding issues on imagemaps [on Steve Faulkner - due 2014-01-23].
DM: Outstanding question on figure element.
… Want to align WCAG and HTML5, and there are concerns about how the figure element will work.
… e.g. is having figcaption replace alt OK? (And what about other replacements).
JS: Can you provide a pointer?
<paulc> If we finish the image map work and the bug mentioned by Janina, what will be the status of the material in http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-alt-techniques-20121025/ ?
PC: There is my question about heartbeats, but what about the alt-techniques document?
JS: SteveF? Judy?
JB: WAI coordination group is having meetings to talk about guidance on alt and what documents we want.
… Trying to fine tune if there are mismatches in guidance being given. Expect to address in a couple of weeks the question of what documents we actually want to have once everything is updated and aligned.
… So a final status is not clear yet, but longer term hope is that the document will be absorbed into others.
<David_> figcaption replacing alt http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Jan/0020.html
… question is whether all the other things have come together with updated content.
SF: For HTML 5.1 spec there are still some bugs that I expect to resolve soon - nothing seems problematic.
JS: Intention is to backport those changes, right?
<David_> test figure element results http://davidmacd.com/test/figure.html
SF: Yes. In any case it is editorial content. SHouldn't need masses of conversation.
… only important issue left is usemap.
PC: Assume that is bug 21579
<paulc> Is that bug https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21579?
<paulc> or is it https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24182?
SF: The former.
PC: So once 21579 is done there
are no more alt-related changes required to the CR version of
HTML?
... There are no other bugs. So if that isn't the case, we need
bugs filed.
DM: The figcaption issue has come up in the last couple of weeks, and doesn't appear to provide a working replacement for alt. So looking at whether we should file a bug.
JS: Because we want to backport changes to 5.1 into 5.0 we should look carefully at the bugs that we have fixed for 5.1 and make sure we've checked them all. As far as I know that hasn't happened yet.
LJW: There are still bugs against 5.0 which have been resolved but aren't checked yet.
JS: We need to make HTML bugs a high priority overall.
… check that we are happy with resolutions to accessibility bugs and any fixes we want to backport form 5.1 to 5.0
<paulc> FYI: 207 open HMLT 5.1 bugs are listed at http://tinyurl.com/mh5ax3j
SF: David's issue sounds like a potential suggestion to change normative advice on figcaption, which was resolved earlier. Not sure I agree with the statements about what happens in regard to alt attributes.
… The spec doesn't remove alt, it allows an alternative where alt cannot be provided. There is also the question of where implementation is - one browser implements, no Assistive Technology does.
<paulc> David's 5.1 bug is Bug 24311 - figcaption does not currently replace alt - https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24311
JS: Sounds like "this is something you can do if alt cannot be added", not a statement that you can skip using alt
<richardschwerdtfeger> I have to drop folks. Mark or Paul were on the canvas call so they know where it sits. really good progress.
PC: Note that editorial team does go through the 5.1 bugs and check if they need to be fixed in HTML5 CR - but they are primarily concerned with editorial, not making technical decisions.
JB: Unaware that figcaption came up again. Talked to Mark about it, looking at some issues about HTML 5.1
… agreed not to pursue a concern over 5.0, some time ago. Want to revisit whether what we have is what we thought our agreement was.
<scribe> … Pending issue for areas where what is used as a caption would not be an apprpriate alt, so cannot replace it. But we found it difficult to express the threshold of numbers of words [or characters] for which this is or isn't an appropriate thing. As far as I know we haven't got this in a bug but are planning to do so for 5.1
<SteveF> this is the related section http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/embedded-content-0.html#when-a-text-alternative-is-not-available-at-the-time-of-publication
DM: Don't want to go back over old issues. I think I should review the specific content, as posted by SteveF
SF: There is only one case - single image, figcaption, and no alt. The advice is to use alt whenever possible.
DM: Seems clear. There is a slippery slope towards just dropping accessibility...
SF: Understand that, but don't want to open it up again at this stage. But we would be better off if we can see implementations.
… There is still a handful of things to be implemented, this is one of them.
JS: Heuristic to identify figcaptions that are not good replacements sounds like something we could put off to 5.1
… Counter example of thing to bring back to 5.0, I think we have been consistently clear that we want all the changes on guidance about alt to be copied back into 5.0
SF: I'm the guy on the HTML editor team responsible for tracking issues like this, and as I find them they get ported back.
JS: Anything else? 5.1, resolved bugs are already on the agenda. Think we covered the rest, but does anyone have more for 5.0?
