14:09:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
14:09:30 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-ag-irc
14:09:32 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:09:32 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ag
14:09:34 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
14:09:34 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
14:09:35 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
14:09:35 <trackbot> Date: 02 May 2017
14:09:40 <AWK> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:09:40 <Zakim> Present: (no one)
14:09:42 <AWK> +AWK
14:09:44 <AWK> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:09:44 <Zakim> Present: AWK
14:09:48 <AWK> Chair: AWK
14:09:53 <AWK> Zakim, agenda?
14:09:53 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
14:10:01 <AWK> agenda+ TPAC reminder
14:11:02 <AWK> agenda+ Single Key Shortcut Alternative: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Top3_18Apr2017/results#xsc
14:12:00 <AWK> agenda+ Timeouts: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/minimize-user-errors-13/results
14:12:21 <AWK> agenda+ Minimize user errors: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Timeouts_Issue14/results
14:14:17 <AWK> regrets+ EA_Draffan, Crystal_Jones, AlexLi, Stein_Erik_Skotkjerra, Denis_Boudreau, Mike_Elledge
14:14:39 <AWK> regrets+ Jim_Smith
14:49:37 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK, do you want me to set myself as scribe now? Do you need any other pre-meeting setup?
14:55:19 <Jake> Jake has joined #ag
14:55:22 <Jake> Present+ Jake
14:55:34 <ChrisLoiselle> Present+ChrisLoiselle
14:55:43 <MelanieP> MelanieP has joined #ag
14:56:03 <LisaSeeman> LisaSeeman has joined #ag
14:57:22 <marcjohlic> marcjohlic has joined #ag
14:57:45 <ChrisLoiselle> Scribe: ChrisLoiselle
14:58:44 <AWK> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:58:44 <Zakim> Present: AWK, Jake, ChrisLoiselle
14:58:54 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #AG
14:58:56 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #AG
14:59:03 <Greg> Greg has joined #ag
15:00:05 <MelanieP> present+ Melanie_Philipp
15:00:29 <Wilco> present+
15:00:30 <Rachael> present+ Rachael
15:00:49 <JF> JF has joined #ag
15:00:55 <adaml> adaml has joined #ag
15:00:57 <JF> Present+ JF
15:01:08 <Bruce_Bailey> Bruce_Bailey has joined #ag
15:01:09 <JF> agenda?
15:01:11 <LisaSeeman> present+
15:01:17 <allanj> present+
15:01:19 <laura> laura has joined #ag
15:01:26 <jasonjgw> present+ jasonjgw
15:01:30 <Bruce_Bailey> present+ Bruce_Bailey
15:01:41 <Lauriat> Lauriat has joined #ag
15:01:43 <marcjohlic> present+ marcjohlic
15:01:56 <gowerm> gowerm has joined #ag
15:02:04 <Greg> present+ Greg_Lowney
15:02:50 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
15:02:54 <Lauriat> Present+ Lauriat
15:03:00 <gowerm> present+ MikeGower
15:03:03 <kirkwood> present+ kirkwood
15:03:06 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, next item
15:03:06 <Zakim> agendum 1. "TPAC reminder" taken up [from AWK]
15:03:13 <laura> present+ Laura
15:03:37 <Bruce_Bailey> q+ to say I am thrilled to be going to TPAC
15:03:38 <david-macdonald> david-macdonald has joined #ag
15:03:56 <allanj> will there be phone bridge available for those not able to attend?
15:04:26 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: Reminder to book hotel in Burlingame, CA.
15:04:29 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #ag
15:05:10 <Bruce_Bailey> http://www.w3.org/2017/11/TPAC/
15:05:17 <Kathy> present+ Kathy
15:05:21 <KimD> KimD has joined #ag
15:05:25 <AWK> ack b
15:05:25 <Zakim> Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to say I am thrilled to be going to TPAC
15:05:25 <KimD> Present+ KimD
15:06:23 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
15:06:58 <ChrisLoiselle> Bruce B: Friday the day for working group?
