IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-02-26
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 20:54:43 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:54:50 [wendy]
- agenda+ edits to principles
- 20:54:59 [wendy]
- agenda+ edits to front matter
- 20:55:04 [wendy]
- agenda+ 1.2
- 20:55:06 [wendy]
- agenda+ 1.3
- 20:55:13 [wendy]
- agenda+ 2.3
- 20:55:17 [wendy]
- agenda+ 2.4
- 20:55:19 [wendy]
- agenda+ 2.5
- 20:55:24 [wendy]
- agenda+ 3.1
- 20:55:28 [wendy]
- agenda+ 3.2 (was 3.4)
- 20:55:36 [wendy]
- agenda+ appendix e
- 20:55:38 [wendy]
- agenda+ appendix f
- 20:55:45 [wendy]
- agenda+ formatting
- 20:57:56 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:58:08 [rellero]
- Hi
- 20:58:13 [Yvette]
- Hi Roberto
- 20:58:33 [rellero]
- I follow in irc only, I am not at home
- 21:01:30 [wendy]
- zakim, this is WCAG
- 21:01:30 [Zakim]
- ok, wendy; that matches WAI_WCAG()4:00PM
- 21:01:34 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 21:01:34 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Dave_MacDonald, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Kerstin_Goldsmith, Matt, Wendy
- 21:02:27 [Zakim]
- +Yvette_Hoitink
- 21:03:34 [Yvette]
- zakim, mute me
- 21:03:34 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 21:03:45 [Zakim]
- +??P3
- 21:03:47 [Yvette]
- still echo?
- 21:03:56 [Yvette]
- ok, I'll dial in again
- 21:04:02 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P3 is Gregg
- 21:04:02 [Zakim]
- +Gregg; got it
- 21:04:04 [Zakim]
- -Yvette_Hoitink
- 21:04:29 [Zakim]
- +Yvette_Hoitink
- 21:04:55 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the call?
- 21:04:55 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Dave_MacDonald, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Kerstin_Goldsmith, Matt, Wendy, Gregg, Yvette_Hoitink
- 21:05:08 [Zakim]
- +JasonWhite
- 21:05:48 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:06:36 [wendy]
- items with no concerns:
- 21:06:46 [Zakim]
- +John_Slatin
- 21:06:51 [wendy]
- principles: other than adding "must" for "should" in #4 - any other issues?
- 21:06:56 [Zakim]
- +??P8
- 21:07:20 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P8 may be Bengt
- 21:07:20 [Zakim]
- +Bengt?; got it
- 21:07:20 [Yvette]
- Bengt did you just join on the phone?
- 21:07:27 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:07:31 [wendy]
- zakim, Bengt? is Bengt
- 21:07:31 [Zakim]
- +Bengt; got it
- 21:07:33 [wendy]
- agenda?
- 21:08:09 [wendy]
- take up item 1
- 21:08:30 [wendy]
- adopted with "must" instead of "should" in #4
- 21:08:33 [wendy]
- close item 1
- 21:08:38 [wendy]
- take up edit 2
- 21:08:44 [wendy]
- zakim, take up edit 2
- 21:08:44 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'take up edit 2', wendy
- 21:08:49 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 2
- 21:08:49 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "edits to front matter" taken up [from wendy]
- 21:10:11 [Yvette]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0401.html
- 21:10:12 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#how-to
- 21:10:49 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin_Goldsmith
- 21:10:53 [wendy]
- ack Dave
- 21:10:57 [wendy]
- add "normative" to glossary
- 21:11:06 [Zakim]
- +??P14
- 21:11:31 [Zakim]
- +Kerstin_Goldsmith
- 21:11:40 [wendy]
- adopt John's proposed rewording of editorial note? (about techniques)
- 21:11:52 [wendy]
- Editorial Note: These checklists do not yet exist. At the present
- 21:11:52 [wendy]
- time, it is not clear if the checklists will be normative or
- 21:11:52 [wendy]
- non-normative. Making them non-normative would allow us to change them
- 21:11:52 [wendy]
- over time, if necessary. but that may defeat their purpose by making the
- 21:11:52 [wendy]
- definition of "conformance" change over time. It may therefore be
- 21:11:53 [wendy]
- necessary for them to be normative in order for the guidelines to be
- 21:11:55 [wendy]
- testable.
