Minutes from 14 December 2000 WCAG WG

Summary of action items and resolutions




Posted 12 December 2000 by Jason White

Summary of W3C Team Project Review

WC Summarizes topics covered.

GV Those that issues that we found sticky, they also found sticky and interesting. Our work is different in that most of W3C work specifies a technology while we describe uses. In the end, the consensus was that we don't want to ignore them but not sure the best way to handle them. Afterwards, in discussion with WC, perhaps we publish a technology-specific that addresses both where accessible and where not accessible.

KHS Reasonable, people use technologies other than W3C every day.

GV Don't want to be in a position where we only list the checkpoints that are accessible and then people assume can meet rest. Want to make clear where they don't meet certain checkpoints.

LK Is conformance something we'll be discussing. Will I be able to go to the guidelines/techniques and come up with conformance claims or will everyone have to come up with own criteria.

WC Not addressed yet so much. Will be soon.

LK Different browser capabilities not yet addressed in new draft.

GV What issue did we not get to?

WC CR exit criteria.

WL How affect CSS?

WC SVG good example.

3.1 Errata

WC Reads proposal for 3.1


WL OK, but would prefer #3 as #1.

LK Would like to see us apply this to specific sites.

GV Our site fails this. There are affects that we can't achieve w/CSS.

CS Then have an out with #2.

GV In a way an out with "when appropriate and support." But, says "avoid" which means absolutely not.

LK General issue, it would give someone an out. I would add that the effect has to be necessary.

GV I would question that. If there is a text-equivalent (this a P2 by the way), then it is not a problem for people who are blind. The scalability is achieve with browsers like Opera that can magnify the alt-text.

WC Alt-text in opera is magnified as well as attempts at image.

LK We have "Temple-Helvetica" and therefore I can use text in images wherever I want. How do we prevent that?

GV Is it creating a serious problem for accessibility? If I do page as Helvetica, then they have one huge alt-text. If the text is there and can be scaled.

CS Add-in for IE that scales image.

LK If we take that approach, why have the guideline at all? There is a difference in Temple Helvetica (which is not much different than Helvetica) vs. a serious affect.

GV Because promotes markup.

LK Could we get this concern into compliance, as in "if you really have to do this."

CS People will draw that line in different places.

WC This is an errata for WCAG 1.0, LK can you take an action to propose something for WCAG 2.0?

Action LK: Propose language for WCAG 2.0 that addresses "if you have to do this."

GV What about avoid where possible?

LK I think that will work.

CS Ok with that. Sounds like what I thought it meant anyway.

Resolved: Adopt proposal as errata for WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 3.1 with the following change: Avoid where possible using raster-based images to represent text -- use text and style sheets.

Resolved: Clean up "magnification" per Al's e-mail

WC Here's a wrench, what about Anne's suggestion? I would feel it passes since it is graphical.

/* discussion about possibilities for arrow images and text */

GV You will either tell people to look at our examples and make their pages look like that but always interpretations. In law, we use case law. We would have a registry. We can incorporate into techniques document. Therefore, we need "alt-text case law." A group will get together and make judgement. People can look and say, "that's not what I would have guessed, but ok. it's there I understand it."

Action LK: Create a page of examples to test this resolution.

GV Yes. Document discussion.

WC Ties back into ideas of candidate recommendation. Is a process to use as move forward.

WL And second agenda item.

Techniques database

GV When we talk about database, I think of where you look stuff up versus wandering through it.

WC But documents could be generated and pull from that database.

WL We're going to collect data, good and bad for each checkpoints.

WC The variety of examples is interesting: including databases, whole sites, pieces of sits. Another issue from this a.m.

CS Copyright issues?

KHS May have to copy the site.

CS Examples that don't comply may be hard.

GV May have to copy onto our site - can't assume won't change. Another is to copy on the site then change the content.

WC UIE used Disney site to show poor usability, but compared to new site is much better.

LK Agree with approach. You can quote something for critical purposes, but don't recommend it.

Resolved: techniques database, examples of poor and good is key to help people determine conformance.

WC Who wants to help design it?

LK How should I start w/my examples?

WL Each a field in the database?

LK All in one page.

$Date: 2001/01/03 18:21:22 $ Wendy Chisholm