15:55:40 RRSAgent has joined #mobile-a11y 15:55:40 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-mobile-a11y-irc 15:55:42 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:55:42 Zakim has joined #mobile-a11y 15:55:44 Zakim, this will be WAI_MATF 15:55:44 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 15:55:45 Meeting: Mobile Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 15:55:45 Date: 04 February 2016 15:55:51 chair: Kathleen_Wahlbin 15:56:08 agenda+ Continue through SC's - https://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/#touch-and-pointer 15:56:09 agenda+ Review assignments http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Technique_Development_Assignments 15:56:11 agenda+ Next steps – next meeting February 11 15:56:58 Jan has joined #mobile-a11y 15:57:17 David has joined #mobile-a11y 16:01:17 Detlev has joined #mobile-a11y 16:01:39 agarrison has joined #mobile-a11y 16:01:56 present+ Kim 16:02:09 present+ Alistair 16:03:52 Kathy has joined #mobile-a11y 16:05:06 present+ Kathy 16:08:06 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Failure_of_2.5.3 16:08:09 Kathy: I won't be on the week of the 18th but I'll try to have understanding written by then and take a look at feedback when I get back 16:08:27 Topic: failure 2.5.3 16:08:35 Kathy: on wiki 16:09:56 Shouldn't "due to all content and functionality not being available" read "due to not all content and functionality being available"? 16:10:23 marcjohlic has joined #mobile-a11y 16:11:11 Present+ David, Detlev, Jan, Marc 16:11:41 What about "Failure of 2.5.3 Content or functionality not available by touch gesture when built-in assistive technology is active" 16:13:50 q+ 16:13:53 jon_avila has joined #mobile-a11y 16:13:54 Present+ Jon 16:14:00 ack Jan 16:14:26 What about "Failure of 2.5.3 Content or functionality not available by touch gesture when built-in assistive technology is active" 16:16:12 Kathy: sections under each failure where it says a better solution would be to – we don't do that in any other failure that I can see. Failure is usually indicating what the error condition was not a better way of actually doing it 16:16:36 Jon: there are number that do that 16:16:49 Kathy: below examples, above resources 16:17:16 q+ 16:17:30 David: we were nervous that people would look at the failures as ways to do things properly and get all mixed up 16:17:51 Kathy: first one is the only when I saw it in. I think it's good to have it in there, but I'm wondering if we should have it in their 16:18:26 David: let's keep that and we can link to it 16:18:35

A better solution would be to provide previous and next controls that 16:18:36 allow the user to scroll the carousel by tapping (or double tapping when 16:18:37 Add technique for "A better solution would be to provide previous and next controls that allow the user to scroll the carousel by tapping (or double tapping when platform assistive technology such as screen reader) is active in addition to support the single finger swipe left and right functionality." 16:18:38 platform assistive technology such as screen reader) is active in addition 16:18:39 to support the single finger swipe left and right functionality.

16:18:53 Add technique for "A better solution would be to use a device independent method such as a click handler (with platform touch support) that allows the user to interact with the control by platforms that alter touch access when built-in assistive technology is used by touch or through a keyboard interface." 16:19:38 David: add as technique instead so people don't mix up failures with what you're supposed to do 16:19:53 Kathy: and the failure should be at another step in the procedure that says turn on the built-in assistive technology 16:20:02 Kathy: step two, turn it on 16:20:15 David: screenreader or assistive technology? 16:20:24 Kathy: built-in platform assistive technology such as a screen reader 16:20:56 q? 16:21:35 Alistair: sufficient technique M027, which is pretty much the flipside of this – supporting touch with gestures. We need to blend it in with that 16:21:46 Kathy: could put examples in that 16:22:28 Under tests "Test that for each interactive element that responds to touch or gesture there is equivalent functionality provided and all content is available when built-in assistive technology is enabled that changes the touch interaction mode". Changed to "Test that for each interactive element that responds to touch or gesture all content is available when built-in assistive technology is enabled that changes the touch interaction mode; or the[CUT] 16:23:21 q- 16:23:25 David: remaps touch gestures and alters the touch interface 16:23:42 q+ 16:23:48 Kathy: I understand remapping, but what does altering mean? 16:24:54 Jon: when the assistive technology like screen reader is running you can touch the screen without activating an element – you have to double tap for example to send equivalent tap gestures. Wording doesn't matter 16:26:03 Kathy: remap better 16:26:22 Alistair: remap isn't exactly perfect, there must be an easier way of putting it but it's not for today 16:26:58 Ex 2

A better solution would be to use a device independent method such as a 16:27:00 click handler (with platform touch support) that allows the user to 16:27:01 interact with the control by platforms that alter touch access when 16:27:03 built-in assistive technology is used by touch or through a keyboard 16:27:04 interface.

