W3C

- DRAFT -

User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

10 Apr 2014

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Jeanne, kford, Greg_Lowney, Kim_Patch, Kelly
Regrets
Jim, Eric
Chair
Kelly, Jan
Scribe
Jan

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 10 April 2014

<kford> we left off at 2.3.3

<kford> comments document: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2014/LCcomments.html

<kford> ---

<kford> Main Comment Gateway -

<kford> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-uaag2-comments/

Meeting at TPAC?

<kford> TPAC is OCT 27-31 in Santa Clara.

<jeanne> We could request Monday - Tuesday

<kford> Group saying we would like to meet 10/27-28. Will explore funding.

Finish Jan's OP06 comments

<Greg> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2014/LCcomments.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2014JanMar/0046.html

<jeanne> Minutes from 13 March -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2014AprJun/0000.html

<Greg> The latest draft wording on 13 March was:

<Greg> Jan's update: 2.3.1 Allow Direct Navigation to Enabled Elements: The user can move keyboard focus directly to any enabled elements in the rendered content. (Level AA)

EDIT 2.3.1 Allow Direct Navigation to Enabled Elements: The user can move keyboard focus directly to any enabled elements in the rendered content. (Level AA)

EDIT 2.3.3 Allow Direct Activation of Enabled Elements: The user can perform an activation action on any enabled element in the rendered content. (Level A)

GL: Element->Elements: 2.3.3 Allow Direct Activation of Enabled Elements: The user can perform an activation action on any enabled elements in the rendered content. (Level A)

<Greg> Actually I felt "element" should be singular in the SC (not title), as a command can't move focus to multiple elements at one time.

KP: But should move the focus as well

2.3.1 Allow Direct Navigation to Enabled Elements: The user can move keyboard focus directly to any enabled element in the rendered content. (Level A)

2.3.3 Allow Direct Activation of Enabled Elements: The user can, in a single action, move keyboard focus to any enabled element in the rendered content and perform an activation action on that element. (Level AA)

2.3.3 Allow Direct Activation of Enabled Elements: The user can, in a single action, move keyboard focus directly to any enabled element in the rendered content and perform an activation action on that element. (Level AA)

JR: Do people like wording (leaving aside level)?

KP: Yes

GL: Tiny bit of ambiguity, but good enough

<kford> I lost all my connectivity about 10 minutes ago.

<kford> are you still on the phone?

JR: We should wait for the chair....

<kford> Now when I dial in, thereis no answer

Yes we are all on the phone

<kford> I keep trying and have been for like 10 minutes

Now we've lost Kelly from IRC

Can I call you on Skype?

I'm calling you on Skype...but the call failed

Kelly, do you agree with the following wording:

2.3.1 Allow Direct Navigation to Enabled Elements: The user can move keyboard focus directly to any enabled element in the rendered content.

2.3.3 Allow Direct Activation of Enabled Elements: The user can, in a single action, move keyboard focus directly to any enabled element in the rendered content and perform an activation action on that element.

KF: OK
... OK with new 2.3.1 and 2.3.3 wording

<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to update document with new 2.3.1 and 2.3.3 wording above. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-963 - Update document with new 2.3.1 and 2.3.3 wording above. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-04-17].

KP: From speech point of view, nav+activation is more important
... It would be more rare to do nav alone

JS: Classic example is screen reader user trying to nav a list but it activates items as you try to navigate the list
... I like AA for both

JR: I could live with that

KP: I can live with AA for both

GL: I can live with AA...but making me think about lengthy doc navigation
... Could use structured nav?

GL Maybe page-down

JS: When deciding levels... we said A would be solved an absolute barrier, was easy to implement, helped many people

KF: OK with Level AA

Resolution: All agree on: 2.3.1 Allow Direct Navigation to Enabled Elements: The user can move keyboard focus directly to any enabled element in the rendered content. (Level AA)
... All agree on 2.3.3 Allow Direct Activation of Enabled Elements: The user can, in a single action, move keyboard focus directly to any enabled element in the rendered content and perform an activation action on that element. (Level AA)

<kford> yes I'm fine with this

Resolution: When re-numbering, put 2.3.1 followed immediately by the 2.3.3

<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to renumber in this order: 2.3.1, 2.3.3, 2.3.2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-964 - Renumber in this order: 2.3.1, 2.3.3, 2.3.2 [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-04-17].

