See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 15 April 2014
<AWK> Survey on Task Force updates: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/April14TFUpdates/
<AWK> Scribe: David
Tewt
test
May 15 is the date to get techniques for November publication
Six months apart is what we are going for
AWK: Survey
... Draft proposal for techniques for dynamic content
<Joshue> +q
Joshue: This goes beyond SCR 21
AWK: goes through comments in survey with users
Joshue: People are using libraies these days... don't now how to address that in our techniques
AWK: JQUERY is used but we can't rely on it...
<AWK> Original comment that kicked this off: https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/35422/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20140107/2891
<David_> Loretta: We shouldn't stand behind a library.. don't endorse anything
<David_> test
<Joshue> DMcD: It's a difficult question, I hear what Josh is saying about real world development.
<Joshue> DMcD: We do want to make sure what we put in works.
<Joshue> DMcD: If we did identify widgets that worked well in JQuery for example, what would be the harm? We link to other resources like Juicy Studio etc.
<Joshue> DMcD: We do need to acknowledge if people are doing things right.
Loretta: I have nightmare of GOV of Canada or otherw saying, you must you foo library
David: Yes it is a real concern
AWK: Original comment was form Wilco... we should address applicability of SCR 21, limit it to that now...
Josh: Yes let's limit to SCR 21
<Joshue> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/SCR21
Josh: Should we retire it
AWK: Wilco doen't think it aplies
to 1.3.1 but it might apply to others such as meaningful
sequence
... it is so braod of a way of using technology, that is cannot
be made consise?
Josh:
it could be a simpler techniue to cut down, and perhaps expand out to other applicability
David: GOV of Canada called me up and said document.write should not be discouraged
AWK: seems to discourage some
practises rather than encouraging good practises
... example hard to map to 1.3.1
... if it was titled how to insert a heading into a oage maybe
that work
Josh: yes agree, title of technique not accurate
<Loretta> Someone might check with Cynthia Shelly on the history of this technique.
Josh: turning down volume on the
don't in the technique could make it a lot more useful
... can't we map to a conformance requirement
s/josh/john
<Joshue> DMacD: I don't think we have ever mapped to a conformance requirement
LORETTA: We could map to a
conformance criteria
... with this mapping to 4.1.1 is that you run risk of things
like duplicate ids
<Joshue> ACTION: Josh to ping Cynthia for some background on SCR21 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-253 - Ping cynthia for some background on scr21 [on Joshue O Connor - due 2014-04-22].
<Joshue> +Q
Gregg: We try to talk about positives, but you can talk in a positive way about things to avoid... so you could say, "this is done in this way to avoid that.... but we usually try to say why
<AWK> Techniques that refer to conformance requirements only currently for CR#1: http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/20140408/#conformance-reqs
Gregg: wrt to wuestion about mapping to conformance criteria... usually it is in conjunction with a SC, but the things that are required are using SC within the conformance criteria, i think we can refer to them but we try tl map to a SC because the Conformance criteria are on the SCs
JOSH: +1 on AWK ... rewrite description, new title, relating to example with Form validation would be better
<Loretta> THe Understanding doc for a conformance criterion with techniques: http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-conforming-alt-versions-head
AWK: wary to map to 4.1.1 but could write failure techniques on messing up dom
JOSH: scr21 doesn't say why it is wrong to do the things it discourages
<Zakim> jamesn, you wanted to ask what is the problem with innerHTML?
<scribe> ACTION: David to connect with GOV of Canada regarding their objections to the discouraged parts of SCR21 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> 'David' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., dmacdona, dtodd2).
<scribe> ACTION: dmacdonato connect with GOV of Canada regarding their objections to the discouraged parts of SCR21 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Error finding 'dmacdonato'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/users>.
<scribe> ACTION:dmacdona : David to connect with GOV of Canada regarding their objections to the discouraged parts of SCR21 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action04]
James: nothing wrong with
document.write... it is just old and clunky
... it seems to be a tuotial on scripting... no our role
... some people might look to us
... i don't know where we can assign this
RESOLUTION: leave open David will get back to us re GOV of Canada
<Jon_avila> http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_support/BulletinView.asp?QC=1165
John: put a tech support... 3rd paragraph explains why it was an issue prior to JAWS 8
the last few sentence about previous issue... requiring refresh
<Joshue> DMacD: General Techs tend to get ignored.