- 21:12:09 [wendy]
- link to text in glossary.
- 21:12:34 [wendy]
- in some cases link to them wherever they occur
- 21:13:01 [Yvette]
- zakim, ??P14 is Gian
- 21:13:01 [Zakim]
- +Gian; got it
- 21:13:02 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P14 is Gian
- 21:13:02 [Zakim]
- I already had ??P14 as Gian, wendy
- 21:13:04 [Yvette]
- :-)
- 21:13:05 [wendy]
- :)
- 21:14:06 [wendy]
- "reliably human" should be "by machine or by humans with high consistency"
- 21:14:51 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 21:15:02 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gregg (32%), Yvette_Hoitink (14%), Bengt (73%), John_Slatin (62%)
- 21:15:29 [wendy]
- john proposes: are testable. Some are machine-testable. Others require human
- 21:15:29 [wendy]
- judgment. Success criteria that require human testing yield consistent
- 21:15:29 [wendy]
- results among multiple testers.
- 21:15:39 [wendy]
- adopted.
- 21:16:09 [wendy]
- beg of conformance section: when we say "Level 1 Success Criterion are" we should
- 21:16:09 [wendy]
- say "Level 1 Success Criteria are..."
- 21:16:26 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin_Goldsmith
- 21:16:27 [wendy]
- adopted.
- 21:17:35 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0428.html
- 21:18:02 [wendy]
- 1. no need to discuss.
- 21:20:47 [wendy]
- agenda+ "A conformance claim of "WCAG 2.0 AAA" can be made if all level 1 and level 2 success criteria and X% of level 3 success criteria for all guidelines have ben met."
- 21:22:20 [Zakim]
- + +1.510.237.aaaa
- 21:23:00 [wendy]
- close this item
- 21:23:45 [Zakim]
- + +1.703.241.aabb
- 21:24:14 [wendy]
- zakim, +1.510.237.aaaa is Kerstin
- 21:24:14 [Zakim]
- +Kerstin; got it
- 21:24:20 [wendy]
- zakim, +1.703.241.aabb is Avi
- 21:24:20 [Zakim]
- +Avi; got it
- 21:24:46 [wendy]
- 1.5?
- 21:25:37 [wendy]
- agenda+ http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#structure-emphasis
- 21:27:19 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 12
- 21:27:20 [Zakim]
- agendum 12. "formatting" taken up [from wendy]
- 21:27:42 [wendy]
- ala: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#text-equiv
- 21:27:57 [wendy]
- except, add level 2 and level 3 criteria as well to the box
- 21:28:07 [wendy]
- q?
- 21:28:24 [wendy]
- defer formatting to later?
- 21:29:24 [wendy]
- perhaps do it for monday's draft and get reactions.
- 21:29:29 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 21:29:29 [Zakim]
- agendum 12 closed
- 21:29:30 [Zakim]
- I see 11 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 21:29:31 [Zakim]
- 3. 1.2 [from wendy]
- 21:30:02 [wendy]
- yvette's comment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0427.html
- 21:30:12 [wendy]
- link to weather web site as an alternative.
- 21:30:31 [wendy]
- in 1.1 said equivalents should be good. don't think web site is a good equivalent for a web cam.
