IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-05-20
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:50:37 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:52:30 [rscano]
- a song as demo :)
- 19:52:34 [rscano]
- for a training :)
- 19:52:50 [rscano]
- I wanna make the song captioning in italian and english
- 19:53:00 [rscano]
- for show that it is useful not only for deaf people
- 19:53:02 [rscano]
- ;-)
- 19:53:17 [wendy]
- cool
- 19:53:51 [wendy]
- wendy has changed the topic to: "+1 617.761.6200 passcode 9224"
- 19:53:57 [rscano]
- i've discovered also that the best solution for deaf people with low vision is Windows Media + SAMI instead of QuickTime with SMIL 1.0
- 19:54:00 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:54:05 [rscano]
- hi rellero
- 19:54:08 [rellero]
- Hi
- 19:54:15 [wendy]
- why is WM+sami better for low vision?
- 19:54:52 [rscano]
- because it let to put the captioned text in a DIV
- 19:55:04 [wendy]
- you can't do that w/smil?
- 19:55:06 [rscano]
- and you can put the text with relative dimensions
- 19:55:14 [rscano]
- Windows Media don't support well SMIL :)
- 19:55:39 [rscano]
- and Real / QT don't let to resize fonts during execution as an object in a page
- 19:55:40 [wendy]
- roberto - how about working on smil techniques for wcag 2.0?
- 19:55:50 [wendy]
- :)
- 19:55:52 [rscano]
- ok... but not only me :)
- 19:56:06 [wendy]
- sounds like part of the issue is ensuring the media players implement UAAG
- 19:56:14 [rscano]
- yes
- 19:56:22 [rscano]
- it's a topic that I've put in my book
- 19:56:35 [wendy]
- it sounds like it is not the smil dtd, but the user agent implementation.
- 19:56:42 [rscano]
- yep
- 19:56:48 [rscano]
- I will tell to Ian
- 19:56:51 [rscano]
- Jacobs
- 19:56:55 [wendy]
- whew. i was going to be concerned if smil had issues.
- 19:57:05 [wendy]
- actually, tell matt may. he's the staff contact of UAWG.
- 19:57:08 [rscano]
- but I check with SMIL ;-)
- 19:57:09 [rscano]
- ah ok
- 19:57:25 [wendy]
- if there are issues with SMIL, those should also go to Matt as he is also the staff contact for PFWG. :)
- 19:57:27 [Yvette]
- Yvette has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:57:31 [wendy]
- hello yvette
- 19:57:31 [Yvette]
- hi everyone
- 19:57:34 [rellero]
- Hi!
- 19:57:49 [rscano]
- hi dutch girl :)
- 19:58:00 [Yvette]
- Isn't it a holiday in the US today? It is here...
- 19:58:09 [Yvette]
- Ascension day
- 19:58:48 [wendy]
- don't think it's a holiday. we're all happily working at WWW2004 in NYC.
- 19:59:01 [sh1mmer]
- sh1mmer has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:04 [wendy]
- hey tom
- 19:59:05 [Yvette]
- Poor guys :-)
- 19:59:07 [Yvette]
- Hi Tom
- 19:59:08 [rscano]
- yep... i cannot be in there :( there was also AC Meeting :(
- 19:59:17 [wendy]
- yes, we missed you.
