07:39:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
07:39:57 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/09/19-wai-wcag-irc
07:39:59 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
07:40:01 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
07:40:01 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
07:40:02 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
07:40:02 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #wai-wcag
07:40:02 <trackbot> Date: 19 September 2016
07:40:21 <AWK> +AWK
07:40:23 <Kathy> present+ Kathy
07:41:24 <Joshue__> Joshue__ has joined #wai-wcag
07:44:39 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #wai-wcag
07:46:57 <Joshue__> Joshue__ has joined #wai-wcag
07:47:37 <Joshue__> Joshue__ has joined #wai-wcag
07:47:50 <AWK> Agenda+ Introductions
07:47:53 <AWK> Agenda+ Review COGA SC Proposals
07:48:34 <AWK> Agenda+ DPUB meeting
07:48:43 <AWK> agenda+ Review MATF SC Proposals
07:48:51 <AWK> agenda+ Review LVTF SC Proposals
07:49:00 <Joshue__> Joshue__ has joined #wai-wcag
07:49:09 <AWK> Agenda+ WCAG 2.1 requirements
07:49:34 <AWK> Zakim, agenda?
07:49:34 <Zakim> I see 7 items remaining on the agenda:
07:49:35 <Zakim> 3. WCAG 2.1 requirements discussion (https://w3c.github.io/wcag21/requirements/) [from AWK]
07:49:35 <Zakim> 4. Introductions [from AWK]
07:49:35 <Zakim> 5. Review COGA SC Proposals [from AWK]
07:49:36 <Zakim> 6. DPUB meeting [from AWK]
07:49:36 <Zakim> 7. Review MATF SC Proposals [from AWK]
07:49:36 <Zakim> 8. Review LVTF SC Proposals [from AWK]
07:49:37 <Zakim> 9. WCAG 2.1 requirements [from AWK]
07:50:51 <Joshue108> Joshue108 has joined #wai-wcag
07:51:44 <Joshue_10> Joshue_10 has joined #wai-wcag
07:51:50 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #wai-wcag
07:51:59 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #wai-wcag
07:52:54 <Joshue108_> Joshue108_ has joined #wai-wcag
07:55:27 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #WAI-WCAG
07:55:50 <Lisa_Seeman> Lisa_Seeman has joined #wai-wcag
07:56:23 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wai-wcag
07:56:36 <JF> JF has joined #wai-wcag
07:56:45 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #wai-wcag
07:57:36 <Joshue__> Joshue__ has joined #wai-wcag
07:58:53 <JF> agenda?
07:59:44 <mhakkinen> mhakkinen has joined #wai-wcag
08:00:45 <jeanne> present+
08:00:53 <jeanne> scribenick: jeanne
08:01:02 <jamesn> present+ JamesNurthen
08:01:06 <Rachael> present+ Rachael
08:01:40 <JF> Present+ JF
08:01:44 <kirkwood> +kirkwood
08:01:48 <Joshue108_> + Joshue108_
08:01:49 <AWK> +AWK
08:01:57 <alastair_> alastair_ has joined #wai-wcag
08:02:02 <mhakkinen> mhakkinen has joined #wai-wcag
08:02:18 <mhakkinen> + mhakkinen
08:02:48 <alastair_> present+ alastairc
08:03:22 <jeanne> JO: welcome
08:03:47 <jeanne> [Introduction]
08:07:07 <SONG_JAE_IL> SONG_JAE_IL has joined #WAI-WCAG
08:07:35 <Kepeng> Kepeng has joined #wai-wcag
08:09:36 <AWK> agenda?
08:09:48 <KIM_BONG_SEOB> KIM_BONG_SEOB has joined #WAI-WCAG
08:09:55 <jeanne> Zakim, tkae up item 4
08:09:55 <Zakim> I don't understand 'tkae up item 4', jeanne
08:10:02 <jeanne> zakim, take up item 4
08:10:02 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Introductions" taken up [from AWK]
08:10:19 <jeanne> zakim, close item 4
08:10:20 <Zakim> agendum 4, Introductions, closed
08:10:20 <Zakim> I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
08:10:20 <Zakim> 3. WCAG 2.1 requirements discussion (https://w3c.github.io/wcag21/requirements/) [from AWK]
08:10:31 <jeanne> zakim, take up item 5
08:10:31 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Review COGA SC Proposals" taken up [from AWK]
08:11:07 <jeanne> AWK: This is the first time we have looked at specific success criteria proposals.