- 21:31:39 [wendy]
- instead of "equivalent" say "substitute"
- 21:33:44 [wendy]
- 5.if the Web content is real-time, non-interactive video (for example,
- 21:33:44 [wendy]
- a Webcam view of surrounding conditions such as weather information), then
- 21:33:45 [wendy]
- one of the following is provided: [I]
- 21:33:45 [wendy]
- *an equivalent that conforms to Guideline
- 21:33:45 [wendy]
- <file:///C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Caldwell\Local%20Settings\Temp\tmp003
- 21:33:45 [wendy]
- 4.html#text-equiv#text-equiv> 1.1 (for example, an ongoing text report of
- 21:33:48 [wendy]
- weather conditions)
- 21:33:49 [wendy]
- *a link to an equivalent that conforms to Guideline
- 21:33:52 [wendy]
- <file:///C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Caldwell\Local%20Settings\Temp\tmp003
- 21:33:54 [wendy]
- 4.html#text-equiv#text-equiv> 1.1 (for example, a link to a weather Web
- 21:33:55 [wendy]
- site that conforms to Guideline 1.1)
- 21:33:57 [wendy]
- s/equivalent/substitute
- 21:34:26 [wendy]
- real-time captions for real-time broadcast?
- 21:34:41 [wendy]
- yes.
- 21:35:40 [wendy]
- deleted audio description, since can't do on real-time broadcast.
- 21:36:34 [wendy]
- add note (what is possible to require for real-time audio descriptions?)
- 21:37:56 [wendy]
- real-time audio description - commentator (like sporting event). if doing good job, don't need audio description.
- 21:38:06 [wendy]
- issue is w/this criterion we're requiring for every live event.
- 21:39:00 [wendy]
- close this item
- 21:39:15 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 3
- 21:39:15 [Zakim]
- agendum 3 closed
- 21:39:16 [Zakim]
- I see 10 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 21:39:17 [Zakim]
- 4. 1.3 [from wendy]
- 21:39:21 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 4
- 21:39:21 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "1.3" taken up [from wendy]
- 21:40:03 [wendy]
- issues from yvette and joe
- 21:40:24 [wendy]
- proposed examples: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0347.html
- 21:41:04 [wendy]
- examples too html-specific?
- 21:43:05 [wendy]
- adopt yvette's proposed exmaples with note: These examples are improvements on previous examples, but are html-speciic. These will be generalized in future drafts."
- 21:43:21 [Yvette]
- For the record: I tried to make them as generic as possible
- 21:43:23 [wendy]
- save old exmaples, perhaps reconsider in the future
- 21:43:58 [wendy]
- joe's comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0345.html
- 21:44:52 [wendy]
- black and white viewing makes it easier to see "lightness" and "darkness" to determine if readable.
- 21:44:58 [wendy]
- mean "greyscale"
- 21:45:25 [wendy]
- replace "black and white" with "greyscale" as did in other parts of doc.
- 21:45:54 [wendy]
- add, "in order to evaluate the relative contrast independent of color"
- 21:46:37 [wendy]
- to identify places where background would interfere with a character identification
- 21:47:18 [wendy]
- to determine if the bacground interferes with character identificaiton
- 21:47:50 [wendy]
- to determine if the background makes it difficult to identify individual characters.
- 21:48:23 [wendy]
- paragraphs aren't part of hierarchy? they are at the bottom of the hierarchy.
- 21:49:15 [wendy]
- cross-reference is a link? linkage fancy word for link? is a linkage always a link?
- 21:49:29 [wendy]
- a link is something you click on. a linkage could be something editorial. not necessarily always html.
- 21:49:45 [wendy]
- a cross-reference?
- 21:51:54 [wendy]
- cross-references and other associations
- 21:51:59 [bengt]
- better..
- 21:52:18 [wendy]
- "special treatment"?
- 21:53:17 [Yvette]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 21:53:27 [Zakim]
- Yvette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gregg (20%)
- 21:53:47 [wendy]
- emphasis or other formatting (instead of special treatment)
- 21:54:19 [wendy]
- level 2 #1
- 21:54:21 [wendy]
- delete?
