15:39:10 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 15:39:10 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/01/26-wai-wcag-irc 15:39:12 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:39:14 Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG 15:39:14 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 15:39:15 Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 15:39:15 Date: 26 January 2016 15:39:27 zakim, agenda? 15:39:27 I see 2 items remaining on the agenda: 15:39:28 2. Survey (Items 3-5 only): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20161stSurvey/ [from Joshue108] 15:39:28 3. Github issues walkthru. https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues [from Joshue108] 15:39:39 zakim, clear agenda? 15:39:39 agenda cleared 15:41:04 Wayne has joined #wai-wcag 15:41:17 agenda+ • Extension document comment survey [continued / to be short!] (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Ext_req_comments/ 15:41:33 agenda+ • UAAG/ATAG update. 15:41:45 agenda+ • Proposed responses to Github issues: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Jan26_2016/ 15:41:57 agenda+ • Github issues walkthru. https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues 15:42:04 Chair: AWK 15:42:43 scribe: Wayne 15:52:45 AWK has joined #wai-wcag 15:53:12 Zakim, agenda? 15:53:12 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda: 15:53:13 1. • Extension document comment survey [continued / to be short!] (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Ext_req_comments/ [from Joshue108] 15:53:13 2. • UAAG/ATAG update. [from Joshue108] 15:53:13 3. • Proposed responses to Github issues: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Jan26_2016/ [from Joshue108] 15:53:14 4. • Github issues walkthru. https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues [from Joshue108] 15:54:30 How do I go from topic to topic and how do I keep comments out of the minutes? 16:01:16 RRSAgent, draft minutes 16:01:16 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/26-wai-wcag-minutes.html AWK 16:01:33 Chair: AWK 16:01:35 +AWK 16:01:37 Mike_Elledge has joined #wai-wcag 16:02:07 Scribe: Wayne 16:02:41 TOPIC: 16:03:14 laura has joined #wai-wcag 16:04:34 marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag 16:04:56 present+ Joshue108 16:04:57 Greg has joined #wai-wcag 16:05:36 Agenda+ Survey for attendance: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/WhenWCAG/ 16:05:54 +Mike Elledge 16:06:03 TOPIC: Extension document comment survey [continued / to be short!] 16:06:18 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Ext_req_comments/ 16:06:25 adam_solomon has joined #wai-wcag 16:06:26 present+ EricE 16:07:09 Sarah_Swierenga has joined #wai-wcag 16:07:40 present+ Laura 16:08:00 present+ Laura 16:08:09 present+ Wayne 16:08:30 present+ marcjohlic 16:08:30 present+ adam_solomon 16:08:38 Kathy has joined #wai-wcag 16:08:40 present+ Sarah 16:08:41 present+ Greg_Lowney 16:08:44 present +Kathy 16:08:52 present+ Kathy 16:09:06 s/present +Kathy// 16:10:04 Zakir take up item 5 16:10:49 Zakim, take up item 5 16:10:49 agendum 5. "Survey for attendance: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/WhenWCAG/" taken up [from AWK] 16:10:53 s/Zakir take up item 5// 16:11:19 AWK: We have an attendance survey and it helps project. 16:11:47 ... please fill out the survey. 16:11:56 Zakim, close item 5 16:11:56 agendum 5, Survey for attendance: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/WhenWCAG/, closed 16:11:59 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 16:11:59 1. • Extension document comment survey [continued / to be short!] (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Ext_req_comments/ [from Joshue108] 16:12:06 Zakim, next item 16:12:06 agendum 1. "• Extension document comment survey [continued / to be short!] (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Ext_req_comments/" taken up [from Joshue108] 16:13:39 AWK: Have received not additional comments. Relates to people's concerns that the extensions will be optional. If we just take out the word optional we are not representing the document properly. 16:14:15 ... If you are working for X-corp it can make it required, but all w3 documents are optional. 16:14:33 jamesn has joined #wai-wcag 16:14:44 rrsagent, make minutes 16:14:44 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/26-wai-wcag-minutes.html jamesn 16:15:49 ... Leaving it in represents what the document is doing. I have change my comment because it is desireable because it is accurate. Would like other peoples comments. 16:16:06 +1 16:19:25 Adam: I like the way David said it. Must discuss discussion. It is not optional if you do not want to conform it is optional. If you want to conform it is not optional. Standing alone optional is too ambiguous. 16:21:22 Greg: Worked early on accessibility with MS, and has worked on many WGs. Now I can do it. 16:21:27 q? 16:22:42 ... I would vote to accept. Most is my concern giving the term optional calls out the particular document 16:23:03 zakim, queue? 