- 19:59:18 [rcastaldo]
- rcastaldo has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:25 [rcastaldo]
- Hi all :-)
- 19:59:26 [Yvette]
- Hi Roberto#3
- 19:59:29 [rellero]
- hi
- 19:59:59 [Yvette]
- In the Netherlands everyone has off today (even stores are closed) and most people have to take tomorrow off as well
- 20:00:07 [Yvette]
- Forced by their employers
- 20:00:07 [rscano]
- Wendy I will check about SMIL and resize of the font for captioning
- 20:00:10 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, this is WAI_WCAG
- 20:00:10 [Zakim]
- ok, sh1mmer; that matches WAI_WCAG()4:00PM
- 20:00:21 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:00:22 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Microsoft], Tom_Croucher
- 20:00:31 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, I am Tom_Croucher
- 20:00:31 [Zakim]
- ok, sh1mmer, I now associate you with Tom_Croucher
- 20:00:35 [rscano]
- hi Tom
- 20:00:42 [sh1mmer]
- hi guys :)
- 20:00:44 [Zakim]
- +??P3
- 20:00:57 [Zakim]
- +Yvette_Hoitink
- 20:01:05 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, ??P3 is David
- 20:01:05 [Zakim]
- +David; got it
- 20:01:06 [Zakim]
- +??P2
- 20:01:13 [rscano]
- zakim, ??P2 is Roberto_Scano
- 20:01:13 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Scano; got it
- 20:01:15 [Yvette]
- zakim, I am Yvette_Hoitink
- 20:01:15 [Zakim]
- ok, Yvette, I now associate you with Yvette_Hoitink
- 20:01:43 [Zakim]
- + +1.732.333.aaaa
- 20:01:51 [wendy]
- zakim, +1.732.333.aaaa is wendy
- 20:01:52 [rscano]
- zakim, i am Roberto_Scano
- 20:01:52 [Zakim]
- +wendy; got it
- 20:01:53 [Zakim]
- ok, rscano, I now associate you with Roberto_Scano
- 20:02:06 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, aaaa is Wendy
- 20:02:06 [Zakim]
- sorry, sh1mmer, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
- 20:02:07 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 20:02:09 [Zakim]
- +Avi
- 20:02:11 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, 333.aaaa is Wendy
- 20:02:11 [Zakim]
- sorry, sh1mmer, I do not recognize a party named '333.aaaa'
- 20:02:12 [Zakim]
- +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 20:02:17 [Zakim]
- +John_Slatin
- 20:02:18 [Zakim]
- +??P7
- 20:02:20 [rscano]
- wendy multitasking version :)
- 20:02:21 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, +1.32.333.aaaa is Wendy
- 20:02:21 [Zakim]
- sorry, sh1mmer, I do not recognize a party named '+1.32.333.aaaa'
- 20:02:21 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:02:22 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Microsoft], Tom_Croucher, David, Yvette_Hoitink, Roberto_Scano, wendy, ??P5, Avi, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, John_Slatin, ??P7
- 20:02:24 [Zakim]
- +JasonWhite
- 20:02:27 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, +1.732.333.aaaa is Wendy
- 20:02:27 [Zakim]
- sorry, sh1mmer, I do not recognize a party named '+1.732.333.aaaa'
- 20:02:34 [wendy]
- zakim, [Microsoft] is Mike_Barta
- 20:02:34 [Zakim]
- +Mike_Barta; got it
- 20:02:37 [rscano]
- zakim, ??P7 is Roberto_Castaldo
- 20:02:37 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Castaldo; got it
- 20:02:41 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:02:42 [Zakim]
- +??P12
- 20:02:43 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:02:43 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Tom_Croucher, David, Yvette_Hoitink, Roberto_Scano, wendy, ??P5, Avi, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, John_Slatin, Roberto_Castaldo, JasonWhite, ??P12
- 20:02:45 [rellero]
- Zakim, ??P12 is Roberto_Ellero
- 20:02:45 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Ellero; got it
- 20:02:52 [rellero]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:02:52 [Zakim]
- sorry, rellero, I do not see a party named 'rellero'
- 20:02:53 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 20:02:58 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, ??P12 is Jason
- 20:02:58 [Zakim]
- I already had ??P12 as Roberto_Ellero, Yvette_Hoitink
- 20:03:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- hmm
- 20:03:06 [rellero]
- zakim, mute Roberto_Ellero
- 20:03:06 [Zakim]
- Roberto_Ellero should now be muted
- 20:03:08 [wendy]
- zakim, [IBM] is Andi_Snow-Weaver
- 20:03:08 [Zakim]
- +Andi_Snow-Weaver; got it
- 20:03:09 [Zakim]
- +??P13
- 20:03:26 [Becky]
- Becky has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:03:29 [rscano]
- :)
- 20:03:34 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 20:03:35 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 20:03:38 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P13 is Bengt_Farre
- 20:03:38 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 20:03:39 [sh1mmer]
- aparently everyone loved my action item :P
