15:27:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
15:27:21 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/06-ag-irc
15:27:23 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:27:23 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ag
15:27:25 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
15:27:25 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
15:27:26 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
15:27:26 <trackbot> Date: 06 April 2017
15:28:19 <Joshue108> zakim, agenda?
15:28:19 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
15:28:56 <Joshue108> agenda+ Continuing discussion on SCs https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/2017April5_top3/results
15:29:13 <Joshue108> agenda+ Target size
15:29:22 <Joshue108> agenda+ Adapting Text
15:29:32 <Joshue108> agenda+ Accidental activation
15:38:38 <David-macdonald> David-macdonald has joined #ag
15:38:58 <David-macdonald> what is the webex number... can someone send an invit tot the list?
15:39:00 <Greg> present+ Greg_Lowney
15:39:08 <MichaelC> present+
15:39:14 <Glenda> present+ Glenda
15:39:16 <laura> present+ Laura
15:39:17 <jasonjgw> present+
15:39:17 <David-macdonald> Present+ david-macdonald
15:39:24 <steverep> steverep has joined #ag
15:39:24 <Joshue108> present+ Joshue108
15:39:29 <JF> JF has joined #ag
15:39:30 <steverep> present+steverep
15:39:30 <ScottM> ScottM has joined #ag
15:39:43 <ScottM> +ScottM
15:40:00 <erich> erich has joined #ag
15:40:03 <David-macdonald> can someone please send an invite to the list?
15:40:35 <JF> present+ JF
15:40:35 <Wayne> Wayne has joined #ag
15:40:57 <erich> present+ erich
15:40:59 <Joshue108> Scribenick: Glenda
15:41:19 <David-macdonald> IS THERE ANYONE HEARING ME!!!!!!!!???
15:41:23 <JF> zakim, who's here?
15:41:23 <Zakim> Present: Greg_Lowney, MichaelC, Glenda, Laura, jasonjgw, david-macdonald, Joshue108, steverep, ScottM, JF, erich
15:41:25 <Zakim> On IRC I see Wayne, erich, ScottM, JF, steverep, David-macdonald, Zakim, RRSAgent, Greg, shawn, Glenda, Lisa_Seeman, laura, AllanJ, Joshue108, MichaelC, kirkwood, yatil, jasonjgw,
15:41:25 <Zakim> ... csarven, trackbot
15:41:31 <Glenda> Zakim, next item
15:41:31 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Continuing discussion on SCs https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/2017April5_top3/results" taken up [from Joshue108]
15:41:35 <shawn> present+ Shawn
15:41:57 <JF> agenda?
15:42:06 <Glenda> Zakim, next item
15:42:06 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, Glenda
15:42:25 <Glenda> Zakim, close item 1
15:42:25 <Zakim> agendum 1, Continuing discussion on SCs https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/2017April5_top3/results, closed
15:42:27 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:42:28 <Zakim> 2. Target size [from Joshue108]
15:42:34 <Glenda> Zakim, next item
15:42:34 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Target size" taken up [from Joshue108]
15:42:59 <Joshue108> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/60
15:43:39 <Glenda> Josh: Kathy has updated to the text for Target Size.  Any points from discussion on Tuesday that anyone wants to go over or carry on today?
15:43:47 <JF> Q+
15:43:55 <Joshue108> ack JF
15:43:56 <Glenda> ack JF
15:44:34 <Joshue108> zakim, ping me in 15 minutes
15:44:34 <Zakim> ok, Joshue108
15:44:43 <Glenda> JF: struggle with a target size that always has to be a size of 44 css pixels square.
15:45:09 <Joshue108> q+ to ask about using relative sizes
15:45:16 <Glenda> JF: worried about onscreen keyboard with this SC would make the size of that onscreen keyboard so big, it would require horizontal scrolling.
15:46:40 <Lisa_Seeman> q+
15:46:40 <Glenda> JF: mobile device breakpoint of 360px and keyboard with 10 keys on top row 44 css px wide = 440 p = scrolling
15:47:18 <jasonjgw> q+
15:47:49 <Glenda> Wayne: we have reached breakpoint of technology and agnostic.  When you start talking about SC that are visually based, and you have to take into account 40 inch display to 4 inch display.  This is a new space.  We may be forced to revist technology agnostic when there are such vast differences.
