15:00:56 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
15:00:56 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/11-ag-irc
15:00:58 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:00:58 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ag
15:01:00 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
15:01:00 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
15:01:01 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
15:01:01 <trackbot> Date: 11 July 2017
15:01:14 <Alex> Alex has joined #ag
15:01:18 <AWK> Scribe: JakeAbma
15:01:26 <MichaelC> present+
15:01:29 <AWK> +AWK
15:01:35 <Bruce_Bailey> Bruce_Bailey has joined #ag
15:01:44 <wayne> wayne has joined #ag
15:01:52 <Bruce_Bailey> present+ bruce_bailey
15:02:01 <Makoto> Makoto has joined #ag
15:02:29 <gowerm> gowerm has joined #ag
15:02:34 <marcjohlic> marcjohlic has joined #ag
15:02:37 <AWK> agenda+ Undo: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/COGA_undo/results
15:02:41 <steverep> steverep has joined #ag
15:02:44 <AWK> agenda+ Personalization
15:02:47 <steverep> present+steverep
15:02:53 <JF> JF has joined #AG
15:02:58 <AWK> agenda+ Adapting Text (continued): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextJuly6/results
15:03:00 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #ag
15:03:10 <AWK> agenda+ Resolving Issues 62/63/71: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Issues64-67-68/results
15:03:23 <Kathy> present+ Kathy
15:03:28 <Makoto> present+ Makoto
15:03:34 <JF> present+ JF
15:03:43 <laura> present+ Laura
15:03:45 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
15:03:47 <AWK> Zakim, agenda order is 4, 3, 1, 2
15:03:47 <Zakim> ok, AWK
15:03:54 <Avneesh> present+ Avneesh
15:04:13 <Greg> Greg has joined #ag
15:04:28 <alastairc> present+ AlastairC
15:04:31 <AWK> Zakim, agenda order is 4, 3, 2, 1
15:04:31 <Zakim> ok, AWK
15:04:44 <wayne> present+ wayne
15:05:01 <gowerm> present+ MikeG
15:05:06 <wayne> I cannot get into webex
15:05:18 <Greg> present+ Greg_Lowney
15:05:30 <kirkwood> present+
15:06:36 <kirkwood> present+
15:07:56 <laura> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
15:08:05 <JakeAbma> Zakim, next item
15:08:05 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Resolving Issues 62/63/71: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Issues64-67-68/results" taken up [from AWK]
15:08:16 <JakeAbma> zakim, next item
15:08:16 <Zakim> agendum 4 was just opened, JakeAbma
15:09:11 <MelanieP> present+ Melanie_Philipp
15:09:21 <JF> agenda?
15:09:28 <AWK_> AWK_ has joined #ag
15:10:49 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #ag
15:10:58 <jasonjgw> present+
15:11:09 <Wilco> Hey John, what's the new PW for the meeting?
15:11:23 <david-macdonald> david-macdonald has joined #ag
15:11:36 <david-macdonald> is there a new oassword
15:11:44 <david-macdonald> password
15:12:04 <gowerm> w3c-wai-gl
15:12:04 <AWK_> q?
15:12:27 <david-macdonald> Present+ david-macdonald
15:12:41 <JakeAbma> Kathy: basically text already present
15:12:57 <JakeAbma> JW: Want to see text to review before approval
15:14:39 <MichaelC> s/w3c-wai-gl//
15:15:15 <JakeAbma> Kathy: should it be 3 SC while already in conformance or not, that's the question before we move on.
15:15:53 <lisa> q+
15:16:11 <AWK_> Keyboard with AT: All functions available by keyboard are still available by keyboard after accessibility-supported assistive technology that remaps keystrokes is turned on.
15:16:35 <AWK_> Touch with AT: All functions available by touch are still available by touch after platform assistive technology that remaps touch gestures is turned on.
15:17:05 <AWK_> Non-interference with AT: Content does not interfere with the normal operation of the platform assistive technology, or a mechanism is available to override the interference, unless:  it is essential for use of the content, and the user is warned before using the component.
