HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

06 Mar 2014

See also: IRC log


Mark_Sadecki, JF, janina, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, paulc, Leonie, Cynthia_Shelly, Judy, Steve Faulkner
Chaals, Adrian Roselli
MarkS, JF


<trackbot> Date: 06 March 2014

<MarkS> Meeting: HTML-A11Y Task Force Teleconference

<MarkS> scribe: MarkS

Identify Scribe http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Scribe_List

March Meeting Schedule & Coming Clock Adjustments

JS: Clocks are changing. This is when things get out of sync. Frequently confusion about when meetings are happening.
... US goes to Summertime or daylight time on Sunday morning.
... this meeting is pegged to Boston time so it will be an hour earlier for many
... Wondering if there is consensus on holding this call during CSUN

<janina> janina can

<JF> not available

JS: 3/20

<paulc> I would be able to participate in two weeks on Mar 20

Likely not for MarkS

<LJWatson> Will be at CSUN.

JS: Will postpone until next week. Looks like we may not have a meeting on the 20th. This is not unusual since its such a big conference for this group.

PC: I understand how important this conference is, but wonder if this would negatively impact progress on key projects, like longdesc

JS: It might have some. Let's ask people to be mindful as we go through the agenda

PC: may be a better question for next week.

JS: may be we need to prioritize

HTML-WG & Web Apps F2F http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2014-04-Agenda

JS: Becoming more clear who can make it.
... doesn't seem like critical mass for anything more than casual work. May be an opportunity to make progress on Canvas
... there will be people from the TF present, and working on Canvas, but probably not a lot of opportunity to do much beyond that.

PC: the chairs objective is to publish an Heartbeat coming out of the F2F with no bugs and no at risk features
... Steve's work on ALT guidance may be problematic
... I'd like to know from Steve if the bugs marked as fixed in 5.1 will end up in 5.0

JS: would like to get a sense of where work goes from here
... what the process should be and where we go when we get to that agenda item

JF: I will know by end of this week, early next week if I can go to F2F

Reviving and Expanding Media Subteam http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Feb/0049.html

JS: Trying to reactivate this activity. Old business to finish up and new business coming. T
... There is a WBS survey out to get that started.

MS: wondering if time slots were an issue for any TF members. May be able to expand the time slots available since Silvia has indicated she cannot participate on calls.

JF: Opening up times earlier in the day makes sense

PFWG Approves DOM4 LC http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Mar/0007.html

JS: PF did review HTML WG DOM4 Last Call and found no accessibility issues. This is simply a DOM spec, not specifically for HTML
... there was some concern regarding the removal of mutation events, but those are still in DOM4 so we are pleased.

Longdesc Update

<JF> scribe: JF

MS: have been working on finalizing exit criteria

good progress, but with some minor re-tooling

'hope to have something to review next week

JS: should time nicely with CSUN, as consensus call requires 1 week - may be able to do that during w/o CSUN

<MarkS> scribe: MarkS

Canvas 2D Status & Next Steps

<JF> MS: Canvas update

<JF> group reviewed spec this week, feature by feature, to identify Priority 1 and 2 issues

<JF> next step is to refine draft

<JF> hope to use that doc to work with implementors to prioritize those features

<JF> goal to find compatible timeline with the spec

<JF> PC: thought we would review the implementors to see what they will be doing what?

<JF> has this changed?

<JF> MS: Rick was on the last call - key implementor

<JF> Google does not seem fussed over a level 1 or level 2 spec

<JF> so see the level 1 spec as a roadmap

<JF> and hope he is open to implementing in a logical order

<JF> starting with the easiest features first, and they are aligned with a11y as well

<JF> JS: they are also in a logical sequence

<JF> Dominic noted that they wanted it all in a "all-in" doc

<JF> however what is emerging is what would be first steps anyway

<JF> RS: trying to show - build on the larger spec without breaking things

<JF> i.e. using dictionaries, etc.

<JF> still think it would be a good idea to seek a meeting

<richardschwerdtfeger> ach richardschwerdtfeger

<JF> they are moving away from WHAT WG spec with our guidance, but they are not there yet

<JF> PC: still have not seen an actual time-table for an editors draft

<JF> revised canvas L1 which would go to last call - is there a timetable?

