Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
30 Apr 2015

See also: IRC log




<trackbot> Date: 30 April 2015

<scribe> meeting: DPUB ARIA Task Force

<scribe> scribenick: tzviya

<janina> trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 30 April 2015

<ivan> ??????

<ivan> in 60 minutes?

<ShaneM> now


tzviya: Michael Smith essentially said that he will not put this (extended roles)into validator

Janina: Will the views of one person hold up the work of W3C?

Ivan: He has a lot of influence over HTML WG

ShaneM: agree that adding attribute like role-vocab would unneeded complexity to validator
... W3C has essentially deprecated the validator. There has been a policy decision that UAs know how to deal with invalid content

<Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to separate architectural issues from vocabulary issues

MichaelC: The architectual issue that's a concern for validator is out of scope for this TF. Must sort it out in ARIA TF.
... Can we find a way for DPUB to publish?

tzviya: DPUB has great concerns about publishing the spec as it is. We agreed to flag any issues in the terms, and there are issues on close to half the terms.

ivan: the issue of ARIA extensibility is separate, but we are concerned with the flurry of issues raised in the last few days
... the essential issues raised are that the scope of ARIA should be wider than basic definition of HTML tag, i.e. add info about HTML content
... and this info is v important for a11y in general
... may not have IMMEDIATE interest for AT today
... IF PF view is that ARIA is for AT only, than we should not continue on this path

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to talk about the scope of ARIA

janina: we need to start socializing architeture of ARIA - perhaps TPAC plenary session
... acknowledge validation concerns of validation
... ARIA is about supporting full a11y, not just AT. Curb cuts are for strollers too
... ARIA expects to be around for a while. It will be around for a while

<Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say a hobbled spec still can collect feedback, and we want that and to say JC doesn´t speak for PF, he speaks for himself - there isn´t an official

Janina: I don't know about publishing a spec with so many flags, especially all from one person

MichaelC: We understand concerns about hobbled spec, but it is worth publishing to get feedback
... James is offering his opinion
... There is not a model for ARIA extension. We need to dev an architecture for ARIA extension.
... The role attr has always been intended for extensibility.
... It's normal for a spec to say that there are open issues, see issue tracker. Worthwhile to put issue

<richardschwerdtfeger> http://www.w3.org/TR/core-aam-1.1/#mapping_role_table

MichaelC: flags on specific contentious issues, but no need to flag all issues

rich: need to avoid incorrect semantic info for role values
... we cannot break AT

Tzviya: we are supposed to be doing a mapping document as well

Rich: The terms may need to be disambiguated so that "part" of book and "part" of airplane can be distinguished

<ivan> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/50#issue-71671785

<ivan> The DPUB abstract role is unnecessary for accessibility. This is a simple section/chapter/region, etc. whose additional semantics are clearly conveyed by the labeling heading (usually "Abstract")

ivan: Yes, there must be a method for disambiguating. This is a question, not of disambiguity, but *WHAT* the roles are

<janina> ~q+

rich: DPUB is trying to deliver something to publishing community, and others are so tightly controlling vocab that cannot

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to mention that the expanded value for a role name should be a URI. Then ATs know EXACTLY what it means and to

Janina: I disagree w assertion that these terms are not important for a11y

<Zakim> shane, you wanted to point out that this is NOT in scope for DPUB

Shane: meta issues are not DPUB's problem

Rich: the reason for the TFs is to avoid such tight control that we avoid innovation
... we must avoid breaking AT and address extensibility

tzviya: what is the next step?

<ShaneM> I just want to point out that in the github thread where people are talking about what things are needed for A11Y or not, James Craig points out that adding aliases for existing roles is trivial in implementations.

rich: we need to address extension mechanism

tzviya: DPUB might want to hold off on publishing anything until there is more to say about extension mechanism

markus: to avoid this taking so much time, we would want to hold off until there is some clarity on extensibility mechanism

<richardschwerdtfeger> http://www.w3.org/TR/role-attribute/

markus: as well as some clarity on @role
... once we have some clarity, we can put more time into this

<Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say publish vocab

Michael: main interest of this group is the roles
... maybe we can pull back and remove some of the language around module stuff
... identify the terms that will eventually become a moduel
... would that work?

markus: i wish we had that idea 6 months ago

janina: don't want to give up

<richardschwerdtfeger> The role attribute takes as its value one or more whitespace separated TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs, which is defined in [RDFA-CORE]. Each component of the value maps to an IRI that corresponds to a vocabulary term that SHOULD be defined using RDF.

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to say that I proposed an extension architecture to PF weeks ago. It needs to be debated / agreed upon.

ivan: we are bound to HTML 5
... relying on doc that we know is rejected by them is not reliable

<Zakim> shane, you wanted to say that I proposed an extension architecture to PF weeks ago. It needs to be debated / agreed upon.

shane: PF is working on solving this problem

Ivan: my problem with what Michael proposed is that if we propose list of terms prior to clarifying extension mech and @role
... then we will get comments like the ones we have seen in the past few days

<Zakim> mgylling, you wanted to say that it is solvable, if we do things in the right order

Tzviya: We are not recommending doing away with the draft, just leaving it alone until the extension mech and scope of ARIA is clarified

markus: we do think this is solvable
... the list of terms would have been great up front, but we don't have resources for major refactoring right now
... we would like to make sure that fundamental issues are addressed by community

rich: next step is extension mechanism

<MichaelC> Extension specifications / modules vs. ARIA Core (ACTION-1618)

<janina> PF Archive: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/

<MichaelC> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dpub-aria/2015Apr/0042.html

<MichaelC> ^ better URI to same message for *this* group

tzviya: DPUB can help out with arguments for extensibility

<richardschwerdtfeger> myvocab-myrole

<mgylling> … and with arguments for non-AT usage scope

tzviya: what are the next steps for this group?

michaelC: we shouldn't assume that the outcome of last negotiation with HTML is a concern
... need to renegotiate

tzviya: this is the last DPUB ARIA meeting for a time

<ivan> +1 to Michael

<Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to keep mailing list open, copy relevant ARIA discussions

rich: anything that goes into ARIA core is open for scrutiny, module should not be reviewed to this extent

michael: we will abandon this call slot, leave the email list open
... copy list on pertinent issues, when this is discussed

ivan: the DPUB IG is being rechartered as well
... the draft for now includes work on this, but we will have minor admin hiccups as well
... should have updated charter in september

tzviya: PF will inform some members that we are not going to FPWD at this point, DPUB will inform membership

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/04/30 13:57:29 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/will not/will/
Found ScribeNick: tzviya
Inferring Scribes: tzviya

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: ARIA IPcaller Ivan Janina Michael Michael_Cooper P1 P3 PF Rich_Schwerdtfeger ShaneM Susann_Keohane aaaa afaik an architecture be but clearly develop dpub-aria extensible extension flags for hobbled https issue joined links many markus meant mgarrish mgylling michaelC more need normal not ones publish rich richardschwerdtfeger role say scribenick shane that to too trackbot tracker tzviya view was we were who with
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Found Date: 30 Apr 2015
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/04/30-dpub-aria-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]