IRC log of ua on 2014-06-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:40:41 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ua
16:40:41 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:40:43 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:40:43 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ua
16:40:45 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WAI_UAWG
16:40:45 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_UAWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 20 minutes
16:40:46 [trackbot]
Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
16:40:46 [trackbot]
Date: 19 June 2014
16:41:11 [a-jealli]
rrs agent, make logs
16:41:27 [kford]
rrsagent, makelogs
16:41:27 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'makelogs', kford. Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:41:48 [kford]
rrsagent, make logs
16:41:48 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make logs', kford. Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:43:00 [kford]
agenda+ Response to UAWG comments HTML 5 Image Description
16:43:01 [kford]
agenda+ comments LG01, 02, 03
16:43:15 [a-jealli]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:43:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate a-jealli
16:46:01 [allanj]
allanj has joined #ua
16:46:20 [allanj]
rrsagent, set logs public
16:54:13 [kford]
agenda+ Meeting times
16:56:25 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has now started
16:56:32 [Zakim]
16:56:53 [kford]
zakim, microsoft is kford
16:56:53 [Zakim]
+kford; got it
16:57:10 [kford]
zakim, a-jealli is Jennifer
16:57:10 [Zakim]
sorry, kford, I do not recognize a party named 'a-jealli'
16:57:35 [kford]
zakim, a-jealli is Jennifer
16:57:35 [Zakim]
sorry, kford, I do not recognize a party named 'a-jealli'
17:00:56 [Jan]
Jan has joined #ua
17:01:09 [Jan]
zakim, code?
17:01:09 [Zakim]
the conference code is 82941 (tel:+1.617.761.6200, Jan
17:01:18 [Zakim]
17:02:19 [Greg]
Greg has joined #ua
17:02:28 [Zakim]
17:02:52 [Zakim]
17:03:05 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jan
17:03:05 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
17:06:17 [kford]
17:06:34 [kford]
chair: Kelly_Ford_Jim_Allan
17:07:40 [Zakim]
17:09:20 [allanj]
scribe: allanj
17:09:43 [allanj]
scribenick: allanj
17:10:33 [kford]
zakim, agenda?
17:10:33 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
17:10:34 [Zakim]
1. Response to UAWG comments HTML 5 Image Description [from kford]
17:10:34 [Zakim]
2. comments LG01, 02, 03 [from kford]
17:10:34 [Zakim]
3. Meeting times [from kford]
17:10:48 [kford]
Group making introductions to Jennifer.
17:11:08 [kford]
zakim take up item 3
17:11:17 [kford]
zakim, take up item 3
17:11:17 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Meeting times" taken up [from kford]
17:15:38 [Jan]
17:16:23 [Jan]
17:17:47 [allanj]
all: discussion of changing meeting time.
17:18:36 [allanj]
js: will reach out to Asia folks to see what times work
17:19:48 [allanj]
kf: would like to move time if we get more participation.
17:19:51 [kford]
zakim, close item 3
17:19:51 [Zakim]
agendum 3, Meeting times, closed
17:19:52 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:19:52 [Zakim]
1. Response to UAWG comments HTML 5 Image Description [from kford]
17:20:38 [kford]
zakim, take up item 1
17:20:38 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Response to UAWG comments HTML 5 Image Description" taken up [from kford]
17:21:09 [kford]
scribe: kford
17:21:27 [allanj]
17:21:29 [kford]
JA: This came to the list, did anyone have issues? I didn't.
17:21:55 [kford]
JA: These were our comments on image description. They took some, ignored some. All seemed reasonable.
17:22:26 [kford]
JA reading parts of the mail.
17:22:44 [kford]
JA: Several like this.
17:22:53 [kford]
JA: Anyone else read or have thoughts.
17:23:11 [kford]
kford: I read, seemed reasonable.
17:23:46 [kford]
JA: Jeanne do we need to do anything else.
