IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-06-17
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:55:04 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:55:13 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
- 19:55:13 [Zakim]
- ok, sh1mmer, I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM already started
- 19:55:20 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, who is on the phone?
- 19:55:20 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Microsoft]
- 19:55:34 [sh1mmer]
- RRSAgent, make logs world visible
- 19:55:34 [RRSAgent]
- I'm logging. I don't understand 'make logs world visible', sh1mmer. Try /msg RRSAgent help
- 19:56:41 [Zakim]
- +??P1
- 19:56:47 [nabe]
- nabe has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:57:03 [nabe]
- good morning
- 19:57:04 [bengt]
- zakim, ??p1 is Bengt_Farre
- 19:57:04 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 19:57:14 [bengt]
- zakim, I am Bengt_Farre
- 19:57:14 [Zakim]
- ok, bengt, I now associate you with Bengt_Farre
- 19:57:22 [bengt]
- zakim, mute me
- 19:57:22 [Zakim]
- Bengt_Farre should now be muted
- 19:58:49 [Becky]
- Becky has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:08 [Zakim]
- +Katie_Haritos-Shea
- 19:59:19 [andyjudson]
- andyjudson has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:50 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 19:59:58 [Zakim]
- +Tom_Croucher
- 19:59:58 [Zakim]
- +John_Slatin
- 20:00:15 [bengt]
- hmm, I cant hear anything !
- 20:00:17 [rcastaldo]
- rcastaldo has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:00:26 [rcastaldo]
- HI all
- 20:00:47 [Zakim]
- +??P6
- 20:00:48 [Zakim]
- +??P7
- 20:00:51 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, I am Tom
- 20:00:51 [Zakim]
- ok, sh1mmer, I now associate you with Tom_Croucher
- 20:00:52 [sh1mmer]
- mute me
- 20:00:56 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, mute me
- 20:00:56 [Zakim]
- Tom_Croucher should now be muted
- 20:01:09 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, [Microsoft] is Mike
- 20:01:09 [Zakim]
- +Mike; got it
- 20:01:16 [Zakim]
- +??P8
- 20:01:17 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 20:01:19 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 20:01:19 [Zakim]
- Tom_Croucher should no longer be muted
- 20:01:38 [Zakim]
- +??P1
- 20:01:46 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, mute me
- 20:01:47 [Zakim]
- +Wendy
- 20:01:48 [Zakim]
- Tom_Croucher should now be muted
- 20:01:49 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P1 is Bengt_Farre
- 20:01:49 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 20:01:58 [rcastaldo]
- Zakim, I am Roberto_Castaldo
- 20:01:58 [Zakim]
- sorry, rcastaldo, I do not see a party named 'Roberto_Castaldo'
- 20:02:00 [bengt]
- zakim, I am Bengt_Farre
- 20:02:00 [Zakim]
- ok, bengt, I now associate you with Bengt_Farre
- 20:02:05 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:02:05 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Becky_Gibson, Tom_Croucher (muted), John_Slatin, ??P7, ??P6, ??P8, Bengt_Farre, Wendy
- 20:02:06 [bengt]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:02:06 [bcaldwell]
- bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:02:07 [Zakim]
- Bengt_Farre should now be muted
- 20:02:16 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 20:02:16 [Zakim]
- Tom_Croucher should no longer be muted
- 20:02:17 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:02:19 [bengt]
- zakim, who is making noise
- 20:02:19 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who is making noise', bengt
- 20:02:26 [bengt]
- zakim, who is making noise ?