15:07:29 <shwetank> shwetank has joined #ag
15:07:59 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #ag
15:08:18 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
15:08:30 <JF> CAn somebody re-post the survey URL? Thanks.
15:08:39 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK mentions that it should read correctly on page for TPAC
15:09:07 <ChrisLoiselle> Hotel is booked by phone, should be mentioning "CSAIL"
15:09:21 <AWK> CSAIL
15:09:26 <Ryladog> "CSAIL"
15:09:40 <Bruce_Bailey> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AGWG_TPAC2017/results
15:09:47 <Bruce_Bailey> my mistake, Friday is listed
15:09:56 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, next item
15:09:56 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Single Key Shortcut Alternative: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Top3_18Apr2017/results#xsc" taken up [from AWK]
15:10:09 <AWK> zakim, ping AWK in 20 minuntes
15:10:09 <Zakim> I don't understand 'ping AWK in 20 minuntes', AWK
15:10:14 <AWK> zakim, ping AWK in 20 minutes
15:10:14 <Zakim> I don't understand 'ping AWK in 20 minutes', AWK
15:10:22 <AWK> zakim, ping me in 20 minutes
15:10:22 <Zakim> ok, AWK
15:10:53 <shwetank> present+ shwetank
15:11:25 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: asks about single key shortcut concerns
15:11:57 <AWK> Current version: https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/single-key-shortcuts_ISSUE-69/guidelines/sc/21/single-key-shortcuts.html
15:11:57 <JF> Q+
15:12:01 <ChrisLoiselle> Jason W: concerns are still there. Conversations need to be had with speech technology manufacturers
15:12:11 <Kathy> q+
15:13:51 <ChrisLoiselle> Speech technology research and development needs to be looked into , if not by WCAG, by public possibly
15:14:06 <Greg> q+ to say that I do not agree with Jason's interpretation that this requires changes to most pages, nor do I agree this is the responsibility of assistive technology or user agents
15:14:14 <AWK> ack jf
15:14:17 <david-macdonald> q+
15:15:00 <ChrisLoiselle> JF: Is there an example of re-mapping keyboard shortcuts in the wild? Is it implementable today?
15:15:02 <LisaSeeman> q+
15:15:03 <AWK> ack kathy
15:15:35 <ChrisLoiselle> Kathy: Gmail does this already, re-mapping is occurring on their apps
15:16:24 <Lauriat> q+
15:16:24 <Ryladog> Kathy we cant hear you as someone else is talking
15:16:32 <Greg> As I said on Thursday, I disagree this is a user agent issue: not at all. This is also not an Assistive Technology issue. Jason, this only puts new requirements on those webapp developers who explicitly, really want to use single-key shortcuts, like F. Doing so is significantly less accessible than using combinations like Ctrl+F, which has been the industry standard for decades.
15:16:32 <AWK> ack greg
15:16:32 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to say that I do not agree with Jason's interpretation that this requires changes to most pages, nor do I agree this is the responsibility of assistive technology
15:16:36 <Zakim> ... or user agents
15:16:38 <ChrisLoiselle> AT vendor relationship can be talked to by Kim
15:16:56 <david-macdonald> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/single-key-shortcuts_ISSUE-69/guidelines/sc/21/single-key-shortcuts.html
15:17:06 <AWK> q+ to clarify what "a mechanism" can mean
15:17:33 <Ryladog> is anybody else hearing two calls?
15:17:35 <ChrisLoiselle> Greg L: differences are based on interpretation of SC by people within our group
15:17:56 <Greg> Also, this is not just speech, but all AT that simulates keyboard input, and also for users who have trouble telling whether the keyboard focus is still where they think it is.
15:18:43 <ChrisLoiselle> Greg L: it is a fairly important requirement who aren't using AT...