15:48:07 <Lisa_Seeman> option one "a mechanisim is availible so that"
15:48:08 <Joshue108> ack me
15:48:08 <Zakim> Joshue, you wanted to ask about using relative sizes
15:48:42 <Lisa_Seeman> option 2 " unless......."
15:48:53 <Greg> q+ to say that perhaps if a page wants to be truly touch accessible it needs to react to small screen sizes and wrap intelligently, rather than say it can use controls too small to be targeted easily
15:48:57 <Glenda> Josh: is the problem that we are setting a specific CSS px size?
15:48:57 <Lisa_Seeman> options 3: give two alterntives
15:49:25 <Glenda> Wayne: Alastair addressed this with css px and the expected viewing differences for that device.
15:49:33 <Joshue108> q?
15:50:31 <Glenda> Josh:  can we drop a hard size, and go with a relative size?
15:50:33 <Joshue108> ack lisa
15:51:36 <Glenda> Lisa:  3 mechanisms that I can think of that may help experts solve the problem.  1) Problem with approach we prefer, add “one of the following is true”. Think of something that maybe isn’t as good, but could work.
15:52:00 <Glenda> Lisa:  giving two options can allow an SC to get through
15:52:23 <Glenda> 2)  If you word it as “a mechanism is available” you can perhaps solve it through personalization
15:52:59 <Glenda> Lisa: 3) Use of an exception (when you can quatifiy where it does not work)
15:53:06 <JF> Q+
15:53:30 <laura> mechanism sets off the unending widget discussion.
15:53:51 <Joshue108> ack jason
15:56:14 <Glenda> Jason:  Already have ability to detect interactive elements.  Someone could write a technology that alllows for a preference to just enlarge target size, or enlarge the control and the target size and allow scrolling.  Possibly devide this SC into two pieces.
15:56:55 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #ag
15:57:00 <Glenda> Jason: Good idea to step back and think which of this SC would be better addressed by User Agents versus Content/Developers.
15:57:15 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
15:57:38 <erich> erich has joined #ag
15:57:41 <Glenda> q?
15:57:54 <Joshue108> ack greg
15:57:54 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to say that perhaps if a page wants to be truly touch accessible it needs to react to small screen sizes and wrap intelligently, rather than say it can use
15:57:55 <kirkwood> present+
15:57:58 <Zakim> ... controls too small to be targeted easily
15:58:00 <Greg> Perhaps if a page wants to be truly touch accessible it needs to react to small screen sizes and wrap intelligently, rather than say it can use controls too small to be targeted easily
15:58:01 <Greg> That is, a page with an on-screen keyboard can use any keycap size it wants, as long as it provides the option to make them at least 44x44 (per bullet 2) without requiring horizontal scrolling (in order to comply with another SC).
15:59:10 <Greg> Language like “A mechanism exists to let the user access all functionality through targets that are at least 44 by 44 CSS px” would let bullets 2 and 3 go away.
15:59:18 <Joshue108> q?
15:59:29 <Greg> On the other hand, as someone replied to my comment on Tuesday, we can certainly keep it as it is without breaking anything, merely requiring some pages to claim conformance only on devices with screens above a minimum size.
15:59:34 <Zakim> Joshue108, you asked to be pinged at this time
16:00:17 <Glenda> q?
16:00:47 <Joshue108> ack JF
16:01:49 <Glenda> JF: understand Greg’s direction.  Question:  How do you apply this to responsive design?  Concerned about applying this at scale on large sites and this is too subjective.  Which is more important, avoiding horizontal scroll or making sure that targets are large enough?
16:02:47 <Greg> "A mechanism exists" also handles text links by allowing the user to bump up the text size to get link 22 or 44 px tall.
16:02:56 <Glenda> Josh:  we will resurvey this again.