08:11:26 <jeanne> ... great work from the Task Forces, we have items to  review
08:13:20 <jeanne> Lisa: Everyone here knows about learning disabilites
08:13:36 <jeanne> [presentation from Lisa]
08:14:42 <jeanne> Lisa: Conditions
08:15:19 <jeanne> ... many different conditions, that are largely groups of symptoms
08:15:22 <jeanne> ... memory
08:15:24 <David_macdonald> David_macdonald has joined #wai-wcag
08:15:26 <jeanne> ... reading text
08:15:39 <jeanne> ... familiarity with symbols (math)
08:15:49 <jeanne> ... familiarity with user interface
08:15:54 <jeanne> ... problem solving
08:16:00 <jeanne> ... keeping focues
08:16:06 <jeanne> ... computation
08:16:17 <jeanne> ... executive function
08:16:37 <jeanne> JO: Interesting article from BBC on dweveloping executive function in children
08:17:13 <jeanne> s/focues/focus
08:17:41 <jeanne> ... people can be extremely intelligent, but can't deal with a specific access to a particular function
08:18:14 <jeanne> ... with Internet of Things, apps are everywhere and growing. If you can't figure out the app to turn on your heat, you can't live alone.
08:19:09 <jeanne> ... much of the research is behind a paywall.  Very expensive to find the right research.  You have to pay even if the research is useless.
08:19:35 <jeanne> ... we are trying to look at the broader view
08:19:58 <jeanne> ... Undeclared (cognitive) disabilities awareness
08:20:19 <jeanne> ... People with cognitive disabilities hide it, especially in the workplace.
08:20:31 <jeanne> ... The need is still there
08:20:42 <jeanne> ... lots of pieces need to come together
08:21:01 <jeanne> ... Phased approach -- started with 8 different disabilities
08:21:38 <jeanne> ... what we found, is that we are getting a lot of overlap, which is a very good sign
08:21:53 <jeanne> ... then we compiled a document of the user research
08:22:08 <jeanne> ... a member of the task force had access to the university research
08:22:26 <jeanne> ... people wrote key findings of the research and put it in the public space
08:23:24 <jamesn> q+
08:23:26 <jeanne> ... next we compiled issue papers.  They brought a broader perspective, such as security.  For people with memory issues, passwords are very difficult, whcih blocks the user from online banking
08:23:56 <jeanne> ... we looked at the problems, and then started looking at the solutions.
08:23:59 <Joshue108> Joshue108 has joined #wai-wcag
08:24:02 <jamesn> q-
08:24:08 <Joshue_10> Joshue_10 has joined #wai-wcag
08:24:27 <jeanne> ... we made a list of authoring techniques -- common ideas and strategies that people were using.
08:25:13 <jeanne> ... we found authoring techniques that helped both people with dyslexia and downs syndrome -- so we knew we were on the right track with that issue.
08:25:31 <jeanne> Lisa: flowchart
08:25:37 <Joshue__> Joshue__ has joined #wai-wcag
08:25:39 <jeanne> ... user research and issues papers feed
08:25:53 <jeanne> ... Gap Analussis and Roadmap that feed
08:25:54 <jlee27> jlee27 has joined #WAI-WCAG
08:26:09 <jeanne> ... W3C initiatives (list of groups)
08:26:37 <jeanne> ... The Roadmap influences more working groups and efforts
08:27:20 <jeanne> ... User Research document
08:27:32 <jeanne> ... Issue papers
08:27:47 <jeanne> ... Gap Analysis and Roadmap
08:27:59 <jeanne> Lisa: Roadmap
08:28:52 <jeanne> ... table of User Needs, proposed success criteria, authoring techniques needed, proposed new semantics, personalization, and operating system level
08:30:06 <jeanne> Lisa: Then there is a document on semantics, which would be used like ARIA.  That makes some of the success criteria less burdensome.
08:30:28 <jeanne> ... people won't be interested in semantics unless there is an author burden
08:31:06 <jeanne> JO:  Can we add a label in Github for the success criteria, can we add a line to reference that it has new semantics
08:32:07 <jeanne> AWK: Something that can't be able to be done today, should be considered for the Silver timeframe.
08:32:13 <Joshue108_> +1 to AWK
08:32:27 <Joshue108_> q?
08:32:37 <jeanne> Lisa: We have a draft of new semantics that ARIA WG is taking up this week.
08:33:05 <jeanne> MC: The semantics won't have a big impact until they are taken up.