- 20:03:41 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:03:41 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Tom_Croucher (muted), David, Yvette_Hoitink, Roberto_Scano, wendy, ??P5, Avi, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, John_Slatin, Roberto_Castaldo, JasonWhite,
- 20:03:44 [Zakim]
- ... Roberto_Ellero (muted), Andi_Snow-Weaver, Bengt_Farre
- 20:03:55 [bengt]
- zakim, I am Bengt_Farre
- 20:03:55 [Zakim]
- ok, bengt, I now associate you with Bengt_Farre
- 20:04:07 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 20:04:07 [bengt]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:04:08 [Zakim]
- Bengt_Farre should now be muted
- 20:04:28 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:04:53 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P5 is Gregg
- 20:04:53 [Zakim]
- +Gregg; got it
- 20:04:58 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:04:58 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Tom_Croucher (muted), David, Yvette_Hoitink, Roberto_Scano, wendy, Gregg, Avi, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, John_Slatin, Roberto_Castaldo, JasonWhite,
- 20:05:01 [Zakim]
- ... Roberto_Ellero (muted), Andi_Snow-Weaver, Bengt_Farre (muted), Becky_Gibson
- 20:05:04 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:05:15 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Roberto_Castaldo (66%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (18%), John_Slatin (28%)
- 20:05:26 [Zakim]
- +??P15
- 20:05:30 [rscano]
- zakim, mute Roberto_Castaldo
- 20:05:30 [Zakim]
- Roberto_Castaldo should now be muted
- 20:05:32 [Andi]
- Andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:05:33 [rcastaldo]
- I've just muted
- 20:05:33 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P15 is Kerstin
- 20:05:33 [Zakim]
- +Kerstin; got it
- 20:05:34 [rscano]
- :)
- 20:05:46 [wendy]
- zakim, who's muted?
- 20:05:46 [Zakim]
- I see Mike_Barta, Tom_Croucher, Gregg, Roberto_Castaldo, Roberto_Ellero, Bengt_Farre muted
- 20:05:56 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:05:56 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 20:06:00 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, unmute me
- 20:06:00 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
- 20:06:03 [wendy]
- zakim, unmute Gregg
- 20:06:03 [Zakim]
- Gregg should no longer be muted
- 20:06:07 [bengt]
- ellero muted not castaldo
- 20:06:19 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:06:23 [rcastaldo]
- I've muted with 61#
- 20:06:29 [rscano]
- i've muted u :P
- 20:06:31 [bengt]
- zakim, who is making noise ?
- 20:06:31 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, mute Roberto_castaldo
- 20:06:31 [Zakim]
- Roberto_Castaldo was already muted, sh1mmer
- 20:06:33 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Mike_Barta (6%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (41%), Avi (4%), JasonWhite (21%)
- 20:06:43 [Zakim]
- bengt, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Roberto_Scano (6%), David (25%), Yvette_Hoitink (24%), Gregg (9%), wendy (10%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (49%)
- 20:07:10 [rscano]
- it's a buzz? :)
- 20:07:53 [wendy]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0468.html
- 20:08:20 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:08:20 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 20:08:49 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, unmute me
- 20:08:49 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
- 20:09:10 [wendy]
- andi's comment: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0403.html
- 20:09:23 [wendy]
- mailing list wtould not meet
- 20:09:34 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:09:38 [wendy]
- jason replied: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0408.html
- 20:09:41 [wendy]
- don't think it's a problem
- 20:09:43 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 20:09:43 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 20:09:59 [GVAN]
- Q=
- 20:10:07 [GVAN]
- Q+
- 20:10:11 [wendy]
- agree with jason. could note lists with dashes and that would not be appropriate.
- 20:10:22 [wendy]
- it is not a great cost to authors (wrt freedom of expression)
- 20:10:40 [wendy]
- only question, legacy question. that's a scoping issue (as ben discussed in his post)
- 20:10:47 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:10:54 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:11:08 [wendy]
- we talked about scoping. w/email archives, easy to say they don't conform w/out talking about rest of site.
- 20:11:18 [wendy]
- don't expect a lot of email markup in the archives.
- 20:11:24 [wendy]
- what is programmatically determined mean?
- 20:11:30 [wendy]
- short term: need to mark things up
- 20:11:55 [MattNYC]
- MattNYC has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:11:55 [wendy]
- long term: if a simple algorithm and tools that would add simple markup, then could be programmatically determined.
