IRC log of wai-wcag on 2003-07-02
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 07:07:29 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:07:36 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:07:58 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:09:59 [wendy]
- plan for the day
- 07:10:11 [wendy]
- - finish reports from yesterday's small groups
- 07:11:36 [wendy]
- what is the impact of what we are doing?
- 07:11:54 [wendy]
- in about a year, we hope wcag 2.0 will become a w3c recommendation. what effect will that have?
- 07:12:40 [silvia]
- silvia has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:12:52 [wendy]
- for the log: <rscano> some photos of yesterday : http://www.iwa-italy.org/fotografie/default.asp?path=2003%2FWCAG+WG/ :)
- 07:15:51 [wendy]
- summaries from yesterday:
- 07:17:12 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:17:32 [wendy]
- italy: yesterday in the parliament, 5 proposals have been merged into one proposal. one refers to w3c (ATAG, WCAG, UAAG). one does not. another refers to only a part of WCAG.
- 07:17:46 [lloydi]
- lloydi has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:18:01 [wendy]
- the proposals have been compiled into one document, not "merged" in that they haven't been combined into one proposal.
- 07:18:48 [wendy]
- 12 proposals, but in commission only 4 or 5 main proposals.
- 07:19:09 [wendy]
- government web sites are about 3% accessible.
- 07:22:54 [wendy]
- there will be a law by the end of the year, but not sure what it says.
- 07:24:04 [wendy]
- israel: no regulation.
- 07:24:41 [wendy]
- a braille reader works in hebrew, but screen readers are not affordable and don't read well.
- 07:24:49 [wendy]
- (i.e., mispronounces many words)
- 07:26:48 [wendy]
- sweden: probably prefer for EU to make a law.
- 07:27:38 [chaalsVCE]
- chaalsVCE has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:27:48 [wendy]
- scotland: 1999 discrimination act, wcag is using law. oftentimes (in the university), don't have people specific for accessiblity but often use consultants.
- 07:28:24 [wendy]
- government bodies also use consultants to create and evaluate web sites. had several workshops for people about creating accessible sites.
- 07:28:42 [wendy]
- spain: not rewriting, but interpreting what wcag 1.0 means.
- 07:29:21 [wendy]
- i.e., "until user agents..." they say "user agents do it, so we won't worry about it." they are running with it. would be good to have more formal interpretation.
- 07:29:37 [wendy]
- when 2.0 comes out, they'll eventually write a law that will adopt 2.0 and eventually will be applied.
- 07:29:56 [wendy]
- it will take some time after it comes out to adopt.
- 07:30:55 [wendy]
- scotland: after 2.0 comes out, what is likely to happen? eventually adopt, once cases are introduced that use the act people will likely take more seriously.
- 07:31:53 [wendy]
- they'll be looking for most up-to-date information (when cases come out). but they are efficient. will also be looking to rest of europe.
- 07:31:58 [wendy]
- (european union)
- 07:32:09 [wendy]
- efficient in making changes and updating.
- 07:32:46 [wendy]
- australia: law - must be accessible or have to fix it. following wcag 1.0 is best prevention from problems with the law.
- 07:33:09 [wendy]
- many govnts watching and anticipating wcag 2.0.
- 07:33:37 [wendy]
- when reaches last call, that's the time to start taking seriously and to begin making changes to it.
- 07:34:27 [wendy]
- public must be (unless cost too much, although doesn't usually wash as an argument), private should be
- 07:35:40 [wendy]
- s/public/private (i.e., no exemtion on public but the exemtion is private)
- 07:35:53 [wendy]
- public == government
- 07:36:19 [wendy]
- public accomodation - anything that offers services to the public
- 07:37:17 [glapis]
- glapis has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:37:22 [wendy]
- germany: laws and regulation at national level, but universities and schools follow state law
- 07:38:19 [wendy]
- took WCAG 1.0 and sorted into 2 priorities. p1 is a must for everything that goes online after everything publisehd after the law into effect.
- 07:38:38 [wendy]
- p2 required for navigation path and key areas onthe site.
- 07:39:01 [wendy]
- entry pages
- 07:39:20 [wendy]
- legacy content has until end of 2005 to be changed or will be deleted. also navigation path to that doc.
- 07:39:24 [wendy]
- :)
- 07:39:50 [wendy]
- no civil discrimination act. act does not cover public places.
- 07:40:11 [wendy]
- will have civil disc. act maybe next year.
- 07:40:21 [wendy]
- then provisions will extend to private sector.
- 07:41:26 [wendy]
- tomas intends to create a mapping between the germany p1s and the WCAG 1.0 checkpoints match up
- 07:43:47 [bengt]
- http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/01-2/sloan.html <-- UK Disability and Discrimination Act
- 07:44:15 [m3mVCE]
- m3mVCE has joined #wai-wcag
- 07:44:17 [wendy]
- germany policies: http://www.w3.org/WAI/Policy/#DE
- 07:44:48 [wendy]
- federalized system. states have authority over culture, education. so whole education sector not covered by federal law.
- 07:45:02 [wendy]
- 7 states that have discrimination act and 9 don't.
