15:49:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pf
15:49:02 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/05/20-pf-irc
15:49:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:49:04 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #pf
15:49:06 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_PF
15:49:06 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_PF()12:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
15:49:07 <trackbot> Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
15:49:07 <trackbot> Date: 20 May 2015
15:49:29 <janina> agenda?
15:50:22 <janina> Chair:  Janina
15:50:22 <janina> agenda: this
15:50:22 <janina> agenda+ preview agenda with items from two minutes; Webex continued
15:50:22 <janina> agenda+ Actions Review (Specs) http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/open
15:50:23 <janina> agenda+ new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html#tr_LCWD
15:50:24 <janina> agenda+ Community Groups http://www.w3.org/community/groups/
15:50:27 <janina> agenda+ ARIA.Next Items--Extension Mechanism [See Below]
15:50:29 <janina> agenda+ Rechartering Continued
15:50:32 <janina> agenda+  Other Task Force Updates; COGA; HTML-A11Y; SVG
15:50:34 <janina> agenda+ Other Business
15:50:37 <janina> agenda+ next and future meetings http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#s_273
15:50:40 <janina> agenda+ be done
15:52:53 <janina>  agenda?
15:56:25 <janina> present+ Janina
15:56:36 <janina> zakim, next item
15:56:36 <Zakim> agendum 1. "preview agenda with items from two minutes; Webex continued" taken up [from janina]
16:01:24 <janina> Yes, James and I are chatting
16:05:07 <joanie> present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
16:09:07 <Gottfried> Gottfried has joined #pf
16:09:27 <Gottfried> Gottfried has left #pf
16:11:29 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #pf
16:11:35 <Zakim> WAI_PF()12:00PM has now started
16:11:42 <Zakim> +??P0
16:11:56 <janina> Rich, we're on Webex!
16:12:04 <janina> Webex 647 857 439#
16:13:08 <Zakim> -??P0
16:13:10 <Zakim> WAI_PF()12:00PM has ended
16:13:10 <Zakim> Attendees were
16:14:03 <fesch> fesch has joined #pf
16:14:20 <fesch> present+ fesch
16:14:33 <MichaelC> present+ Michael_Cooper
16:14:40 <joanie> scribe: joanie
16:14:55 <MichaelC> present+ JamesN
16:15:28 <janina> zakim, next item
16:15:28 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Actions Review (Specs) http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/open" taken up [from janina]
16:15:34 <Gottfried> Gottfried has joined #pf
16:15:56 <joanie> Janina: I'm in the middle of media. It's a long spec.
16:16:07 <joanie> Janina: I need to tell them that I'm working on it still. I'll do that today.
16:16:13 <joanie> MC: That would be a good idea.
16:16:22 <joanie> action-1615
16:16:22 <trackbot> action-1615 -- Janina Sajka to Review media capture and streams http://www.w3.org/tr/mediacapture-streams/ -- due 2015-05-06 -- OPEN
16:16:22 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1615
16:16:35 <joanie> MC: There's a bunch of actions that are not due yet.
16:16:51 <joanie> MC: Aside from media capture streams, there's nothing else under spec review.
16:16:58 <janina> zakim, next item
16:16:58 <Zakim> agendum 3. "new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html#tr_LCWD" taken up [from janina]
16:16:59 <joanie> MC: Everything else is due 27th or 29th
16:18:14 <joanie> MC: Canvas 2D context is in last call.
16:18:26 <joanie> Janina: We're famailiar with that via HTML A11y task force.
16:18:31 <joanie> Janina: Rich is on top of that.
16:18:34 <MichaelC> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2dcontext/ HTML Canvas 2D Context
16:18:52 <joanie> Janina: We were expecting this publication. We had some language changes last minute.
16:19:02 <joanie> Janina: I'm not sure if those changes made it into last call.
16:19:14 <joanie> Janina: We'll continue debugging the two implementations.
16:19:24 <joanie> Janina: Then we'll have full support, including hit regions.
16:19:37 <joanie> MC: About the CR, this is under the old process where it cannot easily change.
16:19:51 <joanie> MC: That means we need to do things in last call.
16:20:03 <joanie> FE: Rich told me hit regions was implemented in Chrome and Firefox.
16:20:13 <joanie> Janina: I think both are amenable to bug reports.
16:20:28 <joanie> Janina: And we'll continue to manage this in the HTML A11y task force.
16:20:34 <joanie> MC: So we don't need an action in PF?
16:20:38 <joanie> Janina: No
16:20:46 <joanie> MC: They do not provide a last call due date.
16:20:46 <Gottfried> Gottfried has left #pf
16:20:55 <joanie> MC: That means we don't know when they'll go to CR.