08:33:47 <jeanne> Lisa: IBM wants to take up promoting the semantic uptake as an open source project
08:33:56 <jeanne> ... people can use it if they want to
08:34:17 <jeanne> Kathy: Assistive technology may not be taken up
08:34:47 <jeanne> Lisa: that is an interesting space, things have varied uptake
08:34:58 <mhakkinen> +q
08:35:16 <jeanne> Kathy: [example] people with dementia have assistive technology, which they may or may not use
08:35:19 <Joshue108_> Good to hear that vendors are involved in the COGA work.
08:35:38 <Joshue108_> s/vendors/AT vendors
08:36:01 <Joshue108_> q?
08:36:05 <jeanne> Lisa: People are using personalization settings for a reminder system, for example.  Assistive technology in COGA are apps.
08:36:17 <Ryladog_> Ryladog_ has joined #wai-wcag
08:36:20 <jeanne> ... a lot of it is in education
08:36:55 <Ryladog_> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
08:37:34 <jeanne> MH: Have you looked at the Acccommodation Guides and Guidelines from US govt?
08:39:32 <jeanne> Lisa: Example: people who have distraction, that they have an app that automatically hides all the other apps and notification, and restores them at the end of the meeting
08:39:40 <Joshue108_> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/7
08:39:47 <Lisa_Seeman> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/3-1.html
08:39:50 <AWK_> AWK_ has joined #wai-wcag
08:39:52 <jeanne> Topic: "Small" change to 3.1
08:40:03 <mhakkinen> There are two documents that I will quickly provide reference to. They are from two different consortia of US states and designed for student assessment:
08:40:06 <mhakkinen> http://www.smarterbalanced.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Usability-Accessibility-Accommodations-Guidelines.pdf
08:40:20 <jeanne> AWK: modification of the guideline, rather than an SC.
08:40:23 <mhakkinen> http://www.parcconline.org/assessments/accessibility/manual
08:40:34 <MichaelC> q+
08:40:41 <mhakkinen> ack me
08:41:07 <jeanne> ... the proposal is the remove the word "text".  COntent needs to be understandable, whether is it text, video, and audio
08:41:25 <Joshue108_> q?
08:41:43 <Joshue108_> q?
08:41:45 <jeanne> Lisa: I thought about changing "readable" to "understandable", but didn't propose it.
08:41:59 <Joshue108_> q+
08:42:16 <AWK_> ack m
08:42:26 <jeanne> James: Isn't there a guideline about symbols -- or at least there should be?  Should the symbols part be in a different place
08:42:48 <jeanne> Michael: Are the guidelines specific to  text and what would be impacted by the change.
08:43:07 <jeanne> ... the success criteria are very text specific.  We are losing focus by this proposal.
08:43:08 <AWK_> q+ to say that this change may be impossible to evaluate without seeing the SC that might fall underneath it
08:43:26 <jeanne> ... I'm trying to address it as a way of thinking -- not as a critique of the proposal.
08:43:45 <jeanne> ... we can create new guideline
08:44:00 <David_macdonald> Make text readable and content understandable?
08:44:33 <MichaelC> q+ to say we should sort out guidelines after SC
08:44:33 <AWK_> q?
08:44:43 <jeanne> LIsa: Breaking things into manageable blocks of content.  This particularly is a problem for long presentations -- putting in bookmarks
08:44:51 <jeanne> ... we need a new guideline
08:45:11 <jeanne> Kathy: I think you should have new guideline. That is what Mobile is doing.
08:45:30 <JF> Q+
08:45:39 <jamesn> q+
08:45:48 <AWK_> ack jo
08:45:49 <Joshue108_> ack me
08:46:28 <AWK_> ack awk
08:46:28 <Zakim> AWK_, you wanted to say that this change may be impossible to evaluate without seeing the SC that might fall underneath it
08:46:42 <David_macdonald> Q+
08:47:06 <jeanne> Joshue:  I'm not really sold on change, and would prefer to see what all the success criteria under it need to do
08:47:06 <MichaelC> q-
08:47:26 <jeanne> AWK: Let's table this item until we see the success criteria.
08:47:53 <AWK_> ack jf
08:48:06 <jeanne> Michael: Guidelines are organizational units, so we should address them later when we know what we are organizing
08:48:09 <jamesn> q-
08:48:10 <AWK_> ack ja
08:48:12 <JF> ack jf
08:48:14 <AWK_> ack da
08:48:19 <alastair_> q+
08:48:48 <jeanne> David: When we first were writing WCAG, we thought it would be a large guideline, but the testability narrowed it down
08:48:59 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #wai-wcag
08:49:01 <jeanne> Joahue: What Lisa is doing, is tapping into that.