16:03:28 <JF> There was also the problem with native controls
16:03:35 <JF> and their size
16:03:52 <Glenda> RESOLUTION: Working group will resurvey this item language proposal
16:04:23 <Glenda> Zakim, next item
16:04:23 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Adapting Text" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:04:38 <Wayne> q+
16:04:41 <Greg> John, I believe that for pages which want to use inaccessible design by default (e.g. small targets), they should have to support or provide alternative presentation options. The user should be able to to choose which SC they want to comply with, based on what's important to them at that time in their situation.
16:04:43 <Joshue108> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/adapting-text_ISSUE-74-78-79/guidelines/sc/21/adapting-text.html
16:04:54 <laura> q+
16:05:03 <Glenda> ack Wayne
16:05:19 <allanj> allanj has joined #ag
16:05:38 <Joshue108> ack laura
16:05:55 <laura> Proposal D
16:05:56 <laura> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-291618718
16:06:10 <laura> Proposal E F
16:06:10 <laura> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-291918379
16:06:11 <KimD> KimD has joined #ag
16:06:19 <laura> Jon Avila had an idea on how to deal with scoping
16:06:20 <laura> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-292174184
16:06:23 <Glenda> Laura: Tuesday call has main issues in minutes.  See github issue URLs Laura just entered here.
16:06:30 <laura> “If the technologies being used can achieve the following, text styles of the page can be overridden as detailed below with no loss of essential content or functionality.”
16:06:32 <Joshue108> zakim, ping me in 15 mins
16:06:32 <Zakim> ok, Joshue108
16:06:38 <KimD> Present+
16:06:43 <steverep> Proposal G is now on GitHub with the following exception: Content presented in a technology which does not support changing text syles is exempt if either (a) a supported technology could not achieve the same content, or (b) text styles are not applicable to the content
16:06:43 <Ryladog> "“If technologies being used can achieve it, text styles of the page can be overridden (without losing  <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#essentialdef> essential content or functionality) as follows:”"
16:07:10 <Glenda> Josh: can you distill the difference in these proposals.
16:07:55 <Glenda> Laura: proposal D - when a mechanism is used, emphasis on when.
16:08:11 <Joshue108> q?
16:08:12 <Glenda> Laura: proposals E and F are in tandum.
16:08:40 <Glenda> Laura: and to E and F add Katie’s refinement “If technologies being used can achieve it, text styles of the page can be overridden (without losing  <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#essentialdef> essential content or functionality) as follows:”"
16:08:50 <JF> I note there is now a Proposal G
16:09:08 <Ryladog> 1.4.5 uses "If technologies being used can acheive" text
16:09:14 <steverep> q+q+ to introduce proposal G with the technology exception
16:09:25 <Glenda> Laura: Level A - without a mechanism
16:09:28 <Ryladog> q+
16:10:06 <Joshue108> ack ryla
16:10:22 <Glenda> Katie:  Avila’s suggestion is great.
16:10:35 <Wayne> q+
16:10:53 <shawn> q-q
16:11:14 <Glenda> Katie: likes Avila’s suggestion here “If technologies being used can achieve it, text styles of the page can be overridden (without losing  <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#essentialdef> essential content or functionality) as follows:”" and then she massaged it a bit to get this :  add Katie’s refinement “If technologies being used can achieve it, text styles of the page can be overridden (without losing  <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#essentialdef>
16:11:14 <Glenda> essential content or functionality) as follows:”"
16:11:18 <shawn> q+ SteveRep
16:11:30 <Joshue108> q?
16:11:32 <shawn> ack s
16:11:34 <Joshue108> ack steve
16:12:18 <Glenda> SteveRep: I don’t want to give a blanket exceptoin for technologies  when it could be achieved otherwise.  Look at proposal G.
16:12:22 <David-macdonald> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-292222640
16:12:39 <Joshue108> q+ to ask if many devs know how to ensure HTML or CSS  content can be overridden.
16:12:44 <Glenda> steverep: Proposal G is now on GitHub with the following exception: Content presented in a technology which does not support changing text syles is exempt if either (a) a supported technology could not achieve the same content, or (b) text styles are not applicable to the content
16:13:27 <laura> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-292222640
16:13:27 <steverep> Technology exception proposal for adapting text: Content presented in a technology which does not support changing text syles is exempt if either (a) a supported technology could not achieve the same content, or (b) text styles are not applicable to the content
16:13:45 <Joshue108> ack wayne
16:14:04 <David-macdonald> q+
16:14:11 <Wayne> Rough Concept-The user can change the font for text to any one of a set of fonts for their language groups.