- 21:56:44 [wendy]
- he didn't suggest delete b/c bad idea, but that if apply similar ideas elsewhere would not be good. it is not a practice we would do with every area of markup.
- 21:57:32 [wendy]
- level 1 would be marked as red that can be identified programmatically. level 2 is marked as red that can be identified programmatically but also marked with *
- 21:58:14 [wendy]
- Separating content and structure from presentation allows Web pages
- 21:58:34 [Zakim]
- -Gian
- 21:58:59 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 21:59:10 [wendy]
- s/pages/content
- 21:59:35 [wendy]
- All of these can benefit people with cognitive, physical, hearing,
- 21:59:35 [wendy]
- > and visual disabilities.
- 21:59:53 [Zakim]
- -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:59:54 [Zakim]
- -Matt
- 22:00:04 [MattSEA]
- MattSEA has joined #wai-wcag
- 22:00:11 [MattSEA]
- just kidding, mike! :)
- 22:00:14 [MattSEA]
- MattSEA has left #wai-wcag
- 22:00:32 [wendy]
- one of yvette's new examples mentions benefit for mobility impair
- 22:01:19 [wendy]
- rest of comments about examples. decided to delete them, replace with yvette's.
- 22:01:36 [wendy]
- in the future, combine 1.5 and 1.3?
- 22:02:19 [Zakim]
- +??P14
- 22:02:22 [wendy]
- 1.3 - info structure, functionality. 1.5 - only structure.
- 22:02:39 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P14 is Gian
- 22:02:39 [Zakim]
- +Gian; got it
- 22:02:47 [Yvette]
- zakim, mute me
- 22:02:47 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 22:03:24 [wendy]
- if level 1is to indicate programmaticaly, level 2 directly (color) - that would mean that "the fields in red are compulsory" complies...if the markup allows ot identify.
- 22:03:32 [wendy]
- could make it overt, in which case don't need markup
- 22:04:15 [wendy]
- meaning doesn't need to be programmatic, that is still through context.
- 22:04:43 [Yvette]
- zakim, unmute me
- 22:04:43 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
- 22:05:43 [wendy]
- suggested change to wording?
- 22:05:47 [wendy]
- level 2 should be level 1
- 22:06:10 [wendy]
- cna't with current defn of level 1: it would force author to change presentation
- 22:06:44 [wendy]
- either need suggested edit or note to move fowrad
- 22:07:59 [wendy]
- require people to read the code if they can't determine the color
- 22:08:07 [Yvette]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 22:08:17 [Zakim]
- Yvette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gregg (6%), Bengt (26%), John_Slatin (9%), Gian (73%), Avi (40%)
- 22:08:27 [Yvette]
- Anyone else getting noise?
- 22:08:33 [Yvette]
- perhaps it's avi
- 22:09:12 [wendy]
- zakim, who's muted?
- 22:09:12 [Zakim]
- I see no one muted
- 22:09:18 [wendy]
- zakim, who's muted?
- 22:09:18 [Zakim]
- I see Avi muted
- 22:09:41 [wendy]
- zakim, mute bengt
- 22:09:41 [Zakim]
- Bengt should now be muted
- 22:09:43 [bengt]
- muted in this end
- 22:10:49 [wendy]
- note: markup must be interpretable by user agents not through actually markup.
- 22:11:16 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 22:11:16 [Zakim]
- agendum 4 closed
- 22:11:17 [Zakim]
- I see 9 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 22:11:18 [Zakim]
- 5. 2.3 [from wendy]
- 22:11:38 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 5
- 22:11:38 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "2.3" taken up [from wendy]
- 22:11:57 [wendy]
- only comment: broken link. fixed by taking it out (still finishing documentation)
- 22:15:00 [wendy]
- adopted
- 22:15:06 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 22:15:06 [Zakim]
- agendum 5 closed
- 22:15:07 [Zakim]
- I see 8 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 22:15:08 [Zakim]
- 6. 2.4 [from wendy]
- 22:15:12 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 6
- 22:15:12 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "2.4" taken up [from wendy]
- 22:16:24 [Yvette]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0367.html
- 22:16:39 [wendy]
- "move about" seems odd
- 22:17:56 [wendy]
- move within the content
- 22:18:25 [wendy]
- lots of editorial notes
- 22:19:16 [wendy]
- "50,000 words" contentious. add to editorial note.
