IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-10-07
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:45:50 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:46:23 [rscano]
- rscano has changed the topic to: +1 617.761.6200 passcode 9224 ("WCAG")
- 19:47:50 [rellero]
- rellero has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:47:59 [rellero]
- Hi
- 19:48:15 [rscano]
- hi
- 19:58:24 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has now started
- 19:58:31 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 19:59:13 [Zakim]
- +??P1
- 19:59:35 [Zakim]
- +Wendy
- 19:59:47 [Zakim]
- +Alex_Li
- 19:59:48 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P1 is Bengt_Farre
- 19:59:48 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 19:59:53 [bcaldwell]
- bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:56 [bengt]
- zakim, I am Bengt_Farre
- 19:59:56 [Zakim]
- ok, bengt, I now associate you with Bengt_Farre
- 20:00:12 [nabe]
- nabe has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:00:15 [Gez]
- Gez has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:00:37 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:00:53 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
- 20:01:09 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:01:19 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:01:19 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Microsoft], Bengt_Farre, Wendy, Alex_Li
- 20:01:23 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: [Microsoft] (58%)
- 20:01:25 [wendy]
- zakim, mute Microsoft
- 20:01:25 [Zakim]
- sorry, wendy, I do not see a party named 'Microsoft'
- 20:01:28 [Zakim]
- +Michael_Cooper
- 20:01:32 [wendy]
- zakim, mute [Microsoft]
- 20:01:32 [Zakim]
- [Microsoft] should now be muted
- 20:01:36 [Zakim]
- +Tom
- 20:01:42 [wendy]
- zakim, mute Bengt
- 20:01:42 [Zakim]
- Bengt_Farre should now be muted
- 20:01:47 [wendy]
- zakim, mute Alex
- 20:01:47 [Zakim]
- Alex_Li should now be muted
- 20:01:48 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, I am Tom
- 20:01:48 [Zakim]
- ok, sh1mmer, I now associate you with Tom
- 20:01:53 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:01:53 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Microsoft] (muted), Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Alex_Li (muted), Michael_Cooper, Tom (muted)
- 20:01:55 [bengt]
- wasnt me :)
- 20:02:08 [wendy]
- zakim, unmute Alex
- 20:02:08 [Zakim]
- Alex_Li should no longer be muted
- 20:02:16 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 20:02:49 [wendy]
- zakim, mute Alex
- 20:02:49 [Zakim]
- Alex_Li should now be muted
- 20:02:49 [nabe]
- zakim, ??P5 is Takayuk_Watanabei
- 20:02:50 [Zakim]
- +Takayuk_Watanabei; got it
- 20:02:57 [wendy]
- zakim, unmute [Microsoft]
- 20:02:57 [Zakim]
- [Microsoft] should no longer be muted
- 20:03:05 [wendy]
- zakim, [Microsoft] is Mike_Barta
- 20:03:05 [Zakim]
- +Mike_Barta; got it
- 20:03:12 [Zakim]
- +??P7
- 20:03:17 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 20:03:20 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 20:03:24 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P7 is David_MacDonald
- 20:03:24 [Zakim]
- +David_MacDonald; got it
- 20:03:25 [Becky]
- Becky has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:03:29 [wendy]
- zakim, [IBM] is Andi
- 20:03:29 [Zakim]
- +Andi; got it
- 20:03:33 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:03:33 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Alex_Li (muted), Michael_Cooper, Tom (muted), Takayuk_Watanabei, David_MacDonald, Becky_Gibson, Andi
- 20:03:38 [Zakim]
- +??P6
- 20:03:48 [rellero]
- zakim, ??P6 is Roberto_Ellero
- 20:03:48 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Ellero; got it
- 20:03:49 [Zakim]
- +??P10
- 20:03:53 [Andi]
- Andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:04:01 [nabe]
- zakim, I am Takayuki_Watanabe
- 20:04:01 [Zakim]
- sorry, nabe, I do not see a party named 'Takayuki_Watanabe'
- 20:04:02 [Zakim]
- -??P10
- 20:04:02 [rellero]
- zakim, I am Roberto_Ellero
- 20:04:03 [Zakim]
