IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-05-12

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:05:23 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag

14:05:31 [wendy]

RRSAgent, make logs world-visible

14:05:34 [Zakim]

+Sailesh_Panchang

14:06:59 [wendy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0333.html

14:10:30 [wendy]

"select technology" should happen before "checklists"

14:10:35 [wendy]

checklists will be technology-specific

14:10:45 [wendy]

some questions for david about what he is intending

14:10:56 [wendy]

"select checklist" mean "select technology"?

14:11:24 [wendy]

perhaps "select technology" then "select checklist or techniques or both"

14:11:30 [wendy]

from that go to technologies

14:11:39 [wendy]

seems like too many paths, seems confusing.

14:12:05 [wendy]

at top of wcag 1.0, link for checklist to "switch the view" - find that very helpful

14:12:20 [wendy]

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/

14:12:27 [wendy]

[contents] [checklist]

14:13:47 [wendy]

how is "technology indie techniques" different from "techniques repository"

14:15:00 [wendy]

action: wendy talk with david about diagram (give suggestions from this call for revision)

14:17:44 [wendy]

some people want to go right to checklists

14:18:29 [wendy]

checklists linked from guidelines?

14:18:41 [wendy]

could work to treat checklists as independent entity

14:19:05 [wendy]

could make ref at top of the document - a separate tool rather than a link from every guideline

14:20:05 [wendy]

checklist is tool for evaluators

14:20:37 [wendy]

evaluators - what kind of evaluators? evaluating content or author/evaluation tool?

14:23:47 [wendy]

tom's personae from last sept: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003JulSep/0497.html

14:24:18 [wendy]

action: Becky review tom's previous work on personas and expand upon them

14:25:33 [wendy]

next week: review the revisions of graph and use cases

14:25:38 [wendy]

end-to-end analyses

14:26:35 [wendy]

1.1 and 1.3: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/att-0054/gateway-outline

14:26:50 [wendy]

1.4 and 1.5: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0158.html

14:30:14 [wendy]

should there be a success criteria if there is nothing specific for users to do.

14:30:36 [wendy]

places where things didn't fall into the hierarchy very well?

14:30:51 [wendy]

when looked at 1.1, there were techs that supported both of the success criteria.

14:31:46 [wendy]

if started with test cases, group those into techniques then group those into guidelines

14:32:01 [wendy]

interesting to create guidelines by test cases of accessibility issues

14:32:34 [wendy]

if someone creates a techniques that aids accessibility and we have nothing in the guidelines, what will we do?

14:32:45 [wendy]

similar to the units of measurement issue - there is nothing in the guidelines right now.

14:32:49 [wendy]

or is it a bug in the browser?

14:33:18 [wendy]

UAAG rely on WCAG, but WCAG should speak to functional aspect of scalable text

14:33:27 [wendy]

become an author responsibility of browsers are broken

14:34:59 [wendy]

a large part of wcag 1.0 was author fixes for user agents

14:35:10 [wendy]

in practice, if you want your content accessible, is the author's responsibility

14:35:57 [wendy]

however, current movements say "use standards. browsers should follow standards"

14:36:08 [wendy]

in some cases, there are techniques that are deprecated.

14:36:13 [wendy]

techs specific to address browser bugs

14:36:18 [wendy]

how much do we want to promote those?

14:37:05 [wendy]

guidelines need to say "text needs to be scalable"

14:37:34 [wendy]

we could include tech that says "broken browser support...." rely on UAAG for appropriate way to do it in browsers

14:40:17 [wendy]

this was an issue raised in relation to reviewing JIS guidelines.

14:40:43 [wendy]

there was agreement in november f2f to create guideline/success criteria related to readable fonts

14:41:02 [wendy]

action: wendy make sure this is included in issues list and gets discussed in WCAG WG

14:41:37 [wendy]

action: wendy make sure other proposals/issues from JIS are also included in issues list/discussion. if not proposals already, request someone write them.