16:15:06 <Glenda> Wayne: couple of ways to scope it.  you can scope by technology.  Or you can limit the choices the author has to make.  Example, for font family (don’t have to be responsible for every font family that occur anywhere), maybe for each language type we could come up with a list of font families in a technique.
16:15:10 <Joshue108> ack me
16:15:10 <Zakim> Joshue, you wanted to ask if many devs know how to ensure HTML or CSS  content can be overridden.
16:15:50 <Wayne> q+
16:16:20 <Glenda> Josh: concerned that developers would feel lost and konw how to accomplish this SC. Is this approach moot if user can override with their own stylesheet.  What would block a user from overriding and getting what they need with a personal style sheet.
16:16:23 <Joshue108> ack david
16:17:06 <jasonjgw> q+
16:17:20 <Glenda> David-macdonald:  it is a big requirement, we should weigh it very heavily.  The impact on all PDFs is very high.  Can this be achieved in that PDF viewer?
16:17:34 <allanj> with a good pdf and VIP-PDF free application. You can do all of Adapting Text SC
16:17:37 <Lisa_Seeman> q+
16:17:39 <Glenda> Laura:  most of these things can be overridden in that PDF viewer.
16:18:00 <Joshue108> ack wayn
16:19:16 <Joshue108> +1 to JF
16:19:24 <shawn> [ Shawn thinks there is still an issue with PDFs that includes forms, etc. ]
16:20:28 <Glenda> Wayne:  we are not going to write off PDFs.  Optimistic that PDFs can be marked up accessibly and most of these parameters can be changed.  Still some work to be done, but hopeful.
16:21:18 <Wayne> trx.knowbility.org
16:21:33 <Zakim> Joshue108, you asked to be pinged at this time
16:22:17 <Glenda> Wayne: See Typographical Prescription (TRx) at https://trx.knowbility.org How a user can choose their best profile for reading.
16:22:24 <allanj> VIP-PDF windows, mac, linux http://snab.ch/en/hilfsmittel/digital-tools/the-first-pdf-reader-for-visually-impaired-people/
16:22:34 <shawn> agenda?
16:22:34 <Joshue108> ack jason
16:22:49 <laura> Yes. We need techniques.
16:22:52 <Glenda> Wayne:  This TRx is almost ready for public consumption https://trx.knowbility.org (just working out a few more things).
16:23:19 <JF> Q?
16:23:56 <allanj> write techniques - https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Technique_Template
16:24:53 <Glenda> Jason: General trend is in the right direction.  No lose of content or functionality when these parameters are overriden.  Author’s responsibility is not to break it.  We need to define how you can confirm you’ve met the requirement.
16:25:18 <Joshue108> +1 to Jason for common failures.
16:25:35 <Joshue108> ack lisa
16:26:48 <Glenda> Lisa: not sure we need to create exceptions for some technology, since some companies may make changes as they see the WCAG 2.1 SC being finalized.
16:26:53 <steverep> +1 to that - putting a little pressure on technology developers to support this is not a bad thing
16:27:05 <Glenda> Josh:  yes, that ties into the user agent responsibility to do their part too.
16:28:36 <Glenda> RESOLUTION: Options for Adapting Text to be surveyed
16:29:12 <Glenda> Jim:  will we be surveying new SC? Or are we still focused on these.
16:29:38 <Glenda> Josh:  we will be adding 2 new SC from COGA and 1 from LV.  We are picking up new proposed SC.
16:30:04 <Glenda> trackbot, end meeting
16:30:04 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:30:04 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Greg_Lowney, MichaelC, Glenda, Laura, jasonjgw, david-macdonald, Joshue108, steverep, ScottM, JF, erich, Shawn, Katie_Haritos-Shea,
16:30:07 <Zakim> ... kirkwood, KimD
16:30:12 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:30:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/06-ag-minutes.html trackbot
16:30:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:30:13 <RRSAgent> I see no action items