15:19:04 <AWK> ack dav
15:20:52 <steverep> steverep has joined #ag
15:20:55 <ChrisLoiselle> David M: not access keys related. What SC is requiring that there is a button to deactivate or activate shortcut keys
15:21:05 <steverep> present+steverep
15:21:23 <Greg> q+ to clarify that even today's accesskey is not single-key activation, because user agents take the key specified by the author and add a modifier such as Alt or Cmd
15:21:24 <AWK> ack lisa
15:21:34 <ChrisLoiselle> David M: Supports doing the due diligence, but understandable it may not be fixable with Dragon
15:21:43 <AWK> ack lau
15:21:53 <JF> Q+ to suggest that this is more tightly scoped to *only* developer-scripted shortcuts
15:22:01 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: open source available to re-write shortcuts
15:23:22 <ChrisLoiselle> Shawn L: keyboard accessibility related to 2.1.1 , you can turn it off and there is keyboard access to this functionality
15:23:23 <AWK> ack AWK
15:23:23 <Zakim> AWK, you wanted to clarify what "a mechanism" can mean
15:23:33 <gowerm> Note: Where the single-character keystroke is turned off, the requirments of 2.1.1 continue to be met
15:24:36 <jasonjgw> q+
15:25:28 <laura> Mechanism definition: https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#mechanismdef
15:25:30 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: mechanism doesn't need to be created by page author. if browser did this work, it would be less work for developers. author can not use single key shortcuts...
15:25:32 <AWK> ack greg
15:25:32 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to clarify that even today's accesskey is not single-key activation, because user agents take the key specified by the author and add a modifier such as Alt or Cmd
15:25:43 <AWK> q+ james
15:25:49 <Greg> Note that today's accesskey does not even support single-key activation, because every user agents I know of take the key specified by the author and add a modifier such as Alt or Cmd. We could add language to except cases where the user agent makes it single-key when the author did not intend that.
15:25:50 <Greg> (Note that Accesskey was originally added not for single-key activation but to emulate the Common User Access input standard when authoring dialog boxes in HTML. CUA combined access keys with Alt or prefixed them with F10, except when in special modes.)
15:27:03 <AWK>  ack JF
15:27:03 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to suggest that this is more tightly scoped to *only* developer-scripted shortcuts
15:27:09 <gowerm> q+
15:28:02 <ChrisLoiselle> JF: Follows up to Greg and David...scope to only keyboard shortcuts that are custom scripted vs. any single key shortcut (user agent) vs. author scripting a widget
15:28:04 <david-macdonald> q+
15:28:29 <gowerm> just add "without modifier keys"
15:28:31 <david-macdonald> "If <a>single-character key shortcuts</a> are implemented by the web page to activate a control,..."
15:28:46 <ChrisLoiselle> Kathy: access keys need modifier vs. shortcut keys
15:30:09 <Ryladog> custom behaviors
15:30:22 <Zakim> AWK, you asked to be pinged at this time
15:30:26 <gowerm> Just address in the glossary
15:30:33 <ChrisLoiselle> David M: implemented vs. scripted , implemented by author
15:30:34 <Ryladog> q+
15:30:42 <david-macdonald> q-
15:31:20 <Ryladog> q+ to say identify it as 'custom scripted behaviors'
15:31:23 <ChrisLoiselle> JF: main concern is around access key...
15:31:23 <AWK> ack jas
15:33:02 <ChrisLoiselle> Jason White: Speech tech and AT getting involved with this would possibly interfere with keyboard functionality. Mechanism approach may be best bet
15:33:06 <Bruce_Bailey> Bruce_Bailey has joined #ag
15:33:22 <ChrisLoiselle> Editorial note on what issues are could be useful
15:33:33 <AWK> ack james
15:34:29 <Bruce_Bailey> q+ to suggest to DM latest edit to "set by the content" rather than "implemented by the webpage"
15:34:48 <ChrisLoiselle> James N: Two points. Survey comment: Never seen this as an actual issue with voice recognition. Text area example. Speech recognition character settings need to be fixed. Unless you turn these commands off in settings...can't find an issue
15:35:19 <Greg> q+ to say that the proposed wording is pretty good but the final "two or more characters" should be "include at least one non-character key", as Ctrl+F is fine, as is PgDn. I would actually prefer "If a key shortcut using only printing characters is implemented by the web page to activate a control, then a mechanism is available to turn them off or remap them to a shortcut that uses at least...