08:49:21 <jeanne> John: What Lisa is proposing is all about language
08:49:38 <David_macdonald> Welcome Rich
08:49:38 <jeanne> ... a guideline about Understandable Structure.
08:49:47 <jeanne> Lisa: I'm good with that
08:50:53 <jeanne> [group agrees to table discussion]
08:51:46 <jeanne> Alastair: We are working with a jigsaw puzzle, and we need to think about all the success criteria from all the groups
08:51:46 <Joshue108_> q?
08:51:49 <alastair_> q-
08:52:37 <jeanne> Lisa: Do you want us to give a success criteria and a recommendation of a guideline?
08:53:05 <jeanne> Kathy: In Mobile, we have a document with all the success criteria grouped by new guidelines
08:53:24 <jeanne> ... we all have our own ideas, but we have cross-work that we need to do.
08:54:00 <jeanne> Joshue:  For the page we have, we only are recording the success criteria, and how we organize it, will come later.
08:54:51 <jeanne> AWK: [shows the template and the entry for the Guideline]
08:55:29 <jeanne> Kathy: But you need a diagram of what new success criteria falls under what Guidelines, especially new guidelines
08:55:38 <jeanne> Topic: Support Personalization
08:55:48 <AWK_> TOPIC: Issue 6 Support Personalization
08:55:49 <AWK_> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6
08:55:50 <Lisa_Seeman> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/support-personalization.html
08:56:40 <jeanne> AWK: This is a much longer proposal
08:56:44 <MichaelC> q+
08:56:49 <Joshue108_> So for future referene for each new proposed SC - if it may result in a new Guideline etc add it under the heading in the SC 'What Principle and Guideline the SC falls within.'
08:56:52 <jamesn> q+
08:57:39 <jeanne> Lisa: I put it all together, and some of it may be moved into the glossary, but that's a formatting issue
08:59:10 <jeanne> ... what are the semantics needed
08:59:29 <jeanne> ... what are the personization settings needed
09:00:12 <jeanne> ... there is an exception that the information doesn't need to be exposed when there is not a standardized way of doing it.
09:00:16 <jamesn> q?
09:00:41 <jeanne> Support personalization:  Contextual information and author settable properties of regions and elements  are programatically determinable so that personalization is avalible.
09:00:41 <jeanne> Where the number of steps in a process can be reduced, the user can control the trade off between function and simplification.
09:00:41 <jeanne> Exception: Information does not need to be exposed when there is not a standardized way of  exposing it in the technology or the platform.
09:00:41 <jeanne> [Contextual information includes: context of elements; concept and role; relevance and information for simplification; position in a process.
09:00:42 <JF> Q+
09:00:43 <jeanne> Author settable properties includes: type of distraction, type of help, type of transaction and type of reminder, instructions and status of an element.] - note this could be in the main text or in the definition
09:00:45 <AWK_> ack m
09:01:02 <jeanne> Michael:  I like most of what it does, but I have some structure issues
09:01:13 <jeanne> ... I don't think you should rely on semantics
09:01:18 <Kathy> q+
09:01:57 <jeanne> ... remove the exception, and have the rewording I suggest.
09:02:21 <jeanne> ... in a future version of WCAG, we could go further.
09:02:33 <AWK_> ack ja
09:02:47 <jeanne> ... "can be personalized"  is the rewording I suggest.
09:03:29 <jeanne> James:  The exception would be very difficult to use.  The example is a page that meets the success criteria, but I modify the page and now it doesn't meet WCAG.
09:03:35 <Joshue108_> q?
09:03:45 <Joshue108_> NOTE: I updated the SC template - with a section about mappings to work in other TFs https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/1
09:04:04 <AWK_> q+ AWK to ask Michael about prog set vs personalization
09:04:06 <jeanne> ... I am also concerned how broad it is, you can't personalize everything -- there is no way to be able to support customers.
09:04:23 <AWK_> ack jf
09:04:31 <jeanne>  Support personalization:  Contextual information and author settable properties of regions and elements  can be personalized
09:05:15 <AWK_> ack kathy
09:05:29 <jeanne> John: Success criteria needs to be @@
09:05:52 <jamesn> q+
09:06:23 <jeanne> Kathy: On mobile, there is specific assistive technology, we limit it to the assistive technology on the platform, and supporting the assistive tech on the platform with non-interference
09:06:25 <Joshue108_> +1 to MATF and COGA working together on personalisation.