- 20:02:27 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Mike (24%), Tom_Croucher (44%), ??P7 (90%), ??P8 (36%)
- 20:02:29 [Zakim]
- +Michael_Cooper
- 20:02:38 [Zakim]
- bengt, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Mike (17%), Katie_Haritos-Shea (4%), John_Slatin (37%), ??P7 (33%), ??P8 (7%), Wendy (18%)
- 20:02:46 [Zakim]
- +Matt
- 20:02:47 [rcastaldo]
- I've muted
- 20:02:50 [MichaelC]
- MichaelC has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:03:00 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:03:00 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Becky_Gibson, Tom_Croucher, John_Slatin, ??P7, ??P6, ??P8, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Michael_Cooper, Matt
- 20:03:00 [GVAN]
- GVAN has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:03:05 [MichaelC]
- zakim, I am Michael_Cooper
- 20:03:05 [Zakim]
- ok, MichaelC, I now associate you with Michael_Cooper
- 20:03:09 [MichaelC]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:03:09 [Zakim]
- Michael_Cooper should now be muted
- 20:03:17 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, ??P7
- 20:03:17 [Zakim]
- I don't understand '??P7', sh1mmer
- 20:03:19 [rcastaldo]
- I should be ??P7
- 20:03:21 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, mute ??P7
- 20:03:21 [Zakim]
- ??P7 should now be muted
- 20:03:36 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P7 may be Roberto_Castaldo
- 20:03:36 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Castaldo?; got it
- 20:03:38 [bengt]
- noise gone
- 20:03:40 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:03:40 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Becky_Gibson, Tom_Croucher, John_Slatin, Roberto_Castaldo? (muted), ??P6 (muted), ??P8, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Michael_Cooper
- 20:03:42 [rcastaldo]
- k
- 20:03:43 [Zakim]
- ... (muted), Matt
- 20:03:57 [bengt]
- watanabe ?
- 20:03:59 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P6 may be Takayuki
- 20:03:59 [Zakim]
- +Takayuki?; got it
- 20:04:06 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P8 may be Gregg_and_Ben
- 20:04:06 [Zakim]
- +Gregg_and_Ben?; got it
- 20:04:09 [rcastaldo]
- Hi Michael
- 20:04:15 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:04:15 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Becky_Gibson, Tom_Croucher, John_Slatin, Roberto_Castaldo? (muted), Takayuki? (muted), Gregg_and_Ben?, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy,
- 20:04:18 [Zakim]
- ... Michael_Cooper (muted), Matt
- 20:04:20 [MichaelC]
- Hi Roberto - long time...
- 20:04:20 [nabe]
- Yes, I think P6 is me.
- 20:04:27 [rcastaldo]
- :_)
- 20:04:29 [rcastaldo]
- :-)
- 20:05:13 [wendy]
- can someone minute?
- 20:05:38 [wendy]
- i guess i will.
- 20:05:50 [wendy]
- latest draft:
- 20:05:52 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html
- 20:06:16 [nabe]
- I can't hear anything on the phone.
- 20:06:22 [wendy]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0667.html
- 20:06:45 [wendy]
- takayuki - maybe call back in?
- 20:06:47 [Zakim]
- +Sailesh_Panchang
- 20:06:51 [Zakim]
- -Takayuki?
- 20:07:22 [Zakim]
- +??P6
- 20:07:46 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P6 is Takayuki
- 20:07:46 [Zakim]
- +Takayuki; got it
- 20:08:01 [wendy]
- you can hear now. ;)
- 20:08:23 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:08:30 [wendy]
- leave 1.1 aside for now since it is in process of being reworded.
- 20:08:40 [rcastaldo]
- HI Roberto
- 20:08:40 [wendy]
- 1.2
- 20:09:03 [rellero]
- hi, my line is only 28 Kbps, I follow only in irc
- 20:09:53 [wendy]
- scoping may help sort out issues with 1.2
- 20:10:08 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:10:15 [wendy]
- refer to jason's recent email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0676.html
- 20:10:27 [wendy]
- basis of proposal: don't think scoping at level of individual success criteria
- 20:10:56 [Zakim]
- + +1.512.339.aaaa
- 20:11:09 [wendy]
- zakim, +1.512.339.aaaa is Andi
- 20:11:09 [Zakim]
- +Andi; got it
- 20:14:08 [GVAN]
- Q+
- 20:14:14 [Andi]
- Andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:14:16 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:16:06 [sh1mmer]
- 1+
- 20:16:08 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:16:50 [wendy]
- q+ to ask "others for reaction to jason's msg. he posits 2 options. can people speak to the issues he raises?"