- 07:45:17 [wendy]
- 2 states are older than federal provison and have nothing about IT accessibility.
- 07:45:29 [wendy]
- 2 others have adopted the federal regulation.
- 07:45:51 [wendy]
- others waiting for 2.0 or take federal law and make state law? don't know.
- 07:47:13 [wendy]
- federal regulation will be evaluted in next 3 years. one appendix (reform of wcag 1.0) **could be** dropped and replaced by 2.0.
- 07:47:53 [wendy]
- (national) disability discrimination act, based on chapter 3 of constitution (race, religion, disability, etc.)
- 07:48:24 [wendy]
- also interesting to map current checkpoints to wcag 2.0 to see how close they are
- 07:50:00 [wendy]
- belgium: nothing in law. some sites work on, not many. most going with wcag 1.0 A.
- 07:50:53 [wendy]
- negotiations, such that earliest something happen next year. if a law, will be based on WAI guidelines.
- 07:51:30 [wendy]
- in french speaking parts, more initiatives butlocal. in flemish, a label "blind surfer" from org who is part of EuroAccessibility.
- 07:52:00 [wendy]
- Marc propose they look at 2.0 rather than 1.0. w/e-govnt initiatives next year, good point to look at.
- 07:52:15 [wendy]
- earliest have law is late 2004
- 07:52:37 [wendy]
- some govnt sites asked for audit, not sure what they do with it.
- 07:55:53 [wendy]
- http://europa.eu.int/information_society/topics/citizens/accessibility/web/wai_2002/ep_res_web_wai_2002/index_en.htm
- 07:58:34 [wendy]
- http://europa.eu.int/information_society/topics/citizens/accessibility/web/wai_2002/eaccess2002_report_final/a_documents/ap2002-wai-rep3.pdf
- 07:59:17 [glapis]
- glapis has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:00:12 [andi]
- andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:00:24 [lloydi]
- A bit more about the DRC (Disability Research Council) briefing on forthcoming survey of 1000 sites: http://www.accessify.com/articles/DRC-briefing-report.asp
- 08:00:44 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:01:30 [wendy]
- UK: in particular, refer to the conclusion section of the sloan paper: http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/01-2/sloan.html#7
- 08:01:48 [wendy]
- prediction for 2.0: see what happens in u.s. and australia
- 08:01:55 [wendy]
- currently, using level A from 1.0 as a model
- 08:02:03 [wendy]
- hopefully adopt 2.0 in the same way
- 08:04:16 [wendy]
- U.S. 508 revised with right of private action (i.e., the govnt can be sued)
- 08:05:27 [wendy]
- if govnt buys a web site it has to be accessible & right of private action. however, if make their own no right of private action.
- 08:06:12 [wendy]
- (more on UK from yesterday's notes 15:14:43)
- 08:07:05 [wendy]
- private sector had been following WCAG b/c they wanted it clear that didn't have to follow 508, but then some felt 508 easier to follow. so in the private sector, no defn.
- 08:07:56 [wendy]
- question about web sites being covered by u.s. law.
- 08:08:03 [wendy]
- current case about an airline.
- 08:08:52 [wendy]
- (508 revised in 1998, final rule published 2001 - update dates in yesterday's minutes)
- 08:09:05 [wendy]
- if web covered is ambiguous.
- 08:09:34 [wendy]
- in practice in govnt - 508. great effort to comply. trying to set a good example.
- 08:09:41 [wendy]
- want to get things done before there is a suit.
- 08:10:23 [wendy]
- getting rid of clutter makes sites more accessible and professional. so, trend towards getting rid of eye-candy
- 08:10:38 [wendy]
- accessibility helped advance usability of sites
- 08:10:54 [wendy]
- private/u.s. heading towards 508 or Level A WCAG 1.0
- 08:11:33 [wendy]
- the tools support 508. people look to lowest common denominator that gives safe harbor.
- 08:12:04 [giorgio_brajnik]
- giorgio_brajnik has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:13:08 [wendy]
- state dept seems to have a more positive attitude about making sites accessible and being innovative. other agencies seem to be more concerned about being sued than doing it because it is a good idea.
- 08:14:06 [wendy]
- what about legacy content?
- 08:14:32 [jason]
- jason has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:14:41 [wendy]
- hey jason!
- 08:14:58 [rscano]
- hi Jason :)
- 08:15:01 [jason]
- Hello Wendy
- 08:15:26 [wendy]
- particularly, "photo pdf" that are images of text, not actual text.
- 08:15:27 [andi]
- Jason, aren't you supposed to be sleeping?
- 08:15:50 [wendy]
- some pdf is locked and assistive technologies can't get info out of them.
- 08:16:26 [jason]
- Not yet, no. I expect to be going to bed early, though, as I caught the family cold this week. It's 6:16 PM here.
- 08:16:41 [jason]
- I thought I would join for a while.
- 08:16:56 [wendy]
- difficult to keep up with everything. there are 300 sites that are in some process of review.
- 08:22:36 [wendy]
- discussion about examples from the state dept of u.s. (cyrillic site)
- 08:22:47 [wendy]
- current state of the state dept.
