20:57:44 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
20:57:48 <bengt> bengt has joined #wai-wcag
20:57:50 <wendy> RRSAGent, make log world
20:58:28 <rellero> rellero has joined #wai-wcag
20:59:11 <David> David has joined #wai-wcag
21:00:24 <ChrisR> ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
21:00:48 <nabe> nabe has joined #wai-wcag
21:01:34 <bengt> zakim, what conferences ?
21:01:34 <Zakim> I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM active
21:01:35 <Zakim> also scheduled at this time are XML_QueryWG(ttf)3:00PM, WAI_UAWG()2:00PM
21:01:48 <bengt> zakim, this is WAI_WCAG
21:01:48 <Zakim> ok, bengt; that matches WAI_WCAG()4:00PM
21:02:03 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
21:02:35 <Zakim> +Matt
21:02:39 <wendy> zakim, who's on the phone?
21:02:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P0, Alan, Wendy, [IPcaller], Mike_Barta, John_Slatin, [IPcaller.a], Matt
21:02:42 <Zakim> +??P6
21:02:49 <wendy> zakim, ??P6 is Bengt
21:02:49 <Zakim> +Bengt; got it
21:03:00 <wendy> zakim, ??P0 is David
21:03:00 <Zakim> +David; got it
21:03:32 <Zakim> +??P7
21:03:32 <MattSEA> MattSEA has joined #wai-wcag
21:03:37 <MattSEA> zakim, who's here?
21:03:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see David, Alan, Wendy, [IPcaller], Mike_Barta, John_Slatin, [IPcaller.a], Matt, Bengt, ??P7
21:03:39 <Zakim> On IRC I see MattSEA, nabe, ChrisR, David, rellero, bengt, RRSAgent, Zakim, wendy, achuter
21:03:40 <Zakim> +JasonWhite
21:03:46 <Zakim> +??P8
21:03:53 <rellero> zakim, ??P7 is rellero
21:03:53 <Zakim> +rellero; got it
21:03:54 <wendy> zakim, ??P8 is Trace
21:03:55 <Zakim> +Trace; got it
21:04:03 <rellero> zakim, mute me
21:04:03 <Zakim> rellero should now be muted
21:04:06 <wendy> zakim, who's on the phone?
21:04:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see David, Alan, Wendy, [IPcaller], Mike_Barta, John_Slatin, [IPcaller.a], Matt, Bengt, rellero (muted), JasonWhite, Trace
21:04:10 <ben_> ben_ has joined #wai-wcag
21:04:25 <Zakim> +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
21:04:32 <wendy> zakim, IPcaller is Chris
21:04:32 <Zakim> +Chris; got it
21:04:38 <wendy> zakim, IPcaller.a is Takayuki
21:04:38 <Zakim> +Takayuki; got it
21:04:47 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
21:04:48 <gregg> gregg has joined #wai-wcag
21:04:54 <Zakim> +[IBM]
21:04:58 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: David (41%), Chris (14%), Takayuki (32%), Bengt (4%), Trace (50%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (3%), Wendy (11%)
21:05:03 <wendy> zakim, IBM is Andi
21:05:03 <Zakim> +Andi; got it
21:05:10 <nabe> zakim, I am Takayuki
21:05:10 <Zakim> ok, nabe, I now associate you with Takayuki
21:05:20 <nabe> zakim, mute me
21:05:20 <Zakim> Takayuki should now be muted
21:05:33 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
21:05:43 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: David (4%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (19%), Andi (26%)
21:05:56 <wendy> zakim, mute Andi
21:05:56 <Zakim> Andi should now be muted
21:06:03 <wendy> zakim, unmute Andi
21:06:03 <Zakim> Andi should no longer be muted
21:06:23 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
21:06:36 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: David (5%), Trace (29%), Loretta_Guarino_Reid (73%), Andi (10%)
21:06:55 <wendy> zakim, mute Loretta
21:06:55 <Zakim> Loretta_Guarino_Reid should now be muted
21:07:00 <David> test
21:07:07 <ben_> ben_ has left #wai-wcag
21:07:14 <ben_> ben_ has joined #wai-wcag
21:07:16 <wendy> zakim, unmute Loretta
21:07:16 <Zakim> Loretta_Guarino_Reid should no longer be muted
21:07:24 <Zakim> +Avi
21:07:26 <Zakim> -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
21:07:41 <Zakim> +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
21:08:14 <Becky_Gibson> Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
21:08:50 <Zakim> +[IBM]
21:09:01 <wendy> zakim, IBM is Becky
21:09:01 <Zakim> +Becky; got it
21:10:00 <wendy> Topic: text equiv summary
21:10:02 <wendy> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/att-0067/text-equiv-summary.html
21:10:06 <MattSEA> for avi: http://www.bestkungfu.com/archive/date/2004/05/understanding-semantics/
21:10:53 <David> wendy will walk through things that seem slam dunk about 1.1 
21:11:04 <David> david is minuting
21:11:25 <David> Wendy, sent email and text as an attachment
21:12:07 <David> grouped issues into 5 groups, 1) close easy, 2) some work) 3) need discussion and some elephants
21:12:52 <David> 170# bugzila advertising, - recommend we stay silent on advertisers leave for polcy makers, think it is handled in 1.1
21:13:35 <wendy> q?