14:42:13 [wendy]

create guidelines for issues that user agents should address rather than authors?

14:43:30 [wendy]

would this boil down to "until user agents...'

14:43:35 [wendy]

handled by techniuqes

14:43:56 [wendy]

section 508 created author requirements and functional criteria

14:44:36 [wendy]

if guidelienes are functional characteristics, these are characterisitcs that content should have to be accessible to people with disabilities

14:44:49 [wendy]

some met by user agents, some met by author's as interim measure...

14:45:02 [wendy]

q+ to say, "slippery slope"

14:45:15 [wendy]

guidelines say, "users should be able to do X"

14:49:39 [MichaelC]

ack wendy

14:49:39 [Zakim]

wendy, you wanted to say, "slippery slope"

14:50:56 [wendy]

one reason for end-to-end was to get the individual pieces connected. look at what is missing.

14:51:12 [wendy]

many pieces seem to be written w/out looking at other related pieces.

15:02:31 [wendy]

wendy has joined #wai-wcag

15:02:46 [wendy]

can't look at content alone, also have to look at user agent

15:02:54 [wendy]

need to educate users

15:05:19 [wendy]

end-to-end should include uaag and atag

15:05:28 [wendy]

it should include references to other guidelines where appropriate

15:06:20 [wendy]

action: wendy, jenae, david update end-to-end analyses with atag/uaag

15:07:04 [wendy]

include atag and uaag in the big diagram?

15:08:21 [wendy]

action: michael write description of "functional characteristics"

15:08:54 [wendy]

how many dangling techniques are there?

15:09:12 [wendy]

(chris thinks about 3 or 4? )

15:10:39 [ChrisR]

Here's the site that contains the current list of checks with associated test files:

15:10:40 [ChrisR]

http://oac.atrc.utoronto.ca/index.html

15:12:13 [wendy]

mappings

15:12:33 [wendy]

action: michael clean up mappings from html techs to success criteria and post to list

15:12:58 [wendy]

david did comparison of 1.0 to 2.0 techniques

15:13:36 [wendy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0384.html

15:14:02 [wendy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0270.html

15:14:11 [wendy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0257.html

15:14:38 [wendy]

1 - david's html 1.o to 2.0 tech mapping

15:14:50 [wendy]

2 - michael, david, and ben's html to guidelines mapping

15:15:00 [wendy]

3. david's css 1.0 to 2.0 tech mapping

15:15:02 [wendy]

===

15:18:09 [wendy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0191.html

15:18:16 [wendy]

linking from guidelines to techniques

15:19:28 [wendy]

wendy summarizes discussions with shawn, suggestion for option 5 at:

15:19:38 [wendy]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2004/04/links-from-wcag.html#Option5

15:19:51 [wendy]

issues: link text gets long quickly, where link to?

15:20:15 [wendy]

david mocked up single page - help people realize "you are here" and this is all the info related to this success criteria

15:21:51 [wendy]

at a minimum, for july draft would like to see link after every success criteria so people can begin to see the big picture

15:21:59 [wendy]

have something for people to reacte to

15:22:37 [wendy]

like the "how to" but would like to have an icon that represents the concept so that there isn't so much text

15:22:47 [wendy]

can we do this by level instead of success criteria?

15:23:08 [wendy]

that was explored in a different option

15:23:21 [wendy]

e.g., option 1 http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2004/04/links-from-wcag.html#Option1

15:23:50 [wendy]

and option 4: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2004/04/links-from-wcag.html#Option1

15:24:15 [wendy]

I18N techniques had something off in margin

15:24:42 [wendy]

two icons: one for techniques one for checklist

15:26:02 [wendy]

make sure the icons have scent...talk with usability folks about how much scent icons have

15:26:12 [wendy]

how likely for someone to follow icon if doesn't say "how to"

15:28:13 [wendy]

how to boil language down?

