13:42:47 RRSAgent has joined #ag 13:42:47 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/08/22-ag-irc 13:42:49 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:42:52 Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 13:42:52 Date: 22 August 2017 13:42:56 zakim, who is on the phone? 13:42:56 Present: AWK, KimD, George, Glenda, Detlev, Romain_Deltour, kirkwood, MichaelC, chriscm, steverep, shawn, Makoto, JF, Kahty, Kathy, alastairc, Avneesh, Pietro, jasonjgw, Kim, 13:42:59 ... Katie_Haritos-Shea, david-macdonald 13:43:01 Present: AWK 13:43:11 Chair: Joshue 13:43:16 Zakim, agenda? 13:43:16 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda: 13:43:17 7. Printing – Issue 76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xmatf1 [from AWK] 13:43:17 8. Animation – Issue 18 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xanim [from AWK] 13:43:17 9. Device sensors - Issue 67 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC10 [from AWK] 13:43:17 10. Undo - Issue 38 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC3 [from AWK] 13:43:19 5. Undo - Issue 38 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC3 [from AWK] 13:43:38 zakim, close item 5 13:43:38 agendum 5, Undo - Issue 38 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC3, closed 13:43:40 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 13:43:40 7. Printing – Issue 76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xmatf1 [from AWK] 13:43:41 Zakim, agenda? 13:43:41 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda: 13:43:42 7. Printing – Issue 76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xmatf1 [from AWK] 13:43:42 8. Animation – Issue 18 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xanim [from AWK] 13:43:42 9. Device sensors - Issue 67 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC10 [from AWK] 13:43:42 10. Undo - Issue 38 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC3 [from AWK] 13:44:09 agenda+ Brief update on W3C/ESO standards coordination EN 301 549 v 2.1.1 with WCAG 2.1 13:45:16 zakim, agenda order is 11, 7, 8, 9, 10 13:45:16 ok, AWK 13:45:18 Zakim, agenda? 13:45:18 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda: 13:45:19 11. Brief update on W3C/ESO standards coordination EN 301 549 v 2.1.1 with WCAG 2.1 [from AWK] 13:45:19 7. Printing – Issue 76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xmatf1 [from AWK] 13:45:19 8. Animation – Issue 18 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xanim [from AWK] 13:45:19 9. Device sensors - Issue 67 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC10 [from AWK] 13:45:21 10. Undo - Issue 38 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC3 [from AWK] 14:04:58 MichaelC has joined #ag 14:12:59 kirkwood has joined #ag 14:24:22 interaccess has joined #ag 14:33:15 interaccess has joined #ag 14:33:38 trackbot, start meeting 14:33:41 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:33:44 Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 14:33:44 Date: 22 August 2017 14:33:56 zakim, agenda? 14:33:56 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda: 14:33:57 11. Brief update on W3C/ESO standards coordination EN 301 549 v 2.1.1 with WCAG 2.1 [from AWK] 14:33:57 7. Printing – Issue 76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xmatf1 [from AWK] 14:33:57 8. Animation – Issue 18 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xanim [from AWK] 14:33:57 9. Device sensors - Issue 67 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC10 [from AWK] 14:33:59 10. Undo - Issue 38 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC3 [from AWK] 14:34:15 Chair: Joshue108 14:45:52 KimD has joined #ag 14:46:04 Present+ 14:46:35 shadi has joined #ag 14:46:59 Detlev has joined #ag 14:50:50 laura has joined #ag 14:51:31 JakeAbma has joined #ag 14:54:30 marcjohlic has joined #ag 14:54:42 marcjohlic has joined #ag 14:56:39 present+ JakeAbma 14:56:47 present+ Joshue108 14:57:53 shawn has joined #ag 14:58:25 JF has joined #AG 14:58:36 Present+ JF 14:58:41 present+ 14:58:44 agenda? 