21:13:37 <David> gv agregation we may make a comment -wendy had it removed but will put it back in
21:13:57 <David> closed 17- bug
21:14:00 <David> #373
21:14:32 <David> requested about read aloud using assistive technology rather than screen readed---will close
21:14:39 <David> #664 
21:14:41 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=664
21:14:59 <Andi> Andi has joined #wai-wcag
21:15:32 <ben_> q+
21:15:34 <David> respond to it buy saying to reviewer, it is beyond us to require that
21:15:45 <David> gv id this about alt text
21:16:10 <David> this is about the leap button
21:16:18 <wendy> s/leap/delete
21:16:36 <wendy> ack ben
21:17:11 <wendy> ack andi
21:17:18 <David> for an icon like garbage can, the alt t4ext shut just say the function rather than a garbage can description...Ben says these discussions should go in General technique.  john will note that 
21:18:08 <wendy> ack chris
21:18:29 <David> Andi...we should close it doesn't belong in our guidelines...gv will respond to say we will recommend the function of the button
21:19:15 <wendy> ack jas
21:19:33 <David> Chris  .... suggest alt= description but title should say where it was going to go....gv...the purpose of alt text is to be able to remove the images, and have the alt perform the function
21:20:28 <David> Jason - agrees we should close it....GV will say close it and say ALT should be function based...unless it is complex...then a longdesc
21:21:09 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=665
21:21:10 <David> GV...closes issue
21:21:37 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=791
21:21:41 <David> 665# a screenreader should.....we've changed the example that they complained about..so its ok
21:21:45 <David> #791
21:22:56 <David> benefit..."1.1 does not benefit people who cannot read test...Wendy thinks we shold decline make no changes and close issue...
21:23:26 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=791
21:23:28 <David> andi thinks we should not say text equivalents will help people who have trouble reading text...
21:23:42 <wendy> action: wendy propose a new benefit based on this response
21:23:47 <David> wendy will propose new benefit based on tis response
21:24:53 <David> GV says we should refer bugs related to informative over to ediors and save our group time
21:25:32 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=890
21:25:33 <David> Wendy will skip ones about examples
21:25:41 <David> #890
21:25:54 <David> guideline leaves no room for null alt
21:26:24 <David> wendy thinks no change and close issue
21:26:34 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=951
21:26:40 <David> #951
21:27:11 <David> text equivalents should be easy to use...its a user issue, close issue
21:27:50 <David> gv: text alternative should be in a standard format
21:28:38 <David> wendy : should be provided according to spec
21:28:54 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1004
21:29:30 <David> clarify sc in guideline 1.1....its old we have fixed ll the proposed issue, overome by events
21:29:58 <David> 1024
21:30:10 <David> covered close..re null alt text
21:30:18 <David> 1078
21:30:25 <David> duplcate
21:31:07 <David> 1082  andi...need a sc to cover when to use alt verses LONGDESC.. when to use each....150 characters....
21:32:07 <David> wendy thought problem...150 is english, language specific and html specific...close...but must have istances where 1075 get to later
21:32:25 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1082
21:32:29 <David> gv lets cover in techniques and checklists not in sc
21:32:40 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test3.html
21:33:03 <David> techniques are wreslting with this test #3 no resolution yet
21:33:17 <David> 1232 done
21:34:03 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1321
21:34:11 <David> 1321 alt text for graphics should be lower priority...response if alt text is moved it will be done less..let's decline...
21:35:02 <David> 1322 related to 1321
21:35:07 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=404
21:35:55 <Zakim> -John_Slatin
21:36:13 <Zakim> +John_Slatin
21:36:37 <David> #404 proposals for examples...infomative...adopt it...created a table for SC...an example for every SC...#5  don't do an example...not leanding itself...Wendy would like feedback for examples
21:37:36 <Zakim> +??P13
21:37:42 <wendy> ack john
21:37:43 <wendy> ack andi
21:38:03 <David> people wonder what example are associated with what examples....GV suggests a code, andi says lets figure out how to do itlater but we should do it and associate examples
21:38:03 <wendy> zakim, ??P13 is Kerstin
21:38:03 <Zakim> +Kerstin; got it
21:38:24 <David> 437# informaive
21:38:32 <Kesh> Kesh has joined #wai-wcag
21:38:35 <David> 588, 633 informative
21:38:57 <Kesh> Kerstin just joined -- sorry I am late.