- 22:19:35 [wendy]
- remove "untestable test critera" link
- 22:20:25 [wendy]
- ack John
- 22:20:33 [wendy]
- ack Dave
- 22:21:21 [wendy]
- don't think can leave links to issues, since go to trace site.
- 22:22:23 [wendy]
- @@ to appendix e
- 22:23:11 [wendy]
- goes to appendix f
- 22:23:30 [wendy]
- e - currently attached to 3.4
- 22:23:39 [wendy]
- 2.4 was going to create new appendix...
- 22:23:44 [wendy]
- this is e
- 22:23:52 [wendy]
- this a, b, c, etc. is new appendix f
- 22:24:44 [wendy]
- gregg will send proposals to the list
- 22:25:08 [wendy]
- consensus to handle big lists by creating appendices and linking to them from a success criterion
- 22:25:19 [wendy]
- does it get them less attention?
- 22:25:43 [wendy]
- (consensus is a question not a statement of consensus - do we have consensus to handle it in this way for this draft)?
- 22:25:52 [wendy]
- otherwise bring app. e. into the guidelines
- 22:26:08 [wendy]
- more useful comments if in one place and don't have to go to an appendix
- 22:26:21 [wendy]
- consensus to move lists up from apendix and put back into body?
- 22:26:43 [rellero]
- I agree
- 22:26:50 [wendy]
- move up and put editorial note that says "considering putting in appendix"
- 22:28:08 [wendy]
- this draft move it up
- 22:28:48 [wendy]
- does seem to be precedence in other w3c documents to have normative info in appendicies (e.g., normative vs informative references, dtds)
- 22:28:54 [wendy]
- close this item
- 22:29:07 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 7
- 22:29:07 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "2.5" taken up [from wendy]
- 22:31:18 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin
- 22:31:42 [Zakim]
- -Avi
- 22:32:13 [wendy]
- no comments on this one
- 22:34:06 [wendy]
- adopted.
- 22:34:11 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 22:34:11 [Zakim]
- agendum 7 closed
- 22:34:12 [Zakim]
- I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 22:34:13 [Zakim]
- 8. 3.1 [from wendy]
- 22:34:18 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 8
- 22:34:18 [Zakim]
- agendum 8. "3.1" taken up [from wendy]
- 22:35:09 [wendy]
- comments about combinign 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 1.4
- 22:35:32 [wendy]
- comments in support, no comments against this approach.
- 22:35:46 [wendy]
- last week, got to Level 2
- 22:36:27 [wendy]
- made one change after the call: instead of "programmatically determined" say "programmatically located"
- 22:36:39 [wendy]
- so instead of determining which defn, locate possible defns
- 22:37:05 [rellero]
- I have to leave now, bye
- 22:37:11 [wendy]
- ciao
- 22:38:05 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0340.html
- 22:43:22 [wendy]
- http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=contracted
- 22:43:34 [wendy]
- have to define "i'm"?
- 22:43:46 [wendy]
- by time get to level 1, have already solved for all i'm
- 22:44:06 [wendy]
- e.g., http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=i%27m
- 22:44:22 [wendy]
- first says, "im" but then says, "contraction of i am"
- 22:45:08 [wendy]
- move to 3rd (since has a long list)
- 22:45:16 [wendy]
- john has action item to make those more testable.