- 08:23:26 [wendy]
- what happened to the ADA?
- 08:23:56 [wendy]
- 1996 ruling: http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/foia/tal712.txt
- 08:24:57 [wendy]
- hearing in 2000
- 08:25:25 [wendy]
- recent suit related to an airline
- 08:26:24 [wendy]
- w3c amicus brief: http://www.w3.org/2003/03/17-brief.html
- 08:28:04 [wendy]
- the question of this case is: does the ada cover internet sites?
- 08:29:12 [giorgio]
- giorgio has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:29:21 [rscano]
- Apply ada for internet: http://www.icdri.org/CynthiaW/applying_the_ada_to_the_internet.htm
- 08:31:59 [wendy]
- another case at same time, found for. all headlines only about case that found against.
- 08:32:48 [wendy]
- question: in wcag 2.0 is there anything that would make it easier or better for adoption in european union or member countries?
- 08:33:02 [wendy]
- in germany, if p1 and p2 lined up with core and extended, would be helpful. :)
- 08:33:55 [wendy]
- 2.0: clear separation between minimum and best practice. have a solid basis, start with something "more legal"
- 08:34:05 [wendy]
- some of the phrases and terminology is difficult to understand.
- 08:34:21 [wendy]
- if have to translate, might be difficult to get the same meaning in other language.
- 08:34:34 [wendy]
- in englihs, might have very specific meaning.
- 08:34:42 [wendy]
- when try to find variation could have different meaning.
- 08:35:00 [wendy]
- (marc has an example passage that could be difficult to explain in dutch)
- 08:35:16 [wendy]
- perhaps first translate the glossary.
- 08:35:33 [wendy]
- the structure seems to be a good step. clear.
- 08:36:42 [wendy]
- committees within union have just adopted 1.0, perhaps might take a while to move to 2.0.
- 08:37:10 [wendy]
- could one person from each country take current wcag 2.0 and read to a friend. each time hit a phrase that is difficult to translate, highlight it.
- 08:39:09 [jason]
- Perhaps this would best be done after the editors have taken one more editorial pass through the 2.0 document, which has recently been reorganized and I think would benefit from a little more editorial work.
- 08:39:14 [RylaDog]
- RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:39:51 [wendy]
- :)
- 08:39:58 [jason]
- By all means, though, if you find problematic expressions or sentences while at the face to face meeting it would be helpful to highlight them.
- 08:40:09 [wendy]
- q+ giorgio
- 08:41:11 [wendy]
- ack giorgio
- 08:41:21 [wendy]
- recently translated LIFT to Italian.
- 08:41:32 [wendy]
- translated text resources.
- 08:42:03 [wendy]
- main difficulty was determining the lexicon and determing how to represent terms like "form"
- 08:42:49 [wendy]
- decided not to translate into italian, used english as technical word
- 08:43:14 [wendy]
- could be ambiguous
- 08:43:34 [wendy]
- took 2 months, 2 persons to translate
- 08:44:32 [wendy]
- had to markup all of the foreign words with span. did not anticipate this. "browser" is not translatable
- 08:46:12 [wendy]
- need to label so they are pronounced the correct way (by a screen reader)
- 08:46:25 [wendy]
- jaws doesn't work with span
- 08:47:21 [wendy]
- are borrowed words in english mispronounced or have they been around long enough?
- 08:47:55 [wendy]
- ghoti == fish?
- 08:48:21 [m3mVCE]
- ghoti ~ fish :)
- 08:48:54 [wendy]
- 1.0 seemed specific, 2.0 too general. difficult to apply.
- 08:49:07 [wendy]
- technology-specific checklists will be important (for 2.0)
- 08:49:28 [wendy]
- q+ katie, patrizia
- 08:49:47 [wendy]
- q+ cmn
- 08:50:07 [wendy]
- coord w/w3c offices?
- 08:50:24 [wendy]
- not curerntly translating. this is informal exercise to look for difficult phrases.
- 08:50:36 [mcappelli]
- mcappelli has joined #wai-wcag
- 08:50:39 [wendy]
- (w3c offices are not currently translating)
- 08:50:53 [mcappelli]
- good morning
- 08:51:04 [rscano]
- hi michela
- 08:51:05 [rellero]
- Hi
- 08:51:07 [wendy]
- ack katie
- 08:51:28 [wendy]
- had ideas for short phrases for checkpoints (like short phrases used on guidelines)
- 08:51:42 [wendy]
- "handles"
- 08:51:49 [wendy]
- katie will send to the list her suggestions
- 08:51:54 [wendy]
- ack patrizia
- 08:52:59 [wendy]
- useful to have information that would help convince sites that are not govnt sites to be accessible
- 08:53:40 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/benefits.html
- 08:54:02 [wendy]
- hierarchy of the most important parts of sites to be accessible.
- 08:54:16 [wendy]
- q+ to respond to patrizia
- 08:54:26 [wendy]
- ack chaals
- 08:54:26 [Zakim]
- chaalsVCE, you wanted to note about translations after the break
- 08:54:33 [wendy]
- that work is done by eowg
- 08:55:09 [wendy]
- translations: if you translate a w3c document, there are formal requirements.