- ok, rellero, I now associate you with Roberto_Ellero
- 20:04:06 [Zakim]
- +John_Slatin
- 20:04:07 [Zakim]
- +??P11
- 20:04:09 [rellero]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:04:09 [Zakim]
- Roberto_Ellero should now be muted
- 20:04:19 [nabe]
- zakim, ??P5 is Takayuki_Watanabe
- 20:04:19 [Zakim]
- I already had ??P5 as Takayuk_Watanabei, nabe
- 20:04:20 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P11 is Ben_and_Gregg
- 20:04:20 [Zakim]
- +Ben_and_Gregg; got it
- 20:04:22 [Becky]
- zakim, I am Becky_Gibson
- 20:04:22 [Zakim]
- ok, Becky, I now associate you with Becky_Gibson
- 20:04:28 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:04:28 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Alex_Li (muted), Michael_Cooper, Tom (muted), Takayuk_Watanabei, David_MacDonald, Becky_Gibson, Andi, Roberto_Ellero
- 20:04:31 [Zakim]
- ... (muted), John_Slatin, Ben_and_Gregg
- 20:05:11 [Zakim]
- +??P10
- 20:05:28 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P10 is Roberto_Scano
- 20:05:28 [Zakim]
- +Roberto_Scano; got it
- 20:05:35 [Zakim]
- +JasonWhite
- 20:05:37 [nabe]
- zakim, I am Takayuk_Watanabei
- 20:05:37 [Zakim]
- ok, nabe, I now associate you with Takayuk_Watanabei
- 20:05:38 [rscano]
- zakim, I'm Roberto_Scano
- 20:05:38 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'I'm Roberto_Scano', rscano
- 20:05:45 [rscano]
- zakim, I am Roberto_Scano
- 20:05:45 [Zakim]
- ok, rscano, I now associate you with Roberto_Scano
- 20:06:01 [gregg]
- gregg has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:06:08 [bengt]
- skype is free
- 20:07:06 [rscano]
- zakim, who is here?
- 20:07:06 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Alex_Li (muted), Michael_Cooper, Tom (muted), Takayuk_Watanabei, David_MacDonald, Becky_Gibson, Andi, Roberto_Ellero
- 20:07:09 [Zakim]
- ... (muted), John_Slatin, Ben_and_Gregg, Roberto_Scano (muted), JasonWhite
- 20:07:10 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see gregg, Andi, Becky, Gez, nabe, bcaldwell, rellero, RRSAgent, Zakim, bengt, rscano, Michael, wendy, MDuerst, sh1mmer
- 20:07:23 [Zakim]
- +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 20:08:30 [wendy]
- Topic: TTF update
- 20:08:37 [wendy]
- mc spent most of the day talking about checklists.
- 20:09:09 [wendy]
- mc how checklists, test files, techniques, etc. relate to each other. primary topic for f2f.
- 20:09:27 [wendy]
- mc experimentally started linking from techniques to test files.
- 20:09:53 [wendy]
- mc internal drafts this friday
- 20:10:37 [wendy]
- mc public in november. trying to address as many issues as can before then.
- 20:10:46 [wendy]
- Topic: 1.2
- 20:11:27 [David_MacDonald]
- David_MacDonald has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:13:28 [wendy]
- wac really close to sending to the group, but not quite. trying to list which issues it closes. have several questions but doesn't make sense to address until people have had a chance to review.
- 20:14:32 [wendy]
- wac working to close 32 issues
- 20:15:31 [wendy]
- Next: moving to open issues, moved JIS dicussion to last 30 minutes
- 20:15:47 [nabe]
- Thank you for rearranging the agenda.
- 20:16:36 [sh1mmer]
- nabe it is nice that you are happy to participate so early.
- 20:16:55 [wendy]
- http://tinyurl.com/44j2v
- 20:17:19 [wendy]
- bc currently 400+ issues for WCAG 2.0...not all of the issues are in the mailing list.
- 20:17:26 [wendy]
- bc need help to close the issues
- 20:17:48 [wendy]
- bc good to see upward trend of issues that are being closed, but also open increasing.
- 20:17:55 [wendy]
- first set (above uri) - need people to take action items.
- 20:18:07 [wendy]
- going through them:
- 20:18:08 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=307
- 20:18:38 [wendy]
- looking at xx-small support in user agents and asst. technologies.
- 20:18:49 [wendy]
- which browsers? how far back?
- 20:19:08 [wendy]
- [question from dmd]
- 20:19:27 [wendy]
- bc particularly need background check with screen readers and screen magnifiers
- 20:20:07 [wendy]
- js not much of an issue for screen readers
- 20:20:24 [wendy]
- bg braille?