- 20:17:29 [Zakim]
- -Sailesh_Panchang
- 20:17:42 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 20:18:35 [wendy]
- axes: content type (e.g., images), levels, scoping
- 20:18:50 [Zakim]
- +Sailesh_Panchang
- 20:19:42 [Zakim]
- -Sailesh_Panchang
- 20:19:43 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 20:19:43 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to ask "others for reaction to jason's msg. he posits 2 options. can people speak to the issues he raises?"
- 20:20:40 [Zakim]
- +Kerstin_Goldsmith
- 20:22:13 [Zakim]
- +Sailesh_Panchang
- 20:22:18 [MichaelC]
- q+
- 20:22:59 [wendy]
- current draft text: The scope of the conformance claim. The scope describes which parts of a site or application are included in the claim. (for example, a single page, an entire site, or a clearly defined portion of a site.)
- 20:23:35 [wendy]
- how do we describe what is included in scope of conformance claim or not?
- 20:23:40 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:23:58 [wendy]
- not do scoping in success criteria, but provide guidance in conformance/scoping section.
- 20:24:06 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:24:17 [wendy]
- ack michael
- 20:24:19 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Mike (5%), Katie_Haritos-Shea (18%), John_Slatin (61%), Gregg_and_Ben? (14%), Wendy (9%)
- 20:24:46 [wendy]
- support first of jason's proposals
- 20:25:01 [wendy]
- unless expect conformance claims to be machine-readable, not sure it makes much difference.
- 20:25:36 [wendy]
- general scoping mechanisms are the only that make sense
- 20:25:56 [wendy]
- q+ to say, "conformance profiles"
- 20:26:18 [GVAN]
- Q+
- 20:26:30 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 20:26:30 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say, "conformance profiles"
- 20:26:31 [GVAN]
- ack wendy
- 20:28:20 [Andi]
- q+
- 20:29:10 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:29:11 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:29:17 [MichaelC]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:29:17 [Zakim]
- Michael_Cooper should now be muted
- 20:29:27 [wendy]
- conformance profiles? templates and examples to help people write their conformance claims.
- 20:30:26 [wendy]
- possible profiles: type of content (multimedia or document vs web application), purpose of content (portal vs e-commerce vs education)
- 20:30:34 [wendy]
- guidance (ala UAAG 1.0, but not as complicated)
- 20:31:10 [wendy]
- how do we deal w/fact that if we went with 1 but not 2, it would eliminate success criteria b/c we know they can't be applied everywhere.
- 20:31:35 [wendy]
- ack and
- 20:31:36 [wendy]
- ack andi
- 20:31:58 [wendy]
- exceptions in the guidelines are not a good idea, but things will be in level 1 that policy makers will require conformance to, when it might not be appropriate.
- 20:32:10 [wendy]
- conformance profiles could help people udnerstand when and what to apply to
- 20:32:21 [wendy]
- something stronger, e.g., model policy?
- 20:32:26 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 20:32:41 [wendy]
- agenda+ conformance profiles or model policies?
- 20:32:48 [GVAN]
- Q+
- 20:33:00 [wendy]
- what's scope vs what's defining appropriate methods?
- 20:33:15 [wendy]
- e.g., 1.1 "text equivalents are explicitly associated...exception..."
- 20:33:39 [wendy]
- if we got rid of the exception, unless put back in by policy makers it would make accessible spelling tests impossible.
- 20:33:46 [wendy]
- is that scoping or dealing w/accessibility issue?
- 20:34:46 [wendy]
- difference between what is scoping to define what needs to be done and scoping for the bounds of reasonableness (and not creating unusable guidelines). should be separated.
- 20:34:58 [wendy]
- q?
- 20:35:09 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:35:44 [wendy]
- example of something that would come out o flevel 1 if we don't scope?