- 08:55:37 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/
- 08:57:05 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 08:57:05 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to respond to patrizia
- 08:57:39 [wendy]
- ===
- 08:57:42 [wendy]
- break
- 08:57:56 [wendy]
- over break - what do you want to discuss during the next session
- 08:58:24 [wendy]
- gv reads possible topics (from draft agenda)
- 09:05:11 [wendy]
- + francesco
- 09:08:56 [jason]
- jason has joined #wai-wcag
- 09:35:04 [wendy]
- reconvened
- 09:35:11 [wendy]
- when do people need to leave?
- 09:35:55 [wendy]
- 12:00 daniela, silvia
- 09:36:08 [wendy]
- lisa, francesco, ian
- 09:36:13 [daniela]
- daniela has joined #wai-wcag
- 09:36:18 [andi]
- andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 09:36:53 [wendy]
- groups:
- 09:37:00 [wendy]
- server techniques/rdf
- 09:38:09 [wendy]
- lisa's tool: she'll send link to list
- 09:39:02 [wendy]
- conformance testing or imp testing framework
- 09:40:07 [bengt]
- lisa: http://www.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003AprJun/0034.html
- 09:42:10 [bengt]
- lisa: http://www.yadsarah.org.il/english/index.asp?id=95
- 09:56:20 [mcappelli]
- mcappelli has left #wai-wcag
- 09:56:44 [wendy]
- breaking for lunch and into small groups
- 09:56:57 [wendy]
- server-side techniques:
- 09:59:19 [glapis2]
- glapis2 has joined #wai-wcag
- 10:01:57 [glapis2]
- glapis2 has left #wai-wcag
- 10:06:14 [wendy]
- lisa, maurizio, andi, enrico, lisa, patrizia, bengt, katie, gregg, charles, giuseppe, etc...
- 11:58:08 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 11:58:30 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:08:03 [rscano]
- rscano has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:10:15 [wendy]
- wendy has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:12:20 [wendy]
- back from lunch
- 12:13:34 [wendy]
- andi?
- 12:13:36 [wendy]
- could you minute?
- 12:14:11 [andi]
- RDF Techniques
- 12:14:32 [andi]
- Should these be independent techniques or part of server side techniques?
- 12:14:47 [wendy]
- group (lisa, maurizio, andy, enrico, lisa, patrizia, bengt, katie, gregg, charles, giuseppe, wendy
- 12:15:33 [andi]
- Related to server side techniques but doesn't really matter because technology specific techniques can be compiled into a single checklist
- 12:15:45 [andi]
- Will bounce any proposed techniques off RDF working group
- 12:15:55 [andi]
- want draft sooner rather than later
- 12:16:21 [andi]
- introduction (how you use it, advantage, general examples) followed by individual techniques with lots of working examples.
- 12:16:51 [andi]
- renderer can be open source, proprietary but freely available, or paid for
- 12:20:21 [giorgio]
- giorgio has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:20:32 [wendy]
- wendy has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:20:53 [wendy]
- for the log:
- 12:20:54 [wendy]
- <wendy> i think we all just got disconnected
- 12:20:54 [wendy]
- [08:18] <wendy> we'll be using editors note to point out some techniques that we're including (so that we don't lose them) but htat might end up in a better place
- 12:20:54 [wendy]
- [08:18] <wendy> ===
- 12:20:54 [wendy]
- [08:19] <wendy> techniques group: tomas and ian
- 12:20:56 [glapis2]
- glapis2 has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:21:25 [RylaDog]
- RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:21:32 [andi]
- andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:21:38 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:21:52 [wendy]
- we went through the early draft of the html techniques.
- 12:21:57 [andi]
- want me to minute again?
- 12:22:02 [wendy]
- please. thx
- 12:22:16 [andi]
- reviewed HTML techniques working draft against WCAG 2.0 draft
- 12:22:29 [andi]
- ideas of useful things to add but didn't try to reinvent the wheel
- 12:23:09 [andi]
- alt text is given for 1.1 so didn't bother with that one.
- 12:23:40 [andi]
- D link - shouldn't be a standard because there are lots of problems with it.
- 12:23:58 [andi]
- perhaps a better technique is to provide a caption for the image that is a link to a long description
- 12:24:40 [andi]
- could put description under the image that is styled in a way that it doesn't interfere with the visual design of the page
- 12:25:05 [andi]
- looked at some examples
- 12:25:35 [andi]
- should we add an example of using an image to provide a skip navigation link
- 12:25:48 [andi]
- ?
- 12:26:07 [andi]
- very few people know you can actually style the alt attribute
- 12:26:20 [andi]
- can render in a different color, size, etc.
- 12:26:23 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:26:55 [andi]
- is it worth recommending different classes for image types depending on function? i.e. bullets, etc.