17:24:17 [kford]
GL: I do consider it unfortunate that they are rejecting some of our comments but it isn't surprising.
17:24:33 [kford]
GL: Such as having it apply to more elements.
17:24:53 [kford]
JA: I could put that in the reply.
17:26:19 [kford]
JS: GL can you give me a bit more of your concenrs. Maybe I can pursue informally.
17:26:55 [kford]
GL: As far as I can tell there is no cost for making longdesc apply to more than image aside from authoring tools having to support. Checking tools would have to be modified too.
17:27:13 [kford]
JA: Also browser implications since they've not been doing longdesc at all.
17:27:46 [kford]
GL: Not sure it would be required for them to do anything other than accept as a valid syntax. We in UAAG would be placing the requirement.
17:27:59 [kford]
JA: They would have to show implementation.
17:28:06 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:28:06 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate kford
17:28:27 [kford]
JA continues to expand on implementation requirements.
17:29:01 [kford]
GL: If it was generalized to other elements to div are you saying they'd have to find two implementations on every element?
17:29:11 [kford]
JA: I believe so yes when I look at their other tests.
17:29:36 [kford]
JA: Want me to say something?
17:29:49 [kford]
JS: We could say we want this to be in the next version?
17:30:02 [kford]
GL: Unless there is an alternative.
17:30:18 [kford]
JA: I know they are working on this with some described work.
17:31:00 [kford]
KF: Fish or cut bate, including this in the reply, asking Jeanne to do something informally or doing nothing.
17:32:30 [kford]
Group will have something mentioned in the reply.
17:33:07 [kford]
Scribe: Jennifer
17:33:44 [allanj]
gl: talking about
17:33:49 [allanj]
> 2. Contrast with ARIA DescribedBy: The use case "Referring to an
17:33:50 [allanj]
> existing description" sounds like exactly what ARIA DescribedBy is
17:33:52 [allanj]
> used for, so it might be good to clarify why longdesc is also needed,
17:33:53 [allanj]
> and whether you're recommending one or both be used.
17:33:55 [allanj]
aria-describedBy must be used on the same page as the thing it describes.
17:33:56 [allanj]
Among other things, this means a single description at a given URI cannot
17:33:58 [allanj]
be re-used by multiple instances of the same image. This would fail to
17:33:59 [a-jealli]
JA: read mail reply
17:34:00 [allanj]
meet the "Re-use" requirement, which is relied on by several use cases.
17:34:14 [allanj]
their response is directed at UAWG but no changes made to the document.
17:35:52 [allanj]
Jim will add to document. for the TF to clarify in the document why aria-describedby and longdesc
17:37:00 [a-jealli]
KF: comment issue is not worth the energy to fight for, we will live with it
17:38:06 [a-jealli]
group: item has been addressed but not sure what can be done
17:39:10 [a-jealli]
Zakim, take up item 2
17:39:10 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "comments LG01, 02, 03" taken up [from kford]
17:39:32 [allanj]
Topic: comment LG01
17:39:58 [allanj]
all JO comments have been done.
17:40:11 [a-jealli]
JA: edited and sent to JS
17:40:59 [allanj]
summary of 2.11 LG01: I noticed an error in guideline 2.11. In the summary, each criterion is identified (e.g. stop/pause/resume 2.11.5). However there is a mismatch starting at 2.11.8. In the summary, 2.11.8 should describe enabling and disabling of tracks while 2.11.9 should address contrast adjustments. However in the following details section, there is no content about tracks, 2.11.8 is...
17:41:00 [allanj]
...used to describe contrast and 2.11.9 is not listed.
17:41:01 [Jan]
17:41:01 [allanj]
That criterion is very important because it likely address captions and audio description of timed media.
17:41:54 [a-jealli]
JA: this seems editorial give to JS
17:41:58 [allanj]
action: Jeanne to repair 2.11 summary in regard to comment LG01
17:41:58 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-986 - Repair 2.11 summary in regard to comment lg01 [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-06-26].