15:35:21 <Greg> ...one non-printing key."
15:35:29 <ChrisLoiselle> 2nd point: take into account multiple key access issues. "G" to go and then a character to go to an element. I.e. unmodified access keys.
15:35:45 <AWK> zakim, close the queue
15:35:45 <Zakim> ok, AWK, the speaker queue is closed
15:37:42 <ChrisLoiselle> Mike ?: keyboards taken over by different apps...thinks there is use for this SC.  Talks to modifier key use and internationalization mapping of keys, keys applied in a series,
15:37:55 <laura> G suite has single keyboard shortcuts: https://support.google.com/a/users/answer/163225?hl=en
15:37:56 <AWK> ack ry
15:37:56 <Zakim> Ryladog, you wanted to say identify it as 'custom scripted behaviors'
15:38:39 <ChrisLoiselle> Katie H-S: could you repeat your first point? Second is custom scripted behavior
15:38:40 <AWK> ack gow
15:38:45 <AWK> ack bru
15:38:45 <Zakim> Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to suggest to DM latest edit to "set by the content" rather than "implemented by the webpage"
15:38:55 <JF> +1 to Custom Scripted behavior
15:39:21 <AWK> ack greg
15:39:21 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to say that the proposed wording is pretty good but the final "two or more characters" should be "include at least one non-character key", as Ctrl+F is fine, as is
15:39:24 <Zakim> ... PgDn. I would actually prefer "If a key shortcut using only printing characters is implemented by the web page to activate a control, then a mechanism is available to turn them
15:39:24 <Zakim> ... off or remap them to a shortcut that uses at least...
15:39:35 <ChrisLoiselle> Bruce B: keystroke vs. character in terms of words used.
15:39:41 <Greg> I pretty much agree with everything Mike said.
15:40:01 <Greg> James, when you tell tell Kim she does not have evidence that this is a real-world problem, please be aware that you’re telling a person who uses speech input full time and creates commercial tools to support speech users, that what she says is a problem for herself and her users is not a problem.
15:40:09 <Greg> The proposed wording is pretty good but the final "two or more characters" should be "include at least one non-character key", as Ctrl+F is fine, as is PgDn. I would actually prefer "If a key shortcut using only printing characters is implemented by the web page to activate a control, then a mechanism is available to turn them off or remap them to a shortcut that uses at least one non-printing key
15:40:11 <Greg> ."
15:40:22 <ChrisLoiselle> Greg L: to James, Kim does have ability to talk to the points James made on use case
15:42:07 <ChrisLoiselle> Greg L: talks to use of the word "Printing key"in terminolgoy
15:42:15 <ChrisLoiselle> RESOLUTION: Leave Open
15:42:24 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, next item
15:42:24 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Timeouts: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/minimize-user-errors-13/results" taken up [from AWK]
15:42:27 <Greg> "If a keyboard shortcut uses only printing characters is implemented by the web page to activate a control, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-printing key."
15:42:46 <Bruce_Bailey> s /terminolgoy/terminology/
15:42:56 <Ryladog> My first point was; in my experience it is areal world problem,. I first discovered it when first learning to use voice recognition and trying to say-in a password
15:43:20 <AWK> Current version: https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/minimize-user-errors_ISSUE-13/guidelines/#minimize-user-errors
15:43:22 <LisaSeeman> q+
15:43:24 <Greg> s/uses/using/
15:43:35 <Bruce_Bailey> s /areal world/a real world/
15:44:18 <jasonjgw> q+
15:44:36 <ChrisLoiselle> James N: address field issue vs. choosing from a list. As long as information is validated
15:44:41 <AWK> ack lisa
15:44:43 <gowerm> q+
15:44:51 <Bruce_Bailey> q+ to ask how pick lists were required?
15:46:03 <ChrisLoiselle> James N: validated to user , picking thing from a list could make it more difficult...