14:58:44 present+ 14:58:48 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:58:48 Present: AWK, KimD, JakeAbma, Joshue108, JF, shawn, shadi 14:59:22 gowerm has joined #ag 14:59:27 Mike_Pluke has joined #ag 14:59:36 Makoto has joined #ag 15:00:05 present_ 15:00:09 present+ 15:00:19 Jan has joined #ag 15:00:21 present+ MikeGower 15:00:23 present+ Laura 15:01:16 bruce_bailey has joined #ag 15:01:18 present+ Detlev 15:01:40 Zakim, ping us in 60 minutes 15:01:40 ok, AWK 15:01:56 present+ Mike_Pluke 15:02:30 alastairc has joined #ag 15:03:05 MelanieP has joined #ag 15:03:06 present+ Makoto 15:03:42 present+ Melanie_Philipp 15:03:46 zakim, take up item 11 15:03:46 agendum 11. "Brief update on W3C/ESO standards coordination EN 301 549 v 2.1.1 with WCAG 2.1" taken up [from AWK] 15:03:55 Ryladog has joined #ag 15:04:14 Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea 15:04:55 present+ marcjohlic 15:04:57 Kathy has joined #ag 15:05:01 present+ 15:05:17 Shadi: WCAG 2 adopted in Europe as EN 301549. The work to revise this will begin soon. Revision due May 31, 018 and Dec 31, 2019 15:06:00 Shadi: Objective is to continue to harmonize. Since both specs are being developed in tandem, creates potential conflict. 15:06:31 s/31, 018/31, 2018 15:06:57 present+ alastairc 15:07:00 s/Since both specs are being developed in tandem, creates potential conflict./Both specs are being developed in tandem, but are slightly out of alignment - this creates potential conflict 15:07:12 Shadi: Call for Proposal by ETSI. W3C in process of responding, and getting feedback. 15:07:14 Glenda has joined #ag 15:07:24 present+ Glenda 15:07:57 david-macdonald has joined #ag 15:08:07 Shadi: We are planning to submit a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). ETSI has not seen this proposal. Deadline is this Friday. 15:08:09 Present+ david-macdonald 15:08:09 Zakim, who is here 15:08:09 Glenda, you need to end that query with '?' 15:08:22 Zakim, who is here? 15:08:22 Present: AWK, KimD, JakeAbma, Joshue108, JF, shawn, shadi, MichaelC, MikeGower, Laura, Detlev, Mike_Pluke, Makoto, Melanie_Philipp, Katie_Haritos-Shea, marcjohlic, Kathy, 15:08:26 ... alastairc, Glenda, david-macdonald 15:08:26 On IRC I see david-macdonald, Glenda, Kathy, Ryladog, MelanieP, alastairc, bruce_bailey, Jan, Makoto, Mike_Pluke, gowerm, JF, shawn, marcjohlic, JakeAbma, laura, Detlev, shadi, 15:08:26 ... KimD, Joshue108, kirkwood, MichaelC, RRSAgent, AWK, lisa, trackbot, jasonjgw, yatil-away, Zakim 15:08:30 Q+ 15:09:10 Shadi: Trying to make use of ETSI development process to ensure straight up alignment of 2.1 be an attachment. 15:09:26 Q+ 15:09:33 present+ 15:10:05 rrsagent, make minutes 15:10:05 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/08/22-ag-minutes.html Glenda 15:10:19 Shadi: You should be hearing about this in next few weeks. Let Shadi know if you have questions or concerns. 15:10:38 q+ to ask if ETSI call for experts is posted 15:10:43 Shadi: The MOU does not place constraints on AGWG, but is to improve organization. 15:10:50 ack JF 15:11:01 John Foliot: Are you the person coordinating this work? 15:11:03 have mic problems, trying to reconnect 15:11:15 Shadi: I am doing the work from w3c side, with involvement from others. 15:11:27 Mike_Elledge has joined #ag 15:11:36 JohnF: Is it happening inside a working group? You mentioned advising AC reps. this is the first I've heard about it. 15:11:52 can this weight to next week? 15:12:19 Shadi: We have a group of liaisons. What you will see as an AC rep is the MOU after we have had initial discussion with ETSI. 15:12:34 ack mike 15:13:09 Mike: We will try to keep things in alignment. Ultimately the final draft should automatically be aligned because it will reference WCAG 2.1 15:13:23 ack bruce 15:13:23 bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask if ETSI call for experts is posted 15:13:24 Mike: I'm hopefully optomistic 15:13:41 Detlev has joined #ag 15:13:42 https://portal.etsi.org/stf/OpenCallForExperts 15:13:45 Curious to understand what happens when we start working on WCAG 2.2? 