- 22:45:21 [wendy]
- add note: attempting to make more testable
- 22:46:07 [wendy]
- "still examining methods to make some or all of these testable"
- 22:46:30 [wendy]
- (Level 3 success criteria for 3.1)
- 22:47:22 [wendy]
- Possible items for additions to level 3
- 22:48:24 [wendy]
- move 1 to appendix e
- 22:48:32 [wendy]
- (which then be moved up, anyway)
- 22:48:47 [wendy]
- 2.Section headings and linked text are understandable when read by
- 22:48:47 [wendy]
- themselves (for example, in a screen reader's list of links or a table of
- 22:48:47 [wendy]
- contents).
- 22:50:11 [wendy]
- move to level 2?
- 22:50:27 [wendy]
- things other than links that we want to apply this?
- 22:50:29 [wendy]
- menu options?
- 22:53:07 [wendy]
- this doc has something like 180 headings. doesn't meet this right now. several headings say "benefits"
- 22:53:19 [wendy]
- put in list of strategies and deal w/it later
- 22:53:30 [wendy]
- leave as level 3 for now.
- 22:53:47 [wendy]
- 3.Page titles are informative and unique.
- 22:55:35 [wendy]
- 3.Page titles are informative - level 2
- 22:55:42 [wendy]
- unique - difficult to do
- 22:55:47 [wendy]
- informative - possible, even generated
- 22:56:16 [wendy]
- The following success criteria were removed
- 22:56:19 [wendy]
- The following success criteria were removed
- 22:56:22 [wendy]
- oops.
- 22:56:23 [wendy]
- ...
- 22:56:32 [wendy]
- put them in the strategies
- 22:57:04 [wendy]
- The following success criteria are not machine
- 22:57:08 [wendy]
- testable...
- 22:58:06 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 22:58:24 [wendy]
- add a definition of text to address "representation in Unicode"
- 22:58:24 [wendy]
- issue (and remove need for a checkpoint on this)
- 22:58:32 [wendy]
- refer to al's comment about character model
- 22:59:03 [wendy]
- instead of our own defn of text, we figure out proper phrase to say "text according to w3c char model"
- 22:59:24 [Yvette]
- BTW: Roberto Ellero signed off
- 22:59:25 [Zakim]
- -Gian
- 23:00:02 [wendy]
- all the other defns (except ascii art) should be covered by char model aciton item/defn
- 23:00:07 [wendy]
- ascii art defn adopted
- 23:00:33 [wendy]
- close this item
- 23:00:46 [wendy]
- agenda?
- 23:01:23 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 10
- 23:01:24 [Zakim]
- agendum 10 closed
- 23:01:24 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 23:01:25 [Zakim]
- 9. 3.2 (was 3.4) [from wendy]
- 23:01:51 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 11
- 23:01:51 [Zakim]
- agendum 11 closed
- 23:01:52 [Zakim]
- I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 23:01:53 [Zakim]
- 9. 3.2 (was 3.4) [from wendy]
- 23:04:27 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 23:04:27 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Dave_MacDonald, Wendy, Gregg, Yvette_Hoitink, JasonWhite, Bengt (muted), [Microsoft]
- 23:05:29 [wendy]
- "screen"
- 23:07:20 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0405.html
- 23:07:35 [bengt]
- wendy ... ?
- 23:08:25 [wendy]
- yes bengt?
- 23:08:42 [wendy]
- "page" try to come up with better phrae later
- 23:08:45 [bengt]
- upcoming f2f registration ? not available yet ?
- 23:08:47 [wendy]
- (put ed note)
- 23:08:50 [wendy]
- not yet
- 23:08:59 [wendy]
- (you mean for tp or csun? tp is closed. csun ont yet available)
- 23:09:03 [Yvette]
- "Components that occur together multiple times within a resource"?