16:21:06 <joanie> Janina: I'll remind Paul to state that.
16:21:24 <joanie> Janina: I don't think we want the spec to change in CR, but do want it to be long enough to catch bugs.
16:21:40 <joanie> MC: It cannot exit CR unless it passes.
16:21:55 <joanie> Janina: I'm talking about bugs in implementation; not the spec.
16:22:01 <joanie> MC: CSS flexbox is up for last call.
16:22:17 <joanie> MC: I believe we've reviewed it before. I know we've had concerns.
16:22:27 <MichaelC> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/css-flexbox-1/ CSS Flexible Box Layout Module Level 1
16:22:32 <joanie> MC: I'm not sure if we have anything to comment upon at this time.
16:22:45 <joanie> MC: Candidate recommendations.
16:23:38 <joanie> RS: Bo is participating with the CSS group and is on top of this.
16:24:10 <Gottfried> Gottfried has joined #pf
16:24:37 <MichaelC> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1/ TTML Text and Image Profiles for Internet Media Subtitles and Captions 1.0
16:25:01 <joanie> MC: I think we took a look at this at the last CR.
16:25:22 <joanie> MC: If they're in CR, there are presumably substantial changes.
16:25:29 <joanie> MC: But I don't see a list of what they are.
16:25:41 <Zakim> WAI_PF()12:00PM has now started
16:25:48 <Zakim> +??P0
16:25:54 <joanie> s/at this/at TTML Text and Image Profiles for Internet Media Subtitles and Captions 1.0/
16:26:05 <joanie> Janina: Would we be out of line to request a list of changes?
16:26:14 <joanie> MC: It wouldn't impact this publication.
16:26:30 <joanie> MC: In general, I'd like to establish some best practices for review.
16:26:38 <Zakim> -??P0
16:26:39 <Zakim> WAI_PF()12:00PM has ended
16:26:39 <Zakim> Attendees were
16:26:45 <Zakim> WAI_PF()12:00PM has now started
16:26:47 <joanie> MC: They've made some changes with respect to frame rate synchronization.
16:26:52 <Zakim> +??P0
16:26:57 <joanie> MC: There's some editorial edits here and there.
16:27:06 <Gottfried> I am trying to get in.  But it says i am the first participant on the conference.
16:27:19 <janina> Gottfried: We're on Webex: 647 857 439#
16:27:30 <joanie> MC: The initial value of text align should be center; before it didn't have a default value.
16:27:30 <Gottfried> What URL?
16:27:37 <joanie> MC: Everything else looks like clarifications.
16:27:48 <Zakim> -??P0
16:27:49 <Zakim> WAI_PF()12:00PM has ended
16:27:49 <Zakim> Attendees were
16:28:02 <janina> https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=m6e3f82ceee1b44268fd496d928c40001
16:28:22 <joanie> MC: Agreed that we don't need to review this?
16:28:28 <joanie> Janina: I don't think we need to review it.
16:28:32 <joanie> MC: Web Notifications
16:28:35 <MichaelC> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/notifications/ Web Notifications
16:28:47 <joanie> MC: This one is under the new process.
16:29:00 <joanie> MC: I have the sense we've looked at this before. I don't recall if we had concerns.
16:29:07 <joanie> Janina: We did, concerns about an icon.
16:29:15 <joanie> Janina: But I think we backed off.
16:29:26 <joanie> MC: Reads from spec.
16:29:35 <joanie> Janina: I think that was the result of our comments.
16:29:49 <joanie> MC: There's no obvious ChangeLog.
16:30:33 <joanie> MC: Three specs from us and two from HTML which use "ARIA" in their titles.
16:30:55 <joanie> Janina: We got review on the Notes on using ARIA in HTML.
16:31:12 <joanie> MC: The names of the two documents confuses me.
16:31:19 <joanie> Janina: Both are Steve's.
16:31:31 <joanie> Janina: The Notes document is basically best practice.
16:32:08 <joanie> Janina: There was quite a lot of discussion on list. Everyone approved publication.
16:32:27 <joanie> Janina: We need to be sure Notes and the ARIA Authoring Practices remain in sync.
16:32:37 <joanie> MC: I see this is REC track. Is that correct?
16:32:43 <joanie> Janina: No.
16:33:13 <joanie> Janina: Action me to point this out.
16:33:54 <MichaelC> action: janina to file comment on Notes on Using ARIA in HTML http://www.w3.org/TR/aria-in-html/ that it should not be on the Rec track
16:33:54 <trackbot> Created ACTION-1641 - File comment on notes on using aria in html http://www.w3.org/tr/aria-in-html/ that it should not be on the rec track [on Janina Sajka - due 2015-05-27].