- 20:12:07 [wendy]
- concern w/"e.g. data list" if that implies more than we need to.
- 20:12:15 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 20:12:15 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 20:12:36 [wendy]
- tools can implly things that are not correct.
- 20:12:41 [wendy]
- s/implly/imply
- 20:13:03 [GVAN]
- Q+
- 20:13:09 [wendy]
- perhaps authors do things consistently, but infer meaning can produce erroneous results.
- 20:13:23 [wendy]
- can not take flat text and programmatically determine it. won't be correct 100% of the time.
- 20:13:39 [wendy]
- if use lists as lists, it will be interpreted correctly 100% of the time.
- 20:13:40 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:13:52 [wendy]
- question of relationship between guidelines and techniques and checklists.
- 20:14:15 [wendy]
- the guideline is right as it is. the tech-specific could say, "for now, markup has to be there."
- 20:14:27 [wendy]
- if later on there are tools, then we can revise the checklists (whether they are normative or not)
- 20:14:56 [wendy]
- q+ to say, "don't expect world to go back to flat text. expect mailing lists would include markup as tools get better, not other way around."
- 20:15:00 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 20:15:02 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:15:23 [wendy]
- other things that violate 1.1, character set identification...
- 20:15:45 [wendy]
- text files are going to fail in a number of places. probably a matter of scoping them out so they cover more than one guideline.
- 20:15:49 [wendy]
- scoping out is way i would do it.
- 20:16:09 [wendy]
- suspect that if go through verion 1.0, the same examples would fail there, too. nothing specific to 2.0 document.
- 20:16:10 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:16:26 [wendy]
- we often point out "bold if not marked up could be missed" however, that's true of all users.
- 20:16:42 [wendy]
- if bold means strong in one place and something else someplace else how does person w/sight know the difference.
- 20:16:51 [wendy]
- don't want to stray too far from accessibility
- 20:16:54 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 20:16:54 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say, "don't expect world to go back to flat text. expect mailing lists would include markup as tools get better, not other way around."
- 20:17:30 [rscano]
- agree with Wendy
- 20:17:54 [rscano]
- think also about forums...
- 20:18:19 [bengt]
- they could do that add markup afterwards
- 20:18:32 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 20:18:50 [wendy]
- agree that that problem can cancel itself out.
- 20:19:01 [GVAN]
- Q+ RESOLUTION
- 20:19:30 [wendy]
- agree w/john wrt techniques/checklists
- 20:19:41 [wendy]
- ack resolution
- 20:20:06 [wendy]
- concensus that the 1st success criteria should be:
- 20:20:17 [wendy]
- ...
- 20:20:19 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 20:20:24 [wendy]
- we've defined structures, have we defined relationships?
- 20:20:33 [wendy]
- kidn of defined in the sturcture defn
- 20:20:42 [wendy]
- perhaps say structures of the content...
- 20:20:50 [wendy]
- hierarchy is a relationship
- 20:20:57 [wendy]
- relationships are either hierarchical or non-hierarchical
- 20:21:28 [wendy]
- defn of structure that john sent "aggregate of elements and relationships that make up something"
- 20:21:53 [wendy]
- structure is the set of elements and relationships that make up a web document
- 20:22:05 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:22:09 [wendy]
- "elements" is loaded w/many words
- 20:22:15 [wendy]
- s/words/meaning
- 20:22:30 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 20:23:01 [wendy]
- checkpoints themselves if properly supported by defns are ok. this is extension of [couldn't understand]
- 20:23:44 [wendy]
- structures and relationships can be derived programmatically
- 20:23:46 [sh1mmer]
- bug 506
- 20:23:57 [wendy]
- most people don't understand what data model means
- 20:24:07 [wendy]
- it's an example of a technique not deriving it programmatically
- 20:24:14 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- q+
- 20:24:20 [wendy]
- concern that it seems html-specific.
- 20:24:26 [wendy]
- do data models suffice?
- 20:24:49 [wendy]
- "derived through standard programmatic means"
- 20:25:04 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:25:14 [wendy]
- yes, end at "programmatically"
- 20:25:19 [sh1mmer]
- q+ to say "agree with greg about ending"
- 20:25:24 [wendy]
- there's a problem with saying "structures and relaetionships *of* the content"
- 20:25:35 [wendy]
- "within" or "of and within"
- 20:26:10 [wendy]
- "structs and relationships within the content..."