15:46:51 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: validated by enough is not enough. People may give up if whole form is incorrect and red errors are everywhere. Errors corrected automatically...
15:47:40 <Greg> q+ to say I'm concerned that the definitions merely refer the reader to non-normative documents. That means there is very little normative guidance. Among other things, that makes it possible for the requirements to change drastically between editions.
15:47:46 <Pietro> Pietro has joined #ag
15:48:07 <Pietro> Present+ Pietro
15:48:30 <ChrisLoiselle> James N: type of value vs. pick from a list of integers. Narrow use case.
15:48:44 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: how to not make mistakes is main point. Don't want people to leave the task
15:49:18 <Greg> q-
15:49:25 <AWK> zakim, ping me in 15 minutes
15:49:25 <Zakim> ok, AWK
15:49:54 <ChrisLoiselle> perhaps adding "where it can't be reliably automatically correctly" into the text
15:50:25 <ChrisLoiselle> James N: the experience could be worse by introducing this, so that is the concern.
15:51:35 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: COGA users vs. non-COGA users and experience of lists vs. text edit fields..what choice is easier?
15:51:47 <Bruce_Bailey> i think my proposed edit solves this delima
15:52:29 <allanj> it depends on the person. ALL is ALL. for some it is easy to type some information. for others picking from a list is easy. everyone is different
15:52:30 <AWK> ack jason
15:53:05 <Greg> q+ to say that a drop-down combo-box is the best UI, because it supports both free-form input and choice from a list. I see online advice on how to implement them in HTML without requiring scripting.
15:55:05 <ChrisLoiselle> Jason W: we will have to defend details if it makes to into WCAG 2.1. What constitutes a correct / valid value? What is invalid vs. incorrect? Assessing of user's knowledge.
15:55:45 <AWK> ack gower
15:56:47 <ChrisLoiselle> Mike : list box and keyboard interaction , for numbers it works.
15:57:15 <AWK> ack br
15:57:15 <Zakim> Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to ask how pick lists were required?
15:57:27 <LisaSeeman> q+
15:57:47 <AWK> ack greg
15:57:47 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to say that a drop-down combo-box is the best UI, because it supports both free-form input and choice from a list. I see online advice on how to implement them in
15:57:51 <Zakim> ... HTML without requiring scripting.
15:57:59 <ChrisLoiselle> Bruce B: use a list box when you can example, 40 is way too much in terms of list items
15:58:02 <Greg> I agree that selecting from a list can be good or bad, depending on context and user. Drop-down combo-box is the best UI, because it supports both free-form input and choice from a list. I see online advice on how to implement them in HTML without requiring scripting.
15:59:03 <AWK> ack lisa
15:59:16 <Bruce_Bailey> I still like the gentle edit (to an early version) that I put into the survey:
15:59:18 <Bruce_Bailey> Error Correction: If an input error is automatically detected and the correction is known, then the correction is automatically made, unless it would jeopardize the security or purpose of the content.
15:59:25 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: moving the number to 31 is the right thing to do.
16:00:49 <Greg> q+ to say I'm a little concerned about the implication that dots (periods) have to be allowed as separators, when they're also used in numbers themselves.
16:01:11 <marcjohlic> q+
16:01:16 <Greg> I'm a little concerned about the implication that dots (periods) have to be allowed as separators, when they're also used in numbers themselves.
16:01:17 <Bruce_Bailey> I disagree w/ Lisa that what I proposed is not testable.  Here is 3.3.3:
16:01:18 <Bruce_Bailey> 3.3.3 Error Suggestion: If an input error is automatically detected and suggestions for correction are known, then the suggestions are provided to the user, unless it would jeopardize the security or purpose of the content
16:02:12 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: introducing the text that "free form text edit is not prohibited " could be introduced in the SC
16:02:34 <AWK> ack greg
16:02:34 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to say I'm a little concerned about the implication that dots (periods) have to be allowed as separators, when they're also used in numbers themselves.