- 20:36:24 [Zakim]
- +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 20:36:28 [Andi]
- wendy, mute me please
- 20:36:29 [wendy]
- move forward, carry these ideas to see if they hold up as we walk through
- 20:36:40 [wendy]
- andi, you can mute yourself by typing, "zakim, mute me"
- 20:36:52 [Andi]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:36:52 [Zakim]
- Andi should now be muted
- 20:36:56 [wendy]
- :)
- 20:37:35 [wendy]
- tests; could say "we do 1.1 except we don't provide captions for spelling tests"
- 20:37:53 [wendy]
- how do you avoid, "we're level 1 conformant except we don't provide alternatives for images"
- 20:38:12 [bcaldwell]
- q+
- 20:38:34 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:38:40 [wendy]
- 1.2 - wanted to leave out webcams
- 20:39:28 [bcaldwell]
- q-
- 20:40:45 [Zakim]
- -Sailesh_Panchang
- 20:40:49 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:41:11 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 20:42:05 [wendy]
- webcams w/speech recognition? scoping them out is not dealing w/accessibility, dealing w/hardships
- 20:42:26 [Zakim]
- +Sailesh_Panchang
- 20:46:36 [Andi]
- q+
- 20:47:48 [wendy]
- ack andi
- 20:48:12 [wendy]
- concept of "essential function"
- 20:48:33 [wendy]
- e.g., for ski resort, need webcam to get info? not usually, often available elsewhere on the site.
- 20:48:41 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:48:44 [GVAN]
- q+
- 20:49:23 [wendy]
- asked question about images transmitted from rover (generated from tool, auto transmitted, and published w/no human intervention)
- 20:49:29 [wendy]
- webcams seem to have similar issues
- 20:50:25 [MattSEA]
- MattSEA has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:50:41 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:50:47 [wendy]
- function is important concept.
- 20:51:01 [wendy]
- "essential function" can be problematic. e.g., of mobile phone.
- 20:51:05 [wendy]
- primary: dialing and talking
- 20:51:11 [wendy]
- secondary: charging batteries, etc.
- 20:51:13 [wendy]
- not useful
- 20:51:40 [wendy]
- ack Mike
- 20:51:48 [GVAN]
- q+
- 20:52:36 [wendy]
- creating scoping for people to create conformance claims, if they have inaccessible content doesn't make snse.
- 20:52:37 [wendy]
- ack gvan
- 20:53:26 [wendy]
- gregg uses analogy of building w/windows and need to describe what you can see outside of the windows.
- 20:53:34 [wendy]
- in order to make the building accessible
- 20:53:49 [wendy]
- webcams are often like windows
- 20:54:23 [wendy]
- we're writing guidelines on how to make content accessible, in conformance we say "you can't make claim if you aren't accessible" except where there is undue burden.
- 20:54:59 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:55:29 [Zakim]
- -Mike
- 20:55:41 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Castaldo?
- 20:56:04 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin_Goldsmith
- 20:56:05 [Zakim]
- +??P0
- 20:56:10 [Zakim]
- +??P7
- 20:56:36 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:56:45 [wendy]
- zakim, who's muted?
- 20:56:45 [Zakim]
- I see Katie_Haritos-Shea, Bengt_Farre, Michael_Cooper muted
- 20:56:47 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Tom_Croucher (45%), Takayuki (4%), ??P7 (48%), Gregg_and_Ben? (44%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (76%), Wendy (10%)
- 20:56:55 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P7 may be Roberto_Castaldo
- 20:56:55 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Castaldo?; got it
- 20:57:01 [wendy]
- zakim, mute Roberto_Castaldo
- 20:57:01 [Zakim]
- Roberto_Castaldo? should now be muted
- 20:57:08 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:57:08 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Katie_Haritos-Shea (muted), Becky_Gibson, Tom_Croucher, John_Slatin, Gregg_and_Ben?, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Michael_Cooper (muted), Matt, Takayuki, Andi,
- 20:57:11 [Zakim]
- ... Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Sailesh_Panchang, ??P0, Roberto_Castaldo? (muted)
- 20:57:18 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P0 may be Kerstin
- 20:57:18 [Zakim]
- +Kerstin?; got it
- 20:57:55 [wendy]
- what are the resolutions for 1.2?
- 20:58:16 [wendy]
- moving on to 2.1
- 20:58:38 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html#keyboard-operation
- 21:02:51 [wendy]
- " where the functionality or its outcome can be described in a sentence," - can this be removed?
