29 June 2000 WCAG Telecon

Summary of action items and resolutions




  1. Revised draft of the Techniques document.
  2. Draft of combined guidelines and technology-specific checklists.
  3. Identification of requirements which are common to WCAG and to broader conceptions of device independence.
  4. Requirements document: identification and classification of technologies to be addressed in the working group's deliverables (issue raised by Wendy).
  5. Any other items that you wish to add to the agenda--please send a message to the list regarding any other issues that you would like to discuss at the meeting.

Action items

JW any one having difficulties with?

WC progress on CSS Tech module, basic overhaul of CSS Tech module, incorporating info from CSS Access note, incorporating resolutions from calls.

GR I have a regress report since I have been off-line since last Tuesday.

MMi - sent something to Wendy. Not sure how to proceed.

WC Send it to the list.

Action MM send TN PDF info, merge and publish joint writing to the list.

WL's bidrectional handed off to DD.

DB asked UA, copied on that list.

JW IJ responded. sounds sufficient enough to incorporate into Techniques.

Techniques document

JW When release another public?

WC Would like to finish overhaul of CSS and add JavaScript stuff.

GR Would like to add XHTML stuff into HTML.

CMN Like to publish ASAP.

WC Can finish edits in the next couple of days, by next week's meeting we could decide to take public. Only open issues are "accesskey" and bidirectional tables.

JW discuss accesskey?

WC GR you are closest to this. what do you consider open?

GR Encourage authors to provide a list. Outline in post to AU group, several test pages.

WC several users gone through?

GR IE only one that supports accesskey. problems with key bindings. sometimes intercepted by User Agent. It should be up to the user. Alan Cantor discussed limiting accesskeys numeric keys, but then only a limited set.

JW it's in the spec that it can be a unicode character with link or form control.

CMN a fundamental problem with accesskey.

JW the name is a real problem with it, it should be "character" that you can associate a mneumonic with it. Need to ensure that the user can enter the character. Many of these are UA issues.

GR We need to cross-check that.

CMN There are mobile implementations of accesskey, such as IMode (although it's not W3C compliant) uses accesskey. It only accepts 0-9. The rest it ignores. IE ignores random sequences of accesskeys.

JW Perhaps a warning statement that older browsers only take 0-9. Basic technique is to use a mnemonic key from the document.

CMN Problem originates with the HTML spec.

JW Propose that numeric characters are clearly available for legacy user agents, the user should choose a character from character set of the document.

GR Also need to cover the case where accesskey is defined for every character including numerics.

Action GR: write proposal for accesskey for HTML Techniques module.

GR Handle links and form controls separately or together?

JW Is there difference between them?

GR In IE4 it didn't support it on anchor, but on IE5 it does.

CMN worth pointing out that certain implementations ignore certain characters.

JW Yes, that should be noted.

WC Be sure to look at html compendium for that info, perhaps. /* Wendy notes that the compendium does not seem to have 4.0 attribute listed... */

Device independence

JW Items common to a broader sense of guidelines: mobile, internationalization. There is little which is unique to accessibility that is common in the general approach. Our guidelines should be in harmony with the general concerns. We need to identify how our guidelines fit into the broader W3C work that is relevant and whether there are specific issues that should be highlighted.

WL Exclusion has to be highlighted. If they aren't paying attention to it, alarms should be raised. If someone adopts a set of guidelines to make something easier to use that ignore this, they are incomplete.

WC Heading to Japan, what should I ask? look for?

WL Should take info, we know a lot about this.

GR Mobile content development in Japan is based on authoring tools, support for objects. All for one. Deliver it in a variety of modalities.

WL If an org to provide usable output for cellphones, and they are outside mainstream of what we're talking about, you don't need a group...

WC metaphor, we have to learn from each other. author has to provide breaks in structure, define the cards.

JW Interested to know about inconsistency between WCAG and any mobile-related guidelines. Also, any areas where greater harmonization can occur.

Action WC Will do a comparison between guidelines for WAP, IMode and WCAG before head to Japan.

JW Then we can look at the relationships betweeen them.

MK Looking at different services as well? Like what is happening at the portals. What content do they have to store? They can't provide the same content for the little screens vs. the big screens. How do they do that?

WC What about people on the call? Marshall?

MJ - don't have much experience, but can do research.

WC What aspect interested in researching?

Action MJ: investigate MK's question. How do the large portals provide info for the different devices. How many diff. types of content do you need to provide. What methods are used to provide the alternative content.

MK e.g., NetMorph.

JW interesting info for ER.

Requirements document

GR an alternate view. Concentrate on the technologies first.

JW Same requirement in substance, doesn't matter how it is expressed. Give us greater room to move in.

Resolved: adopt Wendy's proposal for the Requirements document from 26 June to group issues that minimum requirements must apply to.

Next meeting

Same time next week.

Resolved: Main topic on the agenda for next week's meeting is publishing the Techniques doc as a public working draft.

$Date: 2000/11/08 08:30:15 $ Wendy Chisholm