15:18:30 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #ag
15:18:46 <AWK_> ack li
15:18:55 <Mike_Pluke> present+ Mike_Pluke
15:19:08 <jasonjgw> q+
15:19:36 <david-macdonald> q+
15:19:47 <wayne> q+
15:19:52 <steverep> q+
15:21:03 <AWK_> ack ja
15:21:09 <JakeAbma> Steve Repsher: the issues now have a lot of unsolved problems, hard to make in conformance
15:22:25 <gowerm> q+
15:22:29 <steverep> q+ to give an example of my hesitation based on keyboard interference
15:23:04 <JakeAbma> JW: hard to fail conformance icw AT with already existing SC and conformance language
15:23:10 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:23:54 <Detlev> sorry to be late - can't get Webex to load (maybe IT probs on our side)
15:24:43 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
15:24:46 <AWK> q?
15:25:01 <Detlev> chat does not get updated - looks like we have a problem here - bye for today
15:25:34 <JakeAbma> David: have requirements already, we don’t have it at various breakpoints.
15:25:39 <Pietro> Pietro has joined #ag
15:25:54 <Pietro> Present+ Pietro
15:26:42 <JakeAbma> David: where 2.0 lacked support we wanted to add it to 2.1
15:26:49 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:27:00 <AWK> ack wa
15:27:19 <AWK> q+
15:27:30 <Detlev> Trying again - has the Webex password changed? If so, can someone send it to me off-chat?
15:27:45 <jasonjgw> q+
15:28:45 <JakeAbma> Wayne: what’s different in platform and not platform AT?
15:28:50 <JakeAbma> Kathy: platform = from OS, non-platform = from external parties, plug-ins / external hardware etc.
15:29:08 <david-macdonald> "The full page includes each variation of the page that is automatically generated by the page for various screen sizes. Each of these variations (or their respective conforming alternate versions) needs to conform in order for the entire page to conform"
15:29:09 <AWK> perhaps referring to "technology that uses platform accessibility services that remaps..."
15:29:33 <AWK> s/"technology that/"assistive technology that
15:29:46 <AWK> q?
15:29:49 <JakeAbma> Kathy: There is (still) confusion on what’s accessibility supported, need to add clarity
15:29:49 <AWK> ack da
15:29:58 <AWK> ack steve
15:29:58 <Zakim> steverep, you wanted to give an example of my hesitation based on keyboard interference
15:31:15 <JakeAbma> Steve Repsher: developers can make it hard using platform key-strokes, but really inaccessible is hard
15:31:45 <AWK> ack gower
15:31:51 <AWK> zakim, close the queue
15:31:51 <Zakim> ok, AWK, the speaker queue is closed
15:33:05 <AWK> ack jason
15:33:18 <Mike_Elledge> Mike_Elledge has joined #ag
15:34:26 <david-macdonald> q+
15:35:31 <JakeAbma> JW: if content has features for particular device types and assistive support techniques need to adapt, we need to make it part of conformance requirement
15:35:56 <Mike_Elledge> Present+ Mike Elledge
15:36:06 <AWK> ack AWK
15:36:12 <JakeAbma> David: limit the scope to customise on screen size
15:37:54 <JakeAbma> AWK: strong consensus on pursuing to conformance section
15:37:57 <Detlev> present+ Detlev
15:38:51 <JakeAbma> RESOLUTION: pursue approach on modification to conformace section
15:39:07 <JakeAbma> Zakim, next item
15:39:07 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Adapting Text (continued): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextJuly6/results" taken up [from AWK]
15:39:35 <Detlev_> Detlev_ has joined #ag
15:40:55 <wayne> q+
15:41:44 <alastairc> q+
15:41:59 <AWK> q+ AWK
15:42:23 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #ag
15:42:41 <laura> Adding spacing between paragraph metrics:
15:42:41 <laura> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017JulSep/0053.html
15:42:52 <AWK> ack way