16:02:41 <steverep> q+ to comment about keyboard accessibility and other unintended consequences (e.g. splitting fields to avoid the SC altogether)
16:03:00 <AWK> q+
16:03:02 <Greg> I'm a little concerned about the implication that dots (periods) have to be allowed as separators, when they're also used in numbers themselves.
16:03:04 <Greg> Also we could add a note to the draft saying that the exact number may be adjusted and asking for feedback on that specifically.
16:04:01 <gowerm> +1 for the second paragraph being problematic. I made a note of that in my comments.
16:04:15 <ChrisLoiselle> Greg L: dash, dot , numerical input. i.e. what happens with fractions? "." is the separator ...is there an exception for decimal points?
16:04:26 <Zakim> AWK, you asked to be pinged at this time
16:04:42 <allanj> and internationalization. in some european languages the comma is the decimal point
16:05:03 <AWK> ack marc
16:05:33 <AWK> ack steve
16:05:33 <Zakim> steverep, you wanted to comment about keyboard accessibility and other unintended consequences (e.g. splitting fields to avoid the SC altogether)
16:05:34 <ChrisLoiselle> Marc J: expanding to selected number, is ok. But should this be lane, drive, way? how would this work for all forms of input?
16:06:19 <ChrisLoiselle> Stephen R: full-time screen reader, auto-complete doesn't always work with custom controls.
16:06:41 <ChrisLoiselle> Also, loop hole : combining fields.
16:06:47 <LisaSeeman> q+
16:07:12 <AWK> ack AWK
16:07:18 <ChrisLoiselle> RESOLUTION: Leave Open
16:07:24 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, next item
16:07:24 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, ChrisLoiselle
16:07:28 <AWK> ack li
16:07:34 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, next item
16:07:34 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Minimize user errors: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Timeouts_Issue14/results" taken up [from AWK]
16:08:07 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: Links at top, have current version
16:08:18 <marcjohlic> q+
16:08:22 <marcjohlic> q-
16:08:23 <ChrisLoiselle> on Github
16:09:00 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: SC managers, please add those links to top of page
16:10:13 <JF> s/"Minimize user errors: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Timeouts_Issue14/results"/"Timeouts: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Timeouts_Issue14/results"
16:12:17 <Bruce_Bailey> The older bullet-list version is so much more readable than the current version.
16:12:17 <AWK> Current version: https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/timeouts_ISSUE-14/guidelines/#timeouts
16:12:46 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: Use case: few items in tax return, press next to go to next page. then you go away for a bit. Logged out, data is lost.
16:13:04 <JF> Have we solicited feedback from the Security Folks at W3C around this?
16:13:17 <Bruce_Bailey> The current version is a long run-on compound sentence.
16:13:41 <ChrisLoiselle> 24 hours is reasonable time for this
16:15:21 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: not trying to cover everything, but be able to cover this and make an impact. Educating people on what they need to do.
16:16:20 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: Goes over James N's points from timeouts guideline
16:17:43 <gowerm> q+
16:18:11 <ChrisLoiselle> James N: airline shopping, don't want my current info saved , I do want to abandon that data. Give user info that in 24 hours, this ticket may not be available, etc.
16:19:00 <gowerm> Where data can be lost due to timeouts, users are warned at the start of a process about the length of inactivity that generates the timeout.
16:19:51 <AWK> ack gower
16:20:13 <AWK> q+
16:20:30 <ChrisLoiselle> Mike: on phone , name online is gowerm?
16:20:39 <gowerm> Yes
16:20:42 <ChrisLoiselle> thanks.
16:21:29 <AWK> ack AWK
16:22:08 <AWK> from the SC current version: "unless the user can return to the same point in a task without data loss for a minimum of a 24 hours."
16:22:39 <marcjohlic> I think the 24 hours (while making more sense) will cause issues with 2.2.1..  would rather not include a time limit on this one
16:22:43 <ChrisLoiselle> Mike : read the information, understands what users need to do. Take the timeout, it fits single A.