16:27:54 Kathy: #2 and the procedures – doesn't specify one or more, so somebody could read this that they have to turn on everything all at the same time which may not be what we intended 16:29:11 Kathy: want to make sure it's valid moving forward, not just screen readers 16:29:34 Detlev: are there others 16:30:02 Jeanne: could do this is a for next loop – repeat for each individual platform assistive technology 16:30:28 Kathy: might be instances where you want to turn on more than one, screenreader and screen magnifier 16:31:45 Detlev: rephrase for each interactive element that responds to touch or gesture – is there a case for also covering generic gestures which may not be clearly related to any interactive element – scroll gestures where you swipe across the screen without hitting interactive element in particular, do we need to include that? 16:32:28 Alistair: it was the introduction text 16:32:43 Alistair: for the top sentence 16:33:09 David: were going to have to define platform assistive technology – do we want to say built-in platform assistive technology, or just platform 16:33:55 Jon: I thought we discussed built-in but it could apply to things like Android you could have third-party screen readers 16:34:00 David: we don't want to do that 16:34:06 Jon: it just complicates it 16:34:32 Kathy: an understanding I put system assistive technology – we need to agree on a term and change it throughout. What do people prefer built-in, system, platform 16:34:59 Jeanne: I like platform it's consistent with UAAG and ATAG 16:35:17 David: system, platform, built-in platform, what else – operating system 16:35:29 David: is system a shortcut for operating system? 16:36:00 Jon: and other document we said platform level assistive technology indicating that its operating system level and not some other level like the browser. Browser can be operating system as well 16:36:48 David: people can get very technical with this language. What we really want to say which is too long is the assistive technology that was included with the operating system 16:37:07 David: that's too long, but we can put that in a definition and have a short term and link 16:37:55 David: OS assistive technology? Platform excessive technology? With the easiest to say, most elegant looking, most comprehensive 16:38:34 Alistair: edge case Samsung talkback, if we bind it too heavily to the platform – Android – we may have problems there because there may not be another one that is provided with a platform 16:38:43 David: it's the Samsung version of android 16:39:10 Jon: we say platform level in other places – that's a version of that 16:39:41 Jon: 4.1.4 touch proposal discussion 16:40:35 Kathy: consistency is a good argument to say platform 16:41:18 I like platform – more clear 16:41:24 Suggestion - platform's default assistive technology 16:41:33 FRom ATAG: platform accessibility service 16:41:33 A programmatic interface that is specifically engineered to provide communication between applications and assistive technologies (e.g. MSAA, IAccessible2 and UI Automation for Windows applications, AXAPI for Mac OS X applications, GNOME Accessibility Toolkit API for GNOME applications, Java Access for Java applications). On some platforms, it may be conventional to enhance communication 16:41:34 further by implementing a document object. 16:42:11 Detlev: difficult for edge cases that come in on a skin level or vendor level 16:42:19 From UAAG: platform accessibility service 16:42:19 A programmatic interface that is engineered to enhance communication between mainstream software applications and assistive technologies (e.g. MSAA, UI Automation, and IAccessible2 for Windows applications, AXAPI for Mac OSX applications, Gnome Accessibility Toolkit API for GNOME applications, Java Access for Java applications). On some platforms it can be conventional to enhance 16:42:20 communication further by implementing a DOM. 16:42:21 David: interesting your using the word level – we've been bouncing around platform or platform level 16:43:00 UAAG Platform def: platform 16:43:00 The software and hardware environment(s) within which the user agent operates. Platforms provide a consistent operational environment. There can be layers of software in an hardware architecture and each layer can be considered a platform. Native platforms include desktop operating system (e.g. Linux, Mac OS, Windows, etc.), mobile operating systems (e.g. Android, Blackberry, iOS, 16:43:00 Windows Phone, etc.), and cross-OS environments (e.g. Java). Web-based platforms are other user agents. User agents can employ server-based processing, such as web content transformations, text-to-speech production, etc. 16:43:00 Note 1: A user agent can include functionality hosted on multiple platforms (e.g. a browser running on the desktop can include server-based pre-processing and web-based documentation). 