15:44:05 <JF> Q+ to suggest that linear spacing (space between paragraphs) is not meausered in "spaces" but rather line-height
15:44:23 <laura> Proposed paragraph bullet: * spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 (two spaces)
15:44:31 <JakeAbma> Lisa: spacing between paragraphs en sections of at least 2 spaces, that all good with proposal
15:44:42 <AWK> q+ james
15:45:40 <laura> COGA has Visual Presentation SC #51:
15:45:45 <laura> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/51
15:46:44 <AWK> ack ala
15:47:19 <AWK> +1 alastair in support for paragraphs but not sections
15:47:23 <AWK> q-
15:47:29 <lisa> q+
15:47:31 <JF> +1 to Alastair
15:47:31 <AWK> ack j
15:47:44 <wayne> q+
15:47:48 <JakeAbma> AC: working on the sections would be unworkable, blows up websites
15:47:49 <laura> No mechanism
15:47:55 <AndroUser2> AndroUser2 has joined #ag
15:48:03 <laura> * line spacing (leading) to at least 1.5 (space-and-a-half)
15:48:04 <laura> * spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 (two spaces)
15:48:05 <laura> * letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 em
15:48:06 <laura> * word spacing to at least 0.16 em
15:48:40 <steverep> q+ yes, we need to clarify units for technologyagnosticism
15:48:46 <laura> WCAG 2.0 1.4.8 Visual Presentation says: "Line spacing (leading) is at least space-and-a-half within paragraphs, and paragraph spacing is at least 1.5 times larger than the line spacing."
15:48:52 <alastairc> q+
15:49:00 <JakeAbma> JF: we need measurable metrics in testing scenario’s, needs more clearly defined
15:50:00 <JakeAbma> JF: line-spacing, how big is a space? we need line-height (in CSS) or equivalent.
15:50:12 <Greg> Agreed: it needs to use specific, testable units.
15:50:18 <JakeAbma> AWK: paragraph spacing is not yet present in specs
15:50:22 <AWK> ack JF
15:50:22 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to suggest that linear spacing (space between paragraphs) is not meausered in "spaces" but rather line-height
15:50:27 <AWK> ack l
15:50:48 <Detlev_> James put himself on queue...
15:51:10 <jasonjgw> q+
15:52:44 <AWK> ack way
15:53:04 <david-macdonald> q+
15:53:22 <Detlev_> if memory serves line-height needs no unit...
15:53:26 <JakeAbma> Wayne: letter-spacing is a hard one to not be technology specific, line-height is very CSS specific
15:53:26 <JF> Q+ to say that techniques are non-normative and not a SC
15:53:48 <david-macdonald> q-
15:53:50 <AWK> ack ala
15:54:26 <wayne> q+
15:55:44 <AWK> ack jason
15:55:51 <JakeAbma> AlastairC: .045 was new proposal
15:55:55 <JakeAbma> Wayne: .045 is problematic, other solution / variant are available, will write it up
15:56:38 <laura> WCAG 2.0 1.4.8 Visual Presentation says: "Line spacing (leading) is at least space-and-a-half within paragraphs, and paragraph spacing is at least 1.5 times larger than the line spacing."
15:56:55 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:57:02 <lisa> q+
15:57:15 <AWK> ack j
15:57:15 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to say that techniques are non-normative and not a SC
15:57:59 <steverep> Let's change "line spacing to 1.5" to "line height to 1.5 times the font size" so it solves the ambiguity
15:58:01 <laura> q+
15:58:41 <JakeAbma> JF: we need unit of measurement, techniques are not the way to go for different technologies
15:58:50 <wayne> +1 to steve
15:59:05 <lisa> +1
15:59:06 <AWK> ack way
15:59:15 <AWK> ack lisa
15:59:24 <laura> ack laura
15:59:46 <steverep> q
15:59:54 <AWK> q+ steverep
16:00:17 <lisa> ack lisa
16:00:26 <AWK> ack s
16:00:32 <lisa> (time reminder)
16:01:06 <Detlev> line-height at least can be unitless: use value multiplied by the element's font size - so paragraph offset may be vased on unitless line-height?