- 23:09:22 [wendy]
- move to level 2 (per gregg's comments)
- 23:10:13 [wendy]
- strucrual markup to group - should be deleted? redundant with 1.3
- 23:10:30 [bengt]
- wendy: csun f2f andy_judson will possibly go instead of me
- 23:10:45 [wendy]
- ok. registration should be avail next week.
- 23:10:59 [wendy]
- except for submit buttons...
- 23:11:35 [wendy]
- cxurrent phrasing is ambiguous
- 23:11:45 [wendy]
- move to level2 - tells how to must design page
- 23:12:02 [wendy]
- xforms have submit?
- 23:12:22 [wendy]
- submit buttons - html specific
- 23:12:42 [wendy]
- all elements obtain focus w/out being activated
- 23:13:29 [wendy]
- all components should be able to receive focus w/out being activated
- 23:13:34 [wendy]
- w/out activation
- 23:15:40 [wendy]
- it's onchange and onfocus events that we're talking about
- 23:17:26 [wendy]
- al says, "user should always be able to require separation between select and activate..."
- 23:17:26 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0419.html
- 23:17:59 [wendy]
- "changing the setting of an input field should not cause person to automatically leave the page"
- 23:18:57 [wendy]
- does not automatically cause extreme change in context
- 23:19:25 [wendy]
- @@make sure "extreme change in context"
- 23:19:27 [wendy]
- is defined
- 23:20:00 [Yvette]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#extreme-changedef
- 23:21:00 [Yvette]
- zakim, who's on the phone
- 23:21:00 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who's on the phone', Yvette
- 23:21:08 [Yvette]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 23:21:08 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Dave_MacDonald, Wendy, Gregg, Yvette_Hoitink, JasonWhite, Bengt (muted), [Microsoft]
- 23:22:37 [wendy]
- will attempt to incoproat 1.5 from kerstin into the draft for review. at minimu, 1.5 will go to the mailing list and incorporate in the draft at end of next week
- 23:22:46 [wendy]
- finishing up 3.2...
- 23:25:00 [wendy]
- 2.Visual layout is used to group related components. [ so that
- 23:25:00 [wendy]
- behavior is predictable. ]
- 23:25:03 [wendy]
- move to 1.3
- 23:25:14 [wendy]
- 3.The target of each link is clearly identified. [how do we do
- 23:25:14 [wendy]
- this?] [ Level 3?]
- 23:25:38 [bengt]
- was it 1.3 ?
- 23:25:49 [wendy]
- avoid "click here"
- 23:27:11 [wendy]
- in 3.1 uber proposal: headings nad links read out of context
- 23:27:41 [wendy]
- leave in as 3 for now, consider deleting later
- 23:27:50 [wendy]
- 4.Link text, including alt text for graphical links, includes words or
- 23:27:50 [wendy]
- phrases that occur in the title element of the destination screen. [js note:
- 23:27:50 [wendy]
- Do we need a criterion about informative page titles here? I know we
- 23:27:50 [wendy]
- discussed one somewhere but I don't remember where.] [L3?]
- 23:27:50 [wendy]
- 5.Graphical components that appear on multiple screens, including
- 23:27:51 [wendy]
- graphical links, are associated with the same text equivalents wherever they
- 23:27:53 [wendy]
- appear. [these are ok guidelines - but strict adherence is pretty
- 23:27:56 [wendy]
- restrictive since you don't know how they might be used. L3?]
- 23:27:59 [wendy]
- 4 - redundant. move to techniques
- 23:28:39 [wendy]
- get rid of "screen"
- 23:28:41 [wendy]
- move to 3
- 23:28:48 [wendy]
- 6.Interactive elements that appear on multiple screens, including
- 23:28:48 [wendy]
- graphical elements, are associated with the same functionality wherever they
- 23:28:48 [wendy]
- appear.
- 23:28:54 [wendy]
- ok
- 23:28:58 [wendy]
- 7.Explicit notice is given in advance of any extreme change of context
- 23:28:58 [wendy]
- such as an automatic redirect or a link that opens a new browser window.