16:23:34 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: Advanced notification of timeout, then 2.2.1. would kick in. Mike and AWK, perhaps AA vs. A.
16:23:55 <marcjohlic> +1 to mgowers wording
16:23:56 <Bruce_Bailey> +1 to MG edit
16:24:13 <Ryladog> +1
16:24:17 <Rachael> +1
16:24:17 <AWK> +1
16:24:18 <LisaSeeman> greg and me prefer the old wording
16:24:31 <JF> +1
16:24:59 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK: Providing advanced information is key aspect
16:25:44 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
16:26:00 <Greg> I was at https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/timeouts_ISSUE-14/guidelines/#timeouts; is that not correct?
16:26:01 <ChrisLoiselle> Greg L : more concerned on current version of text is current version. AWK provides link to group
16:26:19 <Bruce_Bailey> I think this is current version:
16:26:20 <Bruce_Bailey> Where a session can time out and form information that has been submitted by the user can be lost before the task is complete, the user is informed of the length of time that the data is preserved and the length of inactivity that generates the time out, at the start of the task, unless the user can return to the same point in a task without data loss for a minimum of a 24 hours.
16:26:50 <LisaSeeman> q+
16:27:18 <ChrisLoiselle> AWK link was part of survey.
16:27:24 <Greg> Is this the correct text? "Where a session can time out and form information that has been submitted by the user can be lost before the task is complete, the user is informed of the length of time that the data is preserved and the length of inactivity that generates the time out, at the start of the task, unless the user can return to the same point in a task without data loss for a minimum...
16:27:25 <Greg> ...of a 24 hours."
16:29:11 <Bruce_Bailey> MG:  Where data can be lost due to timeouts, users are warned at the start of a process about the length of inactivity that generates the timeout.
16:29:18 <alastairc> q
16:29:28 <alastairc> q?
16:29:34 <alastairc> ack lisa
16:30:26 <AWK_> AWK_ has joined #ag
16:30:33 <AWK_> zakim, queue?
16:30:33 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
16:30:37 <ChrisLoiselle> Mike: Data retention vs. timeouts
16:31:17 <ChrisLoiselle> Lisa S: 20 hours vs. 24 hours
16:31:23 <david-macdonald> Where data can be lost due to timeouts more than 24 hours, users are warned at the start of a process about the length of inactivity that generates the timeout.
16:31:25 <Ryladog> +1 to Lisa's thought that 24 hours is better
16:31:30 <marcjohlic> 24 is a better number but it will confuse matters with 2.2.1
16:31:53 <david-macdonald> Where data can be lost due to timeouts that are less than 24 hours, users are warned at the start of a process about the length of inactivity that generates the timeout.
16:32:13 <gowerm> +1 to David's
16:32:18 <alastairc> +1
16:32:23 <Bruce_Bailey> +1 to DM edit
16:32:31 <david-macdonald> Present+ Davidmacdonald
16:32:43 <gowerm> you'll also need langauge around "intentainl" timeouts. obviously a dev can't do anything about network timeouts
16:33:05 <david-macdonald> 20 hours in timing adjustable came from the idea that everyone needs at least 4 hours sleep in 24 hours
16:33:13 <Greg> David, make that "about the length of time and/or inactivity" that generates the timeout.
16:33:19 <ChrisLoiselle> trackbot, end meeting
16:33:19 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:33:19 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been AWK, Jake, ChrisLoiselle, Melanie_Philipp, Wilco, Rachael, JF, LisaSeeman, allanj, jasonjgw, Bruce_Bailey, marcjohlic, Greg_Lowney,
16:33:22 <Zakim> ... Lauriat, MikeGower, kirkwood, Laura, Kathy, KimD, Katie_Haritos-Shea, shwetank, steverep, Pietro, Davidmacdonald
16:33:26 <Bruce_Bailey> Bruce_Bailey has left #ag
16:33:27 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:33:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-ag-minutes.html trackbot
16:33:28 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:33:28 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
16:33:31 <gowerm> BTW, if you do the 24 hours, you are overriding the 22.