- 20:26:20 [wendy]
- "within" sounds like in the single page and not between pages.
- 20:26:26 [wendy]
- content is not a single page.
- 20:26:38 [sh1mmer]
- ack Yvette_Hoitink
- 20:26:57 [wendy]
- "can be derived programattically" sounds like putting burden on user and not author.
- 20:27:25 [wendy]
- if you identify the structures and relationships, it can be derived programmatically. need to phrase for author not user.
- 20:28:20 [wendy]
- at the moment, "can dervie programmatically". isntead, "structs and rel are marke dup so can be derived prog..."
- 20:28:57 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 20:28:58 [Zakim]
- Tom_Croucher, you wanted to say "agree with greg about ending"
- 20:29:56 [wendy]
- q+ to say, "call for vote? ask if people can live with and move on? have 6 other items on the agenda"
- 20:30:16 [GVAN]
- q+
- 20:30:22 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:30:40 [wendy]
- problem is want to ensure success criteria is that it is the author's responsibility.
- 20:31:10 [wendy]
- put burden of identifying on the author. one solution might be, "struture and relationships in content are identified in way that can be dervied programmatically"
- 20:31:31 [wendy]
- structures and relationships within the content are identified in such a way that they can be derived programmatically"
- 20:31:51 [wendy]
- "standard programmatic way'
- 20:32:31 [rscano]
- "structures and relationship within the content are identified and can be derived programmatically" ?
- 20:32:48 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- "structures and relationship within the content are identified so that they can be derived programmatically"
- 20:32:55 [sh1mmer]
- q+ to say "how can we define testibility of standard"
- 20:32:56 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- q+
- 20:33:02 [wendy]
- q-
- 20:33:17 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 20:33:25 [wendy]
- concern about shift of burden to the author.
- 20:33:42 [wendy]
- important that if it can be derived programmatically, if downstream software can derive it, that should satisfy it.
- 20:34:01 [wendy]
- if the text is worded so that it creates more of a requirement, even if it can be derived w/out that.
- 20:34:04 [wendy]
- then requiring too much.
- 20:34:23 [wendy]
- q+ to ask, "real-world example of jason't concern?"
- 20:35:27 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:35:29 [sh1mmer]
- ack GVAN
- 20:37:45 [wendy]
- q-
- 20:38:02 [wendy]
- wac notes concern that we're wordsmithing and would like to send to editors to work out details and put something in next draft.
- 20:38:16 [wendy]
- if we're not getting new issues and just close to wording, let's move on in the agenda.
- 20:38:41 [wendy]
- 40 minutes into the call. 7 more items on agenda
- 20:38:42 [wendy]
- ack david
- 20:39:12 [wendy]
- "structures of the content and relationships between those structrues can be derived programmatically"
- 20:39:27 [wendy]
- not relationship between structure
- 20:39:35 [wendy]
- is relationships between more than structures
- 20:39:37 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 20:39:38 [Zakim]
- Tom_Croucher, you wanted to say "how can we define testibility of standard"
- 20:40:06 [wendy]
- like the idea of "standard programmatically determinable" but not sure how define testibly
- 20:40:19 [wendy]
- phrase in some way that ensures that things are programmatically determinable in a testable way.
- 20:40:21 [GVAN]
- g+
- 20:40:25 [GVAN]
- q+
- 20:40:35 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- q-
- 20:40:44 [wendy]
- reliable is part of the definition of testable!
- 20:40:50 [sh1mmer]
- ack John
- 20:41:20 [sh1mmer]
- not part of the definition of programatically determined
- 20:41:42 [wendy]
- there are 3 main variants on the table. all are ok. would prefer *not* standard programmatic, think for checklists.
- 20:41:53 [wendy]
- ackg van
- 20:41:57 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:42:16 [wendy]
- structs and rels of the content can be derived programmatically.
- 20:42:41 [wendy]
- don't want to replace "of" with "within" because "of" is more broadly applicable.