21:39:58 <David> 587 def of text equivalent...wendy will close 683 and....nothing to discuss yet...
21:40:17 <David> #666 waiting ofr [roosal about metadata
21:40:40 <David> 937 more about examples, suggest we go to general techniques with these examples
21:41:06 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1079
21:41:16 <ben_> q+
21:41:36 <David> 1079# modify "text alternatives...., " propose ...andi thinks irrelevant till we fix 1.1 GV says let's look at it
21:42:13 <ben_> ack ben
21:43:00 <wendy> 1079 - can close
21:43:22 <David> GV says close...if non text is decorative an alt text not required and therefore second sentence is not correct...close it because, it says we need alt for decorative images
21:43:39 <Zakim> -rellero
21:43:59 <David> # clse 
21:44:26 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
21:44:33 <David> 1207 will be closed because related GV says we can close
21:44:41 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 14 seconds I heard sound from the following: John_Slatin (9%)
21:45:03 <rellero> rellero has joined #wai-wcag
21:45:21 <wendy> 1207 - can close b/c OBE
21:45:33 <David> GV its clear that it is marked so it can be closed cause current wording covers it
21:45:48 <David> 1080 close....
21:46:01 <David> 1104# html specific
21:46:05 <Zakim> +??P7
21:46:17 <rellero> zakim, ??P7 is rellero
21:46:17 <Zakim> +rellero; got it
21:46:21 <rellero> zakim, mute me
21:46:21 <Zakim> rellero should now be muted
21:46:33 <David> elaphant time!!!!!!!
21:46:41 <wendy> zakim, mute rellero
21:46:41 <Zakim> rellero was already muted, wendy
21:46:47 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
21:46:51 <David> the noise isthe elephant
21:46:59 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: David (14%), Andi (8%), Wendy (69%), JasonWhite (5%)
21:47:08 <David> 1075 andi will summarize
21:47:08 <wendy> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1075
21:47:25 <Zakim> +Alex_Li
21:48:14 <David> it should be possible to provide a Text alternative that is not associated with the technology, IE, chart and graph, had alt text...but alt is not enough...longdesc should be used or put on the pages or a link to the page
21:48:16 <achuter> q+
21:48:44 <wendy> ack jas
21:49:13 <David> JW : disagree with proposal, about aainst explict content
21:50:30 <David> person reading who has dsability will not know that the external text is an alternative.. so there will be an explicit assoc copy and an external, very confusing, 
21:50:43 <David> if it is done on a server the issue will go away...
21:51:18 <wendy> q+ to say, "at least one....at least a label.... is explicitily assoc..."
21:51:21 <David> GV: agrees
21:51:45 <wendy> ack ach
21:51:46 <gregg> q+
21:51:48 <David> an automated tool may take care of it...erhaps the explcit assoc should be in metadata
21:52:34 <David> Allan: can be in the same page. long desc pointing to a paragraph below the graph. not a separate page
21:52:39 <wendy> ack john
21:52:41 <David> John agrees with Jason
21:52:55 <David> HPR can find a long desc on same page
21:52:57 <wendy> ack mike
21:53:42 <David> Mike agrees with andi, he understands it includes linking to same page is in spec
21:54:13 <Kesh> q+ kerstin
21:54:35 <wendy> ack wendy
21:54:35 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to say, "at least one....at least a label.... is explicitily assoc..."
21:54:43 <David> wendyl. propose to both camps: have alt that says has a description. current wording..."maybe say ..."at least one...." play with wording to satisfy both groups
21:54:46 <wendy> ack gregg
21:55:42 <David> GV: don't have bits and peices of the description in different places...
21:56:15 <Kesh> Kerstin: I have to go to another meeting, sorry -- just wanted to put my hand up and agree with Andi and Mike.  I agree that we should not create rules for testing facilitation as Gregg is saying, as well.
21:56:17 <wendy> q+ to say, "in case of svg, are the alternatives always explicit? i.e., the alternative is an alternative view of the data, isn't it? i.e., extracting text, reading order... from the svg data??"
21:56:20 <Kesh> ack kerstin
21:56:27 <David> GV let's not create rules just for testing...and besides you can't test if a alt text is necessary
21:56:48 <Kesh> Bye!