- 21:04:29 [wendy]
- sentences can be very long. is this an issue?
- 21:04:40 [wendy]
- needs to be rewritten and clarified
- 21:05:04 [wendy]
- why not "words" - sentence is too long. however, "words" is even more vague.
- 21:05:16 [wendy]
- what about "phrase?"
- 21:06:09 [wendy]
- if get rid of scoping in level 1, it is the same as the level 3 criterion.
- 21:07:05 [wendy]
- 2.2
- 21:07:06 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html#time-limits
- 21:07:54 [wendy]
- most are methods, not exceptions. those that are exceptions:
- 21:07:54 [wendy]
- the time limit is an important part of a real-time event (for example, an auction), and no alternative to the time limit is possible or;
- 21:07:54 [wendy]
- the time limit is part of an activity where timing is essential (for example, competitive gaming or time-based testing) and time limits can not be extended further without invalidating the activity.
- 21:08:08 [wendy]
- (level 1 criterion)
- 21:09:22 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Cooper
- 21:10:45 [wendy]
- overarching "scope" for whole guideline, "unless specific real-time events or rules of competition make such control impossible."
- 21:11:08 [wendy]
- also, scope in most criterion ala, "content that blinks for more than 3 seconds" and " moving or time-based content."
- 21:11:18 [wendy]
- thus, not exceptions, but scoping is built in
- 21:12:03 [wendy]
- 2.4
- 21:12:04 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html#navigation-mechanisms
- 21:12:14 [wendy]
- "documents greater than 50,000 words or sites larger than 50 perceived pages"
- 21:12:33 [wendy]
- how to require structure around a 1 paragraph note?
- 21:12:49 [wendy]
- just one p element...but says, "hierarchical structure,
- 21:12:49 [wendy]
- table of contents (for pages) or site map (for sites),
- 21:12:49 [wendy]
- alternate display order (for pages) or alternate site navigation mechanisms (for sites)
- 21:12:51 [wendy]
- "
- 21:13:08 [wendy]
- trying to say, "if small enough, don't have to do"
- 21:13:34 [wendy]
- times when don't need to provide skip navigation links
- 21:14:08 [Zakim]
- -Andi
- 21:14:19 [wendy]
- 2.5
- 21:14:21 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html#minimize-error
- 21:14:40 [wendy]
- "If a user error is detected, and suggestions for correction are known and can be provided without jeopardizing security or purpose (for example, test validity), they are provided "
- 21:14:47 [wendy]
- similar or different than what have seen before?
- 21:16:06 [wendy]
- types of exceptions: impossibility (e.g., if can't describe in words, no need for description), destroy function (e.g., captioning spelling tests), counter-productive (e.g., no need for skip nav links if onl y have 3 links),
- 21:16:39 [wendy]
- this seems to be combo of impossibility (may not be able to provide suggestions) and function (jeopardizing security)
- 21:16:56 [wendy]
- "Where consequences are significant and time-response is not important"
- 21:17:29 [wendy]
- if not significant, not useful to do. therefore, additional category, "useful"
- 21:17:57 [wendy]
- level 3 for 2.5
- 21:17:58 [wendy]
- Where the input options are known, there are less than 75 of them, and they can be provided without jeopardizing security, test validity, etc, users are allowed to select from a list of options as well as to enter text directly.
- 21:18:21 [wendy]
- "known" = possibility, "<75" = counterproductive, "jeoparding..."=function
- 21:18:46 [wendy]
- 3.1
- 21:18:46 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html#meaning
- 21:19:37 [wendy]
- level 2, #4: note "This does not include use of foreign words in text where such usage is a standard extension of the language."
- 21:21:45 [wendy]
- scoping related to this, i.e., art, poems
- 21:23:05 [wendy]
- but, only 3.1 level 3 #4
- 21:23:12 [wendy]
- the others are applicable, even to poems or archives
- 21:23:31 [wendy]
- however, #4 (complexity of content) could it be scoped out for art? archives?
