13:59:45 RRSAgent has joined #lvtf 13:59:45 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/20-lvtf-irc 13:59:47 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:59:50 Zakim, this will be 13:59:50 Meeting: Low Vision Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 13:59:50 Date: 20 April 2017 13:59:50 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:00:07 zakim, clear agenda 14:00:07 agenda cleared 14:00:20 present: 14:00:38 Present+ 14:05:41 allanj has joined #lvtf 14:08:08 Agenda+ reminder Joint LVTF & COGA call Mon 24 April. Topic: personalization 14:08:10 Agenda+ User Needs Document - publishing timeline, Issues 14:08:11 Agenda+ Adapting Text - Fonts 14:08:13 Agenda+ User Interface graphics contrast - table borders? 14:08:21 zakim, who is here? 14:08:21 Present: allanj 14:08:23 On IRC I see allanj, RRSAgent, shawn, Zakim, trackbot 14:54:41 ScottM has joined #lvtf 14:54:55 laura has joined #lvtf 14:57:20 zakim, agenda order 1, 3, 2, 4 14:57:20 ok, allanj 15:01:20 Wayne has joined #lvtf 15:01:59 Marla has joined #lvtf 15:02:01 alastairc has joined #lvtf 15:03:54 scribe: Jim 15:04:06 zakim, open item 1 15:04:06 agendum 1. "reminder Joint LVTF & COGA call Mon 24 April. Topic: personalization" taken up [from allanj] 15:04:25 erich has joined #lvtf 15:05:10 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:05:10 Present: allanj 15:05:11 steverep has joined #lvtf 15:05:14 JohnRochford has joined #lvtf 15:05:20 present+steverep 15:05:28 Glenda has joined #lvtf 15:05:50 Present+ AlastairC, JohnR, Laura, Shawn, Marla, ScottM, Wayne, Glenda 15:06:11 COGA call 12 EST, 11CST 15:06:30 zakim, close item 1 15:06:30 agendum 1, reminder Joint LVTF & COGA call Mon 24 April. Topic: personalization, closed 15:06:33 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 15:06:33 3. Adapting Text - Fonts [from allanj] 15:06:43 open item 3 15:07:21 http://nosetothepage.org/FontTst.html 15:07:56 present+ Glenda 15:08:37 present+ erich 15:09:00 +1 15:09:24 jim: perhaps we leave fonts out, to get the 15:09:40 q+ to suggest we try to come together on technology support wording 15:09:52 +1 15:09:53 ... SC in the document. 15:10:20 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:10:20 Present: allanj, steverep, AlastairC, JohnR, Laura, Shawn, Marla, ScottM, Wayne, Glenda, erich 15:10:26 Scribe: erich 15:10:35 ack s 15:10:35 steverep, you wanted to suggest we try to come together on technology support wording 15:11:44 +1 for not supporting giving a pass for technologies that don't support it ! 15:11:51 SR: Claim is if technology can support user styles than the SC is a pass, and I have concerns with that 15:12:17 LC: We've had it both ways, that wording was insisted upon over the weekend 15:12:47 WD: I interpret it as if you are working with technology that has support for some browsers, than every single browser for which it has support has to work 15:13:07 q+ 15:13:23 q- 15:13:25 WD: This does not deal with technologies for which there are no browsers that support 15:14:05 WD: Earlier approach was that if it was not allowed on one agent, then we couldn't require it on others 15:14:59 SR: Notes distinction between user agent support vs. technology support, sees that as the issue 15:15:36 4. Only Accessibility-Supported Ways of Using Technologies: Only accessibility-supported ways of using technologies are relied upon to satisfy the success criteria. Any information or functionality that is provided in a way that is not accessibility supported is also available in a way that is accessibility supported. (See Understanding accessibility support.) 15:15:40 https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibility-support-head 15:15:43 https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html 15:15:59 Hi Gregg: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017AprJun/0196.html 15:17:19 AC: He talks about major web technologies, to which we could add 15:18:02 SR: Big difference is we're giving a blanket pass with no stipulations behind it 15:20:16 JA: We have 13 versions of wording nobody can agree on 15:20:33 Proposal L text: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Issue_78_Options#Proposal_L_text_reads: 15:20:36 JA: We want the want that talks about accessibility supported, and leaves out the technology stuff 15:20:58 JA: No matter what we say about the Fonts, until we get some metric, it's just going to spin 15:21:35 My vote: Go with “L” version. Dropping font for now (to get this SC in). 15:22:14 AC: Do we need to worry about spacing issues caused by replacing fonts? 15:22:39 +1 to Glenda 15:23:05 Up the spacing? 