09:06:46 <jeanne> Lisa: The phrasing that Jeanne put in IRC doesn't make sense.
09:07:01 <jeanne> AWK: We will work on the details of that.
09:07:29 <jeanne> Lisa: Looking at an older version of the SC, because that is closer to what Mobile TF is doing.
09:07:58 <jeanne> Kathy: There are very specific settings --- you can't support personalization of every app.
09:08:14 <jeanne> Joshue: Then it is the never ending -- like the access keys
09:08:31 <jeanne> Kathy: For example, JAWS wouldn't apply, because it isn't platform based.
09:08:33 <Lisa_Seeman> q+
09:08:44 <AWK_> ack AWK
09:08:44 <Zakim> AWK, you wanted to ask Michael about prog set vs personalization
09:08:46 <jeanne> ... there is SO much  personalization in the new iOS 10
09:09:04 <Joshue108_> +1 to using an authoritative channel for managing personalisation thru, else its potentially a tower of author preference babel.
09:09:28 <jeanne> AWK: When you are suggesting removing programmatically determinable, it seems like the opposite of what we usually do in WCAG.
09:09:41 <Joshue108_> q?
09:10:02 <jeanne> ... I think what we need is the crispness of, for example, headings.  Obviously, it is more than headings.
09:10:45 <jeanne> ... we have specific callouts for specific semantics, we have to present broader that will address different authoring needs.
09:11:19 <jeanne> ... we don't want people to just say that increase the fontsize then meets the personalization SC.
09:11:45 <AWK_> ack jam
09:11:46 <jeanne> John: Even if a program doesn't exist, you have a hook for it.
09:12:09 <jeanne> James: I think this might go more in @#@
09:12:15 <Lisa_Seeman> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/
09:13:03 <jeanne> Lisa: It's not covered today, we need wording for how it will work today and also how it will work later
09:13:09 <Joshue108_> q+ to say that end user awareness of even current native personalisation options at the OS level is vital.
09:13:12 <AWK_> ack lis
09:13:16 <Joshue108_> q-
09:14:04 <jeanne> Lisa: If people go out of that, there are control testing of user settings, we think 5 is most we can ask for, if people want to do more, then it is on them
09:14:27 <jeanne> ... we would have to come out with definitive guidelines on the test suite.
09:14:48 <jeanne> James: iOS exposes wonderful things, but a ton of them aren't available in a web application
09:15:00 <jeanne> Kathy: Agreed, and there are specific techniques
09:15:02 <Joshue108_> q?
09:15:12 <jeanne> James: It's a moving target and constantly changing
09:15:38 <Joshue108_> q+ to say what about not AT users with COGA requirements. Is this SC too focussed on programmatic determination. Sounds like a Silver project.
09:15:46 <jeanne> Kathy:  We can't limit ourselves because it isn't available today.  We have to push people to be able to do more personalization
09:15:57 <jeanne> ... there is a tremendous research on personalization
09:16:20 <jeanne> ... I agree with James on what can be done on the web, but we can't say that we aren't thinking about it.
09:16:41 <jeanne> Lisa: it would be great to get Apple and Google to standardize
09:16:44 <AWK_> ack jo
09:16:44 <Zakim> Joshue108_, you wanted to say what about not AT users with COGA requirements. Is this SC too focussed on programmatic determination. Sounds like a Silver project.
09:16:58 <Joshue108_> ack me
09:17:54 <jeanne> Joshue: We have to put this in Silver.  Semantics are all about assistive technologies, and it mean the user agents have meet us half way.
09:17:59 <jeanne> jeanne: +1
09:18:21 <jangkunblog> jangkunblog has joined #wai-wcag
09:18:32 <jeanne> Lisa: We need to define semantics and safe standarized techniques
09:19:19 <jeanne> Joshue: What are unsafe standardized techniques?
09:19:47 <jeanne> Lisa: usual example is those that are related to marketing and influencing people to increase profits.
09:20:38 <jeanne> AWK: There are lots of semantics, which ones would I use?  I don't know what I would tell a developer what to do to meet it.