- 12:27:28 [andi]
- questions can be put in the issues list for followup discussion in techniques working group (Wednesdays)
- 12:27:50 [andi]
- should post proposals to WCAG mailing list
- 12:27:56 [rscano]
- rscano has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:28:06 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:28:51 [andi]
- captions are a good idea for some pictures, but not all
- 12:29:14 [andi]
- most browsers now support longdesc
- 12:29:38 [andi]
- UIs range - only available through ATs to robust support
- 12:29:48 [m3mVCE]
- m3mVCE has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:30:19 [andi]
- WCAG 1.0 specs say you should support older ATs. WCAG 2.0 says it differently.
- 12:30:43 [andi]
- sometimes have to use presentational markup in order to support older technologies
- 12:31:25 [andi]
- example where older technology did not support block level HTML elements
- 12:31:35 [andi]
- rendered as one long line.
- 12:32:13 [andi]
- what does it mean if you use depracated markup
- 12:32:31 [andi]
- WCAG 1.0 errata proposed to resolve this issue
- 12:33:09 [andi]
- lot of times where you have to support older technologies; e.g. EU requirement to use Netscape 4
- 12:33:22 [andi]
- errata needed to build exceptions into WCAG 1.0
- 12:53:28 [andi]
- andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:53:31 [m3mVCE]
- m3mVCE has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:53:33 [giorgio]
- giorgio has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:53:37 [wendy]
- wendy has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:53:49 [wendy]
- updating the log:
- 12:53:52 [RylaDog]
- RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:53:58 [wendy]
- (we lost connectivity at: 08:34
- 12:53:58 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:54:01 [andi]
- GV suggests expanding circle of reviewers
- 12:54:15 [wendy]
- (@@WAC paste log here...)
- 12:54:34 [rscano]
- rscano has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:54:38 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:55:16 [andi]
- need to be careful about selecting implementors to work closely with. Don't want to choose only those people that want to work with us because their site is already accessible.
- 12:55:35 [andi]
- want to be able to say "we fixed some really bad stuff"
- 12:56:06 [andi]
- using guidelines, can take something that is really inaccessible and end up with something that is accessible but is still "robust"
- 12:56:45 [andi]
- example: transportation site in Seattle - partnership between e-gov and university
- 12:57:07 [andi]
- should start document on home page to collect categories of sites
- 12:57:56 [glapis]
- glapis has joined #wai-wcag
- 12:58:22 [andi]
- need a way to measure whether or not a site is more accessible after applying the guidelines
- 12:58:35 [andi]
- difficult to define objective guidelines to do this
- 12:58:59 [andi]
- test is not whether a site got more accessible
- 12:59:33 [andi]
- test is "can the principles be applied to a site?" and "were there parts of the website that seemingly don't have any guidelines that apply?
- 13:00:00 [andi]
- e.g. if we said all video has to be captioned in real time, then discovered web cams
- 13:00:45 [andi]
- intent is that criteria we put into it is indicative of more accessible content, not "user testing"
- 13:01:14 [andi]
- usability testing guidelines themselves? testing sites tests the "guidelines", not the "guidelines document"
- 13:02:05 [andi]
- have to define audiences that "should" be able to use it and see if the "can" use it
- 13:02:39 [andi]
- may have to define primary and secondary audiences
- 13:03:38 [andi]
- wendy believes primary authors should be developers of authoring tools because that's where we will make the most impact on accessible content
- 13:04:29 [andi]
- primary audiences - people who develop authoring tools, people who create web sites, people who create policy
- 13:05:01 [wendy]
- create accessible and innovative web sites
- 13:05:45 [wendy]
- ===
- 13:05:47 [andi]
- conformance group
- 13:05:55 [wendy]
- conformance - giorgio, andi, francesco, charmaine
- 13:06:08 [wendy]
- sorry - habit. :)
- 13:06:16 [andi]
- started with definition of conformance vs. compliance
- 13:06:25 [andi]
- conform to standard, comply with law or regulation
- 13:07:02 [andi]
- good to distinguish requirements into CORE set that is absolutely required and additional optional set to push up level of accessibility of web site
- 13:07:55 [andi]
- could base CORE set on testability and impact to person with disability
- 13:08:19 [wendy]
- q+ cmn
- 13:08:24 [andi]
- freedom of expression could be another one
- 13:08:46 [andi]
- user testing should not be a technique, testability must be independent of user testing
- 13:09:27 [andi]
- another criteria was whether or not it is appropriate for all sites or whether it is practical with current technology
- 13:09:42 [andi]
- two audiences
- 13:10:00 [andi]
- policy makers - WCAG should suggest that policy makers only look at CORE requirements
- 13:10:23 [andi]
- as a way to achieve some sort of standardization across the world
- 13:10:38 [andi]
- avoids different regulation in each country
- 13:10:59 [andi]
- for EXTENDED checkpoints, assign point value to each.
- 13:11:26 [andi]
- point value should measure impact; i.e. all checkpoints are not equal
- 13:12:34 [andi]
- suggestion for policy makers is "compliance". may be premature to do this when haven't settled on conformance scheme yet.
- 13:12:37 [wendy]
- (who is the 2nd audience if 1st is policy?)
