See also: IRC log
<AWK> Scribe: JakeAbma
<AWK> +AWK
<wayne> I cannot get into webex
<laura> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
<Wilco> Hey John, what's the new PW for the meeting?
<david-macdonald> is there a new oassword
<david-macdonald> password
Kathy: basically text already present
JW: Want to see text to review before approval
Kathy: should it be 3 SC while already in conformance or not, that's the question before we move on.
<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.
<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.
<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.
Steve Repsher: the issues now have a lot of unsolved problems, hard to make in conformance
JW: hard to fail conformance icw AT with already existing SC and conformance language
<Detlev> sorry to be late - can't get Webex to load (maybe IT probs on our side)
<Detlev> chat does not get updated - looks like we have a problem here - bye for today
David: have requirements already,
we don’t have it at various breakpoints.
... where 2.0 lacked support we wanted to add it to 2.1
<Detlev> Trying again - has the Webex password changed? If so, can someone send it to me off-chat?
Wayne: what’s different in platform and not platform AT?
Kathy: platform = from OS, non-platform = from external parties, plug-ins / external hardware etc.
<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"
<AWK> perhaps referring to "assistive technology that uses platform accessibility services that remaps..."
Kathy: There is (still) confusion on what’s accessibility supported, need to add clarity
<Zakim> steverep, you wanted to give an example of my hesitation based on keyboard interference
Steve Repsher: developers can make it hard using platform key-strokes, but really inaccessible is hard
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
David: limit the scope to customise on screen size
AWK: strong consensus on pursuing to conformance section
RESOLUTION: pursue approach on modification to conformace section
<laura> Adding spacing between paragraph metrics:
<laura> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017JulSep/0053.html
<laura> Proposed paragraph bullet: * spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 (two spaces)
Lisa: spacing between paragraphs en sections of at least 2 spaces, that all good with proposal
<laura> COGA has Visual Presentation SC #51:
<laura> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/51
<AWK> +1 alastair in support for paragraphs but not sections
<JF> +1 to Alastair
AC: working on the sections would be unworkable, blows up websites
<laura> No mechanism
<laura> * line spacing (leading) to at least 1.5 (space-and-a-half)
<laura> * spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 (two spaces)
<laura> * letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 em
<laura> * word spacing to at least 0.16 em
<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."
JF: we need measurable metrics in
testing scenario’s, needs more clearly defined
... line-spacing, how big is a space? we need line-height (in
CSS) or equivalent.
<Greg> Agreed: it needs to use specific, testable units.
AWK: paragraph spacing is not yet present in specs
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to suggest that linear spacing (space between paragraphs) is not meausered in "spaces" but rather line-height
<Detlev_> James put himself on queue...
<Detlev_> if memory serves line-height needs no unit...
Wayne: letter-spacing is a hard one to not be technology specific, line-height is very CSS specific
AlastairC: .045 was new proposal
Wayne: .045 is problematic, other solution / variant are available, will write it up
<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."
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to say that techniques are non-normative and not a SC
<steverep> Let's change "line spacing to 1.5" to "line height to 1.5 times the font size" so it solves the ambiguity
JF: we need unit of measurement, techniques are not the way to go for different technologies
<wayne> +1 to steve
<lisa> +1
<steverep> q
<lisa> (time reminder)
<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?
Steve Repsher: word spacing is too CSS specific, needs work
<lisa> should we do a quick survey if we are ready for a cfc
<lisa> uderstanding that small changes might happen after qugust
<wayne> We were dependent on CSS units inadvertently. So our numbers mean the increase above normal.
<laura> So how about:
<laura> 1. line spacing (leading) to at least 1.5 times the font size
<laura> 2. spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size
<laura> 3. letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 em
<laura> 4. word spacing to at least 0.16 em
<lisa> reminder about the time
<lisa> we can put that in understanding
<steverep> Agree with Wayne....let's just say "word spacing to 0.16em plus the technology's default
Wayne: ‘above normal spacing’ should have been included
JF: make it ‘default’ for clarity
<laura> 1. line spacing (leading) to at least 1.5 times the font size above default spacing
<laura> 2. spacing between paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size above default spacing
<laura> 3. letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 em above default spacing
<laura> 4. word spacing to at least 0.16 em above default spacing
<wayne> Why don't we don't we just put it forward now and adjust the numbers later.
RESOLUTION: leave open
<lisa> alister has proposed new wording for support personlization
<lisa> Common navigation elements, form elements or interactive controls can be personalised by:
<lisa> a mechanism that enables the user to add symbols OR
<lisa> contextual information that can be programmatically determined.
<lisa> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6
<AWK_> Issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6
<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>.
<AWK_> SC in draft GL: https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/support-personalization_ISSUE-6/guidelines/#support-personalization
<Alex> can everybody mute
<david-macdonald> no breathing allowed :)
JF: concerned for wording about ‘common’ and in what it results
<alastairc> Suggested re-wording, trying to say the same thing: Common navigation elements, form elements and interactive controls can be personalised by:
<alastairc> - a mechanism that enables the user to add symbols OR
<alastairc> - contextual information that can be programmatically determined.
Lisa: multiple ways to meet SC, you don’t have to rely on coga-semantics, you don’t HAVE to use it
<Zakim> Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to ask if SC can be written "interactive controls" instead of "for pages that contain interactive controls".
JF: question: title attribute seems to cover SC conditions, but still Lisa doesn’t agree. How do we cope with this?
<lisa> i think we can clarify in the understading and tequneques
<lisa> JF do you have a better text?
<lisa> JakeAbma, alisters wording suggests that
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say title is not programmatically determined from a relationship / descriptive perspective
Detlev: if coga-semantics is still not ready, it’s hard to conform, don't support till then
<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)
<alastairc> I think I started it with "Where a defined vocabulary is available..." rather than mechanism.
<lisa> we understand that JF but agree
<lisa> but dont agree
JW: technologies need to be in place before the SC is useful. Right way is to have ground work in place.
<JF> +1 to Jason
JW: we can’t be precise about what needs to be in SC before this
<Detlev> agree with jason +1
<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.
<AWK> thanks Alastair
<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
<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.
<lisa> i would like it
<Greg> The definition of programmatically available developed for UAAG 2.0 addresses the voiced concerns.
<Greg> programmatically available
<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...
<lisa> thanks greg
<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.
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say the sc wording should allow non-semantic ways to meet
MC: first bullet is intended to not using coga-semantics
RESOLUTION: leave open
trackbot, end meeting
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152 of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/w3c-wai-gl// Succeeded: s/"technology that/"assistive technology that/ Default Present: MichaelC, AWK, bruce_bailey, steverep, Kathy, Makoto, JF, Laura, Avneesh, AlastairC, wayne, MikeG, Greg_Lowney, kirkwood, Melanie_Philipp, jasonjgw, david-macdonald, Mike_Pluke, Pietro, Mike, Elledge, Detlev, Glenda Present: MichaelC AWK bruce_bailey steverep Kathy Makoto JF Laura Avneesh AlastairC wayne MikeG Greg_Lowney kirkwood Melanie_Philipp jasonjgw david-macdonald Mike_Pluke Pietro Mike Elledge Detlev Glenda Found Scribe: JakeAbma Inferring ScribeNick: JakeAbma WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 11 Jul 2017 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/07/11-ag-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]