See also: IRC log
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Oct/0011.html
deborah: let's focus on table 2, which lists our requirements vs the proposed tech approaches
tzviya: we should be looking at these elements as they are in existing specs
dk: clarify in analysis that the
proposed technologies is as they are today, not proposing any
specs changes
... Row "Not required to be visible in standard content view"
is unclear because this is something that does not exist in any
spec. We spoke about creating functionality that allows authors
to indicate to AT and UA that the description is
available
... We recommend adding a note to the introductory section to
table 2 indicating this. This row can then be eliminated, even
though it might be possible to hide these elements with
"hidden" etc.
please confirm that description links refers to <link> or <a>
DK: "not restricted to images"
row is a little confusing because end up with double negatives.
The requirement is that not be restricted to images
... but reading the table is REALLY confusing
... should row head "Reusable in multiple content" be "Reusable
in multiple contexts"?
described-by/skippable by AT is a ?. Per spec, this should be skippable. Check with AT vendors
dk: figure with details/Not restricted to images, this is not restricted to images
figure with details/Same technique for different objects is yes
figure with details/ Discoverable by AT, change "yes" to "no" because AT can read it, but has no method of knowing what it is
figure with details/Available on demand to AT users, change "yes" to "no" because AT cannot id what the specific piece of details is
figure with details/Skippable by AT change to "no" because there is no way to target the exact piece to skip
figure w details/Able to pass structured content to an additional specialized user agent change to "no" because details allows only flow content
figure with details and embedded iFrame/not restricted to images - is not restricted to images
figure with details and embedded iFrame/Same technique for different objects - yes
figure with details and embedded iFrame/Discoverable by AT = no because AT cannot id what the specific piece of detail is
figure with details and embedded iFrame/Available on demand to AT users and Skippable by AT - no (see above)
DK: We think it would be clearer to use A11y APIs over AT in row headers
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/changed/changes/ No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: tzviya Inferring Scribes: tzviya WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. Present: tzviya WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list! WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Got date from IRC log name: 02 Oct 2015 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/10/02-dpub-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]