- 13:13:35 [wendy]
- do checkpoints that impact people who are blind have a higher weight since more of them?
- 13:13:57 [andi]
- 2nd audience is organizations who have web sites
- 13:14:35 [andi]
- defining criteria for assigning point value is difficult
- 13:14:52 [andi]
- is it the number of people or number of difficulties it affects?
- 13:15:01 [andi]
- difficulties = disabilities
- 13:15:39 [andi]
- suppose each checkpoint has one point
- 13:15:42 [wendy]
- if each checkpoint is critical for at least one disability group, then there is not diff in weight.
- 13:15:51 [andi]
- benefit is that it still promotes web masters to do more
- 13:16:13 [andi]
- disadvantage - are costs higher than benefits?
- 13:17:49 [andi]
- disadvantage is it is difficult to compare sites because there is not information about what features were implemented
- 13:18:42 [andi]
- also suggest different scales if you want to target particular disability group
- 13:19:32 [andi]
- WAI does not want to promote a conformance scheme by disability type
- 13:19:45 [andi]
- grading should not be "certified"
- 13:20:19 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 13:20:57 [andi]
- what about UAAG style of conformance? CORE set of checkpoints plus "keyword" for others
- 13:21:07 [rscano]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/conformance.html#conformance-profiles
- 13:21:26 [andi]
- browser supports "visual rendering" or "speech output"
- 13:22:40 [andi]
- could use "label" idea proposed by Katie
- 13:22:56 [andi]
- labels = handles
- 13:23:12 [wendy]
- i support core plus structure and error recovery
- 13:24:29 [andi]
- could have CORE+ logo that links to conformance statement that identifies "+" handles
- 13:26:15 [andi]
- discussion about having different labels for CORE+
- 13:26:40 [andi]
- what about best practices?
- 13:26:52 [andi]
- no ideas on table yet for allowing people to make claims about best practices
- 13:27:32 [andi]
- consultants think that unless people can make claims about best practices, no one will be incented to do them
- 13:27:50 [andi]
- concern about making claims on best practices because they are not testable
- 13:28:15 [andi]
- but some best practice items are testable
- 13:57:38 [andi]
- andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 13:58:09 [andi]
- I can do it
- 13:58:16 [rscano2]
- rscano2 has joined #wai-wcag
- 13:59:11 [andi]
- reason "best practices" are not in "required" is because we don't ever want them to be in law
- 13:59:28 [andi]
- concerned that if we define a conformance scheme for them, they may end up in a law somewhere.
- 13:59:47 [andi]
- Chaals disagrees
- 14:00:11 [glapis]
- glapis has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:00:16 [andi]
- might be okay in "common law" situation but in "codified" system, it doesn't work
- 14:00:43 [andi]
- Chaals agrees that best practices should stay out of conformance scheme.
- 14:01:01 [andi]
- important but no reliable way to determine that you have done them
- 14:01:32 [andi]
- W3C can't prohibit something from becoming policy
- 14:02:07 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:02:08 [andi]
- can make it clear that best practices are not testable
- 14:03:17 [andi]
- andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:03:27 [andi]
- hello?
- 14:04:50 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:04:55 [GVAN]
- -
- 14:05:00 [rellero]
- :I
- 14:05:16 [wendy]
- wendy has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:05:38 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:05:50 [andi]
- if we end up in situation where laws in two countries conflict or union of two law sets is impossible, that is real problem for industry
- 14:05:53 [wendy]
- [i was not connected from break until disconnected. intergrate notes from andi]
- 14:06:08 [andi]
- WCAG should be careful not to give conflicting advice
- 14:06:34 [andi]
- lots of things that would be okay if just a standard but because countries adopt standard as law, much more concern
- 14:06:49 [andi]
- some elements in best practice are testable but can't be applied to all sites
- 14:07:18 [andi]
- reasons we couldn't make them "required" are also reasons why they shouldn't be codified into law
- 14:08:17 [andi]
- probably are items in current best practices that could be put into law but when we're done, there shouldn't be
- 14:08:39 [andi]
- some may be generally applicable to certain types of web sites
- 14:08:58 [andi]
- need to be very explicit about what we are creating for the policymaker audience
- 14:09:20 [andi]
- have to be careful that we don't appear to be telling policy makers how to make their laws
- 14:09:37 [andi]
- policy makers don't always have technical knowledge
- 14:09:56 [andi]
- likewise, WCAG doesn't have policy making knowledge
- 14:10:09 [wendy]
- Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility - http://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/pol.html
- 14:10:37 [andi]
- should anyone get credit for it since you can't test for it
- 14:11:19 [andi]
- awards, competitions, training classes can reward web sites who implement best practices
- 14:11:47 [mcappelli]
- mcappelli has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:11:57 [mcappelli]
- hi
- 14:12:02 [rellero]
- hi
- 14:12:13 [andi]
- anything people say about best practices has to be separate from conformance claims
- 14:14:46 [andi]
- confuses the issue about what they are saying can be proven and what can't
- 14:15:11 [wendy]
- (the opinion of one person is...[see above statements])
- 14:15:40 [andi]
- clear that we don't want to have something that is "required" that is not testable
- 14:15:41 [wendy]
- (s/one/at least one)
- 14:16:21 [andi]
- why is it bad for sites who have done "best practices" to list them in their META data?
