15:27:23 RRSAgent has joined #ag 15:27:23 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/20-ag-irc 15:27:25 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:27:28 Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG 15:27:28 ok, trackbot 15:27:28 Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 15:27:28 Date: 20 July 2017 15:27:29 Chair: AWK 15:27:32 +AWK 15:27:56 agenda? 15:28:08 Zakim, clear agenda 15:28:08 agenda cleared 15:28:18 agenda+ Personalization 15:28:27 agenda+ Undo (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/COGA_undo/results) 15:28:31 agenda+ scribes 15:28:36 JF has joined #AG 15:29:46 Topic: today's password for WebEx is W3C 15:29:58 s/Topic: today's password for WebEx is W3C/ 15:30:17 present+ 15:30:55 note the password is not the same tuesday! 15:31:38 Present+ JF 15:33:21 present+ alastairc 15:34:56 Alex has joined #ag 15:36:36 Detlev has joined #ag 15:37:02 Jan has joined #ag 15:37:26 Scribe: Jan 15:37:26 David-MacDonald has joined #ag 15:37:36 Zakim, take up item 3 15:37:36 agendum 3. "scribes" taken up [from AWK] 15:37:42 present+ JMcSorley 15:37:51 present+ 15:37:56 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List 15:38:04 Sign up for a future call date 15:38:07 what's pwd these days 15:38:10 w3c 15:38:28 Zakim, take up item 1 15:38:28 agendum 1. "Personalization" taken up [from AWK] 15:38:38 two sc 15:38:40 https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6 15:38:42 and 15:38:52 at AAA https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/309 15:39:14 is there a scribe already? 15:39:53 Andrew: Another meeting on personalization took place yesterday & 2 SCs were proposed from that meeting 15:40:07 ... we will get the gist of that meeting describe to us today 15:41:33 q+ 15:43:10 Lisa: We may have to tweak the word "purpose" and use "function" instead because "purpose" may interfere with other SCs 15:43:20 Can someone paste in the AA and AAA versions? 15:43:43 JF: The piece that is currently missing is not only telling them what something is, but what is the purpose - what are you supposed to do with it. 15:44:05 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions: Labels or instructions are provided when content requires user input. (Level A) 15:44:40 q+ 15:44:44 ... the idea of the AA is to use existing tools that we have write now to provide a description of what a person is supposed to do with conventional components - it's just about providing that information. 15:45:30 ack ala 15:45:40 ... at AAA is about using a fixed taxonomy; in AA, the description could just be written in prose, which is not ideal for machine checks, but it gives people a way to interact with the widget. 15:45:55 q+ 15:46:17 q+ 15:46:31 Alistair: I think this changes what it was trying to achieve - I thought it was trying to achieve cross-site compatibility, but now it looks like it's just trying to achieve in-site compatibility 15:47:04 What is the "personalisation" aspect at double AA then? 15:47:18 JF: At AA, we probably can't accomplish a cross-site compatibility because we don't have a fixed taxonomy, but we might be able to get there eventually; this is the way we introduced ARIA 15:47:59 ... we are trying to set up a similar condition here - the net goal is to provide information on how to use conventional widgets 15:49:22 Lisa: I agree with Alistair that the more important issue is to provide a way to use this across sites, but that was not getting through, but with this alternative, we make it easier and more similar to what people are used to doing with pages across a given site. Longterm we would like for them to use the metadata, be we are not requiring it at AA at this time. 15:50:18 ... what we were hoping is that over time, after taxonomies are more matured, then perhaps the current proposed AA would eventually be deprecated and the AAA would be move to AA 15:51:16 ... this is a "can live with," there is a certain amount of compromise, but it's a huge win 15:51:24 ack l 15:51:25 Q+ 15:51:26 ack david 15:51:29 ack lis 15:51:58 q+ to suggest that we don't use the coga spec, but import the core items to WCAG material 15:52:02 David: I understand that you are trying to introduce SC that will act as a place holder for when the COGA stuff is ready to go. 15:52:07 JF: Not exactly 15:53:11 David: That is my understanding of it - I don't see much diffence between this and 3.3.2 - labels or instructions; I think this new proposal has a huge overlap with 3.3.2 15:53:36 or metadata 15:53:47 JF: The difference here is the difference between "or" and "and." We want both - not either 15:54:27 q+ 15:54:34 David: We could probably do something with 3.3.2 - maybe we put this in for now and then roll them together after August. I just think that it's a lot of effort to learn a new SC without that much that is actually new. 15:54:39 q+ 15:54:57 ... there are a lot of times when labels are explicit and easy for people to understand and if it's not clearn, then you provide instructions. 