<Joshue> DMacD: They don't have the same profile. What do we do?
AWK: Yes we should work with EO on that
RESOLUTION: Accepted as proposed LC 2887
AWK: second option is generally accepted.... We could remove the technique
<Joshue> DMacD: But isn't it important to notify people of changes to the DOM?
<Joshue> <gives example>
<AWK> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/F76.html
<Joshue> AWK: This is about changing the users context.
<Joshue> DMacD: But shouldn't it be required? Shouldn't we have a failure where they don't provide instructions for DOM changes?
<Joshue> AWK: The only thing thats different here is the notion of where the user location is.
<Joshue> AWK: Where can you put this, where it's not at a location that may be bypassed?
<Joshue> DMacD: What about ARIA?
<Joshue> AWK: Sure, but that's a different technique.
<Joshue> DMacD: I'd like to think this over.
<Joshue> AWK: This isn't about DOM changes, but changes in context.
JOHN: would like to have a failure for this DOM... rather have it more general than not at all
AWK: if success criteria says it do we need a failure
<Joshue> +q
AWK: my gut is we could leave it ope, or remove it for now, and come back faiure techniques
JOSH: should remove it
Jon: agree part of the title is
not great... but if we remove failure we loose the test
steps
... if we remove this are there any failures with test
steps
JOSH: i don't find test steps useful
JON: my preference would be to improve test steps
<Joshue> DMacD: Sounds like we need a larger strategy.
<Joshue> DMacD: We need to review the way people are doing things now.
<Joshue> +q
<Joshue> -q
JON: might be able with describedby to modify... maybe reinstate...
<Joshue> +q
JON: would it be the same name or number
AWK: depends
JON: must weigh danger of leaving it with the what we lose if removed
AWK: Concerned it has a lot of problems
<scribe> ACTION: David and JON to look at rewriting technique in communication with AWK [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> 'David' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., dmacdona, dtodd2).
JAMES: may need mandatory training... should be allowed to replace it
AWK: leqve open until May 15, pending action by David and JON, but if we don't we will yank...
RESOLUTION: dmacdona and JON to work on rewriting technique.... if done before May 15 it will be considered... if not drop it.
<scribe> ACTION: dmacdona and jon to look at rewriting technique f76 in communication with AWK [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-254 - And jon to look at rewriting technique f76 in communication with awk [on David MacDonald - due 2014-04-22].
<AWK> JA: this aligns with the HTML spec
<Kathy> +1
<AWK> KW: Works in JAWS
<AWK> DMD: reading ok with NVDA
<Jon_avila> I have to drop off the call.
RESOLUTION: Accepted as ammended H30 new example pending editorial changes
<AWK> RESOLUTION: Accepted as proposed
RESOLUTION: accepted as proposed G141 change "would to could" in second paragraph of
the description
will do minutes
<AWK> Anyone with Techniques questions can attend the techniques meeting Thursday at 4pm Eastern.
<AWK> IRC channel #wcag-techs
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) FAILED: s/josh/john/ Succeeded: s/userd/sers/ Succeeded: s/sers/users/ Found Scribe: David Inferring ScribeNick: David WARNING: Replacing list of attendees. Old list: AWK Michael_Cooper +1.910.278.aaaa kathleen Katie_Haritos-Shea David_MacDonald +1.703.637.aabb Jon_avila Loretta_Guarino_Reid Kathy_Wahlbin Marc_Johlic Joshue_O_Connor Gregg_Vanderheiden James_Nurthen +1.212.924.aacc John_Kirkwood New list: AWK Michael_Cooper +1.910.278.aaaa kathleen Katie_Haritos-Shea David_MacDonald +1.703.637.aabb Jon_avila Loretta_Guarino_Reid Default Present: AWK, Michael_Cooper, +1.910.278.aaaa, kathleen, Katie_Haritos-Shea, David_MacDonald, +1.703.637.aabb, Jon_avila, Loretta_Guarino_Reid Present: AWK Michael_Cooper +1.910.278.aaaa kathleen Katie_Haritos-Shea David_MacDonald +1.703.637.aabb Jon_avila Loretta_Guarino_Reid Regrets: Bruce_Bailey Sailesh_Panchang Bruce Sailesh Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2014AprJun/0024.html Found Date: 15 Apr 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/04/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html People with action items: canada connect david dmacdona dmacdonato gov jon josh objections of regarding their with WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]