- 20:21:04 [wendy]
- js hpr and jaws can be set to tell it that "pronounce bold in lower voice"
- 20:21:15 [wendy]
- wac do that for font sizes?
- 20:21:28 [wendy]
- wac want it?
- 20:23:51 [wendy]
- action: david test 307 with screen magnifiers and screen readers, john test with screen readers
- 20:24:51 [wendy]
- action: nobody do some research on xx-small....xx-* support on mobile phones
- 20:25:12 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=368
- 20:25:19 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=501
- 20:25:44 [wendy]
- lumping these 2 together - both are talking about differences between 1.0 and 2.0 and audience/understandability.
- 20:26:11 [wendy]
- bc someone need to look at Appendix C: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-20040730/#id4518765
- 20:26:19 [wendy]
- bc bring this section up-to-date
- 20:26:57 [wendy]
- bc good to clarify before the next public draft
- 20:27:17 [wendy]
- js draft overview of wcag 2.0 - there is clear language there.
- 20:28:42 [wendy]
- action: wendy approach shawn about overview/appendix/intro and coordinating issues related to issues 368 and 501
- 20:28:57 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=381
- 20:29:07 [wendy]
- js think this is moot
- 20:29:12 [wendy]
- action: john address issue 381
- 20:29:21 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=592
- 20:29:57 [wendy]
- for tomorrow's draft, lots of work on normative sections on 1.4/1.5, but did not touch informative (examples)
- 20:30:47 [wendy]
- action: gregg look at examples for 1.4/1.5
- 20:30:57 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=702
- 20:31:03 [wendy]
- bc examples related to guideline 3.3
- 20:31:25 [wendy]
- there is no 3.3
- 20:32:08 [wendy]
- js i rewrote the "concrete concept" example, didn't get incorporated. will resend.
- 20:32:22 [wendy]
- 702 overlaps 381
- 20:32:31 [wendy]
- action: john address 702 (related to 381)
- 20:32:43 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1021
- 20:32:55 [wendy]
- action: becky proposal to close issue 1021
- 20:35:08 [wendy]
- bc next batch are public comments that need answers
- 20:35:24 [wendy]
- action: wendy and becky talk at the f2f about editing xml source
- 20:35:41 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=487
- 20:35:57 [wendy]
- Are tables used for layout (i.e. to structure content) a violation of guideline 1.3?
- 20:36:16 [wendy]
- bc guidelines themselves don't make it clear, has been work on html techniques.
- 20:36:53 [wendy]
- js not technically a violation, if using a data table, must make the relationships perceivale, but doesn't say "can't use talbes for layout"
- 20:37:13 [gregg]
- ack john
- 20:37:23 [gregg]
- q+
- 20:37:26 [wendy]
- js if you use tables for layout, still have to make other relationships clear. can't just use tables to indicate relationships, have to markup structure
- 20:37:32 [wendy]
- ack loretta
- 20:38:01 [wendy]
- lgr initial intention of tables is that they be data, but the reality is that if we limit to data, we'd be "swimming upstream"
- 20:38:08 [wendy]
- ack gregg
- 20:38:15 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:38:46 [wendy]
- gv what does the html spec do?
- 20:38:57 [T_SEKI]
- T_SEKI has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:39:17 [rscano]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/tables.html#h-11.1.1
- 20:39:20 [wendy]
- gv nothing to prevent you from using a table for layout, if you do don't need to do headers.
- 20:39:29 [nabe]
- good morning Seki san!
- 20:39:43 [sh1mmer]
- q-
- 20:40:10 [T_SEKI]
- Good morning
- 20:40:39 [rscano]
- Ohayou :)
- 20:40:48 [wendy]
- gv propose to close by saying, "nothing in 1.3 that prevents use of tables for layout. If there is a relationship in info between the cells, then you must expose it."
- 20:40:55 [wendy]
- js i've got that in general techniques.
- 20:41:16 [rscano]
- we can refer to "old" WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 5.4
- 20:41:22 [wendy]
- gv furthermore, 4.1 says to use things according to spec, and it is up to html wg to answer if use of layout for tables is allowed.
- 20:41:33 [wendy]
- gv thus, we don't prevent it and don'thav ethe authority to reinterpret.