- 20:42:46 [wendy]
- "relationships of content"
- 20:43:01 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:45:08 [sh1mmer]
- q-
- 20:45:15 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:45:34 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 20:45:34 [sh1mmer]
- ack Jason
- 20:45:37 [wendy]
- ack andi
- 20:46:20 [wendy]
- simple text document should be able to conform at level 1
- 20:46:57 [wendy]
- have raised questions, would like to find some good wording and summarize the questions and debate on the list.
- 20:47:01 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 20:47:10 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:47:18 [GVAN]
- q+
- 20:47:35 [wendy]
- simple text doc, headings, ps, lists is that shows up in a way that has no navigation?
- 20:47:38 [wendy]
- possibly
- 20:47:52 [wendy]
- if it's just short text, then can live w/it.
- 20:48:07 [wendy]
- as soon as navigation, especially if before, want a way to jump to it.
- 20:48:26 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:48:26 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 20:48:31 [wendy]
- [wac notes that this is like the mailing list archive. navigation controls *are* html evne if body of mail is plain text]
- 20:48:49 [wendy]
- wcag 1.0 does not require headings at level 1
- 20:49:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- yes it's prior 2
- 20:49:34 [wendy]
- 3.5 Use header elements to convey document structure and use them according to specification. [Priority 2]
- 20:49:41 [wendy]
- 3.6 Mark up lists and list items properly. [Priority 2]
- 20:49:54 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- 3.1 When an appropriate markup language exists, use markup rather than images to convey information. [Priority 2]
- 20:50:34 [wendy]
- 3.1 has been contentious. especially with the low vision community.
- 20:50:47 [wendy]
- but, part of that are broken user agents that don't let you increase font size of text equivs
- 20:51:19 [wendy]
- (which is changing)
- 20:51:29 [wendy]
- in checklist, "in this technology, this is what you do..."
- 20:51:39 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 20:52:21 [rscano]
- IE let to resize pixel
- 20:52:27 [wendy]
- stucts and relationships of/within the content can be derived programmatically
- 20:52:38 [wendy]
- s/ of/within / within
- 20:52:55 [wendy]
- note: the concept of reliability and standardness should be incorporated into defn of programmatically
- 20:53:01 [rcastaldo]
- ok
- 20:53:33 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- q+ to say
- 20:53:48 [wendy]
- doc. title at top. 8 paragraphs. some subtitles. that's it. does it have to be marked up to be accessible?
- 20:54:14 [wendy]
- how draw a line between simple and complex documents?
- 20:54:21 [wendy]
- if complex, document becomes indecipherable.
- 20:54:30 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zaki, unmute me
- 20:54:35 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 20:54:50 [sh1mmer]
- ack gvan
- 20:54:50 [wendy]
- ack yvette
- 20:54:52 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink, you wanted to say
- 20:54:54 [wendy]
- q+ gvan
- 20:55:01 [wendy]
- other example: interactive web site
- 20:55:06 [wendy]
- people can post comments
- 20:55:12 [wendy]
- can ask people filling in comments w/structure
- 20:55:17 [wendy]
- it would require html knowledge
- 20:55:46 [wendy]
- q+ to say, "think about auth tools as the new word processor."
- 20:56:33 [wendy]
- not a plain text document. people can type reactions to article. they are not able to mark up their responses.
- 20:56:46 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 20:56:46 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say, "think about auth tools as the new word processor."
- 20:58:28 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:58:56 [Becky]
- q+
- 20:59:40 [wendy]
- move this out of level 1? to level 2?
- 20:59:47 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 20:59:56 [wendy]
- many plain text documents are not accessible
- 21:00:32 [rscano]
- yep... no explanation for acronyms, abbr, change of language...
- 21:00:46 [wendy]
- then the exception should go into scoping
- 21:00:50 [wendy]
- should not be exception in the guideline
- 21:00:52 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- even main language (prio 1)
- 21:01:15 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- q+ to say "plain text files would fail different level 1 already"
- 21:01:17 [wendy]
- simple algorithm would allow to determine headers, thus plain documents coiuld comply
- 21:01:44 [wendy]
- what is sufficient?
- 21:02:53 [wendy]
- scoping seems to be the only way to move forward.