15:13:53 BruceBailey: I'm a little surprised this is so new to me too. is the call for feedback public facing? I don't see it on the ETSI page. 15:14:16 Shadi: This came up in the last few weeks, the end of July. 15:14:45 25th August 15:14:48 Mike: The closing date on that is this Friday, to reiterate 15:15:02 zakim, take up item 7 15:15:02 agendum 7. "Printing – Issue 76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xmatf1" taken up [from AWK] 15:15:17 Present+ Mike Elledge 15:15:34 Josh: We're going to try to keep things efficient today. 15:15:47 q+ to ask what is the official SC proposal language 15:15:58 dboudreau has joined #ag 15:15:59 Josh: Seems to be split about whether this is ready for editor's draft. 15:16:05 present+ dboudreau 15:16:06 ack awk 15:16:06 AWK, you wanted to ask what is the official SC proposal language 15:16:40 AWK: My concern is that we don't know what the survey is covering. 15:17:42 Jim's suggestion in the survey: "Where a page can be printed, essential information can be printed with no loss of content and or adapted text properties." 15:17:53 q+ 15:17:56 Glenda?: There has been discussion of additional wording. 15:17:57 Jim added a new proposal: "Where a page can be printed, essential information can be printed with no loss of content and or adapted text properties." 15:18:22 s/Glenda?/Kathy 15:18:26 Q+ 15:18:44 Jim Allan’s 21 Aug email: “ Printing will be on the agenda. This is someting in authors control. It should go in and see what the wider world of reviewers says.” https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-tf/2017Aug/0027.html 15:18:46 AWK: The survey table of responses contains comments. 15:19:05 Josh: Has the group had sufficient time to review? 15:19:08 s/Kathy/Shawn 15:19:29 Josh: Can people live with this text? 15:19:44 Where a page can be printed, essential information can be printed with no loss of content and or adapted text properties. 15:19:49 Yes 15:19:49 q? 15:19:58 ack david 15:19:59 +1 15:20:14 +1 15:20:36 DavidM: At the end of last meeting, as I understand it the direction was to take it up on the list and bring it up if there was a lot of momentum. I'm not seeing that momentum. 15:20:42 q+ to say that there has been no discussion since last week. Missing definition also? 15:20:52 q+ 15:20:56 DavidM: How do you override the browser? 15:21:12 Josh: I don't know what an adapted text property is 15:21:31 DavidM" The adapted text property is about the Adapted Text success criterion. 15:21:40 q+ to also say that there is a need for exceptions or clarity for paged media (EPUB/PDF/etc). 15:21:44 chriscm has joined #ag 15:21:50 DavidM: the problem is that the user has their own style sheet. I'm feeling like we don't have momentum. 15:21:55 ack JF 15:22:10 John: My concern is that this strays into user agent territory. 15:22:14 present+ 15:22:59 John: I haven't done any testing with a print style sheet, but I don't know if we'll get text reflow. 15:23:05 ack AWK 15:23:05 AWK, you wanted to say that there has been no discussion since last week. Missing definition also? and to also say that there is a need for exceptions or clarity for paged media 15:23:08 ... (EPUB/PDF/etc). 15:23:08 ack awk 15:23:28 AWK: I'm concerned there hasn't been any discussion since last week. 15:24:08 q+ 15:24:30 ack alast 15:24:53 Alastair: Jake's comments drove a lot of the changes that Jim was making. 15:24:59 Jim’s examples in the Wiki: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Printing_Customized_Text#Examples 15:25:29 Alastair: Jim's testing established that his adapted text properties (i.e. line height) do impact the printout. 15:25:39 q+ 15:25:59 Alastair: You don't need print style sheets. The easiest way to fulfill this is to target the CSS at screen, then it doesn't affect the printout. 