- 20:42:00 [wendy]
- js html-specific question, thus not in guidelines.
- 20:42:09 [wendy]
- gv perhaps a comment for techs doc.
- 20:42:13 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:42:27 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 12 seconds I heard sound from the following: Takayuk_Watanabei (42%), Ben_and_Gregg (3%), John_Slatin (91%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (3%)
- 20:42:37 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:42:39 [bcaldwell]
- bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:42:49 [wendy]
- zakim, mute takayuk
- 20:42:49 [Zakim]
- Takayuk_Watanabei should now be muted
- 20:42:56 [nabe]
- q+ to say "I wonder how many audience can undersrtand these things?"
- 20:43:04 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:43:18 [nabe]
- zakim ,unmute me
- 20:43:56 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, unmute nabe
- 20:43:56 [Zakim]
- sorry, sh1mmer, I do not see a party named 'nabe'
- 20:44:01 [wendy]
- gv anyone want to speak against that conclusion
- 20:44:17 [sh1mmer]
- ack Tom
- 20:44:18 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 20:44:19 [bcaldwell]
- q+
- 20:44:47 [wendy]
- tc see the use of tables as degrading the experience of someone using a screen reader. w/current css support, no need to do it.
- 20:45:14 [gregg]
- q+
- 20:45:39 [wendy]
- tc unacceptable that peoplehave to switch between navigation modes (time it takes to do it0
- 20:45:41 [wendy]
- ack takayuk
- 20:45:43 [Zakim]
- Takayuk_Watanabei, you wanted to say "I wonder how many audience can undersrtand these things?"
- 20:46:02 [wendy]
- tw no one can understand this discussion by only reading the guideline.
- 20:46:19 [wendy]
- tw we need an explanation.
- 20:46:44 [sh1mmer]
- ack gregg
- 20:46:51 [wendy]
- gv there are 2 places that we will make it clear. one is in the technology-specific techniques and the other is the checklist.
- 20:47:01 [wendy]
- gv we will not make it clear in the guidelines because it is an html-specific topic.
- 20:47:51 [wendy]
- gv we don't want to be ambiguous, so will provide information but not at the guideline level
- 20:48:14 [sh1mmer]
- ack bcaldwell
- 20:48:16 [wendy]
- ack ben
- 20:48:34 [nabe]
- zakim ,mute me
- 20:48:38 [wendy]
- bc in response, specifically include a recommendation. "we don't prohibit tables, but we suggest use css"
- 20:48:52 [wendy]
- bc prohibiting tables issue related to authoring tools
- 20:49:12 [wendy]
- gv perhaps at level 3, say don't use tables
- 20:49:27 [wendy]
- gv need to figure what guideline that would fit under
- 20:49:30 [wendy]
- ack andi
- 20:49:52 [wendy]
- asw like ben's approach. "recommend css, but if you use tables for layout we give you guidance for how to use"
- 20:49:55 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 20:50:07 [wendy]
- jw agree with gregg and ben's proposals.
- 20:50:53 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 20:51:42 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:52:05 [wendy]
- js where put something related to layout tables? perhaps 2.4
- 20:52:47 [wendy]
- js at level 3?
- 20:53:11 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 20:53:59 [wendy]
- tc everyone seems to agree that pages w/out layout tables are better. perhaps not instead of put it somewhere, make it similar to scoping? (e.g., phase-in of multimedia) make it a scoping issue.
- 20:54:31 [wendy]
- dmd don't think css support is there yet to totally abandon tables
- 20:56:24 [wendy]
- gv any objection to saying that nothing in 1.3 prevents use of tables for layout?