JS: HTML WG sets a good example on this.
<paulc> See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Jan/0037.html
… There are at least 2 documents sitting around. Not aware of any work on them.
… I know we are planning to work on them soon.
<paulc> 2 docs are Using WAI-ARIA in HTML and HTML to Platform Accessibility APIs Implementation Guide
… Think PF would like to be a co-publisher of this with HTML. Are people tweaking these?
SF: Using ARIA in HTML is still being edited. I am perfectly happy to have a heartbeat publication of it.
… just a question of work.
… We need to restructure the API guide to fit in with other documents. I don't want to publish a heartbeat until we have a better understanding of the plan for the structure of that document.
<SteveF> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Jan/0040.html
… Do we need to do a heartbeat?
JS: Note that there is no expectation that the HTML mappings doc will be ready in 5.0 timeframe, but in 5.1 timeframe we think it is important and maybe will become normative and go through CR itself.
PC: HTML chairs want editors to make heartbeats. Sometimes there has been minimal work - we want to be pragmatic. Likely to do HTML5, 5.1, LC on polyglot and DOM4, and Canvas level 1, too.
… If you want to target late Feb for one, put the other on hold, that's OK. But want to make sure that we are making progress and publishing heartbeats.
… And to have a common understanding of the longer-term plan. I think this is the first time I have really understood that the API mappings is envisaged in the HTML 5.1 timeframe.
DM: There are about a dozen bugs on the mappings document.
JS: We really want to make the HTML mappings important, but need to get ARIA 1 out first.
… hope to exit CR around the end of the month on UA Guide and ARIA 1.0
… second day of Toronto face to face is for structuring the ARIA 1.1 docs, focused on HTML 5.1 and SVG 2.0
… and meeting their requirements in ARIA 1.1
MS: Rich sent an email this morning explaining this.
JS: Yes.
… Basically everyone seems to be agreeing taht they like the idea, but nobody has bought into a solution yet - which is sensible. confident taht we can resolve this in Toronto or shortly after and have a plan on what we are going to do with these documents, and ARIA 1.1
<paulc> "HTML to Platform Accessibility APIs Implementation Guide" has no normative references. Maybe that could be added and the reference could be to HTML 5.1 to indicate you plan to do the work in that timeframe.
<Zakim> Mark, you wanted to remind Steve that he is the Staff Contact on these publications now
MS: I'm staff contact for those - give me a notice and I can do it.
SF: OK.
PC: Heartbeats go through PF and HTML too...
MS: Right.
PC: Looked at API implementation guide. Has nothing normative in it anywhere.
JS: Yet.
<janina> acl p
PC: So add the normative reference to HTML 5.1, which would make it clearer that it is the target for aligning.
SF: If you look at Rich's email, everything is targeted at 5.1 and will reference that.
DM: Is it possible to be an observer at the f2f?
JS: Need to check space, but otherwise no problem.
LJW: Bug Triage has done what we can. A lot on our plate - wonder if we should invite people with expertise into Triage call (Feb 12)
JS: Sure - hope to have discussions here before that too.
<paulc> ... leaving for prep for HTML Wg meeting
JS: Anything we have to discuss today?
<JF> I will attend
DM: Who is going to CSUN - are we going to meet?
<David_> +1
<Mark> MarkS will be at CSUN
<SteveF> yes csun
<janina> csun for maybe only 1 day
<LJWatson> I fly in on Sat, fly home Friday evening
JS: Many people are busy in CSUN and that makes it hard.
AR: Are invited experts allowed to attend?
JS: Yes
<LJWatson> +1 to JF's suggestion.
<LJWatson> CMN: The April meetings may be at risk.
[adjourned]
JS: Regrets for next week.
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: s/replacement/working replacement/ Succeeded: s/the circumstances in which/the threshold of numbers of words [or characters] for which/ Succeeded: s/??/AR/ Found Scribe: chaals Inferring ScribeNick: chaals WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: AR Adrian_Roselli CMN CN Cynthia_Shelly DM David_ David_MacDonald FYI IPcaller IanPouncey JB JF JS John_Foliot Joshue Judy LJW LJWatson MS Mark Mark_Sadecki Microsoft P8 PC Rich_Schwerdtfeger SF SteveF aardrian cabanier_ chaals chaals1 davidb davidb_ davidb__ hober html-a11y inserted janina joined paulc plh richardschwerdtfeger trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Found Date: 16 Jan 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/01/16-html-a11y-minutes.html People with action items: stevef WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]