06 March 2000 ER Telecon

Summary of action items and resolutions



LK editing going on. Are there overall issues?

BM There are some thing listed under repair that are more like evaluation. Some repair, "allow the user to do this" is very vague. Beyond scope of repair unless integrated with authoring tool.

LK you could in some cases ask to pop up the person's favorite editor. most often when you have embedded applet or object. we had discussed a format for tools to integrate.

BM want to hear what people are thinking. bobby is less interactive that a-prompt.

CR what do you mean by "interact with editor?"

LK for example if there is a warning that pop-ups about SMIL content having synchronized equivalents. at that time, pop-up SMIL editor.

CR there are some things that we figure A-Prompt can do, others that editor will do. therefore, return an error code and let the Editor decide.

LK that's in the spirit of a-prompt being a library rather than self-contained tool

WL is repair something that changes the source?

BM server-version keep version on server that they can get. may require author input.

GR HTML-Tidy. you can say it is an evalution tool. can get it to fix it. it can transform HTML into XHTML.

BM in all cases, will write a file for you. evaluation may just be report.

LK report doesn't have to be completely automatic.

BM there are only a few that can be done automatically. even then, check with the user.

WC interesting that none of the user repairs are in here.

GR "repair" means a change to the source.

WL may be talking about css.

WC a transformation more than repair. where do we document "transformations?"

LK yes, would blow up the document.

GR the table linearizer, someone could make a claim that our page uses tables, here's the table linearizer, download it and use it. it hasn't repair the page.

/* discussion of sniffing. helping users recognize that tools are out there to help them make their browser able to use a page better. */

WC basic question - what to do about transformation.

CR transformation not mentioned in WCAG.

BM linearizer is an evaluation tool.

LK it can produce various versions. if you use that for evaluation it can make the page look better.

GR that's an example of assistive technology. it assists certain classes of users. repair affects change, AT offers assistance.

WL is the linearizer a way to get around a guideline?

GR danger - I've got all of these things telling me to get rid of tables i'm going to provide a link to this tool instead.

WC ideally, authors should do less and less because user agents and assistive technologies become more powerful.

GR but, SVG final form due to legal reasons is unmutable. We need to give people final control over their documents. As much as user agents will open things up, there will be a counter movment to save presentation.

WL someday there will be a magic machine that looks at a gif file and reads it to you.

GR it's important to stay in communication w/your place of business they run locked in versions of applications. certain things are disabled. the user loses some configuration options.

BM "until user agents" - how do you determine when to eliminate.

LK that's a good question. what is the current state of information on which of these features are available. e.g., which UA support longdesc? is this info available publically?

GR there was a thread on IG. a lot of people are finding that they are getting less hits from older browsers. a lot of businesses as part of Y2K, upgraded browsers. Many individuals did the same. That's not everyone, but...

LK if I put in longdesc, what is the payoff? how many people will i help?

GR we should as a resource work with I18N, voice browsing and mobile browsing.

WC Web characterization?

LK for my purposes, as long as i can say, that at least one browser supports, that's enough.

WL the other thing to tell these people is that someday you may be testifying against them in a lawsuit.

LK it is a good question, "who will this benefit." because this page may not be here in a year once this attribute is supported.

GR need to bother lynx community to get these things supported.

WC we need to get involved in open source: Amaya and Mozilla.

GR Charles is working on Amaya. We ought to ask IBM reps. IBM has committed to working on Mozilla.

HB Mozilla folks willing. glad to see IBM post.

WL so what do about transformation?

WC nothing. we have a lot to do already. it would clutter the ERT if add it to. don't want to start another document at this time.

BM we could annotate but don't need to include algorithms.

LK we could link to the list of tools.

BM point to a specific tool.

GR perhaps we should have an appendix addressed to end users to do on-the-fly repair.

WC would like to focus on current document until it's out. let's leave as open issue.

/* consensus not to worry about documenting techniques for transformation tools at this time. will leave as an open issue. */

LK one thing that is difficult to check is JavaScript. Work on detecting what JavaScript is doing so we can test what is going on?

WC point to implementation experience in general.