09:20:56 <jeanne> Joshue: A lot of it is predicated on name, role state
09:21:32 <jeanne> Kathy: But in mobile, text size means to support to the platform settings. That's not name role state
09:21:47 <jeanne> Joshue: We could &&
09:22:24 <jeanne> Kathy: Mobile proposed an SC under 4.1 that extends 4.1.2
09:22:54 <jeanne> AWK: We can't put something into a guideline that doesn't have specific things that the author can do.
09:23:11 <jeanne> Lisa: The original wording would meet our needs.
09:23:48 <jeanne> AWK: The challenge is that there are a number of things that need to be merged in all the Task Forces
09:24:00 <jeanne> ... "here are a handful of things you could do"
09:24:11 <jeanne> Lisa: But that sounds more like Techniques
09:24:33 <jeanne> Joshue: Personalization is not just COGA. WE need to take it outside COGA
09:24:54 <jeanne> Kathy: I think this needs to wait until December, when we can see it as a whole.
09:25:01 <David_MacDonald__> David_MacDonald__ has joined #wai-wcag
09:25:23 <jeanne> ... we can't come to an agreement today.  Mobile addresses A, COGA addresses B, Low Vision addresses C.
09:25:37 <jeanne> ... we can't intermix it now.
09:26:24 <jeanne> Joshue: Personalization has to be addressed as a group.  If you say personalization is available, look at Techniques, done.
09:26:40 <JF> Q?
09:26:41 <jeanne> Lisa: Our version was completely dependent on Techniques
09:26:57 <JF> Q+
09:27:11 <adsl> adsl has joined #wai-wcag
09:27:13 <jeanne> ... the advice we were given was to get broader, which drove us crazy.
09:27:52 <jeanne> AWK: What does the universe of Personalization look like?
09:27:53 <Joshue108_> ack jf
09:28:00 <AWK_> ack jf
09:29:06 <Joshue108_> +1 to the support personalisation Guideline.
09:29:10 <jeanne> John: A lot of Personaization is under the Robust principle.  Maybe we have a 4.2 with Personalization with a success criteria with different threads.  When developers come to us and say, we getwhat you want, but how do we do that?
09:29:20 <jeanne> ... get everything out there and then look at it.
09:29:24 <Joshue108_> If we tried to do this in 2.1 this could start a dialog and set the groundwork for Silver.
09:29:43 <jeanne> ... a new Guideline would make it easier to bring them together.
09:30:16 <jeanne> Kathy: Then you could break the SC into more manageable chunks.
09:30:43 <jeanne> Lisa: Submit the success criteria as they are, then in December, WCAG WG looks at the whole universe and puts it together.
09:30:51 <David_MacDonald__> +q_
09:30:56 <David_MacDonald__> q+
09:31:19 <jeanne> Lisa: So we don't have to go crzy about the wording, because WCAG will rip it up anyway.
09:31:55 <jeanne> Kathy: Mobile TF is focusing on the research, the problems and the benefits, because we know that WCAG will change the wording
09:32:09 <jeanne> Joshue: This is very exciting.
09:32:38 <AWK_> ack david
09:32:39 <jeanne> Kathy: We will need a task force to merge the Task Forces
09:32:46 <jeanne> AWK: It will be a focused study
09:33:23 <jeanne> David:  What can we do is what John said about making a new Guideline
09:33:37 <jeanne> ... create a bucket, and we can start putting things in it.
09:34:05 <jeanne> Joshue: Personalization will capture people's attention
09:34:24 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
09:34:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html jeanne
09:34:44 <jeanne> rrsagent, make logs public
09:35:05 <jeanne> chair: Andrew, Joshue
09:35:40 <jeanne> Lisa: the personalization space needs to pull in other groups.
09:35:53 <Joshue108_> q?
09:36:13 <JF> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2016#13:30-14:30_Cognitive_Accessibility_Task_Force_Interlock
09:36:14 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
09:36:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html jeanne
09:36:28 <David_MacDonald__> New Guideline: Provide a means to allow personalization of the presentation of the content
09:37:49 <AWK_> RESOLUTION: Needs to be considered at the same time as MATF and LVTF personalization items, possibly a new GL group.