- 14:16:55 [andi]
- will be some who will claim to have done more than they have but this can also happen with the required ones
- 14:17:42 [andi]
- table this until we define what conformance claims look like
- 14:18:27 [andi]
- GV summarizes discussion
- 14:18:36 [andi]
- entire set of CORE is required
- 14:18:43 [andi]
- to claim anything
- 14:19:01 [andi]
- if do all EXTENDED, claim EXTENDED
- 14:19:18 [andi]
- CORE+ and define what + means using handles
- 14:19:58 [rscano2]
- wendy shows http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/conformance.html#conformance-claims
- 14:20:39 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/conformance.html#conformance-claims
- 14:20:53 [andi]
- could provide link to separate information on best practices claims
- 14:21:22 [andi]
- concern that if link from "conformance claim" to "best practices claim", could be misinterpreted as part of conformance claim
- 14:21:40 [andi]
- and someone could misuse when formulating a policy
- 14:23:32 [andi]
- would guidelines for policy makers section in WCAG 2.0 alleviate concern?
- 14:24:02 [andi]
- not sure
- 14:24:30 [andi]
- don't want advisory statements to get mixed up with conformance
- 14:25:01 [andi]
- could have conformance logo and best practice logo
- 14:25:09 [andi]
- objections to best practice logo
- 14:26:21 [andi]
- one of the things to consider is a best practice statement that is separate and sufficiently different from conformance statement
- 14:27:46 [andi]
- ACTION: GV to check with AC and coordination group on whether or not we can have a section on guidelines for policy makers
- 14:28:43 [wendy]
- not AC, just CG
- 14:28:44 [andi]
- ACTION: If yes, Andi will help work on this section
- 14:28:49 [andi]
- ok
- 14:29:59 [andi]
- under CORE checkpoints, there are some best practice items that ARE testable. We just put them in best practices for other reasons
- 14:30:49 [andi]
- ACTION for everyone: review the guidelines with the thought that everything in best practices is off the table. Rethink whether or not we should make some of them EXTENDED checkpoints.
- 14:31:25 [andi]
- .
- 14:31:32 [andi]
- discussion on handles
- 14:32:08 [andi]
- text equivalents
- 14:32:15 [andi]
- synchronized media equivalents
- 14:32:47 [wendy]
- q+
- 14:32:50 [wendy]
- q-
- 14:32:59 [andi]
- will post complete handle lists to mailing list for discussion
- 14:33:55 [wendy]
- q+ katie
- 14:34:12 [wendy]
- ack cmn
- 14:34:14 [andi]
- one-word labels are really hard to translate
- 14:34:31 [andi]
- literal translations are often not correct according to the original meaning
- 14:34:50 [wendy]
- q+ to ask about translation of some of the proposed handles
- 14:35:14 [wendy]
- ack katie
- 14:35:28 [andi]
- handles have to have meaning, not just be labels
- 14:36:19 [wendy]
- q+ giorgio
- 14:36:26 [wendy]
- q+ gv
- 14:36:27 [andi]
- people use them today but they are not "defined". WCAG should define them so that everybody uses the same set.
- 14:36:48 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 14:36:48 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to ask about translation of some of the proposed handles
- 14:37:23 [andi]
- would be worth it to experiment here with translating proposed handles to see how well they translate
- 14:37:43 [andi]
- UAAG uses phrases, not necessarily single words
- 14:38:11 [andi]
- but these phrases are not what they use for conformance claims
- 14:38:21 [wendy]
- ack giorgio
- 14:40:30 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:41:11 [bengt_]
- online ?
- 14:41:15 [wendolyn]
- wendolyn has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:41:27 [wendolyn]
- lost connectivity at 10:38
- 14:41:37 [rscano2_]
- rscano2_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:41:42 [wendy]
- short labels should remind what it is, but not long enough that you won't
- 14:41:42 [wendy]
- learn the long phrase.
- 14:41:48 [wendy]
- might be that we have 2 lengths - figure out which are more useful in which
- 14:41:48 [wendy]
- context.
- 14:41:50 [wendy]
- q?
- 14:41:51 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:41:53 [wendy]
- ack gv
- 14:41:57 [wendy]
- q+ giorgio
- 14:42:11 [glapis2]
- glapis2 has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:42:31 [wendy]
- everyone: read the guideline then in your own language, write a 2-3 word phrase the essence of the checkpoint.
- 14:43:11 [wendy]
- q- giorgio
- 14:43:15 [wendy]
- checkpoint 1.1:
- 14:43:23 [wendy]
- 1.1 [CORE] All non-text content that can be expressed in words has a text equivalent of the function or information that the non-text content was intended to convey. [was 1.1]
- 14:43:29 [wendy]
- short phrase?
- 14:43:36 [wendy]
- text equivalent
- 14:43:57 [wendy]
- how does that translate into any language?