EDIT (to match 1.9.1) 2.5.2 Provide Structural Navigation

JR: Only change is more general handle and added "content sections"

GL: Should we add recognized?

2.5.2 Provide Structural Navigation: The user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the recognized structure types are present: (Level AA) - By heading - By content sections - Within tables

2.5.2 Provide Structural Navigation: The user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the following structure types are recognized: (Level AA) - By heading - By content sections - Within tables

2.5.2 Provide Structural Navigation: The user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the structure types are recognized: (Level AA) - By heading - By content sections - Within tables

GL: Looks good

JR: +1

KP: Good

<jeanne> +1

JS: Good

KF: Fine

Resolution: All agree to: 2.5.2 Provide Structural Navigation: The user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the structure types are recognized: (Level AA) - By heading - By content sections - Within tables

<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to update 2.5.2 with new wording: 2.5.2 Provide Structural Navigation: The user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the structure types are recognized: (Level AA) - By heading - By content sections - Within tables [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-965 - Update 2.5.2 with new wording: 2.5.2 provide structural navigation: the user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the structure types are recognized: (level aa) - by heading - by content sections - within tables [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-04-17].

REMOVE 2.5.3 Allow Elements to be Configured for Structural Navigation

2.5.3 Allow Elements to be Configured for Structural Navigation: The user can configure a set of important elements (including element type) for structured navigation and hierarchical/outline view. (Level AAA)

http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2014/ED-IMPLEMENTING-UAAG20-20140410/#sc_253

KF: I think lots of users would use this

KP: I go to lots of web pages regularly
... People do same things over and over....and ineffecient

2.5.3 Allow Elements to be Configured for Structural Navigation: The user can configure which elements are used for structural navigation and outline views. (Level AAA)

1.9.1 Outline View: Users can view a navigable outline of rendered content composed of labels for important elements, and can move focus efficiently to these elements in the main viewport. (Level AA)

- Note: The important elements depend on the web content technology, but may include headings, table captions, and content sections.

That was current wording...

1.9.1 Outline View: Users can view a navigable outline of the rendered content that allows focus to be moved to the corresponding element in the main viewport. (Level AA) - Note: The elements reflected in the outline view will depend on the web content technology and may include: headings, table captions, and content sections.

<Greg> Note: It is recommended that the user agent allow users to customize which elements are included in the outline view.

GL: Another approach would be to add a note to 1.9.1 saying it is recommended that users be able to customize which elements to include

2.5.3 Allow Elements to be Configured for Structural Navigation: The user can configure which elements are used for structural navigation and outline views. (Level AAA)

GL: 1.91. and 2.5.3 etc. should point to this

2.5.3 Configurable Structural Navigation...

<Greg> "Configuring Structural Navigation and Views"?

<Greg> "Configure Structural Navigation and Outline View"?

2.5.3 Configuring Structural Navigation and Views: The user can configure which elements are used for structural navigation and outline views. (Level AAA)

JR: KP, JS...handle?

2.5.3 Configure Elements for Structural Navigation and Views: The user can configure which elements are used for structural navigation and outline views. (Level AAA)

2.5.3 Configure Navigation and Views: The user can configure which elements are used for structural navigation and outline views. (Level AAA)

<Greg> My pref would be the shorter "2.5.3 Configure Structural Navigation and Views", but can live with it long.

2.5.3 Configure Structural Navigation and Views: The user can configure which elements are used for structural navigation and outline views. (Level AAA)

JR: +1

KP: +1

<jeanne> +1 to Greg's

GL: +1

<Greg> GL +1

KF: +1

Resolution: All agree with: 2.5.3 Configure Structural Navigation and Views: The user can configure which elements are used for structural navigation and outline views. (Level AAA)

<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to reword 2.5.3 Configure Structural Navigation and Views: [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-966 - Reword 2.5.3 configure structural navigation and views: [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-04-17].