15:28:18 [wendy]

"how to ... 1.1"

15:28:36 [wendy]

1.1 is gobbledygook for people who don't live in guidelines. "text equivalents" has scent.

15:28:45 [wendy]

(or at least more scent than 1.1)

15:28:58 [wendy]

in june 2003 draft, did we have keywords?

15:30:50 [wendy]

katie haritos-shea introduced idea of "handles" for each guideline

15:31:10 [wendy]

action: sailesh propose "handles" (short text phrases) for each success criteria.

15:31:26 [wendy]

we could use these in the traffic cop (instead of entire text of SC) as well as in links to techniques

15:31:48 [wendy]

wait for revised flowchart to continue discussion on linkages

15:32:12 [wendy]

===

15:35:42 [wendy]

css doesn't seem to make too much sense on its own. current draft has lots of issues.

15:35:46 [wendy]

many is reiterating css spec.

15:35:51 [wendy]

many techs rely on html techs

15:36:00 [wendy]

use css diff for xml, x/html, svg

15:36:13 [wendy]

what are the accessibility issues with css alone? most stem from combined use w/scripting.

15:36:26 [wendy]

therefore, web apps and joint techs w/atag seems most interesting

15:36:57 [wendy]

many of css techs (re: color) belong in gateway/tech indie

15:37:06 [wendy]

discussion on list re: supporting technologies

15:38:35 [wendy]

in html techs, where say use structure, then say "use css to style"

15:38:52 [wendy]

how include that in css?

15:42:16 [wendy]

wendy wants to do analysis of guidelines and how relate to css. also talk w/css gurus about possible css issues. concern about css3, but in CR

15:42:17 [wendy]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-CSS-TECHS-20031219.html

15:43:44 [wendy]

action: wendy talk with tim. write proposal for how to move forward with CSS techs.

15:44:43 [wendy]

===

15:44:46 [wendy]

table headers

15:46:12 [wendy]

most browsers seem to require scope

15:46:19 [wendy]

if go w/th, should also consider scope

15:46:32 [wendy]

disagreement with data

15:46:43 [wendy]

th w/out scope does trigger screen readers to do things

15:46:51 [wendy]

it's difficult to test

15:47:12 [wendy]

however, have a test where heading is diagonal from the cell

15:47:16 [wendy]

see if SR reads it

15:47:29 [wendy]

scope to add th is not necessary

15:47:49 [wendy]

scope is fairly recent. headers and id were first to be supported.

15:47:58 [wendy]

scope mostly intended to be used with td

15:48:16 [wendy]

scope is not necessary in row 1 or col 1

15:48:20 [wendy]

want to make sure reason for scope

15:48:35 [wendy]

doesn't make sense if we know scope is col

15:48:39 [wendy]

th rule is one option.

15:49:13 [wendy]

not bad to add something beyond html, but don't like th because it adds things that we dont need. using headers and id could get the same info.

15:50:35 [wendy]

captions optinal on data tables?

15:50:46 [wendy]

in wcag 1.0, priority 2

15:50:52 [wendy]

caption *or* summary but not both

15:51:01 [wendy]

both are necessary, they serve diff purposes

15:51:06 [wendy]

summary = "" on layout table

15:51:21 [wendy]

summary is not reliable

15:51:35 [wendy]

has been used so many ways

15:51:40 [wendy]

correc that?

15:51:45 [wendy]

for layout tables, used summary=""

15:53:07 [wendy]

use th in addition to headers/id

15:53:19 [wendy]

from the list, if use headers/id don't also need to use th

15:53:30 [wendy]

is that acceptable?

15:53:53 [wendy]

what is current pratice? what is ideal?

15:54:20 [wendy]

current practice = how authors use table as well as how browsers and assistive technologies support table elements/attributes

15:54:33 [wendy]

issues with visual impact of th. use styles!

15:54:52 [wendy]

other reasons for using this markup?

15:54:57 [wendy]

search engines?

15:55:25 [wendy]

what does the spec say?

