See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 20 August 2015
<scribe> scribe: allanj
browsers should do more so authors don't have to do so much
Browsers don't meet wcag
polyfills are hacks - bad for accessibility. too many authors writing it wrong. browsers should implement html5
<jeanne> charter has been extended 90 days to allow us time to finish.
<jeanne> We will publish a working draft during the week of Sept 1
<jeanne> ... we would have published next week, but there is a moratorium.
one item on charter is providing input to WAI 3.0
open item 1
http://w3c.github.io/UAAG-Implementations/Implementations-by-feature
1.2.1 all browsers do this. none attempt to repair text alternatives.
1.3.3 user stylesheet or stylish extension
stylish works on chrome, ff, safari
1.4.4 configure print -
<Greg> This gives instructions for editing a web page in Chrome's page debugger so as to make it use the screen stylesheet:
<Greg> browser - How do I print with the screen stylesheet? - Super User
<Greg> https://superuser.com/questions/456700/how-do-i-print-with-the-screen-stylesheet
<Greg> A total hack, and manual at that.
<Greg> As one commenter says "Depressing."
<Greg> This supposedly lets Chrome print the screen view:
<Greg> PrintScreen - Chrome Web Store
<Greg> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/printscreen/jmhipjpegbhhmhneoogigjgfmekglogf
<Greg> As far as I can tell Safari 8 does not allow you to override author colors and fonts, much less use the system defaults. Serious bummer.
<Greg> (On the positive side, Safari 8 provides good UI for setting a single user style sheet.)
none found that default to platform text settings
user style sheets, stylish
word spacing supported by all desktop browsers
auto hyphenation supported by all desktop browsers
all is supported, changeable via user stylesheet or stylish
<Greg> On 2013-07-11 I wrote: However, there is a problem with the "Zoom out" portion. It consists of two clauses that could conflict, and it's not clear how such conflicts would be resolved. For example, what if reducing to 10% is not enough to let the content fit within the height or width of the viewport,then what? Is it saying that zoom has to go to 10% or the amount necessary to make the...
<Greg> ...content fit, whichever size is smaller? Perhaps rephrase as "Zoom out: to 10% or less of the default size, or enough to let the content fit within the height or width of its viewport, whichever size is smaller."
all zoom, but user can use stylish or stylesheet to constrain content to viewport
<jeanne> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/
possible need to reword? to fix "so the content fits within the height or width of the viewport" --
js: has been vetted. unless we find an error. will leave it
<Greg> Safari 8 does maintain point of regard when zooming in or out.
chrome, IE, safari maintain point of regard
IE center of viewport
<Greg> However, if you have highlighted the found occurrences of a search term, those highlights are no longer over the right words when you change the zoom! Hah!
chrome center of viewport
FF NOT
<Greg> What Safari does is to keep the same text at the top of the visible portion of the viewpoint.
close item 1
open item 2
js: say why we have changed to a note
and be polite
it was developed by users
identifies key needs for people with disabilities in browsers
<jeanne> stakeholders developing UAAG represent disability community needs
much of UAAG is implemented by browsers, not always easy or efficient, but user can make it work
1 or 2 paragraphs
need before publishing on week of Sept 1
<jeanne> Ample support from W3C membership for continuing the UAAG 2.0 development, but several formal objections from the browser vendors are forcing W3C to curtail the work.
gl: don't want to make the formal objections seem valid
<jeanne> Ample support from W3C membership for continuing the UAAG 2.0 development, but formal objections from the browser vendors are forcing W3C to curtail the work.
gl: the group does not feel the objections were valid
reason we are going along, resources not available to do the compliance testing.
going along = publishing as a note
<jeanne> UAWG decided to scale back to a Note, because the intensive resources to perform Candidate Recommendation testing
<jeanne> ... especially without support from the browser vendors.
1 para on w3 stuff, 1 para user need
kp: 2 reasons - objections and lack of resources. if there were no objections would we have scaled back.
js: not only resouces, but lack of time given the constraints imposed on the group
kp: delays from charter review and objection resolution, time and resource contraints
<jeanne> The pressure of the formal objections to continuing UAAG 2.0, combined with the intensive resources of testing for Candidate Recommendations made it advisable to publish UAAG 2.0 with the finished text as a Note.
The pressure of the formal objections to continuing UAAG 2.0, combined with the lack of resources necessary for testing for Candidate Recommendations made it advisable to publish UAAG 2.0 with the finished text as a Note.
<jeanne> The pressure of the formal objections to continuing UAAG 2.0, combined with the lack of resources for testing for Candidate Recommendations made it advisable to publish UAAG 2.0 with the completed text as a Note and not pursue Candidate Recommendation.
UAAG had a last call
<jeanne> We had Last Call and published x working drafts in response to comments.
<jeanne> The pressure of the formal objections to continuing UAAG 2.0, combined with a lack of resources for testing for Candidate Recommendations, made it advisable to publish UAAG 2.0 with the completed text as a Note and not pursue Candidate
<jeanne> UAWG decided to publish this final working draft, process any remaining comments, them publish a UAAG 2.0 as a Working Group Note.
begin working with WAI 3.0 combining content and user agent guidelines
<Greg> Maybe combine them as something along the lines of "There has been ample support from W3C membership for continuing the UAAG 2.0 development, and widespread support from stakeholders representing the disability community. However, browser vendors have continued to raise formal objections to continuing UAAG 2.0. The pressure of these formal objections, combined with the lack of resources for...
<Greg> ...testing for Candidate Recommendations made it advisable to publish UAAG 2.0 with the completed text as a Note and not pursue Candidate Recommendation."
<Greg> Could modify that to have the newer versions of the later sentences.
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/wide support in disability community// Succeeded: s/Ample support from W3C membership, but several formal objections from the browser vendors are forcing W3C to curtail the work./Ample support from W3C membership for continuing the UAAG 2.0 development, but several formal objections from the browser vendors are forcing W3C to curtail the work./ Found Scribe: allanj Inferring ScribeNick: allanj Present: jim jeanne greg kim Found Date: 20 Aug 2015 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/08/20-ua-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]