REMOVE: GLOSSARY: important elements

JR: Agree to remove

KP: +1

GL: We will need to remove from summary of 1.9, 2.3

Resolution: All agree to remove "GLOSSARY: important elements" and mention of import elements from summaries (1.9 and 2.3)

<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to remove definition of "important elements" and remove mention in the summaries of 1.9 and 2.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-967 - Remove definition of "important elements" and remove mention in the summaries of 1.9 and 2.3 [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-04-17].

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2014AprJun/0004.html

<scribe> Scribe: Jan

http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2014/LCcomments.html

JS: All of that "Important elements" stuff was related to comment MSO9

GL: Actually we ere on OP06
... An opera comment
... That was the last Opera comment

JR: So what's next?

JS: Maybe James Craig....AP01
... The working group agrees that many items in UAAG 2.0 are relatively easy to acheive with CSS and scripts bu the onus should be on user agents developers rather than users in the general public to implement these.

<jeanne_> UAWG agrees that many items in UAAG2 are relatively easy to achieve with user style sheets and user scripts, but the onus for developing the style sheets and scripts should be on user agent developers rather than users.

<Greg> I'm thinking that to claim compliance, the claimant needs to demonstrate compliance, which may be done with existing user style sheets and scripts. However, it is insufficient to claim that those could *in theory* be written, if none can be demonstrated.

<jeanne_> UAWG agrees that many items in UAAG2 are relatively easy to achieve with user style sheets and user scripts, but the onus for developing the style sheets and scripts should be on user agent developers rather than users. To claim compliance, there must be a solution for the non-expert, not a sample of what could be done.

<Greg> In order to claim compliance, the claimant must demonstrate that solutions, and any required additional components, are available to non-expert users. Enabling the creation of such solutions is not by itself sufficient.

<jeanne_> UAWG agrees that many items in UAAG2 are relatively easy to achieve with user style sheets and user scripts, but the onus for developing the style sheets and scripts should be on user agent developers rather than users. To claim compliance, there must be a practical solution for the non-expert user, not just a sample of what could be done.

<jeanne_> UAWG agrees that many items in UAAG2 are relatively easy to achieve with user style sheets and user scripts, but the onus for developing the style sheets and scripts should be on user agent developers rather than users. In order to claim compliance, the claimant must demonstrate that solutions, and any required additional components, are available to non-expert users. Enabling the creation of such solutions is not by itself sufficient.

Resolution: UAWG agrees that many items in UAAG2 are relatively easy to achieve with user style sheets and user scripts, but the onus for developing the style sheets and scripts should be on user agent developers rather than users. In order to claim compliance, the claimant must demonstrate that solutions, and any required additional components, are available to non-expert users. Enabling...
... the creation of such solutions is not by itself sufficient.

<jeanne> Next Week: Start with AP02

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to remove definition of "important elements" and remove mention in the summaries of 1.9 and 2.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to renumber in this order: 2.3.1, 2.3.3, 2.3.2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to reword 2.5.3 Configure Structural Navigation and Views: [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to update 2.5.2 with new wording: 2.5.2 Provide Structural Navigation: The user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the structure types are recognized: (Level AA) - By heading - By content sections - Within tables [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to update document with new 2.3.1 and 2.3.3 wording above. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html#action01]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2014-04-10 18:35:25 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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/rrsgent, make minutes//
Succeeded: s/KF/KP/
Succeeded: s/rrsagent, make minutes'//
Found Scribe: Jan
Inferring ScribeNick: Jan

WARNING: Dash separator lines found.  If you intended them to mark
the start of a new topic, you need the -dashTopics option.
For example:
        <Philippe> ---
        <Philippe> Review of Action Items

Default Present: Jeanne, kford, Greg_Lowney, Kim_Patch, Kelly
Present: Jeanne kford Greg_Lowney Kim_Patch Kelly
Regrets: Jim Eric
Found Date: 10 Apr 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/04/10-ua-minutes.html
People with action items: jeanne

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]