16:43:01 Note 2: Accessibility guidelines for developers exist for many platforms. 16:43:51 Alistair: is level adding anything? 16:44:02 Jon: my net be provided with a platform but interfaces at a low level with the platform 16:44:51 Jon: I still think that talkback – injecting JavaScript but as far as touch interface at the platform level not at the browser level 16:45:18 David: I think the edge case of Samsung I think we're okay because I would really say they're just modifying the platform with their own thing attached to it 16:45:46 Kathy: going to be a lot of edge cases with Android. Samsung in latest operating system, but that could happen all over the place 16:46:46 David: better off saying platform rather than platform level. If somebody's modifying the platform, than the assistive technology needs to work, and needs to work on at least one platform. I think we need to stay with that – android is such a disaster right now for the screenreader talkback – work on one platform is sufficient 16:47:01 Detlev: Samsung has a platform that their shipping and Google has a platform 16:47:47 Jon: platform and platform level used interchangeably 16:48:18 David: are people good with using platform without level? 16:48:19 +1 to platform 16:48:22 general agreement 16:48:43 Kathy: changing to platform throughout including understanding 16:49:03 platform assistive technology 16:49:46 Changed to "Test that for each interactive element that responds to touch or gesture all content is available when built-in assistive technology is enabled that changes the touch interaction mode; or there is equivalent functionality provided". 16:50:42 Shall we address general gestures here? 16:51:25 Swipe to scroll, to bring in menu from display edge, etc 16:53:21 Kathy: under user agent might be good to say the current technology that remaps gesture are… 16:53:34 David: also give a sense of what it is in the understanding so people don't have to go look somewhere else 16:54:49 Kathy: understanding language we had a link to gestures from the manufacturers – that's good to put under resources 16:55:09 Jeanne: I can find them 16:55:23 Kathy: in this failure good to have the gestures that get remapped for screen readers 16:55:39 Jeanne: link to list 16:56:12 Detlev: are assistive technologies taking specific gestures, things like swipe, or the entire interface 16:56:32 Kathy: some of them don't get remaps, some of them do, you can also do passthrough gestures, you can also write custom gestures in some scenarios, so I don't think we can get more specific 16:56:41 This is a bit dated by I try to update that soon: http://www.incobs.de/gesten.html 16:56:53 and it's German right now 16:57:54 Jeanne: I'll take that definition and link throughout the document and techniques 16:59:38 David: want to make sure that it's clear that were not requiring people to make something work by touch and a screen reader that doesn't work by touch otherwise 16:59:57 Jon: we say that in the notes 17:01:04 Jon: could be met through screen keyboard, screen controller with arrow keys, use the on-screen thing to meet this requirement – there are other ways to meet it 17:01:08 The technique is applicable even when 17:01:10 access via a physical keyboard interaction is present and makes sure that 17:01:11 interactions can be performed through a keyboard interface using touch 17:01:13 gestures rather than relying on a physical keyboard accompanying the touch 17:01:14 screen device. 17:01:55 q+ 17:02:16 Jon: the whole point of this technique is say you have a slider – key up up in key down events, available through keyboard but not accessible through touch gestures, that's why we have this. physical keyboard access needs to be tested separately. Two requirements here keyboard interface requirement that supported with touch and keyboard interface requirement that supported with physical... 17:02:17 ...keyboard. 17:02:29 his technique applies to interactive elements on platforms where touch screen access is 17:02:31 provided. 17:02:46 got thrown out of the WevEx Meeting somehow... 17:02:49 David: so were really talking at the element level 17:03:06 Jon: maybe at the feature level – say swipe – screen level 17:03:29 under tests 3 - suggest change "active or another touch method is" to "active or another method is" 17:03:50 David: I'll continue with this paragraph and send it off. 17:03:56 Kathy: will continue this discussion on the list 17:04:54 zakim, list participants 17:04:54 As of this point the attendees have been Kim, Alistair, Kathy, David, Detlev, Jan, Marc, Jon 17:05:42 Present+ Jeanne 17:05:49 zakim, list participants 17:05:49 As of this point the attendees have been Kim, Alistair, Kathy, David, Detlev, Jan, Marc, Jon, Jeanne 17:05:59 rrsagent, make minutes 17:05:59 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-mobile-a11y-minutes.html Kim