09:37:52 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
09:37:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html jeanne
09:55:48 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #wai-wcag
09:58:13 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #wai-wcag
10:00:50 <jnurthen> jnurthen has joined #wai-wcag
10:04:38 <AWK> AWK has joined #wai-wcag
10:04:47 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #wai-wcag
10:10:06 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #wai-wcag
10:18:15 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wai-wcag
10:19:12 <Lauriat> Lauriat has joined #wai-wcag
10:37:27 <SONG_JAE_IL> SONG_JAE_IL has joined #WAI-WCAG
11:34:41 <laura> laura has joined #wai-wcag
12:03:55 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #wai-wcag
12:05:47 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #wai-wcag
12:09:41 <JF> JF has joined #wai-wcag
12:13:18 <jnurthen> jnurthen has joined #wai-wcag
12:13:56 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag
12:14:14 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
12:14:53 <JF> Present+ JF
12:15:54 <AWK> AWK has joined #wai-wcag
12:16:06 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #wai-wcag
12:17:31 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #wai-wcag
12:18:25 <AWK> +AWK
12:18:58 <Lisa_Seeman> Lisa_Seeman has joined #wai-wcag
12:23:46 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #wai-wcag
12:24:54 <david-macdonald> david-macdonald has joined #wai-wcag
12:26:07 <Rachael> scribenick: Rachael
12:27:13 <Kathy> https://gist.github.com/patrickhlauke/96110b10547770021e58f5098dd31087
12:27:36 <Kathy> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/WCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria_Submission_Requirements
12:28:01 <AWK_> AWK_ has joined #wai-wcag
12:28:25 <SONG> SONG has joined #WAI-WCAG
12:29:36 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wai-wcag
12:32:32 <Joshue108> Joshue108 has joined #wai-wcag
12:35:46 <KIM_BONG_SEOB> KIM_BONG_SEOB has joined #WAI-WCAG
12:37:30 <patrick_h_lauke> patrick_h_lauke has joined #wai-wcag
12:38:07 <MichaelC_> MichaelC_ has joined #wai-wcag
12:38:26 <Kepeng> Kepeng has joined #wai-wcag
12:38:29 <Rachael> AWK: Welcome back. We will be talking about mobile. We thought we'd been talking about individual success criteria but after this morning we want to take a slightly different tack.  We will start with a high level view from the 10,000 foot view. Big picture first, then zoom into the different pieces some time after that.
12:39:08 <Rachael> Kathy: First thing we did was to look at mobile and determine what's different from desktop. What has changed.
12:39:17 <Kathy> https://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-accessibility-mapping/
12:39:17 <Rachael> ...People in general face issues on mobile.
12:39:34 <jlee27> jlee27 has joined #wai-wcag
12:39:43 <Rachael> ...This document shows how WCAG 2.0 apply to mobile.
12:40:07 <Rachael> ...a number of techniques will go into current success criteria. We will not discuss this today but we have it documented.
12:41:16 <Rachael> ...What is different: Smaller screens, different ways of interaction. What came out was that things that are different are not just for mobile. We have touch screens on desktops, etc.  So the things we talk about are not exclusive to mobile but are required for mobile.
12:42:07 <Rachael> ...3 different areas for success criteria: touch and  pointer, personalization and interaction that is inherint to mobile (portrait to landscape interaction)
12:43:01 <song_> song_ has joined #WAI-WCAG
12:43:30 <song_> song_ has left #wai-wcag
12:43:37 <Rachael> ...I want to give a high level view of all the different success criteria for touch and pointer specifically. One of the challenges we've had, is keeping the existing criteria for keyboard interactions and work touch and pointer in. They are intertwined. The success criteria can't be examined alone.
12:44:09 <Kathy> https://gist.github.com/patrickhlauke/96110b10547770021e58f5098dd31087
12:44:31 <Jaeil_Song> Jaeil_Song has joined #WAI-WCAG
12:44:39 <Rachael> What we are discussing is in the link.
12:45:34 <Rachael> Patrick: Wanted to look holistically at input. Good opportunity to patch in different types of inputs not sufficiently covered in WCAG.
12:46:12 <Jaeil_Song> Jaeil_Song has left #wai-wcag
12:47:01 <Rachael> ...Current bias is towards keyboard accessibility. There is a base assumption that developers design to work with mouse. WCAG adds keyboard.  Newer technologies on devices allow a fully accessible application without a keyboard or mouse.
12:47:35 <Rachael> ...Sometimes users have a bluetooth keyboard but that is not always the case.
12:48:31 <jamesn> q+
12:49:39 <Rachael> ...Some patterns in techniques fail on devices.  The documents attempts to go through all input devices.  Keyboard is fully covered. Assuming that it can't be changed, I've added about 5 more areas.
12:50:02 <Rachael> AWK: What pushback did you get that we shouldn't change the existing criteria?