- 23:30:07 [wendy]
- prog. identify is level 1. this easily done by icon that says "open in new window" htmls-pecific.
- 23:30:09 [wendy]
- include note
- 23:30:44 [wendy]
- Success Criteria for Level 3
- 23:30:51 [wendy]
- 1.When components such as navigation bars and search forms appear on
- 23:30:51 [wendy]
- multiple pages, users can choose to have those elements presented in a
- 23:30:51 [wendy]
- different visual position or reading-order.
- 23:31:11 [wendy]
- s/menus/bars
- 23:31:43 [wendy]
- navigation menu
- 23:32:14 [wendy]
- 2.There are no extreme changes of context such as automatic redirects
- 23:32:14 [wendy]
- or automatically appearing pop-up windows.
- 23:32:47 [wendy]
- user agent specific
- 23:33:55 [wendy]
- leave at, "2.There are no extreme changes of context"
- 23:35:28 [Yvette]
- zakim, mute me
- 23:35:28 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 23:35:52 [Yvette]
- zakim, unmute me
- 23:35:52 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
- 23:37:22 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 23:37:22 [Zakim]
- I do not know what agendum had been taken up, wendy
- 23:37:27 [wendy]
- agenda?
- 23:37:32 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 9
- 23:37:32 [Zakim]
- agendum 9 closed
- 23:37:33 [Zakim]
- I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 23:37:34 [Zakim]
- 13. "A conformance claim of "WCAG 2.0 AAA" can be made if all level 1 and level 2 success criteria and X% of level 3 success criteria for all guidelines have ben met." [from wendy]
- 23:38:12 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 13
- 23:38:12 [Zakim]
- agendum 13. ""A conformance claim of "WCAG 2.0 AAA" can be made if all level 1 and level 2 success criteria and X% of level 3 success criteria for all guidelines have ben met.""
- 23:38:15 [Zakim]
- ... taken up [from wendy]
- 23:39:04 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft]
- 23:39:07 [Zakim]
- -Dave_MacDonald
- 23:39:13 [Zakim]
- -Yvette_Hoitink
- 23:39:17 [Zakim]
- -Bengt
- 23:39:18 [Zakim]
- -JasonWhite
- 23:39:26 [Yvette]
- enjoy bengt!
- 23:39:32 [wendy]
- change to: A conformance claim of "WCAG 2.0 AAA" can be made if all level 1, level 2, and level 3 success criteria for all guidelines have been met."
- 23:39:42 [bengt]
- if I can find any :)
- 23:39:51 [bengt]
- bye
- 23:39:53 [Yvette]
- what time is it with you?
- 23:39:56 [Yvette]
- bye
- 23:39:59 [bengt]
- 1 am
- 23:40:03 [Yvette]
- me too
- 23:40:10 [bengt]
- bengt has left #wai-wcag
- 23:40:19 [wendy]
- include editorial note: proposal to meet AAA as some percent of Level 3 success criteria.
- 23:40:22 [Yvette]
- bye Wendy, bye Gregg
- 23:40:24 [wendy]
- bye
- 23:40:30 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 23:40:30 [Zakim]
- agendum 13 closed
- 23:40:31 [Zakim]
- I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
- 23:40:32 [Zakim]
- 14. http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#structure-emphasis [from wendy]
- 23:40:42 [wendy]
- item 14: cover during the week
- 23:44:30 [Zakim]
- -Gregg
- 23:44:36 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 23:44:37 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
- 23:44:38 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Dave_MacDonald, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Kerstin_Goldsmith, Matt, Wendy, Yvette_Hoitink, Gregg, JasonWhite, John_Slatin, Bengt, Gian, Kerstin, Avi, [Microsoft]
- 23:44:46 [wendy]
- Microsoft was Mike Barta
- 23:44:49 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 23:44:49 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 23:44:52 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 23:44:52 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items