15:55:37 [wendy]

there may be exceptions to the rule, but it's a simple rule.

15:55:49 [wendy]

"all data tables should have th" exceptions are...other options are...

15:56:06 [wendy]

whenever use colspan no need to use th

15:56:15 [wendy]

only in simple talbe th work all the time

15:56:29 [wendy]

for whom do we want this technique?

15:56:40 [wendy]

authors.

15:56:43 [wendy]

screen readers?

15:57:00 [wendy]

they can read any table cell-by-cell. behavior doesn't change knowing it is a data table.

15:57:06 [wendy]

could announce "found data table"

15:57:34 [wendy]

SRs have own algorithms to detect

15:57:42 [wendy]

by default read as data table, can be frustrating

15:57:47 [wendy]

user has to know to change reading mode

15:58:06 [wendy]

data tables are difficult to navigate w/a SR

15:58:32 [wendy]

q+ to say "s/layout tables/css"

15:59:23 [wendy]

tables should have captions like maps show which direction is north

16:00:27 [wendy]

if have th is empty cell, get no headings

16:00:32 [wendy]

sailesh had example

16:02:10 [wendy]

what about css?

16:02:37 [wendy]

fix problem in 1.0, people assume summary needed for every table

16:03:01 [wendy]

layout: summary="" data="something about the data"

16:03:55 [wendy]

should our focus be on how to distinguish between data and layout? how to create good data tables is a much more difficult and interesting problem.

16:04:03 [wendy]

let's put our energy there.

16:04:28 [wendy]

and push css for layout

16:04:34 [wendy]

no resolution today.

16:04:49 [wendy]

how would this be refleted in techniques?

16:04:52 [wendy]

in html techs

16:05:09 [Zakim]

-Don_Evans

16:05:17 [wendy]

next week: another 2 hour mtg? 3 hour?

16:06:24 [wendy]

next week: issues w/html and gateway.

16:06:38 [wendy]

need new drafts, at least 2, so can publish something in july

16:06:50 [wendy]

longer mtgs in next few weeks to help us get through those

16:08:37 [wendy]

please contact wendy about how to help. i can help break tasks into smaller chunks.

16:08:48 [Zakim]

-Becky_Gibson

16:09:18 [Zakim]

-Jenae

16:10:46 [Zakim]

-Jim_Thatcher

16:10:47 [Zakim]

-Michael_Cooper

16:10:48 [Zakim]

-Sailesh_Panchang

16:10:49 [Zakim]

-Chris

16:10:49 [Zakim]

-Ben

16:10:50 [Zakim]

-Wendy

16:10:51 [Zakim]

WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended

16:10:52 [Zakim]

Attendees were Becky_Gibson, Jim_Thatcher, Wendy, Jenae, Chris, Michael_Cooper, Ben, Don_Evans, Sailesh_Panchang

16:16:47 [ChrisR]

ChrisR has left #wai-wcag

16:17:40 [wendy]

zakim, bye

16:17:40 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #wai-wcag

16:17:43 [wendy]

RRSAgent, bye

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

I see 9 open action items:

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: wendy talk with david about diagram (give suggestions from this call for revision) [1]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T14-15-00

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Becky review tom's previous work on personas and expand upon them [2]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T14-24-18

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: wendy make sure this is included in issues list and gets discussed in WCAG WG [3]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T14-41-02

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: wendy make sure other proposals/issues from JIS are also included in issues list/discussion. if not proposals already, request someone write them. [4]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T14-41-37

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: wendy, jenae, david update end-to-end analyses with atag/uaag [5]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T15-06-20

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: michael write description of "functional characteristics" [6]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T15-08-21

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: michael clean up mappings from html techs to success criteria and post to list [7]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T15-12-33

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: sailesh propose "handles" (short text phrases) for each success criteria. [8]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T15-31-10

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: wendy talk with tim. write proposal for how to move forward with CSS techs. [9]

16:17:43 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/05/12-wai-wcag-irc#T15-43-44