GR definitely things can look for in the script. can tell if they are generating links, creating new windows, "onmouseover" and "onchange" definitely look for.

CR we looked at for scrolling text. we had a couple suggestions for that.

LK theoretically shouldn't it be possible to detect that? the code is analyzable.

WL a script disector?

HB we are trying to second-guess what programmers can do. that's a hard problem. I'm not optomistic that we can do a reliable job.

GR what if we limited looking at event handlers.

WL some person could find ways around you.

GR lynx developers did not want to assume that form with onchange to transform it into a form w/a submit mechanism. they said no, because onchange may not lead anywhere but a redirect because target may be constantly changing.

HB let's work on easier problems.

WC Judy and I have been discussing rechartering and attracting developers.

GR lots of cross-over with AU and UA. perhaps draw them in.

WC or work closer with those working group.

GR is talk of rechartering AU as IG.

WL AU is a guidelines group and ER is a working group. not only for AU, but WCAG and UA as well. since what we do is implementing stuff in WCAG, AU, and UA.

LK rather than have ER, we should have an implementation group: evaluation, authoring, and browsing.

WL pull all of those techniques from those groups.

WC they create the techniques and we implement.

GR or suggest techniques and we determine if implementable.

LK amaya is user agent and authoring tool. one proposal is to transform into a development group doing things for Amaya.

WL do for other things like Bobby.

GR Amaya's intent is to be experimental. There are only 4 core people working on it. They want to take on ATAG compliance, but will take a while. It should be able to evaluate and repair.

WC I like that too.

LK what language written in?

/* not sure */

WL Can we explore this idea with Judy, Irene, and Charles? Some of us have always wanted to have Amaya be the model for what can be done.

GR sure Amaya would be receptive.

WL perhaps PF pitch in also?

HB reality check. how many people working on.

LK if we want to have influence on a large chunk of source code we have at least 2 candidates: amaya and mozilla.

WL there are those in GNU.

GR I think Amaya is the biggest win situation. editing and browsing. so, bang for buck but also quickly and correctly. then work on propogating else where.

WL if right ones immersed, that would be true. if we had more resources devoted to amaya. perhaps hier someone.

LK this group can be writing source code for amaya, recommending features or both. people who have the best chance of getting ideas included are those who are involved in writing code. let's all try it.

WL use it already.

LK still using AOL Press. How many people do?

do not: HB, CR, LK

GR would like to but does not.

do: WL and WC.

WL everyone should download and experience furstrations and promise.

WC perhaps get Amaya folks to face2face?

GR contractor from Allaire is based in the Netherlands. easy for her to come to meeting.

WL Hakon big organizer of WWW9, perhaps also get to our meeting.

@@WC invite Amaya folks to the face2face.

WL every tool could be included in Amaya.

LK at least it's functionality.

@@GR contact woman from Allaire to get to face2face.

@@WL contact Hakon about face2face.

LK if no longer ER and become prototyping group, that would be a bigger change. there are so many features that are authoring tool features. for example, a tool that causes longdesc to appear as text on the screen. could be useful in authoring tool, especially if editable, useful in user agent or transformation tool to make that info available to the user. difficult to separate.

WL this group is permanent.

LK "tools are us."

GR erase division between tools.

WL yes, author and browsing tools should be one.

@@WC take ideas of reshaping the groups to WAI team domain meeting tomorrow.

List of existing tools

HB in the list of tools, there are still open paragraphs.

LK open invitation for people to take tools to review.

WL tried to do a couple, but not there. e-mailed wendy.

@@WC double check that the links are up to date.

@@WL get back to the list of existing tools.

Moving forward with ERT

WC expecting to publish new version tomorrow.

LK my pass is at http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert-20000228-a.html

@@Everyone review new ERT when released - look for it today or tomorrow.

Alternative browsing

HB noticed this alternative browsing document. it's a draft resource page.

GR the final version has been passed through EO page.

LK this is the latest link?

WC latest is http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/Browsing

HB on "other pages of interest" it points to an older version.

@@WC update link to Browsing page in list of tools.

$Date: 2000/11/08 08:17:43 $ Wendy Chisholm