13 July 2000 telecon

Summary of action items and resolutions



Action items

Refer to Jason White's e-mail from x July 2000

Marshall: research has been frustrating. still waiting for calls back. looking at the sites, Yahoo strongest is supporting PDAs. Not sure how they are creating it and how relates to standard data. CNN and alta vista no way to get to PDA from my browser.

GV how do you get to the other content?

Marshall: there is a link at the bottom of the pages.

Also looked at Google, computer world, etc.

WC what about using emulator to get content negotiated content.

Marshall: have not tried. hope to get a palm. Netmorf appears to be a proxy of some sort: a code stripper that gets rid of images and image maps. Have not played with it. That's a guess.

DB Send me some e-mail I'll help you with MSN mobile stuff.

Action Marshall: send e-mail to DB re: how MSN creates pages for mobile devices.

GV is the whole site available?

DB I have tried pieces of it via a pager. I can talk with people who are more familiar.

KSH My action item: to combine techniques with generalized checkpoints. Trying to incorporate Jason's principles in with it.

WC action item coming along. Need help with taking screen shots for CSS module.

KHS will help

Action KHS and WC take screen shots for CSS doc.

JW re: KHS proposal for nav bar for technique doc.

WC would not be able to complete before release to WAI-IG.

WC open issues from last couple of weeks?

JW follow-up with on list, focus on techniques and guidelines today.

ASW several comments will send to list. however, if go to p1 checkpoint see list of both p1 and p3 checkpoints.

WC could then break into finer chunks. discuss p1 checkpoints, then p2 checkpoints, then show example.

KHS supports better navigation.

ASW In glossary, it should be definitions of terms but checkpoints have snuck into glossary.

JW use cross-references from glossary.

ASW don't think it needs to refer back.

Action ASW: propose what should be removed from glossary and make sure that information is not lost.

Resolution: WC try to get techniques to WAI IG tomorrow, if slip then publish next week and incorporate ASW's comments. Otherwise ASW comments in next working draft with other comments from IG.

Resolution: Incorporating KHS's proposed table of contents should be reviewed by working group before being sent to IG. Therefore, incorporated into next release not this one.


JW aspects of what i've written are a bit different than from what we've had up until now. I've outlined an approach, a categorization without writing in the examples and details. Attempted to minimize the number of new technical terms created in the document.

GV we need to abstract beyond web. that's how we got into the HTML bind - we thought about web as it is now. this document talks in a fundamental fashion. we almost go from fundamental guidelines to checkpoints. we could have something in the middle. if the checkpoints match with 1.0 i don't think that anything else needs to match. the guidelines disappear when people write checklists. if wcag2.0 and you could see a 1.1 mapping with old and new (for HTML) all of upper level was gone.

JW I agree. I tried to distinguish between guidelines, checkpoints, and principles. checkpoint will be technology specific.

GV what are techniques then?

JW technology-specific checkpoints with examples.

WL I propose that the principles be taken as a whole and dealt with intensively in the same sense the EO dealt with the quicktips. Although we have become more abstract we have become less vague. "clear and simple" don't appear in principles. the number of layers under that seem to be less important at this time.

GR the analysis that william proposes will help us address what happens when people discuss a language or derive a new language without incorporating the accessibility features.

JW also gives us room to discuss how to create new languages. e.g. the XML guidelines.

DB re: principle one of your rewrite, what does that mean?

JW must be able to present in purely tactile, purely audio, or any combination of media that someone needs.

DB what if i only display text?

JW satisfied. if media-specific you don't. we're trying to bring in checkpoint 2.2 from WCAG 1.0 - color contrast.

DB However, if say that text satisfies what about the cognitive disabilities?

GV principle 4 is cognitive. if in text can be rendered in speech. if someone can't understand the words then it has nothing to do with how info presented asking for different info to be presented.

DB What about marti's proposal for principle 1?

GV that is not a better wording for principle 1 it is trying to combine a whole bunch of things into principle 1.

DB Not positive I understand that. I could not use that in a presentation on the guidelines. it needs work.

GV if the concept of the first principle is: you may be able to view this if you only have 1 sensory modality, how does that work?

DB Not sure what "one sensory modality" means?

WL "Can helen keller read it?"

GV modalities are hearing, seeing, or touching.

MM my suggestion was that i thought the direct reference to text would upset the cognitive disability population. some of these proposals sound better.

GV we're not talking about alternatives we're talking about modality-independent.

GV is markup the appropriate term for labelling items in a pdf file?

MM yes.

JW the PDF spec discusses represeting logical structure via elements, attributes, etc. but it does not mention markup. it could be clarified with a definition. it's originally a type-setting term. need to be clear that it is not just SGML-syntz markup but any system.

GV what about Java.

WC "markup" does not make sense in sense of storing information about objects.

GV if you have a java document, you have code that causes it to be presented.

JW may not apply to programmatic objects in nature.

WC the "separate structure, content, and presentation" principle definitely applies to Java. The MVC and pluggable look and feel is all about this.

/* discussion about people raising issues they are uncomfortable with since these usually raise the subtleties in language that are necessary to clarify or resolve or cause issue later on */

Resolved We will work off of Jason's draft to move forward with the guidelines

GV if people have other formulations they would like to make, please do. This by no means is the end all but I will at least be working off of this draft rather than the one I had begun working on.

Next meetings

same time next week.

regrets Gregg Vanderheiden

$Date: 2000/11/08 08:30:16 $ Wendy Chisholma