16:34:44 <joanie> MC: There is now a means to publish more frequently via a new automated tool.
16:35:06 <joanie> MC: The current version of this tool doesn't yet support non-REC-track documents.
16:35:43 <joanie> MC: The tool should allow NOTE-track documents to also be published.
16:35:49 <joanie> Janina: Did they even think about it?
16:36:02 <joanie> MC: Yes, there's documentation stating that you cannot publishing NOTE-track stuff.
16:36:14 <joanie> MC: Which is why I haven't moved us to that process yet.
16:36:29 <joanie> Janina: ARIA in HTML is the breakout of the section that talks about ARIA conformance.
16:36:50 <joanie> Janina: We had a lot of discussion about not having joint ownership of this document.
16:37:06 <joanie> Janina: And that document is on the automated process, and it is REC-track.
16:37:20 <joanie> Janina: We need to proactively review it from time to time now as a result.
16:37:47 <joanie> Janina: This is a coordination question we haven't talked about yet.
16:38:13 <joanie> Janina: If the group splits, the review working group would need to stay on top of things remaining in sync.
16:38:31 <joanie> Janina: And it will be up to the ARIA group to decide about joint ownership or not.
16:38:59 <joanie> MC: There are two other docs that are working drafts.
16:39:04 <joanie> Zakim, next item
16:39:04 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Community Groups http://www.w3.org/community/groups/" taken up [from janina]
16:39:19 <MichaelC> present+ Gottfried
16:39:36 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #pf
16:39:53 <joanie> MC: I had gotten a month ahead of our three-month advance.
16:40:05 <joanie> MC: So we don't have any new community groups to look at as a result.
16:40:14 <joanie> Zakim, next item
16:40:14 <Zakim> agendum 5. "ARIA.Next Items--Extension Mechanism" taken up [from See Below]
16:40:29 <joanie> Janina: Rich, we have an extension definition.
16:40:37 <joanie> Janina: And we want a formal consensus?
16:41:08 <janina> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/ARIAExtensions
16:41:13 <joanie> RS: We ran into an issue with Digital Publishing.
16:41:42 <joanie> RS: We need to be able to extend ARIA without impacting ARIA core.
16:42:03 <joanie> RS: So the Extensions proposal allows other groups to write an extension module.
16:42:13 <richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/ARIAExtensions
16:42:20 <joanie> RS: Shane and I worked on this (link above)
16:42:28 <joanie> RS: Anyone can start working on an extension.
16:42:42 <joanie> RS: This is for 1.x. We don't yet know what we're going to do about ARIA 2.x.
16:42:56 <joanie> RS: (Reads from document linked above)
16:43:46 <joanie> RS: I don't know what will happen after the chartering.
16:44:50 <joanie> RS: We may have one in development like ARIA 1.1, which is maybe in draft form. We need to be sure it's published on the TR list.
16:45:12 <joanie> RS: (More reading from document)
16:46:12 <joanie> RS: The ARIA group might want to incorporate some roles into the main spec, like Chapter.
16:46:30 <joanie> RS: The other thing that will be required is a REC-track mapping specification.
16:46:49 <joanie> RS: The important part is your extension cannot break ATs or interfere with other mappings.
16:47:01 <joanie> RS: Are there any concerns about this?
16:47:16 <joanie> CS: I still need to write up the non-role-related extensions.
16:47:30 <joanie> RS: We're going to present this to the HTML A11y group tomorrow.
16:47:41 <joanie> RS: I wouldn't worry too much about this now.
16:47:50 <joanie> Janina: We want to formally adopt this.
16:48:01 <joanie> Janina: This is version 1.0. We can always make a 1.1.
16:48:15 <joanie> CS: My concern is that 2.0 is going to be done as a set of modules.
16:48:28 <joanie> RS: If we have to tweak the process at some point, I don't think that's a problem.
16:48:43 <joanie> Janina: And this is for ARIA 1.x.
16:48:57 <joanie> s/A11y group/Working Group/
16:49:12 <joanie> CS: So you added the bit about it being for 1.x?
16:49:14 <joanie> RS: Yes.
16:49:25 <joanie> CS: I'll give it a quick read and send any concerns to the mailing list.
16:49:34 <joanie> Janina: Should I wait for this call to complete for a CFC?
16:49:44 <richardschwerdtfeger> (hand-wave about versions and synchronization - TBD).
16:49:56 <joanie> RS: There's a statement from Shane about "hand wave" (text above)
16:50:21 <joanie> MC: What's to be determined is how we implement that.
16:50:31 <joanie> MC: Does the ARIA spec say how to make extensions noramtive?
16:50:44 <joanie> MC: Does the ARIA spec gets published with the extension incorporated into it?
