See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 01 October 2014
<janina> agenda: this
<scribe> scribenick: joanie
JS: Are there any additions, corrections, or edits for last week's minutes?
... Hearing none, objections to publishing them.
RESOLUTION: The group agrees to publish the minutes as submitted.
JS: I wanted to spend some time talking about this in terms of figuring out who all needs to be at the table and how much time is needed.
... I was hoping Rich would be here. Perhaps we should come back to this topic.
MC: Reminder to Cynthia and Rich to review CSS flexbox. But the actions are set due for next week.
... action 1512
JS: Still working on it
MC: action 1508
JF: Still working on it
MC: action-1503 on Lisa, who isn't here.
... A couple of actions for Janina and Cynthia for device implementation status.
JS: Still now updates.
<MichaelC> close action-1428
<trackbot> Closed action-1428.
MC: Re action-1428. In practice we should wait to last call.
<MichaelC> close action-1460
<trackbot> Closed action-1460.
JS: I want to talk about TPAC, in particular the group's sense on two things:
... Topics to meet with other people.
... Who needs to be at the table and how much time do we think we need for each topic?
... Topics are: Event handler enumerations,
... Taxonomy for graphics, roles and validation for digital publishing
... Also notes and footnotes
... Name computation and the like.
... A new issue that surfaced this week, regression in the CR version of the canvas 2d spec
... HTML working group has on their list how to handle W3C HTML5 specs moving forward, including modularization of the spec.
... Going back, event handlers. I think we need us, HTML because the own the specs, and web apps
... Anyone else?
CS: I'm very interested in that area.
JS: So we should try to do it on Thursday the 30th?
CS: Yes, that would be excellend, and I may even have a proposal.
JS: I will try to do that. Who else?
... How long a conversation would this be? 30 minutes? 60? 90?
CS: At least 60.
RS: Agreed.
CS: If we could schedule it right before lunch that would be great, for informal follow-up discussion.
JS: Thursday from our perspective is a possibility.
... Though the afternoon is gone to digital publishing.
... We'll aim for Thursday morning.
... 2. Taxonomy for graphics
Fred: I should be there. I'll be there Thursday and Friday.
JS: This would be a joint meeting with SVG and HTML, and also maybe CSS
... How much time?
<Susann_Keohane> SK: I'm interested in attending that meeting too
RS: We are not going to solve it all. I think a half hour to 45 minutes.
JS: I'll put 30-60 minutes.
... Roles and validation for digital publishing.
<JF> I too am interested in the taxonomy discussions
JS: I think we should meet with them after lunch on Thursday.
... I have an email out to the dpub chair. I offered them the 2:30 time slot.
... Then we could meet with HTML and then transition into footnotes, etc.
... How long do we need jointly?
... Another 30-45 minutes.
JF: At least 45 minutes.
RS: Digital publishing is going to probably take longer.
JS: I think the particulars, we'd talk to them directly. We need HTML on the approach.
RS: That's a big deal, and I agree. Mike Smith?
JS: Yes, and Robin.
JF: And Henri Sivonen.
JS: 45-60 minutes for that
... Name computation?
... Do we have something to talk about this?
RS: I think we have this under control.
... We have details to work out, but we're getting there.
JS: And we don't need their sign off on anything.
RS: What I don't have a good handle on is time frame. Part of what we're doing is the interoperability piece.
... And they changed their schedule.
... Are they doing to do a 5.1 in a year?
... We want to sync up the two efforts.
JS: The modularization route will make topic sync up more relevant. But they need to decide about modularization first.
RS: Probably not for this TPAC, but in the back of your mind, education and outreach at some point in the future, integrating host language semantics in HTML 5 is going to impact authors.
... How do we convey that? We have some education to do.
JS: Agreed. Authoring best practices needs to get off and running.
... Regarding the regression Rich found in the canvas 2D spec. Is this a TPAC item?
RS: The hit test location assignment to a fallback element got dropped from the spec that you need to notify ATs of the location of the region
JS: We cannot yet estiimate if this is a TPAC topic or not.
... Anyone else with questions or items?
MC: CSS flexbox, we already have actions for.
JS: We should probably update the actions with the pointer to the spec.
... We have a first cut next week. Do they have a due date for comments?
MC: They should (looks)
... Comment date 25 October.
<MichaelC> action-1510: http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-css-flexbox-1-20140925/
<trackbot> Notes added to action-1510 Review sept 2014 version of css flexbox http://www.w3.org/tr/css3-flexbox/.