12:50:27 <Rachael> Patrick: General pushback on not changing existing items.
12:50:52 <jamesn> q?
12:51:12 <Rachael> AWK: It is not clear for 2.1 that we are not open to adding new SC.
12:51:59 <Rachael> Kathy: Right now we've created SC to be added. When we first started with adjusting Keyboard criteria, the thought after a bit was that we were changing too much. I think its important to look at each of the success criteria.
12:52:40 <Rachael> Josh: Question:  Keyboard is a type of pointer. Can we generalize them under pointer?
12:53:14 <Rachael> Patrick: There is something about pointers beign about to target a particular XY value on the screen.
12:54:14 <webwatch> webwatch has joined #wai-wcag
12:54:40 <AWK_> s/beign/being
12:54:44 <Rachael> ...at a very high level, everything boils down to be input agnostic.
12:54:52 <AWK_> q?
12:55:10 <Joshue108> q?
12:55:36 <Rachael> ...generalizing everything to be input agnostic, maybe a step too far.
12:55:48 <AWK_> ack _
12:55:50 <AWK_> ack jam
12:56:41 <Rachael> James: When keyboard was written, keyboard was the primary way of interacting with information. Do we risk in 5 years that pointers are not the primary way of interacting?
12:57:13 <Rachael> Patrick: I did add a SC that will allow abstraction to future devices.
12:57:34 <Rachael> AWK: One solution will be to ensure WCAG can be refreshed more often than every 8 years.
12:58:07 <Rachael> Kathy: We called out touch specifically but added a definition that expands touch so that it applies to all pointers.
12:58:28 <Rachael> ...if touch doesn't apply, then like video, it is skipped.
12:59:11 <Rachael> Jeanne: We can look at keyboard as sequential navigation and touch as direct navigation
13:00:00 <Joshue108> q+ to ask my silly question, will people looking at this know that pointer events relate to mobile devices as opposed to touch?
13:00:56 <jamesn> q+
13:01:02 <Rachael> Patrick: Overview. We start with keyboard then suggest a section on Pointer accessibility. This is currently implicit in WCAG 2.0. This should be an automatic pass becuase this is how most developers develop but its included for completed.  The argument for inlcuding this is that somethigns in the future may not be designed for mouse interaction.
13:02:38 <Rachael> [brief off topic discussion of target size]
13:05:44 <Joshue108> q?
13:05:48 <Rachael> Patrick: Next section covers gestures.  If something is built into the OS that handles gestures then you can exclude some of these. We will need an exclusion based on this.  Users need a way to back out of gesturebased actions.
13:06:26 <Rachael> ...most features already implemented something like this where it only activates on the removal of the pointer (up gesture).
13:06:43 <Rachael> ...Then we discuss variations based on use of AT.
13:08:41 <Rachael> ...AT usually remaps keyboard inputs for example. Making sure that functions still work on those scenarios. The next about touch with AT, is there becuase the AT will intercept the gestures and interpreted as a command to the AT. So the gestures may not be passed down to the application level.
13:09:03 <Rachael> ...I consider pass throughs in AT to be a workaround
13:09:07 <Rachael> Josh: Its also a poweruser tool
13:09:14 <Joshue108> q+ to ask about the grouping of ‘Keyboard with AT’, ‘Touch with AT’,’Input Agnostic’.
13:09:43 <jamesn> q+ about 2.6.1
13:10:02 <jamesn> q- about
13:10:09 <jamesn> q- 2.6.1
13:10:34 <jamesn> q-
13:10:35 <Rachael> Patrick: The next, input agnostic, is about whether you only focus on input agnostic events (onclick, onblur, etc) but its really about making sure that your content works regardless of input mechanism.
13:10:42 <jamesn> q+ to ask about 2.6.1
13:11:20 <laura> rrsagent, make minutes
13:11:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html laura
13:12:21 <Kathy> This page has links to the success criteria that has been written by the taskforce: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/WCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria_Submission_Requirements
13:13:14 <Rachael> ...The turn off shortcuts is about certain situations where the single key shortcut keys built into the application can cause problems for AT users. Users need the ability to turn them off. Multi-key shortcuts can still cause problems.
13:13:40 <Rachael> Kathy: the link goes into more detail.
13:14:13 <Judy> Judy has joined #wai-wcag
13:14:18 <Rachael> Patrick: The no focus trap is the best candidate for merging with the existing focus keyboard trap SC.  It tries to dover the various scenarios.