- 14:44:05 [rscano2_]
- equivalente testuale
- 14:44:05 [wendy]
- is there a better phrase for your language?
- 14:44:35 [rscano2_]
- testo equivalente (italian)
- 14:44:55 [wendy]
- spanish and french be similar
- 14:45:18 [wendy]
- in german: text equivalent - but umlaut, etc.
- 14:45:43 [wendy]
- one word: non-text, equivalent
- 14:45:44 [bengt]
- textekvivalens
- 14:46:09 [wendy]
- 1.2 [CORE] Synchronized media equivalents are provided for time-dependent presentations. [was 1.2]
- 14:46:16 [wendy]
- synchronized equivalents
- 14:46:36 [wendy]
- australian: synchronised equivalents
- 14:46:49 [wendy]
- synchronized media
- 14:48:26 [wendy]
- synchronized presentation
- 14:48:38 [rscano2_]
- media sincronizzati (italian)
- 14:51:47 [Cyberfox]
- Cyberfox has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:10:02 [mcappelli]
- mcappelli has left #wai-wcag
- 15:12:33 [giorgio]
- giorgio has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:14:57 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:18:09 [wendy]
- wendy has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:18:43 [Cyberfox]
- zakim, start timing
- 15:18:43 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'start timing', Cyberfox
- 15:18:55 [Cyberfox]
- zakim, help
- 15:18:55 [Zakim]
- Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot for more detailed help.
- 15:18:57 [Zakim]
- Some of the commands I know are:
- 15:18:58 [Zakim]
- xxx is yyy - establish yyy as the name of unknown party xxx
- 15:19:00 [Zakim]
- if yyy is 'me' or 'I', your nick is substituted
- 15:19:02 [Zakim]
- xxx may be yyy - establish yyy as possibly the name of unknown party xxx
- 15:19:04 [Zakim]
- I am xxx - establish your nick as the name of unknown party xxx
- 15:19:06 [Zakim]
- xxx holds yyy [, zzz ...] - establish xxx as a group name and yyy, etc. as participants within that group
- 15:19:08 [Zakim]
- xxx also holds yyy - add yyy to the list of participants in group xxx
- 15:19:10 [Zakim]
- who's here? - lists the participants on the phone
- 15:19:12 [Zakim]
- who's muted? - lists the participants who are muted
- 15:19:14 [Zakim]
- mute xxx - mutes party xxx (like pressing 61#)
- 15:19:16 [Zakim]
- unmute xxx - reverses the effect of "mute" and of 61#
- 15:19:19 [Zakim]
- is xxx here? - reports whether a party named like xxx is present
- 15:19:22 [Zakim]
- list conferences - reports the active conferences
- 15:19:23 [Zakim]
- this is xxx - associates this channel with conference xxx
- 15:19:24 [Zakim]
- excuse us - disconnects from the irc channel
- 15:19:25 [Zakim]
- I last learned something new on $Date: 2003/04/02 17:04:07 $
- 15:19:36 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, stop logging
- 15:28:26 [m3mVCE]
- gv: We ask for help fairly often. Without help, we won't make our 1-year deadline.
- 15:28:34 [wendy]
- [11:24] <m3mVCE> gv This has been a successful meeting. Very happy with the number and quality of interaction of the
- 15:28:34 [wendy]
- [11:24] <m3mVCE> participants. We are a year from kickoff, and need to get more international participation. We spent
- 15:28:34 [wendy]
- [11:24] <m3mVCE> a lot of time lingering over things. The editors need your input and feedback. We're looking for
- 15:28:34 [wendy]
- [11:24] <m3mVCE> experts in the field to step forward. It's going to be a big, long year for this. The last 20% takes
- 15:28:37 [wendy]
- [11:24] <m3mVCE> 80% of the effort. We have to plot out how to get to something that is in fact done. Best Practice
- 15:28:40 [wendy]
- [11:24] <m3mVCE> under core: we'll have to see if it should be pulled, moved into Extended, etc. We'll need to map it
- 15:28:43 [wendy]
- [11:24] <m3mVCE> all out. Who would be interested in leading the effort to do something?
- 15:29:12 [m3mVCE]
- cynthia: Is this 1 year until CR, or 1 year to Rec?
- 15:29:47 [m3mVCE]
- wac: If implementation testing begins in September, then Last Call early next year, a quick Candidate Rec, we can get it done by the end of 2004.
- 15:29:54 [wendy]
- :)
- 15:30:01 [m3mVCE]
- gv: This will require work on the checklists, ec.
- 15:30:07 [m3mVCE]
- s/ec/etc/
- 15:30:55 [m3mVCE]
- gv: Thanks to everyone, the host for treating us like royalty, Maurizio for the booklets.
- 15:31:49 [m3mVCE]
- khs: Next meeting ideas?
- 15:32:28 [m3mVCE]
- wac: Some interesting offers for the January time frame. We need to have a meeting in Asia, and we may do that in November. It would be good to have another techniques-specific meeting.
- 15:33:08 [m3mVCE]
- gv: February would be an interesting time to be back in Europe.
- 15:41:19 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, stop logging