16:01:15 <JakeAbma> Steve Repsher: word spacing is too CSS specific, needs work
16:02:11 <lisa> should we do a quick survey if we are ready for a cfc
16:02:28 <lisa> uderstanding that small changes might happen after qugust
16:03:00 <wayne> q+
16:05:47 <wayne> We were dependent on CSS units inadvertently. So our numbers mean the increase above normal.
16:05:49 <Mike_Elledge> q+
16:06:20 <laura> So how about:
16:06:20 <laura> 1. line spacing (leading) to at least 1.5 times the font size
16:06:21 <laura> 2. spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size
16:06:22 <laura> 3. letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 em
16:06:23 <laura> 4. word spacing to at least 0.16 em
16:07:00 <lisa> reminder about the time
16:08:07 <lisa> we can put that in understanding
16:08:13 <steverep> Agree with Wayne....let's just say "word spacing to 0.16em plus the technology's default
16:08:23 <JakeAbma>  Wayne: ‘above normal spacing’ should have been included
16:08:31 <JakeAbma> JF: make it ‘default’ for clarity
16:08:43 <laura> 1. line spacing (leading) to at least 1.5 times the font size above default spacing
16:08:44 <laura> 2. spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size above default spacing
16:08:45 <laura> 3. letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 em above default spacing
16:08:46 <laura> 4. word spacing to at least 0.16 em above default spacing
16:09:51 <wayne> Why don't we don't we just put it forward now and adjust the numbers later.
16:10:00 <AWK_> AWK_ has joined #ag
16:10:44 <AWK_> q?
16:10:46 <AWK_> ack w
16:10:51 <AWK_> ack mik
16:11:02 <JakeAbma> RESOLUTION: leave open
16:11:03 <AWK_> Zakim, next item
16:11:03 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Personalization" taken up [from AWK]
16:11:07 <JakeAbma> Zakim, next item
16:11:07 <Zakim> agendum 2 was just opened, JakeAbma
16:11:49 <lisa> alister has proposed new wording for support personlization
16:11:50 <lisa>    Common navigation elements, form elements or interactive controls can be personalised by:
16:11:52 <lisa>       a mechanism that enables the user to add symbols OR
16:11:53 <lisa>   contextual information that can be programmatically determined.
16:11:55 <lisa> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6
16:11:58 <AWK_> Issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6
16:11:58 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-49 - Https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6.  Please complete additional details at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/issues/49/edit>.
16:12:09 <Detlev_> Detlev_ has joined #ag
16:12:13 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #ag
16:12:23 <AWK_> SC in draft GL: https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/support-personalization_ISSUE-6/guidelines/#support-personalization
16:13:14 <AWK_> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/support-personalization_ISSUE-6/guidelines/terms/21/common-form-elements.html
16:13:26 <lisa> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/support-personalization_ISSUE-6/guidelines/sc/21/support-personalization-minimum.html
16:14:07 <Alex> can everybody mute
16:14:09 <david-macdonald> no breathing allowed :)
16:14:53 <JF> Q+
16:15:46 <AWK_> ack j
16:15:53 <lisa> q+
16:16:14 <Bruce_Bailey> q+ to ask if SC can be written "interactive controls" instead of "for pages that contain interactive controls".
16:16:57 <AWK_> ack lisa
16:17:08 <Detlev_> q+
16:17:50 <JakeAbma> JF: concerned for wording about ‘common’ and in what it results
16:19:20 <alastairc> Suggested re-wording, trying to say the same thing: Common navigation elements, form elements and interactive controls can be personalised by:
16:19:21 <alastairc> - a mechanism that enables the user to add symbols OR
16:19:21 <alastairc> - contextual information that can be programmatically determined.
16:21:23 <JakeAbma> Lisa: multiple ways to meet SC, you don’t have to rely on coga-semantics, you don’t HAVE to use it
16:23:26 <MichaelC> q+
16:23:50 <MichaelC> ack br
16:23:50 <Zakim> Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to ask if SC can be written "interactive controls" instead of "for pages that contain interactive controls".
16:23:55 <JakeAbma> JF: question: title attribute seems to cover SC conditions, but still Lisa doesn’t agree. How do we cope with this?