<MichaelC> action-1511: http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-css-flexbox-1-20140925/
<trackbot> Notes added to action-1511 Review sept 2014 version of css flexbox http://www.w3.org/tr/css3-flexbox/.
JS: 25 October for comments re action-1510 and action-1511
... We'll talk about this next week.
Fred: CSS regions module level 1, which came out in Feb is related to this.
... They seem to do what tabindex does. They have before and after.
RS: That might be the solution for flexbox. You need to ensure you have a logical navigation sequence.
Fred: Since you can have HTML elements with tabindex, isn't that the same thing?
CS: If one is in the markup and one is in the style, it's going to get screwed up.
(general agreement)
Fred: Also, does this overlap with ARIA flowto?
CS: Somewhat.
RS: If you can do this with CSS to help you with navigation order, it's a win.
<fesch> CSS Regions Module Level 1
Fred: The above is the name for the module.
MC: There's no other last calls. There are some working drafts.
... DOM Level 3 events. I don't know if we need to formally review it though we are keenly interested in it.
JS: Do we want to ask Shane to look at it?
Shane: I'll look at it.
<MichaelC> ACTION: shane to review DOM 3 Events WD http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-DOM-Level-3-Events-20140925/ [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/01-pf-irc]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1516 - Review dom 3 events wd http://www.w3.org/tr/2014/wd-dom-level-3-events-20140925/ [on Shane McCarron - due 2014-10-08].
<MichaelC> TTML Text and Image Profiles for Internet Media Subtitles and Captions 1.0
<fesch> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-regions/
<MichaelC> http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-ttml-imsc1-20140930/
RS: Could we carve out some time at TPAC for flexbox, etc.
JS: With whom?
RS: Us.
JS: I'm adding it to the list.
JF: What are we doing with TTML Text?
MC: I think we did look at it before. I don't recall if we had specific concerns, though it does intersect strongly with our work.
JS: I think we can let this draft go currently due to lack of time/resources. We should dig deeper first and/or reach out.
JF: They are looking to add images that would be registered on the timeline.
... This would augment captions; not replace it.
... We need to be sure the WCAG folks are watching it.
... I'll discuss it with Andrew and Josh, perhaps at TPAC.
MC: FYI, there are updated drafts of UAIG and supporting documents.
... This is just a working draft.
JS: I thought I also saw a selectors draft?
RS: We'll have another heartbeat draft in time for TPAC.
... Also for the name and description.
... Beyond that, we're going to have a discussion with digital pub at TPAC.
... By early next year, we'll also have the SVG draft. This is moving along.
... The big thing now is making sure we work through all of our action items for 1.1.
JS: This afternoon, I'll send out an email to HTML and SVG chairs about wanting to have a joint meeting at TPAC.
RS: As long as they meet before TPAC, I can get it on the agenda for the following week.
JS: (Summarizes the issue)
... I think we really need to get that missing language back.
RS: Agreed. Either now or by the 1.1.
... It's already implemented in browsers.
<MichaelC> 2dContext CR
<MichaelC> 2dContext 2 WD
MC: It looks like there is both a CR and WD (above). One thing to check is if the text is missing there too. I'm not sure how to triage at what point the text went missing.
RS: We were going to notify the author. The earlier text in a draft basically said that the user agent should notify the assistive technologies. But it wasn't normative. They were going to make it normative, but for some reason it didn't go in.
MC: That's different from it having been removed.
... If it's critical, we might push for the re-cycle.
JS: I think Rich is correct, whatever the remedy is, we need it relatively soon.
RS: They did put in if draw focus is needed, it sets the location.
... It's not like we're without anything.
... Also, there were a number of changes for hit testing which would go into version 2 which I like.
... In version 1, you get notified of the hit, but it's at the canvas level; not the fallback level.
... This would change in version 2.
JS: What can we do with the level 1?
... I think we want to do two things: 1) We believe it's implemented and will pass CR if we can write a test for it. So we should verify this.
... 2) It would be useful to push the URL into the minutes where we agreed that it should go in.
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say need to figure out where the loop broke
MC: It will be important to figure out where the communication broke down.
RS: Everyone believes we should be testing for location information. The fact that it's not in the spec, I think everyone is suprised.
<MichaelC> ACTION: janina to figure out why canvas 2d hit region testing wasn´t put in the spec [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/01-pf-irc]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1517 - Figure out why canvas 2d hit region testing wasn´t put in the spec [on Janina Sajka - due 2014-10-08].
MC: We'll also want to consider impact on their timeline.
... And if there's anything we can do to help.
JS: That's why we want to find out if it's already implemented.
(Some discussion on the potential timeline impact)
JS: This will be on tomorrow's task force agenda.