15:26:21 Alastair: It should have the same caveats as the Adapted Text properties. 15:26:26 Josh: Is it ready for prime time? 15:26:34 ack jason 15:26:44 Alastair: I'd like it to go for wider review, and expect it will be changed. 15:26:45 +1 to include in public draft (to get wider review) 15:27:05 +1 to include in public draft (to get wider review) 15:27:06 Ryladog_ has joined #ag 15:27:15 Jason: It doesn't say what needs to be preserved. I think this is underdeveloped and should be shelved. 15:27:19 +1 to Jason, this isn't fully baked yet 15:27:31 ack jake 15:27:35 +1 to wait, not yet baked 15:27:42 test 15:28:24 Jake: I have lots of experience with printing web pages and adjust the print style sheets. Just as much we can control html with CSS, we can control the print itself. I have extensive work totally changing the print output. 15:28:54 Jake: You can override it with the printmedia query. 15:29:15 Jake: I can make sure that what I want you to print as a user, I have control over. 15:29:52 We can also include this in the "supplemental guidance" document 15:29:53 @Jake... so what happens when the author uses 'page-break-before' (CSS), but the end user needs to increase the page font size? 15:30:26 Josh: What I'm hearing is that it may not be ready, but there are voices saying going out for wider review would be good. 15:30:32 I would like to see it go out for wider review 15:30:44 q+ 15:30:50 Josh: I can see if this was mapped to a magnification level that that be printed, but not seeing that specified. 15:30:50 NB: Zoom isn't brought to the print version by the browser, so that was removed. 15:30:55 ack shawn 15:31:12 Shawn: It is not to a zoom level, because that had problems. But it is to adapted text. 15:31:41 +1 to agree that printing effects is importatnt to PWD and low vision in particular 15:31:46 Josh: There seems to be an interdependence with Adapted Text. I'm on the fence about this. 15:32:17 AWK: I've got my own concerns; I'm also not hearing substantial concensus. 15:32:23 q+ 15:32:26 q+ to argue that it is out of scope 15:32:27 Josh: Me too, but I'm not hearing substantial objections either. 15:32:34 q+ 15:32:41 ack ryla 15:32:56 +1 No specific objections, but also do echo concerns. Seems to me like "wider review" is really appropriate. 15:33:00 Kati: I think this is important and worthwhile to put it out for review. 15:33:09 ack bruce 15:33:09 bruce_bailey, you wanted to argue that it is out of scope 15:33:44 Bruce: I think it is out of scope. We need to figure out if we're covering printing. it is a huge issue for people with low vision, but it seems adhoc. 15:33:54 +1 to Bruce - I have concerns about bringing forward half-baked SC "for review" 15:34:09 Bruce: We are already adapting WCAG to PDF. it just seems out of scope. 15:34:17 ack kathy 15:34:27 +1 to Bruce 15:34:34 AWK: With the current lack of updated text for the SC, the lack of a definition to review, the concerns about paged media, and user agent concerns, I can't live with this. 15:34:35 @Bruce, this is to fill in the gaps for LV, and that is why it is proposed for WCAG 2.1. Jim Allan has detailed research that this is in author control. 15:34:38 Come to think of it, +1 to what Bruce said as well 15:34:40 Kathy: I have similar concerns. I was wondering if we should change it to AAA and put it out for comment. 15:34:45 +1 to AAA 15:34:48 jon_avila has joined #ag 15:34:52 then education will look at it 15:34:55 present+jon_avila 15:34:59 +1 that printing issue should not rushed 15:35:04 q+ 15:35:06 Kati: I agree with that. I think it is fine as AAA 15:35:09 @Kathy - if Jim Allan was hear he could answer many of your quesitons. +1 to open for public comment 15:35:23 yes AAA 15:35:29 Not sure it's ok at AAA if not at AA 15:35:41 0 15:35:44 Josh: could anyone not live with it? 15:35:48 IMHO we should first decide if print-fill-mail web page forms are covered 15:36:07 ack dboud 15:36:20 Agree with Shawn that it is more than just a user agent issue 15:36:24 Denis: if we put it to triple A and change our minds, can we remove it at some piont? 