- 20:56:59 [wendy]
- no one objects
- 20:57:26 [wendy]
- gv add a note that says we may (at level 3) say that no tables are used for layout
- 20:57:27 [Zakim]
- +??P15
- 20:57:51 [wendy]
- no one objects to that statement
- 20:58:12 [wendy]
- gv whether tables are allowed under 4.1 is something that is not determined by this committee but by html wg
- 20:58:16 [wendy]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 20:58:27 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Andi (9%), Ben_and_Gregg (19%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (27%), ??P15 (76%), Wendy (28%)
- 20:58:54 [wendy]
- zakim, mute ??P15
- 20:58:54 [Zakim]
- ??P15 should now be muted
- 20:59:09 [wendy]
- no one disagrees
- 20:59:37 [wendy]
- zakim, unmute ??P15
- 20:59:37 [Zakim]
- ??P15 should no longer be muted
- 20:59:38 [MDuerst]
- zakim, dial Martin-617
- 20:59:38 [Zakim]
- ok, MDuerst; the call is being made
- 20:59:40 [Zakim]
- +Martin
- 20:59:52 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P15 is Makoto
- 20:59:52 [Zakim]
- +Makoto; got it
- 21:00:04 [nabe]
- zakim ,unmute me
- 21:01:06 [wendy]
- zakim, mute Makoto
- 21:01:06 [Zakim]
- Makoto should now be muted
- 21:01:20 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 21:01:20 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Alex_Li (muted), Michael_Cooper (muted), Tom (muted), Takayuk_Watanabei, David_MacDonald, Becky_Gibson, Andi,
- 21:01:23 [Zakim]
- ... Roberto_Ellero (muted), John_Slatin, Ben_and_Gregg, Roberto_Scano (muted), JasonWhite, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Makoto (muted), Martin
- 21:02:33 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1140
- 21:02:58 [wendy]
- (1) We find some part of WCAG 2.0 is difficult to understand because they are
- 21:03:00 [wendy]
- too abstract and too precise. Reader of WCAG 2.0 may need a manual or handbook.
- 21:03:01 [wendy]
- WCAG had better have more examples that show an example to at least one SC.
- 21:04:27 [wendy]
- gv checklist should help clarify
- 21:05:12 [wendy]
- gv e.g., checklist say "use alt-text with img" and "provide captions with movies" the specificity and concreteness you will find in the checklist
- 21:05:18 [wendy]
- gv would that help?
- 21:05:24 [wendy]
- gv or would it still exist?
- 21:05:44 [wendy]
- tw understand the strategy, but guidelines are difficult to read.
- 21:06:39 [wendy]
- gv we agree with the comment and are attempting to write them in as simple language as we can
- 21:07:11 [wendy]
- gv we will see what we can do to provide more examples
- 21:07:22 [wendy]
- ack john
- 21:07:36 [Zakim]
- +??P14
- 21:07:52 [wendy]
- js agree that the guidelines are still more difficult to understand than they should be, intrigued about the "handbook" comment
- 21:08:06 [wendy]
- js don't think we should dismiss that. part of the function that the techniques documents will serve.
- 21:08:09 [wendy]
- zakim, mute ??P14
- 21:08:09 [Zakim]
- ??P14 should now be muted
- 21:08:14 [bcaldwell]
- q+
- 21:08:36 [wendy]
- js no matter how carefully we write the guidelines they will not be self-explanatory. this is why we rely on EOWG and will have books and manuals to explain.
- 21:09:01 [wendy]
- js can't make everything self-explanatory. additonal explantory material will be required.
- 21:09:24 [wendy]
- gv we also agree that [some] reader[s] of WCAG 2.0 will need a manual or handbook
- 21:10:01 [wendy]
- ack bcaldwell
- 21:10:19 [wendy]
- bc i related this issue to the "O'reilly version of wcag 2.0" matt already has action item to propose.
- 21:10:43 [wendy]
- md working with the publisher or using that word to say "good books"
- 21:10:44 [nabe]
- that's a good idea.
- 21:10:47 [wendy]
- gv it is used generically
- 21:11:17 [wendy]
- next comment: http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1141
- 21:11:37 [wendy]
- hello seki-san - did you just join the call?
- 21:12:01 [T_SEKI]
- yes I am sit in
- 21:12:03 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 21:12:03 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Mike_Barta, Bengt_Farre (muted), Wendy, Alex_Li (muted), Michael_Cooper (muted), Tom (muted), Takayuk_Watanabei, David_MacDonald (muted), Becky_Gibson, Andi,
- 21:12:06 [Zakim]
- ... Roberto_Ellero (muted), John_Slatin, Ben_and_Gregg, Roberto_Scano (muted), JasonWhite, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Makoto (muted), Martin, ??P14 (muted)
- 21:12:13 [wendy]
- ok. i think you are P14.
- 21:12:21 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P14 is T_Seki
- 21:12:21 [Zakim]
- +T_Seki; got it
- 21:12:33 [rscano]
- ISO/CD 23973 referred has a long way before become standard....