17:43:19 [allanj]
Topic: LG02 1.7.4 Save Copies of Stylesheets:
17:43:38 [allanj]
LG02: To save some crucial load time and bandwidth for mobile users, it is custom to compress stylesheets and scripts (the process is usually called minification). Considering this, it would be highly beneficial if the saved stylesheet were saved in a pretty-print manner to facilitate authoring by users.
17:43:40 [allanj]
Note that minification is not as important for local stylesheet as files loaded locally don't incur the overheads of HTTP requests.
17:44:40 [a-jealli]
JA: ask for input
17:45:47 [a-jealli]
GL: must be tools that can be used
17:46:44 [a-jealli]
Group: agree
17:47:10 [allanj]
action: allanj to create an implementation note for 1.7.4 about formatted CSS not minified
17:47:10 [trackbot]
Error finding 'allanj'. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
17:47:22 [allanj]
action: jallan to create an implementation note for 1.7.4 about formatted CSS not minified
17:47:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-987 - Create an implementation note for 1.7.4 about formatted css not minified [on Jim Allan - due 2014-06-26].
17:48:01 [allanj]
Topic: LG03 2.4.5 Alternative Content Search:
17:48:11 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:48:11 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jeanne
17:48:13 [allanj]
LG03: 2.11.2 and 2.11.3 requires the ability to block execution or playback of media. However in 2.4.5, searching a page should also search in captions, which may not be loaded as per 2.11.2 / 2.11.3. The examples for 2.4.5 mention that the user agent moves to the specified point in the video.
17:48:15 [allanj]
Am i misunderstanding?
17:48:59 [a-jealli]
JA: conflict or a misunderstanding
17:52:38 [a-jealli]
Group: Discussing captions vs document. What is actually getting down loaded? When are captions downloaded?
17:54:57 [a-jealli]
GL: 2.11.1 auto play over ride discussion
17:56:02 [a-jealli]
JA: note or move over to 2.4.5.
17:56:55 [a-jealli]
JS: does it apply to just 2.4.5. or move to top
17:58:14 [a-jealli]
JR: Example of issue
17:59:03 [a-jealli]
JA: Infinite scowling
17:59:15 [allanj]
17:59:52 [a-jealli]
thank you
18:00:52 [a-jealli]
KF: discuss push back from browsers
18:05:31 [kford]
Group sorting out comment status
18:05:34 [a-jealli]
JA All editorials, Erik all done, comment dispositions not all up to date
18:06:03 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:06:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate kford
18:06:10 [Greg]
That is, push back from browser developers if we were to try to require content to be downloaded early, just so the user could search alternative content. We are explicitly instead adding a note to clarify that we are NOT requiring that.
18:09:15 [Greg]
18:10:08 [allanj]
Topic: SH03 1.8.14 Provide Webpage Bookmarks
18:10:32 [allanj]
H03: 1.8.14 is a good idea but I think we need to make it clear that persistence is not guaranteed if the page elements have changed and there needs to be some way to notify people that the marked content has changed or been lost.
18:11:03 [kford]
JA: Doesn't this seem related to infinite scroll.
18:11:40 [allanj]
and searching, or live regions
18:11:41 [kford]
GL: this is no different than having a bookmark to an internal link and that link might be gone.
18:14:34 [kford]
JR goes over a couple of examples of facebook and snapchat messages that disappear over time.
18:15:40 [a-jealli]
JA: JS numbers on 1.8.17 is has something not come through
18:16:26 [a-jealli]
JS: comments where written by JR
18:17:11 [a-jealli]
JR: not amending but adding another case
18:18:02 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:18:02 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate kford
18:18:09 [kford]
regrets: Kim
18:18:45 [allanj]
Topic: SH04 1.10.1 Show Related Elements:
18:18:54 [allanj]
SH04: For 1.10.1 are we assuming that close elements will be close in the DOM. I'd think this would be hard based on the visual rendering, and would require some idea of the semantics of the association. I'd also think that a label to a form element could be close in DOM for distant in the visual rendering based on the CSS, how is this handled?