15:36:31 Q+ 15:36:38 Josh: Yes, anything that goes into the editor's draft is not a golden ticket to making it to final. 15:36:53 -1 We have 4 months til CR and ***29*** SCs to get in shape 15:37:09 Joshue108: There are things that the author can do that make printing a page unreadable, e.g. fixed height blocks. 15:37:20 Crystal: I have concerns with how this works. I don't understand at what point it gets adapted and how to test it. There are alot of things that can be modified. At what point should it be tested to see if it can print? 15:37:23 ack JF 15:37:23 I could live with AAA 15:37:27 +1 to david m concern with priorities\ 15:37:40 s/Joshue108: There are/Joshue108, There are 15:37:58 can we have a cfc at AAA 15:38:12 John: I'm concerned about the matuirty. Nothing close to consensus. As we roll this out later on, if amongst the strong SC we have some that are weak, it weakens the draft overall. I don't see why this can';t be deferred. 15:38:54 Josh: Even simple things like the language and use cases are not sufficient right now, to be frank. 15:39:04 Josh: does nayone object to deferring? 15:39:11 Shawn uncomfortable with deferring 15:39:15 +1 to deferring 15:39:34 Kati: I would like a different option. 15:39:43 Kati: I wish Wayne was here. 15:39:54 Josh: This has had a lukewarm reception at best. 15:40:05 -1 for AAA too because same issues as at AA 15:40:05 q+ 15:40:20 I wish Jim and Wayne were here too. 15:40:25 Michael: I'm hearing a lukewarm reception, but I'm not hearing large concerns. 15:40:25 +1 to Micheal 15:40:37 I can live with it waiting for WCAG 2.2 (sadly) 15:40:46 Michael: I prefer to err on the side of adding, if we can. 15:41:09 Josh: does anyone object to putting in as AAA? 15:41:15 +1 15:41:19 +1 15:41:20 -1 15:41:20 +1 to AAA 15:41:21 +1 to giving it a shot at AAA 15:41:22 +1 to tripple a 15:41:24 +1 to AAA 15:41:25 +1 (for adding to draft) 15:41:26 q- 15:41:28 okay (0) 15:41:28 +1 to draft as AAA 15:41:34 +1 15:41:38 0 15:41:42 +1 15:41:42 o 15:41:42 +1 15:41:43 +1 15:41:44 +1 AAA 15:41:46 +1 to AAA 15:41:52 Where a page can be printed, essential information can be printed with no loss of content and or adapted text properties. 15:42:26 present+ 15:42:30 +1, suggest note about needing to define the techniques before it is finally accepted. 15:42:38 +1 to adding it 15:42:52 AWK: Do we have the text for the definition? 15:42:53 present+ JanMcSorley 15:43:03 Should be rewritten to get rid of and/or phrasing. 15:43:05 I note that "with no loss of content and or adapted text properties" is hard to parse 15:43:19 q+ 15:43:44 we need any missing definitions. 15:43:59 -1 I don't want last week's abberation to become common practice. 15:44:04 josh, hard to understand you (sounds muffled) 15:44:16 +1 to MikeGower 15:44:18 it is the last chance mike, there is no commen practicw 15:44:26 +1 to Bruce about "and/or phrasing" 15:44:46 Style Properties: https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/adapting-text_ISSUE-74-78-79/guidelines/terms/21/style-properties.html 15:45:00 Q+ 15:45:10 AWK: So this is text size but not zoom? 15:45:42 Adapted text size is taken on by the browser, but I'm not sure Jim was suggesting it be included? 15:46:01 zakim, agenda? 15:46:01 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda: 15:46:02 11. Brief update on W3C/ESO standards coordination EN 301 549 v 2.1.1 with WCAG 2.1 [from AWK] 15:46:02 7. Printing – Issue 76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xmatf1 [from AWK] 15:46:02 8. Animation – Issue 18 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xanim [from AWK] 15:46:02 9. Device sensors - Issue 67 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC10 [from AWK] 15:46:04 Seriously, is this ready? 