15:56:45 Jason: This proposal, along with this line, has potential, but there is lack of clarity at this point. I have addressed some of these on list, but I would also like to point out the ARIA work - shortcut attribute that points out that it doesn't specify what the actions or effects would be of using the shortcuts would be. 15:57:18 ... the ability to specify with greater granularity and higher degree of machine readability is at least tentatively on the agenda of the ARIA working group for version 1.1. 15:57:26 Jason's example is illustrative of what we would like to see at AA 15:57:42 ... I think there's room for extention and we should be cognizant of this. 15:57:46 ack JF 15:57:53 ack jason 15:58:29 JF: Jason's example is exactly what we are talking about - that would be a success technique for the AA proposal - it would allow me to provide additional information. 15:59:34 ack ala 15:59:34 alastairc, you wanted to suggest that we don't use the coga spec, but import the core items to WCAG material 15:59:34 ... while the COGA semantics will be ideal for the future, the SC as written now just calls for extensible schemas that are available now, for example schema.org - we don't want to make it more narrow by specifying a specific taxonomy or schema, we want people to be able to use existing tools. 16:02:28 JF: The AA is different from AAA, but the AA sets up a condition to encourage people to go in the direction of the COGA semantics, but until they are more mature 16:03:12 Alistair: I believe the AA wording is pushing people in a different direction to than the AAA, so I would rather have a more defined AA and a more open AAA. 16:03:32 JF: Do we have agreement in the group of what we are trying to accomplish here? 16:03:42 https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6 16:03:47 Andrew: Can someone please put the text of AA and AAA into IRC 16:03:47 at AAA https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/309 16:03:53 @(AA): In content implemented using markup languages, the purpose of conventional controls[1] can be consistently, programmatically determined across a set of web pages. @(AAA): In content implemented using markup languages, the purpose of conventional controls[1] can be consistently, programmatically determined and modified across a set of web pages through the use of metadata or semantics. 16:04:20 In content implemented using markup languages, the function of conventional controls can be consistently, programmatically determined across a set of web pages. (AA) 16:04:21 Note 16:04:23 Conventional controls for form fields are: name (corresponds to both first and family), first name, family name, initial, phone (corresponds to a user phone number), cell phone, address 1, city, state, country, post code, phone, credit card, expiry, birth date, day, *month *year, expiry date, today's date, credit card code, date start, date end. 16:04:24 Conventional controls for buttons or controls are: compose, delete, next, previous, submit, undo, cancel, buy, add label, move, view, save, send, received, sent, edit, reply, forward, my profile, upload, close, more, calendar, entry, expand, unexpanded, open, new, print, settings, mode, higher, lower. 16:04:26 Conventional controls for links are: home, contact us, our phone, our email, site map, help, about us, terms, tools, comment, language, sign in, sign up, product, services, social, post, contactus, help, chat help, 16:04:47 Andrew: Are we defining "purpose?" 16:05:19 JF: People are struggling with that term, on list. The idea is that it is explaining to the user, how to interact. It is about helping someone know how to interact with a component. 16:05:23 q+ 16:05:34 Andrew: Does it give them hints about what will happen if they interact with this? 16:05:39 JF: Yes 16:05:40 Volume Slider: Role: Volume Property: Slider State: 50% (Purpose): Use this slider to make it louder or quieter 16:06:40 How will tooling happen if each site does it differently? 16:06:42 gowerm has joined #ag 16:06:45 Lisa: The additional information this SC gives us is huge because as people begin to implement it and the tooling matures, then personalization will be begin to happen. 16:06:51 q+ 16:07:04 @alastair, it wont, not at AA, unless an org does taht too 16:07:35 so, for example, if the Beeb did this at AA, and used consistent terms, then a plugin *could* be created for all BBC sites 16:08:01 yes, sorry, I got those two transposed Andrew 16:08:03 ... it opens the door to the use of metadata 16:08:21 present+ MikeGower 16:08:43 tomorrow afternoon would be ok for me 16:08:44 ack detlev 16:08:45 Lisa: Perhaps if Alistair, Jason, JF, and Lisa get on a call to rework the wording, that might be the best way to resolve the concerns 16:08:46 ack me 16:08:52 Q+ 16:08:59 ack l 16:09:43 Detlev: My main concern is that if this is at AA, if the typical way it to add contextual information with ARIA, that would be fine, but it does not seem to fit under the name of personalization - there is if you use metadata - otherwise, I think it would confuse people. 