<JF> MS: grabbed the latest HTML from the spec and then added our priorities to it

<JF> it should be a copy and paste exercise

<JF> need an approval from the sub-group on what was decided to keep and what was deferred

<JF> JS: the logical read should still not break things in the spec -should verify that

<scribe> scribe: MarkS

JS: RE: Canvas and CSUN, I don't think CSUN Will impact Canvas progress

<JF> JS: sounds like CSUN should not impact getting an editors draft together

<JF> should be able to happen during next week

<scribe> scribe: MarkS

PC: It's not obvious to me what the progression of steps for this is. Possible schedule:
... Get a Draft of L1 LC ready, it then goes through the TF, then the HTML WG

JS: What we should talk about is the common desire that we will have two implementations to meet CR requirements. That is when the discussion with dominic becomes very important.
... the fallback is to look to webkit. looking for the right person to work with.

PC: So SubTeam Editors Draft -> Tf -> HTML WG to LC

RS: Rik has contacts over there

Alt Guidance & Next Steps

JS: Where are we with migrating 5.1 into 5.0.

SF: There is one open CR bug on ALT which I will resolve before 3/15. Been sick, been catching up. Will respond to emails from PC as well.
... most of the stuff in 5.1 is already in 5.0

JS: The goal for the HTML F2F is to have a heartbeat with no bugs and no features at risk.
... would like to have all ALT work done and publish the ALT techniques document and publish it as a Note
... The Status section would point to HTML5 pointing out that they appear in HTML 5.0 and 5.1
... There is some interest to continue to develop ALT guidance and possibly use that document, continue to develop it.

JB: we have been having discussions in WAI groups RE ALT guidance. Want to expand work in these settings. The pointers may go to other WAI resources as well.

PC: someone should file a CR bug
... trying to work through these as quickly as possible.

JS: I believe the processing of ALT bugs have been done in front of the HTML WG. Is there any other approval process we need to go through?

PC: I don't think so, but it is possible that some closer inspection may reveal more issues. I think Steve did a good job of documenting his work using Bugzilla. It's what the editorial team has been doing for their work.
... Steve's done a great job of working transparently. I think HTML WG should be clear what has been done.

SF: In discussions on list, I have indicated what is to be back ported. All the process should be there. I don't think there will be any surprises moving them to 5.0

<richardschwerdtfeger> +1

PC: That is exactly why the chairs want to do this as early as possible. Canvas has made it clear that when it appears you are at the last stage, you may not be.
... we want to get the clean CR in people's hands early so we can resolve any issues without holding up the timeline

JS: There is a concern that people may not see these individual bugs as a much larger change to the spec.

SF: the overarching change has been flagged in the HTML landscape document, listing all the big changes from the last spec.

JS: will CSUN set this back?

SF: no

Bug Triage: Review of Resolved Bugs tracked by TF

LW: good discussion on processing bugs with HTML Chairs and Editors. Have clear path to move forward with old bugs which may still be relevant.
... we will change the component to the a11y tf component and either close it or prep it to be reopened in 5.1

PC: I think the plan discussed in email is a good plan. I will indicate that on the thread.
... I think there are some bugs in the component already. The bug triage team may want to process those as well.
... prior to adding new ones in there.

Other Business

RS: I sent a note about User Agent Implementation Guides

JS: Long discussion in ARIA call, and on the PF call. We have several documents, some out of this group, at least one between PF and SVG. Mapping HTML elements into the AAPIs and defining ARIA behaviors. This is for the next iteration of ARIA 1.1 and beyond
... the common factor is PF and the ARIA work, so they would like to oversee all of these documents. On the other hand, we don't think its appropriate for PF to author these. We would like to get active on these documents in the HTML5.1 time frame. We are aiming for 2016 for HTML and SVG
... how can we get this work going? working on refactoring workflow and document structure/hierarchy
... Figuring out what features will go into Core and what will go into technology specific documents.
... Michael Cooper will be in charge of most of this, but won't be able to focus on it until ARIA 1.0 is out the door and his WCAG work as well.
... Likely in April
... i believe that what we do RE: HTML will be a TF document.
... we will publish Heartbeats
... coordination will happen in PF

CS: Would like feedback on what this work will have on the HTML5 aria map document

<paulc> I am sorry but I am chairing the WG meeting today and have to leave ASAP.

CS: who will be working on that
... from this group

RS: All of HTML5 and SVG2 will be defined in terms of ARIA semantics. A core specification. This will reduce the size of the exiting document.

<paulc> Can we please take this up next week when we would have more time?

<paulc> I MUST leave now. Sorry.

RS: a lot of the things we find in SVG2 overlap with HTML. There is a common DOM. This is where the core spec becomes important.
... should explain why the HTML ARIA Implementation guide will get smaller

CS: Want to know who I need to talk to, who may have an issue with this.

JS: I think everyone is focused on getting 5.0 out the door.
... don't think we are looking for editors, but looking for people to participate.
... the F2F might be a good opportunity to bring this topic up.


Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2014-03-08 18:33:11 $