- 21:02:54 [Andi]
- not "changes in language". That has been moved to Level 2
- 21:02:54 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- q-
- 21:03:32 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- but main language, acronyms, abbreviations, are at level 1
- 21:03:51 [rscano]
- yep
- 21:03:52 [rcastaldo]
- ANd they should stay there, I think
- 21:04:05 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- I agree
- 21:04:12 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 21:04:12 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 21:04:28 [GVAN]
- ack gvan
- 21:05:03 [wendy]
- can not derive structures generically.
- 21:05:08 [wendy]
- exception is a disservice.
- 21:06:04 [wendy]
- not happy about plain text being excluded
- 21:06:19 [wendy]
- but, plain text would conform iff tools have no trouble
- 21:06:21 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- q+ to say "the whole reason for HTML was to markup text, plain text is yesterdays technology"
- 21:07:10 [wendy]
- wac wants to remind people of the milestones in our proposed charter: http://www.w3.org/2004/04/wcag-charter.html#milestones
- 21:07:41 [wendy]
- ack becky
- 21:07:53 [wendy]
- any web app that lets people input web content.
- 21:08:09 [wendy]
- there is nothing that forces the user to use markup
- 21:08:50 [sh1mmer]
- tom said: you can repair plain text if you made it in a consistent way
- 21:08:59 [rscano]
- "any web app that generate web content" :)
- 21:09:16 [wendy]
- could say, "all content accessible but can't guarantee..."
- 21:09:23 [sh1mmer]
- you cannot programmatically derive plain text across multiple ways plain texts has been formats to imply content
- 21:09:39 [bengt]
- some lists har formatting rules builtin to their input mechanisms
- 21:09:48 [wendy]
- scoping could be savior, but give us another burden.
- 21:09:56 [wendy]
- ack yvette
- 21:09:56 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink, you wanted to say "the whole reason for HTML was to markup text, plain text is yesterdays technology"
- 21:09:58 [sh1mmer]
- hence structure in plain text cannot be programmatically determined it can only repaired to markup that can
- 21:10:12 [wendy]
- html was invented to deal with plain text
- 21:10:17 [wendy]
- see decrease in use of
- 21:10:27 [wendy]
- people will use html instead of text. that benefit accessibility.
- 21:10:29 [rcastaldo]
- Agree
- 21:10:33 [wendy]
- agree
- 21:10:39 [sh1mmer]
- agree
- 21:10:39 [rscano]
- agree
- 21:10:44 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- :-)
- 21:11:16 [wendy]
- proposal for closure: stucts and relationships of/within the content can be derived programmatically
- 21:11:16 [wendy]
- [16:52] <wendy> s/ of/within / within
- 21:11:16 [wendy]
- [16:52] <wendy> note: the concept of reliability and standardness should be incorporated into defn of programmatically
- 21:11:23 [wendy]
- remain level 1
- 21:11:40 [wendy]
- scoping to handle places where not applicable
- 21:12:00 [wendy]
- any objections?
- 21:12:04 [rscano]
- nope :)
- 21:12:05 [wendy]
- none
- 21:12:07 [wendy]
- :)
- 21:14:30 [wendy]
- the summary were html and text specific. assuming we are talking about document rendered on the screen.
- 21:15:20 [wendy]
- if the browser suddenly spoke something louder, then must have been markup to tell it to do that.
- 21:15:26 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 21:15:26 [wendy]
- thus, by defn, already have markup.
- 21:15:34 [wendy]
- thought we were talking about if that markup should be present.
- 21:16:09 [rscano]
- yes... VoiceXML works with markup
- 21:16:50 [wendy]
- ack mike
- 21:17:06 [wendy]
- there are ways to provide distinctions, that are not visible to prog. access.
- 21:17:25 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:17:35 [wendy]
- the note from before, "programmatically means in standard fashion...
- 21:17:49 [wendy]
- could be derived programmtically abut idiosyncratic to your own page.
- 21:18:07 [wendy]
- as long as programatically avail w/out a priori knowledge
- 21:18:14 [rscano]
- idiosyn..what? :)
- 21:18:31 [wendy]
- standard way of showing emphasis
- 21:18:36 [rscano]
- thank u :)
- 21:18:59 [sh1mmer]
- ack jason
- 21:19:00 [wendy]
- ack john
- 21:19:50 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- zakim, mute me
- 21:19:50 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 21:20:24 [wendy]
- use good semantics. author needs to be clear what means and what intent is.