15:46:05 10. Undo - Issue 38 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Final_prelockdown_set/results#xSC3 [from AWK] 15:46:23 from Adapting Text SC: 1. line height (line spacing) to at least 1.5 times the font size 15:46:23 2. spacing underneath paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size 15:46:24 3. letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 times the font size 15:46:25 4. word spacing to at least 0.16 times the font size 15:47:10 definition: adapted text: changes made to the style properties by the user as per SC # 1.4.13 15:47:45 RESOLUTION: SC to be tided up and definition written and CFC to follow 15:48:31 You can use my definition as a place holder if you want. 15:48:47 zakim, take up next item 15:48:47 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, gowerm 15:49:08 zakim, close queue 15:49:08 ok, Joshue108, the speaker queue is closed 15:49:13 zakim, take up item 8 15:49:13 agendum 8. "Animation – Issue 18 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extra_sc/results#xanim" taken up [from AWK] 15:49:40 Josh: this one has reasonably positive feedback 15:49:54 I can 15:49:56 q+ 15:50:02 q+ 15:50:22 ack l 15:50:42 a main use case is parallax scrolling 15:50:46 ack JF 15:51:25 ack alas 15:51:50 Alastair: started out as AA equivalent to animation. It has been simplified quite a bit. 15:52:15 Alastair: It is designed to address parallax. 15:52:42 Alastair: a drop-down menu is essential so excluded, in example. 15:53:03 This one is AAA currently 15:53:04 Alastair: This is AAA. 15:53:15 ack gower 15:53:16 "For non-essential animations triggered by a user action, there is a mechanism to disable the animations yet still perform the action." 15:53:24 MG: I've put in rewording. 15:53:25 https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/animation-from-interactions_ISSUE-18/guidelines/sc/21/animation-from-interactions.html 15:53:30 MG: To simplify the language. 15:53:46 it's not about performing the actino 15:53:47 q+ 15:53:57 q- 15:54:26 +1 15:54:37 Jon: I support this at AAA. It's about beingn able to complete the action without the side-effects of the animation. 15:54:46 very important for photophobia 15:55:10 Alastair: Scrolling would be essential part of animation. Parallax would be non-existential 15:55:40 cnn is an example 15:55:46 Alastair: Came from vestibular disorder perspective. The MAC Pro page is an example . 15:55:49 q? 15:55:53 ta 15:55:55 it is compeletly essential for photophobia 15:56:30 q+ 15:56:32 Josh: Michael Cooper, do you understand the issue a bit better? 15:56:38 q? 15:56:50 +1 to argue for AA instead of AAA, if we use phrasing that is closer to 2.2.2 15:57:04 For non-essential motion animations triggered by a user action, there is a mechanism to disable the animations yet still perform the action. 15:57:19 q+ 15:57:22 get rid of plural? 15:57:30 ack jon 15:57:38 For non-essential animation triggered by a user action, there is a mechanism to disable the animation yet still perform the action. 15:57:48 q+ to suggest that we need a definition for animation 15:58:03 +1 to need for definition 15:58:04 ww can tweek it after today 15:59:06 q? 15:59:24 Alastair: scrolling is under your control. parallax isn't. So if movement occurs based on something you've done but is beyond your control 15:59:39 q+ 16:00:12 John: There are workarounds without disabling. 16:00:47 Michael: I guess it's clearer. The wording seems weird to me. 16:01:08 Michael: I'm mixing it up with something else.... It is clearer. 16:01:09 ack bruce 16:01:22 For any moving, blinking or scrolling information that are activated by the user, there is a mechanism for the user to pause, stop, or hide it unless the movement, blinking, or scrolling is part of an activity where it is essential. 16:01:32 Bruce: I'm hearing people arguing for a new AAA. If we reword we can make it AA. I'm pasting it in. 16:01:40 AWK, you asked to be pinged at this time 16:01:49 ack awk 16:01:49 AWK, you wanted to suggest that we need a definition for animation 16:02:09 q+ 16:02:15 Scribe: Laura 16:02:42 ack jason 16:03:08 +1 to Bruce. It seems so close to 2.2.2 16:03:27 ack alast 16:03:54