18:19:32 [kford]
Present: Jim, Jan, Greg, Kelly, Jeanne
18:20:01 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:20:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate kford
18:21:10 [a-jealli]
GL: doesn't understand comment and explains his reasoning
18:21:20 [allanj]
gl: the relationship is 'recognized', spatial proximity should not matter
18:23:00 [allanj]
jr: what does "access" mean? can the user go there, is there a tooltip, or access to the information.
18:23:11 [a-jealli]
GL: access does that mean go there or access to info
18:23:12 [allanj]
gl: access to information, not navigation.
18:23:39 [Greg]
The Intent and Examples clarify this is not about navigation, but about presenting related information to the user.
18:24:57 [kford]
Group keeps discussing what we mean about the path to an element.
18:25:07 [kford]
Talking about how unbounded this can become.
18:25:28 [allanj]
from the implementation doc: Some users have difficulty perceiving, remembering, or understanding the relationships between elements and their descriptions. Certain elements relate to others in a recognizable manner, such as relationships with 'id' attributes and child elements (e.g. Ajax widgets and with form elements). This allows users to better understand these relationships even if the...
18:25:30 [allanj]
...elements are not adjacent on the screen or the DOM.
18:25:55 [Greg]
Jan is correct that the SC is vague about how many different types of relationships need to be supported.
18:26:42 [a-jealli]
JR: How does a browser know when it is fullfulled
18:27:18 [Greg]
Also note that the title of the SC doesn't really match with the actual wording, as the former says "show related elements" but the SC does not require showing any elements, but rather information from or about those elements.
18:28:22 [a-jealli]
GL: suggest change title or sc
18:29:32 [Jan]
1.10.1 Show Related Elements: The user agent presents labels for at least the following element relations: (Level AA)
18:29:34 [Jan]
- Form control labels
18:29:35 [Jan]
- tyable cell headers
18:29:39 [a-jealli]
JA: Headers and id or relationships with nested elements, open for discussion
18:30:23 [allanj]
+1 to Jan proposal
18:30:38 [allanj]
kf: +1 to jan proposal
18:30:40 [a-jealli]
KF: agree with JR 1.10.1
18:30:43 [Jan]
1.10.1 Show Related Elements: The user agent presents labels for at least the following element relationships: (Level AA)
18:30:45 [Jan]
- Form control labels
18:30:46 [Jan]
- table cell headers
18:31:15 [Jan]
1.10.1 Show Related Elements: The user agent presents adjacent labels for at least the following element relationships: (Level AA)
18:31:16 [Jan]
- Form control labels
18:31:18 [Jan]
- table cell headers
18:31:50 [a-jealli]
Group Discuss JR proposal
18:33:11 [Zakim]
18:33:13 [Zakim]
18:33:16 [Zakim]
18:33:24 [Zakim]
18:33:26 [Zakim]
18:33:27 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has ended
18:33:27 [Zakim]
Attendees were kford, Jeanne, Greg_Lowney, Jan, Jim_Allan
18:33:29 [allanj]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:33:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate allanj
18:34:53 [allanj]
zakim, please part
18:34:53 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ua
18:35:01 [allanj]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:35:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate allanj
18:38:55 [allanj]
rrsagent,please part
18:38:55 [RRSAgent]
I see 3 open action items saved in :
18:38:55 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jeanne to repair 2.11 summary in regard to comment LG01 [1]
18:38:55 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:38:55 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: allanj to create an implementation note for 1.7.4 about formatted CSS not minified [2]
18:38:55 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:38:55 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jallan to create an implementation note for 1.7.4 about formatted CSS not minified [3]
18:38:55 [RRSAgent]
recorded in