- 21:12:51 [wendy]
- welcome to the call. if you would like to speak, please type "q+" in IRC and you will be added to the speaker queue.
- 21:13:21 [wendy]
- gv our charter says we can only work on accessibility issues. in the comments it say, "they are related to each other."
- 21:13:27 [T_SEKI]
- Thank you, wendy
- 21:13:54 [wendy]
- gv where they interact (usability and accessibility), it does trigger on accessibility, but if it is a problem for everyone then it is outside of our charter.
- 21:14:17 [wendy]
- gv it would be good if there were usability guidelines, but there are many books that talk about usability.
- 21:15:03 [wendy]
- gv the best that we have is a standard for documenting usability testing - the CIF.
- 21:15:11 [wendy]
- gv however, no standard for usability.
- 21:15:25 [nabe]
- q+
- 21:15:33 [wendy]
- ack Takayuk
- 21:15:47 [wendy]
- zakim, Takayuk_Watanabei is Takayuki_Watanabe
- 21:15:47 [Zakim]
- +Takayuki_Watanabe; got it
- 21:16:13 [wendy]
- tw someone did a user test of WCAG 1.0 and found that most of the problems are not accessibility issues but usability issues.
- 21:17:09 [wendy]
- tw understand the opinion, but we should treat usability issues as much as we can. otherwise, it is difficult to use a web site.
- 21:17:52 [wendy]
- gv it is true that often the people with disabilities have the same problems as everyone else, however, we do not have authority to work on that unless it is a much great problem for someone with a disability.
- 21:18:33 [wendy]
- q+ to say, "perhaps we can talk about a specific example? perhaps we cover more than we think? or is there a usability problem we are not aware of?"
- 21:20:15 [wendy]
- gv ideas for how to address?
- 21:20:19 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 21:20:19 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say, "perhaps we can talk about a specific example? perhaps we cover more than we think? or is there a usability problem we are not aware of?"
- 21:21:58 [wendy]
- action: takayuki provide example of usability issue don't feel is covered. [we'll discuss at f2f]
- 21:22:04 [wendy]
- ack loretta
- 21:22:14 [wendy]
- lgr what would you like to see covered?
- 21:22:25 [wendy]
- gv yes, would be good to see what have in mind.
- 21:22:34 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1142
- 21:22:48 [wendy]
- gv reads issue
- 21:23:11 [wendy]
- gv you said it should be more explicit. we could do that in the examples.
- 21:23:23 [wendy]
- gv could add "an older person who is experiencing..."
- 21:23:48 [wendy]
- gv our guidelines are called, "accessibility guidelines" but don't mention who they are accessible to. so, mention both disabilities as well as older.
- 21:23:53 [rscano]
- "older person" isn't a disability
- 21:23:57 [wendy]
- gv some older people do not have disabilities.
- 21:24:18 [wendy]
- gv could say "people who are older and often develop single and often mixed disabilties" to clarify that is one of our target audiences.
- 21:24:30 [nabe]
- q+
- 21:24:33 [wendy]
- gv that is a good comment. we need to clarify our language to reflect that.
- 21:24:36 [wendy]
- ack takayuki
- 21:25:01 [wendy]
- tw if a person who is old and cognitive function is deteriorated, is he disabled?
- 21:25:11 [wendy]
- gv he or she is experiencing a disability.
- 21:25:27 [wendy]
- ack andi
- 21:25:42 [wendy]
- asw we would consider them to have a disability but they may not consider themselves to have a disability.
- 21:25:57 [wendy]
- asw the paragraph about the design principles could use work. we could include issues withg aging. as well as in user needs.
- 21:26:24 [sh1mmer]
- Well done Andi!
- 21:26:44 [rscano]
- yep!
- 21:26:53 [wendy]
- action: asw incorporate aging into paragraph about the design principles as well as user needs.
- 21:26:53 [nabe]
- thank you!
- 21:27:14 [wendy]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1143
- 21:27:28 [wendy]
- gv we talked about that earlier in this call. the techniques doc says "avoid layout tables"
- 21:27:43 [wendy]
- gv the conclusion we came to today is:
- 21:27:58 [wendy]
- gv 1.3 does not preclude using tables for layout
- 21:28:33 [wendy]
- gv 4.1 says "use according to spec" and we don't decide the specification -it is up to the HTML WG
- 21:29:08 [wendy]
- gv open question: perhaps at least at level 3 it would be good to have suggestion to avoid tables for layout. it is not there currently.