- 21:23:47 [wendy]
- 4.1
- 21:23:48 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html#use-spec
- 21:23:59 [wendy]
- "Except where the site has documented that a specification was violated for backward compatibility or compatibility with assistive technology,"
- 21:24:48 [wendy]
- that's scoping that applies across the site
- 21:24:56 [wendy]
- falls into counterproductive category?
- 21:26:41 [wendy]
- we've identified 4 primary reasons to create scopig (refer to 4 categories)
- 21:30:18 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 21:30:26 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 21:30:40 [Zakim]
- -Katie_Haritos-Shea
- 21:30:49 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, make log world
- 21:31:42 [wendy]
- action: gregg write up 4 categories of exceptions that we identified to begin discussion on the list
- 21:31:57 [wendy]
- horizontal vs vertical concept?
- 21:32:01 [wendy]
- clarification about scoping
- 21:32:20 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin?
- 21:32:21 [wendy]
- proposals about conformance profiles?
- 21:32:36 [wendy]
- in some cases we see scoping and in others we see exceptions.
- 21:32:51 [wendy]
- is there a way to make them all one or the other?
- 21:33:12 [wendy]
- ack loretta
- 21:33:31 [wendy]
- can we capture the reasons that we have scoping/exceptions?
- 21:33:43 [wendy]
- then, within each guideline, we can highlight where the principles change the interpretation
- 21:34:21 [wendy]
- need to capture how we intend this to be used, particularly by regulatory bodies
- 21:34:53 [wendy]
- if we assume vertical scoping, but wcag 2.0 adopted by someone who does not allow vertical scoping...creates an issue
- 21:36:05 [nabe]
- q+
- 21:36:36 [wendy]
- action: loretta work with gregg on capturing how intend wcag 2.0 to be used, particularly by regulatory bodies.
- 21:36:57 [wendy]
- vertical: large parts of site don't conform (archive)
- 21:37:07 [wendy]
- horizontal: images (pieces taht go across several page)
- 21:37:18 [wendy]
- vertical: one particular page or section of site
- 21:37:35 [Zakim]
- -Matt
- 21:37:45 [wendy]
- horzizontaL: particular element applied across site (e.g., images, webcams that create content)
- 21:38:01 [wendy]
- my site is accessible, except this page that has a webcam - then that's vertical
- 21:38:39 [wendy]
- problem: if say "site except advertisements" but every page has ads...how handle?
- 21:38:47 [wendy]
- perhaps another category, "source of content"
- 21:40:36 [rcastaldo]
- Goodbye folks
- 21:40:37 [Zakim]
- -Tom_Croucher
- 21:40:38 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 21:40:38 [Zakim]
- -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:40:39 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 21:40:40 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 21:40:41 [Zakim]
- -Sailesh_Panchang
- 21:40:42 [Zakim]
- -Gregg_and_Ben?
- 21:40:43 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:40:44 [Zakim]
- -Takayuki
- 21:40:46 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Castaldo?
- 21:40:47 [rcastaldo]
- rcastaldo has left #wai-wcag
- 21:40:48 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
- 21:40:50 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Bengt_Farre, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Becky_Gibson, Tom_Croucher, John_Slatin, Mike, Wendy, Michael_Cooper, Matt, Roberto_Castaldo?, Takayuki?, Gregg_and_Ben?,
- 21:40:53 [Zakim]
- ... Sailesh_Panchang, Takayuki, Andi, Kerstin_Goldsmith, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Kerstin?
- 21:41:05 [wendy]
- reminders
- 21:41:12 [wendy]
- 1. poll re: 2 lists or 1
- 21:41:27 [wendy]
- 2. registration for f2f open. closes on 7 july
- 21:41:34 [wendy]
- 3. reduced rate for hotel expires on 29 june
- 21:41:39 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 21:41:39 [RRSAgent]
- I see 2 open action items:
- 21:41:39 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: gregg write up 4 categories of exceptions that we identified to begin discussion on the list [1]
- 21:41:39 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/17-wai-wcag-irc#T21-31-42
- 21:41:39 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: loretta work with gregg on capturing how intend wcag 2.0 to be used, particularly by regulatory bodies. [2]
- 21:41:39 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/17-wai-wcag-irc#T21-36-36