16:24:04 <lisa> i think we can clarify in the understading and tequneques
16:24:38 <MichaelC> q+ to say title is not programmatically determined from a relationship / descriptive perspective
16:24:43 <lisa> JF do you have a better text?
16:24:53 <Detlev_> ack me
16:25:07 <lisa> JakeAbma, alisters wording suggests that
16:25:15 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #ag
16:26:02 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
16:26:05 <AWK> q?
16:26:10 <jasonjgw> q+
16:26:11 <Glenda> present+ Glenda
16:26:24 <AWK> ack michaelC
16:26:24 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say title is not programmatically determined from a relationship / descriptive perspective
16:26:33 <JakeAbma> Detlev: if coga-semantics is still not ready, it’s hard to conform, don't support till then
16:26:35 <lisa> q+
16:26:43 <JF> The title attribute represents advisory information for the element, ...on interactive content, it could be a label for, or instructions for, use of the element; and so forth. (Source: http://w3c.github.io/html/dom.html#the-title-attribute)
16:26:57 <alastairc> I think I started it with "Where a defined vocabulary is available..." rather than mechanism.
16:27:50 <lisa> we understand that JF but agree
16:27:50 <AWK> ack jason
16:28:00 <lisa> but dont agree
16:28:27 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
16:29:02 <Greg> q+ to say We created a better definition of "programmatically determinable" for UAAG 2.0 than that used in WCAG, and it addressed some of the current concerns.
16:29:21 <MichaelC> q+ to say the sc wording should allow non-semantic ways to meet
16:29:29 <JakeAbma> JW: technologies need to be in place before the SC is useful. Right way is to have ground work in place.
16:29:45 <JF> +1 to Jason
16:29:56 <JakeAbma> JW: we can’t be precise about what needs to be in SC before this
16:30:09 <AWK> ack lisa
16:30:12 <Detlev> agree with jason +1
16:30:14 <alastairc> sorry, I have to go now. Just to say a lot of the problems I had with the previous versiond have been addressed, happier with the direction given that there is a list of elements are now included in the definitions.
16:30:25 <AWK> thanks Alastair
16:32:42 <Detlev> it's just that the first bullet point isn't going to solve the problem in a good way that makes things predictable fro users
16:34:01 <AWK> ack greg
16:34:01 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to say We created a better definition of "programmatically determinable" for UAAG 2.0 than that used in WCAG, and it addressed some of the current concerns.
16:34:20 <lisa> i would like it
16:34:25 <Greg> The definition of programmatically available developed for UAAG 2.0 addresses the voiced concerns.
16:34:34 <Greg> programmatically available
16:34:35 <Greg>     Information that is encoded in a way that allows different software, including assistive technologies, to extract and use the information relying on published, supported mechanisms, such as, platform accessibility services, APIs, or the document object models (DOM). For web-based user interfaces, this means ensuring that the user agent can pass on the information (e.g. through the use of...
16:34:36 <lisa> thanks greg
16:34:37 <Greg> ...WAI-ARIA). Something is programmatically available if the entity presenting the information does so in a way that is explicit and unambiguous, in a way that can be understood without reverse-engineering or complex (and thus potentially fallible) heuristics, and only relying on methods that are published, and officially supported by the developers of the software being evaluated.
16:34:52 <AWK> ack michael
16:34:52 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say the sc wording should allow non-semantic ways to meet
16:35:31 <JakeAbma> MC: first bullet is intended to not using coga-semantics
16:35:49 <JakeAbma> RESOLUTION: leave open
16:36:38 <AWK> rrsagent, make logs public
16:36:54 <JakeAbma> trackbot, end meeting
16:36:54 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:36:55 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been MichaelC, AWK, bruce_bailey, steverep, Kathy, Makoto, JF, Laura, Avneesh, AlastairC, wayne, MikeG, Greg_Lowney, kirkwood, Melanie_Philipp,
16:36:55 <Zakim> ... jasonjgw, david-macdonald, Mike_Pluke, Pietro, Mike, Elledge, Detlev, Glenda
16:37:02 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:37:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/11-ag-minutes.html trackbot
16:37:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:37:03 <RRSAgent> I see no action items