15:24:07 AC: If people have to leave a certain spacing around text, does it matter why? 15:24:16 How about: No loss of content or functionality occurs when a user agent.... (Proposal D but replace mechanism with user agent), then use the bullets of J minus font for now 15:25:27 Dropping off now to attend a COGA call. 15:25:36 JohnRochford present+ 15:26:23 WD: verbalizing potential metric formulation 15:28:56 I love this direction. Let’s leave font off…and see how far this SC can take us! It will sure be a step forward. 15:29:25 +1 font off (for now) 15:29:32 WebAIM Feedback: “The variations introduced by font family customization are, we believe, adequately covered by the manipulation of line, letter, and word spacing.” 15:29:39 https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/254 15:29:57 adapting text just changed - https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/288/files 15:30:28 moving over to AG call 15:30:31 quit 15:30:45 rrsagent, make minutes 15:30:45 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/20-lvtf-minutes.html erich 15:31:04 wayne just type /join ag 15:39:50 Marla has left #lvtf 16:27:23 laura has left #lvtf 16:34:07 laura has joined #lvtf 16:41:00 agenda? 16:41:14 zakim, take up item 2 16:41:14 agendum 2. "User Needs Document - publishing timeline, Issues" taken up [from allanj] 16:43:56 Shawn to finish going through GitHub issues and public comments. Then go through the Issues in the draft where the TF planned to add info and see if they are easy enough to handle. Then decide if we can publish it as done (with the idea that we can update it later), or if we publish an updated Draft now and set a milestone to get back to it after the SCs settle down (like in 8+ months). 16:44:30 https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/AWK_adapting-text/guidelines/#adapting-text 16:44:35 TF will need to review proposed changes. 16:45:03 https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/288/commits/ab7b16c0ca5027863a0bca3837a4e64a30b358e8?diff=split 16:45:44 Each of the following text styles of the page can be overridden with no loss of essential content, functionality or meaning. 16:46:47 jf hasd "All font-families specified on the page can be overridden with no loss of essential content, functionality or meaning."' 16:47:57 jim: remove the "technology" clause 16:48:55 topic: interface affordance 16:49:19 glenda: table borders and bullets contrast 16:50:52 https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/user-interface-component-contrast-minimum_ISSUE-10/guidelines/index.html#user-interface-component-contrast-minimum 16:53:02 what do we call table borders? 16:53:10 visual affordance? 16:53:59 table borders are not and interactive user interface component 16:55:13 sh: graphical components for table borders? 16:55:53 sh: can we consider table borders as a graphic for 1.4.12 16:56:26 gs: fine with moving table borders to 1.4.12 16:57:18 laura: would need a definition of graphical object. tho already used in the SC. 17:00:14 jim: the arrows used in https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/user-interface-component-contrast-minimum_ISSUE-10/guidelines/index.html#user-interface-component-contrast-minimum in lower left hand corner 17:00:50 ... are they user interface? 17:01:29 gs: if graphic supplied by author then it falls with Issue 9 graphics contrast 17:04:39 ... if the image, border, created by user agent then issue 9 17:04:41 http://html5doctor.com/the-details-and-summary-elements/ 17:06:50 laura has left #lvtf 17:07:13 jim: video element, audio element controls should fall into issue 9 because the controls are created by the user agent. 17:07:36 rrsagent, make minutes 17:07:36 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/20-lvtf-minutes.html allanj 18:08:14 laura has joined #lvtf 18:35:56 Glenda has joined #lvtf 20:02:00 Glenda has joined #lvtf 20:25:46 allanj has joined #lvtf 21:29:08 shawn? 21:42:09 yes 21:42:34 ​some of the controls fail LVTF proposed SC. ​If I file a bug, I don't think I can point to a proposed SC. I thought of pointing the the User Needs document. But, I could not find a user need related to this topic or (Issue 9 & 10; graphics contrast & user interface control contrast, repectively). We have lots of information about text and contrast, but not graphics and controls. 21:42:59 just a sec... 21:44:04 i drafted it earl;ier this week for TF review 21:44:05 https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-a11y-tf/issues/54#issuecomment-294968939 21:44:19 how about I put it in the Editors draft and then you can point to that? 21:44:50 or -- just wait until we get it in the published note... 21:45:10 ok, 21:45:29 I was just writing a message to the group. I was going write a paragraph/section on the topic with some images for illustration 21:45:57 ping me if you want me to do more now :-) 21:46:00 I already have the form controls page, now I have the media controls 21:46:20 no you don't need to do more now. bug will wait till next week 21:46:25 bye