- 21:29:10 [David_MacDonald]
- I think we've talked about that on techniques. I think the techniques taskforce is still up i the air about that. I don't think we are leaning in the direction "avoid layout tables"
- 21:29:35 [wendy]
- gv in techniques: describe problems.
- 21:29:47 [wendy]
- gv in 4.1 could describe problem in an example
- 21:30:25 [wendy]
- gv we are reluctant to state "avoid tables for layout" because there is still issues with css development (tools and widely used practices)
- 21:30:30 [wendy]
- tw that's ok
- 21:30:37 [wendy]
- gv we are at the end of the call
- 21:31:04 [wendy]
- gv will set aside time at f2f to further discuss these questions
- 21:31:56 [wendy]
- q+ to say "need to follow-up at better time of day for japan?"
- 21:32:12 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 21:32:16 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 21:33:50 [Zakim]
- -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:34:51 [Zakim]
- -JasonWhite
- 21:35:24 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Cooper
- 21:36:02 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Scano
- 21:36:11 [Zakim]
- -Roberto_Ellero
- 21:36:15 [sh1mmer]
- and I thought 9pm was a PITA
- 21:36:25 [rscano]
- by to all
- 21:36:28 [sh1mmer]
- Well done nabe :)
- 21:36:59 [nabe]
- thank you Tom,
- 21:37:15 [Zakim]
- -Mike_Barta
- 21:37:16 [Zakim]
- -Alex_Li
- 21:37:17 [Zakim]
- -Andi
- 21:37:18 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 21:37:20 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:37:20 [Zakim]
- -Ben_and_Gregg
- 21:37:21 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 21:37:22 [Zakim]
- -Tom
- 21:37:24 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 21:37:27 [Zakim]
- -Martin
- 21:37:28 [Zakim]
- -David_MacDonald
- 21:37:35 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, make log world
- 21:37:43 [Zakim]
- -T_Seki
- 21:37:53 [T_SEKI]
- Hi
- 21:38:10 [nabe]
- Tnak you Gregg, thank you Wendy.
- 21:38:41 [nabe]
- nabe has left #wai-wcag
- 21:38:51 [wendy]
- You are welcome. Thank you for commenting and attending. Thanks also to Martin, Makoto, and Seki-san
- 21:38:56 [Zakim]
- -Makoto
- 21:39:32 [T_SEKI]
- Thank you Gregg ,thank you wendy, see again Brussels
- 21:39:53 [wendy]
- See you in Brussels.
- 21:40:54 [T_SEKI]
- Yes I going to EU work Shop
- 21:42:12 [wendy]
- Good. It should be interesting.
- 21:42:47 [T_SEKI]
- I sit in 3 days
- 21:43:56 [Zakim]
- disconnecting the lone participant, Takayuki_Watanabe, in WAI_WCAG()4:00PM
- 21:44:00 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
- 21:44:01 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Wendy, Alex_Li, Bengt_Farre, Michael_Cooper, Tom, Mike_Barta, Becky_Gibson, David_MacDonald, Andi, Roberto_Ellero, John_Slatin, Ben_and_Gregg, Roberto_Scano,
- 21:44:03 [Zakim]
- ... JasonWhite, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Martin, Makoto, T_Seki, Takayuki_Watanabe
- 21:44:14 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 21:44:14 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 21:44:19 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- I see 10 open action items:
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: david test 307 with screen magnifiers and screen readers, john test with screen readers [1]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-23-51
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: nobody do some research on xx-small....xx-* support on mobile phones [2]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-24-51
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy approach shawn about overview/appendix/intro and coordinating issues related to issues 368 and 501 [3]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-28-42
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: john address issue 381 [4]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-29-12
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: gregg look at examples for 1.4/1.5 [5]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-30-47
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: john address 702 (related to 381) [6]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-32-31
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: becky proposal to close issue 1021 [7]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-32-55
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy and becky talk at the f2f about editing xml source [8]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T20-35-24
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: takayuki provide example of usability issue don't feel is covered. [we'll discuss at f2f] [9]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T21-21-58
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: asw incorporate aging into paragraph about the design principles as well as user needs. [10]
- 21:44:19 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/07-wai-wcag-irc#T21-26-53
- 21:44:34 [T_SEKI]
- bye