16:09:51 present+ Detlev 16:09:52 +1 to Detlev 16:09:53 @@@ Issue - does the name fit for the AA SC? 16:09:58 that could be good becuse it point to the prefered way and the explinations are trasitory conformnce 16:10:58 q+ 16:11:02 ack dav 16:11:05 q+ 16:11:20 David: I actually support a AA SC - one camp seems to be saying "let's just really try to get a subset of COGA next year that can be supported and put that at AA," but the other camp is saying let's get something in now that can be used while the COGA semantics mature. The first option makes more sense to me. 16:11:35 then we can mark it at risk 16:11:51 agree with Alastair's and David suggestion to focus on a small subset of coga semantics 16:11:54 JF: There's no guarantee that COGA semantics will be mature in the near future and so any SC that relies on those is a non-starter 16:12:16 Other idea: modularise "accessibility preferences", start with the ones needed here only, get that through asap. 16:12:27 ... the idea of the current AA is to introduce the concept to the larger dev community that we have to do something more than name, role, and state ... we need to add purpose. 16:13:16 ... if we can do that, we open the door to a fixed taxonomy in the future; the current SC proposal allows the use of ARIA or other current tools to provide the "purpose" through contextual information. 16:13:21 So every home link has to have a title attribute or aria-describedby? 16:13:29 q? 16:13:32 ack JF 16:13:36 Q+ 16:14:25 good summary Andrew 16:14:46 Andrew: Does everyone agree with this general approach? It sort of hinges on wanting to do "something" with metadata, but certain subgroups don't believe that metadat can be used at AA, but could be used at AAA, so this proposal gives us the option of doing something at AA, while still offering the AAA metadata option. 16:14:54 the best is the enamy of the good 16:15:04 ack awk 16:15:10 Was there a question there? 16:15:12 no, because what is suggested at AA (unless you use coga-semantcis) has nothing to do with personalisation 16:15:15 ... should we just stick with the required metadat at AAA, or should we continue with the proposal of AA and AAA options? 16:15:19 ack jason 16:15:53 Jason: One of the ambiguity issue is the use of titles, labels, and other textual materials to provide information about a user interface component. 16:16:41 Question: Do people support having an SC at AAA that requires metadata and do people support a non-metadata SC at AA that tries to provide some "hinting" for items on a page? 16:16:50 ... one suggestion earlier was to revise 3.3.2 so that it says labels AND instructions instead of labels OR instructions, but we would have to decide if we should have it at AA instead of A with the change to the word "and" 16:16:53 +1 to Jason 16:17:06 Q+ 16:17:08 AWK - yes, but I more concerned with the AA SC, that's what will get the 'press' 16:17:24 thanks alastair. Others? 16:17:25 "Doing something" is not a valid reason to do anything. It comes down to cost benefit balance. This is too different and too new for me to tip my hand. But I am only inclined to agree if I can fully appreciate the benefit and the cost of implemeting this at scale. Not convinced yet. 16:17:53 Alex, is that for AAA or AA or both 16:18:02 AA 16:18:08 3.3.5 Help: Context-sensitive help is available. (Level AAA) 16:18:12 ack lisa 16:18:29 Lisa: I am wondering if you saw the note that listed the controls? 16:18:48 ... you will have techniques in the understanding section 16:19:08 q+ 16:19:12 Lisa: To David and Alistair - we are not going to get it through if we try to press the metadata at AA 16:19:17 q+ 16:19:38 could we move 3.3.5 to AA and add the metadata techniques 16:19:59 is anyone saying "I don't understand the benefit?" Has anyone said that? 16:20:11 Lisa: there seems to be a 3rd camp of people who don't understand the benefits - the benefit is that it will allow people who are currently outside of accessiblity to be included 16:20:28 being "inclusive" is too high level of a "benefit"; you need to be far more specific 16:20:42 q+ 16:21:02 But this AA SC doesn't provide that benefit 16:21:11 how will the AA provide symbols? 16:21:25 ... we could even change the SC name to Personalization or Explanation if that resolves the concerns - there are millions of people who rely on symbols who cannot currently use web technology and this will allow them to get that access. 16:21:51 But how will a user-agent know what symbol to use when every site is different? 16:21:51 but there's no metadata requirement in AA SC 16:21:54 Lisa: The AA will provide symbols, but if you use AAA techniques and use metadata, then the symbols can be added 16:22:45 ... there are no metadata REQUIREMENT at AA, but it is a preferred technique 16:22:57 Lisa, wrap up 16:23:02 And how does this benefit LV, which is what Wayne was asking for regarding personalization? 