16:23:03 I see no one on the speaker queue 16:23:16 AWK: WCAG itself does not refer to itself as optional. Only the conformance claims are optional. 16:23:57 q+ 16:24:16 ack me 16:24:17 ??: Extensions are opti0nal relative to WCAG 2, but not conversely. 16:25:20 josh: We are not trying to hide these are option. We place it in the abstract and moved somewhere else as to how it relates to conformance. 16:25:22 Currently in status: "This is a First Public Working Draft of Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. It sets requirements for WCAG 2.0 extensions, optional modules that add accessibility guidance to the base of WCAG 2.0." 16:26:28 q+ 16:26:42 ack laura 16:26:46 AWK: This would be the place it would appear. Speaking about approach is better approach. (David) 16:27:04 Laura: Just use it verbatum. 16:27:26 josh: I don't see what else it is adding. 16:27:32 “for those who claim conformance to them.” 16:28:00 +1 to davids 16:28:10 q? 16:28:10 insert the words "for those who claim conformance to them..." 16:28:19 +1 16:28:20 +1 16:28:35 +1 16:28:45 Quick try at adding: "This is a First Public Working Draft of Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. It sets requirements for WCAG 2.0 extensions, optional modules that build on the existing requirements for WCAG 2.0. Extensions are designed to work in harmony with the WCAG 2.0. standard, for those who claim conformance to them. Conformance to WCAG 2.0 by itself does not mandate conformance to these extension 16:28:48 s" 16:29:34 this one: "This is a First Public Working Draft of Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. It sets requirements for WCAG 2.0 extensions, modules that build on the existing requirements for WCAG 2.0. Extensions are designed to work in harmony with the WCAG 2.0. standard, for those who claim conformance to them. Conformance to WCAG 2.0 by itself does not mandate conformance to these extensions." 16:29:52 +1 16:29:54 Conformance to WCAG 2.0 on its own does not mandate conformance to these extensions." 16:29:55 +1 16:29:58 +1 16:30:14 s/Quick try at adding: "This is a First Public Working Draft of Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. It sets requirements for WCAG 2.0 extensions, optional modules that build on the existing requirements for WCAG 2.0. Extensions are designed to work in harmony with the WCAG 2.0. standard, for those who claim conformance to them. Conformance to WCAG 2.0 by itself does not mandate conformance to 16:30:14 these extension// 16:30:33 adam: Inserts an alternative 16:30:48 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:30:48 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/26-wai-wcag-minutes.html yatil 16:31:22 +1 16:31:34 AWK: Are there objections? 16:31:37 +1 like 16:31:39 +1 – I like it 16:31:46 +1 16:31:47 like 16:31:51 +1 16:32:18 RESOLUTION: We sent this wording to the list. 16:33:00 Zakim, close this item 16:33:00 agendum 1 closed 16:33:01 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 16:33:01 2. • UAAG/ATAG update. [from Joshue108] 16:33:08 Zakim, next item 16:33:08 agendum 2. "• UAAG/ATAG update." taken up [from Joshue108] 16:33:50 q+ 16:33:58 AWK: We will be talking about and will continue... 16:34:27 q- 16:35:35 ... We may take up UAAG and ATAG issues. There is not too much to discuss. But we may come back with topics and keep the group up to date. 16:36:22 MichaelC: We need to make a considered proposal before we discuss it. 16:36:33 Zakim, close this item 16:36:33 agendum 2 closed 16:36:34 I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 16:36:34 3. • Proposed responses to Github issues: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Jan26_2016/ [from Joshue108] 16:36:41 Zakim, next item 16:36:41 agendum 3. "• Proposed responses to Github issues: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Jan26_2016/" taken up [from Joshue108] 16:38:41 TOPIC: [Github ISSUE: #151] ARIA5: About jQuery code 16:40:07 AWK: Feel that the draft should mention jQuery. In the live example you can see jQuery. We will not change because jQuery is not essential. 16:40:42 MichealC: Our general practice without adding reason. 16:41:39 MikeE: I think it may be useful when we mention something like jQuery is being used. 16:42:20 AWK: In this case the example is from the open AJAX alliance. They have an example that uses jQuery in the code. 16:42:43 ARIA5: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/ARIA5.html 16:42:47 ??: Our example has jQuery in the code. That was linked, not out code. 16:43:51 MichealC: There is jQuery code but it is not relevant to the technique. 16:44:33 q+ 16:45:48 ack j 16:45:57 q? 16:46:04 MikeE: For people who are not experts it is important. If it uses jQuery for tasks, it is important to use the reference. It could require a lot of information. 16:46:33 adam: I feel it is not a real world problem to anyone. 16:47:24 +1 16:47:31 q+ 16:47:35 AWK: My problem is the technique requires jQuery. This is to display the ARIA. It could give the wrong impression. 16:48:33 .. Based on principle of not making changes when not necessary. This is more than editorial. How would you like to handle it. 16:49:24 MichaelC: This person is looking for consistency. 