16:50:48 <joanie> RS: I think that depends.
16:51:01 <joanie> Janina: It already says you could go either way with that.
16:51:39 <joanie> Janina: We don't have a mechanism on the engine end to implement only parts of things.
16:51:51 <joanie> CS: Not every browser is going to do every extension.
16:52:20 <joanie> CS: For instance, if DPUB becomes a recommendation, why would browsers implement that?
16:52:33 <joanie> CS: And it seems weird that failure to implement DPUB would make you non-compliant.
16:52:43 <joanie> RS: All DPUB readers are based on web engines.
16:53:27 <joanie> CS: If someone does an extension spec for scientific equations, would that mean your browser is not compliant?
16:53:34 <joanie> RS: Ah, no.
16:53:47 <joanie> RS: You have to define a mapping, and have two implementations.
16:53:54 <joanie> RS: A host language might not implement a module.
16:54:05 <joanie> RS: For instance I don't think SVG would implement DPUB.
16:54:14 <joanie> MC: I do think the wording of item 4 is problematic.
16:54:26 <joanie> MC: I read it to mean conformance equals ARIA plus all modules.
16:54:30 <joanie> CS: Yes.
16:54:39 <joanie> RS: Do you have suggested wording?
16:54:45 <joanie> MC: I don't have a single sentence.
16:55:30 <joanie> MC: I think we need to make it clear that you can still conform to ARIA core.
16:55:42 <joanie> RS: Things that are not in ARIA core would be considered optional.
16:55:58 <joanie> MC: We say all roles are normative.
16:56:20 <joanie> CS: Conformance needs to be separate.
16:56:41 <joanie> RS: That's what I mean by optional. Browsers don't have to implement it. But you need two implementations.
16:57:02 <joanie> MC: What's not called out in this wording is if the extensions are in the REC track, their conformance is non-optional.
16:57:35 <joanie> CS: ARIA DPUB, for example, should be optional with respect to conformance to ARIA core.
16:57:58 <joanie> Janina: I think we'll be happiest if implementation of extensions is optional.
16:58:08 <joanie> MC: We need to be sure to include stakeholders.
16:58:24 <joanie> MC: For instance, we'd be unhappy if longdesc were viewed as extensions.
16:58:39 <joanie> CS: I'm not worried about REC; I'm asking about my browser being compliant.
16:58:55 <joanie> Janina: Since this is not hammered out, it's not ready for CFC.
17:00:15 <joanie> RS: If the browser vendors don't implement the mappings, that's going to be a problem.
17:00:32 <joanie> CS: The concern is the never-ending addition of new things to ARIA.
17:00:42 <joanie> RS: Maybe I can word this differently.
17:01:06 <joanie> RS: I think what Cynthia is saying is I've got a project schedule and now there's a new module.
17:01:18 <joanie> CS: Right.
17:01:42 <joanie> MC: And the ability to say IE is not a DPUB reader.
17:02:37 <joanie> CS: If there were ARIA molecular browser, I wouldn't expect everyone to implement it.
17:03:30 <joanie> CS: We don't have molecular biology in the accessibility APIs.
17:04:11 <joanie> Janina: We may have lots of specialized extensions.
17:04:24 <joanie> CS: I agree that a path for specialized applications is an important thing.
17:04:37 <joanie> RS: So we need to tweak that bullet.
17:04:59 <joanie> CS: Yes, I want to say compliance to each extension is a separate thing.
17:05:12 <joanie> RS: I will figure out how to word this.
17:05:29 <joanie> Janina: Maybe things that are prefixed are optional and non-prefixed items are required.
17:05:46 <joanie> RS: So we're going to probably need another round of this.
17:05:59 <joanie> RS: I hope it won't take too long because DPUB is waiting for this.
17:06:19 <joanie> RS: Maybe we get what people agree to in this version.
17:06:34 <joanie> CS: Maybe an editorial note regarding things we're still discussing.
17:06:51 <joanie> RS: I'll note that on the bullet.
17:07:06 <joanie> Janina: I think we're ready for tomorrow's meeting.
17:07:23 <joanie> Janina: I've invited everyone from PF, DPUB, and HTML.
17:08:03 <joanie> Zakim, part
17:08:03 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pf
17:08:09 <joanie> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:08:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/20-pf-minutes.html joanie
17:11:06 <joanie> present+ Rich_Schwerdtfeger
17:11:13 <joanie> present+ Cynthia_Shelly
17:11:22 <joanie> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:11:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/20-pf-minutes.html joanie
17:11:43 <jcraig> jcraig has joined #pf
17:29:05 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has left #pf
17:31:53 <Gottfried> Gottfried has left #pf