16:23:12 ack jf 16:23:33 Lisa, could you link to an extension, does that exist now? 16:23:42 andrew I thnk people need their questions answered 16:23:53 that is a realy good thing to do on this call 16:24:30 gowerm to be fair the scope & SC have changed a lot. 16:24:31 but some people have just joined 16:24:51 and havnt seen the deom etc and then they dont know, 16:25:07 JF: Watching the IRC - both Jason and David have pointed to current SC 3.3.5 could be moved to AA / 3.3.2 changed to "and" - both are right, but it's more than the contextual help or instructions, it's about how to interact; at AA there is no expectation that metadata be used, but you can still provide information through other means. This sets the condition for growth in this area so that eventually AAA will move to AA. 16:25:10 If you really think this strategy will work - maybe its worth getting public comments on this 16:25:29 https://github.com/ayelet-seeman/coga.personalisation is a lonk to the opensource implention 16:25:36 I agree that people's questions need to be answered but I guarantee you that if you or anyone else talks non-stop as the questions roll in that people will tune out. 16:25:49 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions, 3.3.5 Help: Context-sensitive help is available, 3.2.4 Consistent Identification - All overlap 16:26:04 EXACTLY Jason, that is the idea 16:26:11 old demo is at https://rawgit.com/ayelet-seeman/coga.personalisation/demo/conactUs.html 16:26:25 Ah, the demo with scripts, sorry, I thought someone said browser extension. 16:26:36 Jason: I just heard from JF a proposal to change 3.3.5 and 3.3.2 - one way of going to this is add new SC that mirrow 3.3.2 and 3.3.5 and then after August those could be integrated back into those SCs as appropriate; another issue would be to provide more clarification about programmatic determination requirements and clarify what those are 16:26:44 q? 16:26:50 q- 16:26:53 zakim, close the queue 16:26:53 ok, AWK, the speaker queue is closed 16:27:01 ack jas 16:27:07 Present+ David-MacDonald 16:27:26 ... there are ambiguities with the definitions as they are proposed - what can be provided in natural language vs. machine language. 16:27:41 present+ David-MacDonald 16:27:46 andrew czn we set up anther wording call 16:27:51 ... I would suggest that we propose mirror SC to 3.3.2 and 3.3.5 and then look at combining them after August. 16:27:57 ack dav 16:28:10 +1 David 16:28:20 we don't want to lose taht momentum 16:28:30 David: there is a lot of momentum behind this, which is good, but we don't have much time. Alistair, what are your thoughts? 16:28:51 Alistair: I am worried about having descriptions to every home link - that will not help website interfaces 16:29:26 ... I am still fairly convinced that there's a nub of the metadata that we can get in - it seems easier than ARIA, in my view, and if it is then it's easier for browser tooling to deal with this. 16:29:44 q+ 16:29:57 David: That is my feeling too - I would not like to see us back off of the metadata issue and try to get something in at risk. 16:30:18 Andrew: I am hearing support for the AAA level, but the AA level may need to be morphed into a different form. 16:30:45 ... I don't think we will get consensus on metadata at the AA level as a requirement. 16:31:13 ... I agree that another call needs to be formed so that the wording can be tweaked. If you're interested in doing that, please put something in IRC 16:31:38 Monday is a problem for me Lisa 16:31:47 Suggested times: A) 11am ET tomorrow or B) same time on Monday 16:31:48 Friday at 11:00 EST or the same time on Monday, the 24th at 11:00 EST 16:32:00 tomorrow afternoon (friday) best for me 16:32:04 a 16:32:06 I could do Friday 16:32:36 thank you !!! 16:32:59 Andrew: We will be meeting again on Tuesday 16:33:16 zakim, who is on the call? 16:33:16 Present: AWK, KimD, JakeAbma, Laura, ChrisLoiselle, JF, steverep, jasonjgw, MikeGower, Greg_Lowney, Melanie_Philipp, Makoto, dboudreau, Detlev, wayne, WayneDick, chriscm, lisa, 16:33:19 ... bruce_bailey, MichaelC, Rachael, kirkwood, marcjohlic, Pietro, jon_avila, alastairc, JMcSorley, David-MacDonald 16:33:31 trackbot, end meeting 16:33:31 Zakim, list attendees 16:33:31 As of this point the attendees have been AWK, KimD, JakeAbma, Laura, ChrisLoiselle, JF, steverep, jasonjgw, MikeGower, Greg_Lowney, Melanie_Philipp, Makoto, dboudreau, Detlev, 16:33:34 ... wayne, WayneDick, chriscm, lisa, bruce_bailey, MichaelC, Rachael, kirkwood, marcjohlic, Pietro, jon_avila, alastairc, JMcSorley, David-MacDonald 16:33:39 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 16:33:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/20-ag-minutes.html trackbot 16:33:40 RRSAgent, bye 16:33:40 I see no action items