16:50:04 adam: what if that person wants this consistently could they do it. 16:51:06 josh: Should we just suggest that he submit his full changes? 16:51:24 "Proposed response for WG: We keep the examples as simple as possible, and JQuery is not critical for the clarification of the important points in the technique, so we are not making a change at this time. Consistency of this type between techniques is good but is not an absolute requirement. If you would like to submit a pull request with specific changes we will consider them." 16:51:39 +1 16:51:43 +1 16:51:50 +1 16:52:00 +1 16:52:03 +1 16:52:03 +1 16:52:07 +1 16:52:10 +1 ok 16:52:15 +1 16:52:27 +1 16:52:30 +1 16:52:48 RESOLUTION: We send the wording above to the list for consensus. 16:53:51 TOPIC: Github ISSUE: #150] ARIA4/5: Clarification of a user interface component 16:54:34 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/150 16:55:23 RESOLUTION: Pass the wording of the response to the list for consensus. 16:56:06 TOPIC: [Github ISSUE: #148] WAI-ARIA Technology Notes: Old UA descriptions 16:56:17 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/148 16:57:00 AWK: Not all of our UA comments are correct. They are too old. Josh's comment discusses changes. 16:57:38 AWK: This is a lot of work, to keep up with all UA. 16:58:06 James: if we are to add comments, make sure mobiles are missing. 16:58:44 ... I am not sure if we only list the supported releases. 16:59:08 MichaelC: Should we make a change or notes for an edit. 17:00:09 josh: anyone with improvements could include them. 17:00:20 i have lost sound 17:00:53 jamesn has joined #wai-wcag 17:01:18 AWK: How would WAI ARIA respond to helping us change the techniques for ARIA technology. 17:01:54 james: They would probably say we have no time. If someone had interest. 17:02:41 MichaelC: We need to note that WCAG cannot maintain this, but other groups do not have similar priority. 17:03:04 q+ 17:03:21 josh: The thing is work in general, but there are problems with details. 17:03:55 ... we don't want to create documents that address Firefox X and Jaws Y. 17:04:15 james: Maybe we should just chop the old versions. 17:05:10 AWK: Our options are: say sorry cannot do it or ask ARIA WG to do it, or to have some people do the work to review it. 17:06:02 ... The task can be much larger. ... We know there is a depth we are going to address. How do we do this in general. 17:06:28 q+ 17:06:43 ack marc 17:06:49 ack mike 17:07:22 mikeE: Maybe we should make a link to some active links that keep track of this, or is it vendor preference? 17:07:41 ack mich 17:07:52 ack mich 17:10:06 Powermapper people: http://www.powermapper.com/company/people/ 17:10:21 Mark Rogers, CEO 17:10:21 MichaelC: We have strayed into a recurrent discussion. The accessibility support DB is supposed to be current. We might look to off source. We shouldn't make a pointer casually. But this is possible. I don't a vender question. We cannot say you must use this. We've given up on keepping up but here are some options. 17:10:27 503 on https://www.w3.org/WAI/accessibility-support/ 17:11:27 AWK: Does anyone on the call thinks the update ARIA is in the top 5 of things to do. Does anyone want to allocate any time. 17:11:52 ... My gut is we are not going to do anything about this. 17:13:07 MichaelC: If you want a change please submit a pull request. Get that out there. This is a public forum. 17:13:26 AWK: Can you submit a pull request. 17:14:06 RESOLUTION: Leave this one open. 17:14:19 Zakim, close this item 17:14:19 agendum 3 closed 17:14:20 I see 1 item remaining on the agenda: 17:14:20 4. • Github issues walkthru. https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues [from Joshue108] 17:14:23 Zakim, next item 17:14:23 agendum 4. "• Github issues walkthru. https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues" taken up [from Joshue108] 17:16:28 AWK: I hope people feel encourages, but I am not sure if the know how. 17:20:53 Kathy: Should we get rid of HTML stuff should be a NO answere. 17:21:07 s/answere/answer/ 17:23:01 AWK: I there anyone on the call who can give any time to any issues? 17:23:27 David has joined #wai-wcag 17:23:36 AWK: Could everyone look at the list and take them on. 17:23:47 regrets... I have to teach today.... on lunch now 17:24:42 bye all! 17:25:00 have a good week. bye 17:25:05 trackbot, draft minutes 17:25:05 Sorry, Wayne, I don't understand 'trackbot, draft minutes'. Please refer to for help. 17:25:17 trackbot, end meeting 17:25:17 Zakim, list attendees 17:25:17 As of this point the attendees have been AWK, Josh, wayne, jon_avila, JF, Sarah_Swierenga, MichaelC, Katie, Haritos-Shea, JamesNurthen, Laura, Mike, Elledge, Jan, Rakesh, Eric, 17:25:20 ... LisaS, Kathy, David_MacDonald, Joshue108, Srini, EricE, marcjohlic, adam_solomon, Greg_Lowney 17:25:25 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 17:25:25 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/26-wai-wcag-minutes.html trackbot 17:25:26 RRSAgent, bye 17:25:26 I see no action items