- 21:20:37 [wendy]
- could be specific ways to make prog. identifiable that have nothing to do w/presentation.
- 21:21:05 [wendy]
- whatever the viz presentation is, is available elsewhere.
- 21:21:11 [wendy]
- need semantics that may not be in viz presentation.
- 21:21:39 [wendy]
- adding semantic marku that no sighted user would get
- 21:21:47 [wendy]
- that should be under "understanding"
- 21:22:02 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 21:22:02 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 21:22:46 [wendy]
- only way to reliably determine emphasis is by using semantic elements
- 21:22:48 [wendy]
- (yes!)
- 21:22:56 [wendy]
- anything else could be visual styling
- 21:23:54 [wendy]
- http://bestkungfu.com/archive/?id=471
- 21:24:20 [wendy]
- http://bestkungfu.com/archive/?id=474
- 21:24:23 [wendy]
- ack john
- 21:24:40 [wendy]
- emphasis can be programmatically derived
- 21:25:48 [wendy]
- don't want to say "emphasis and other meaning" too broad
- 21:26:16 [wendy]
- tom - did you read something from the archives? if so, pls put uri and text.
- 21:27:48 [sh1mmer]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0460.html
- 21:27:54 [sh1mmer]
- Ben's comments from here
- 21:27:54 [wendy]
- look at semantic elements in langs, such as html, svg.
- 21:27:58 [wendy]
- emphasis, cite, etc.
- 21:28:05 [sh1mmer]
- Perhaps "... imply additional meaning, emphasis or distinction, such as
- 21:28:05 [sh1mmer]
- > ..."
- 21:28:33 [wendy]
- cite is inline, default rendering is italic
- 21:28:35 [Zakim]
- -Avi
- 21:28:47 [Zakim]
- -Gregg
- 21:29:14 [rcastaldo]
- Ooopssss... my Dialpad has died... :-|
- 21:29:25 [sh1mmer]
- hmm
- 21:29:30 [rscano]
- have u paid Roberto? :D
- 21:29:35 [sh1mmer]
- Gregg didn't go. but roberto did
- 21:29:48 [rcastaldo]
- Yep
- 21:30:41 [wendy]
- agreement on "emphasis can be derive programmatically" (or however decided to word previous one)
- 21:30:55 [rscano]
- see ya!
- 21:30:55 [Zakim]
- -Andi_Snow-Weaver
- 21:30:56 [Zakim]
- -Mike_Barta
- 21:30:56 [bengt]
- bye
- 21:30:58 [rellero]
- bye
- 21:30:58 [Zakim]
- -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:30:59 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 21:30:59 [Zakim]
- -wendy
- 21:31:01 [Zakim]
- -Yvette_Hoitink
- 21:31:01 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:31:02 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 21:31:04 [Zakim]
- -David
- 21:31:05 [rcastaldo]
- bye
- 21:31:06 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin
- 21:31:06 [Becky]
- Becky has left #wai-wcag
- 21:31:08 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Castaldo
- 21:31:10 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Scano
- 21:31:12 [Zakim]
- -Tom_Croucher
- 21:31:14 [rcastaldo]
- rcastaldo has left #wai-wcag
- 21:31:18 [Zakim]
- -JasonWhite
- 21:31:19 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Ellero
- 21:31:20 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
- 21:31:21 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Tom_Croucher, Yvette_Hoitink, David, Roberto_Scano, wendy, Avi, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, John_Slatin, JasonWhite, Mike_Barta, Roberto_Castaldo, Roberto_Ellero,
- 21:31:23 [Zakim]
- ... Andi_Snow-Weaver, Becky_Gibson, Bengt_Farre, Gregg, Kerstin
- 21:34:15 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, make log world-visible
- 21:45:05 [rscano]
- rscano has left #wai-wcag
- 21:46:00 [sh1mmer]
- wow
- 21:46:03 [sh1mmer]
- bit of a marathon
- 21:55:00 [Andi]
- Andi has left #wai-wcag
- 22:14:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 22:14:16 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items