21:56:50 <Kesh> Kesh has left #wai-wcag
21:56:55 <Zakim> -Kerstin
21:58:18 <David> GV I had a chart, and chart was described below so no need to have a LONGDESC to it cause it will be read twice, we should just make sure that it is easy to find the text alternative
21:58:20 <wendy> ack andi
21:59:01 <David> Andi, OK with that, but if there has to be a programatic association, then that's a problem
21:59:18 <wendy> ack john
21:59:21 <wendy> ack wendy
21:59:21 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to say, "in case of svg, are the alternatives always explicit? i.e., the alternative is an alternative view of the data, isn't it? i.e., extracting text, reading
21:59:25 <Zakim> ... order... from the svg data??"
21:59:26 <David> GV: so every image should have a caption and it could be an alt text?
21:59:48 <David> wendy what about SVG, 
22:00:15 <wendy> ack jas
22:00:20 <David> Wendy.. no defn of explicitly associated
22:01:26 <gregg> q+
22:01:37 <David> Jason disagress cause it should be a machine readable so machine can decide what to do it. disagrees that new technologies will not support it. because our specs can be followed by mfg
22:01:54 <David> he disagrees with wendy's position
22:02:02 <wendy> s/wendy's/andi's
22:02:05 <David> oops andi's postion
22:04:08 <David> prefers, saying that we put explicit assoc in metadata, HTML does satisfy explicit association ALT text satisfys even if more content alternative is not machine associative
22:04:23 <wendy> ack gregg
22:04:39 <David> GV. can'[t just say there is a chart here
22:05:37 <David> If you have  a technology that doesn't associate then does not satify 1.1
22:06:13 <wendy> ack andi
22:06:18 <David> If it wasn't necessary to put in the ALT text.
22:07:29 <David> Wendy....if someone invents new format that brings in benefits, but not acessible, but we provide acessible html version it is the text alternative...to have expicit association necessary then this would not be conforming
22:07:39 <David> andi
22:07:41 <wendy> isn't that 4.2? "Any programmatic user interface components of the content conform to at least the default set of conformance requirements of the UAAG 1.0 at Level A plus the sets of requirements (a) through (i) (below) that apply. If the custom user interfaces cannot be made accessible, an alternative solution is provided that meets WCAG 2.0 (including this provision) to the level claimed."
22:07:47 <David> sub andi for wendy...
22:08:27 <wendy> ack jason
22:09:54 <David> Jason...not what's happening in 1.1...just make conformance claim on the html version, rather than saying its a 1.1 issue...an alternative version that meets guideline stands on it s own.
22:11:07 <David> Wendy: so if I have an image on a page, diecide to leave alt null and put description below..is that conforming 
22:11:15 <wendy> s/Wendy/andi
22:11:47 <David> GV says no put "Chart...descibed below" in the alt text...because its not a decorative issue
22:12:03 <David> oopss sorry I have that in my brain your both brilliant
22:12:46 <wendy> :)
22:13:52 <wendy> q+ to say "who take action to define 'explicitly associated?'"
22:14:32 <David> john what would happen if "use title in paragraph"   using title element as an alt but 
22:15:08 <David> GV we have closure,,, we must have ALT text exicitly associated but if there is more. text it should be easy to find..
22:15:23 <wendy> q-
22:15:43 <wendy> action: andi propose definition of 'explicitly associated'
22:16:13 <wendy> dmd: it "is must be easy to find" is that testable?
22:16:34 <Becky_Gibson> sorry, have to run
22:16:37 <wendy> gv: immediately adjacent, explicitly associated, or longer description explicitly associated.
22:16:37 <Zakim> -Becky
22:16:49 <David> thx wendy
22:17:18 <wendy> we'll need defn of "immediately adjacent" especially if the content can reflow...how code it in case it gets repurposed?
22:18:24 <wendy> ack jason
22:18:38 <wendy> q+ to ask, "how to code something to be adjacent?"
22:18:50 <wendy> i.e., to ensure adjacency
22:18:54 <wendy> q-
22:19:11 <David> GV: if its not immediately agascent then it would not confom like text books images  are not immediatly ajascent
22:19:31 <David> spelling adjacent
22:20:16 <wendy> q+ to say, "propose that we move on to the mapping. wait for defn before more discussion"
22:22:18 <David> JW: i think we killed the elephant
22:22:45 <wendy> q-
22:22:57 <David> Ben will send John the minutes from the bug...ANdi will work on the defintion
22:23:44 <David> of expicitly association...andi doesn't think the elephant is dead....gredd says we'fe not behind it anymore we are in front of it
22:23:48 <David> issue 895
22:24:17 <David> baseline discussion, 
22:24:39 <David> questions about scripts, noscripts
22:25:34 <David> related to non-text content , and related to 1.1 that wendy has an action item
22:26:19 <David> gv; uaag if you have a script y0u must do following, but doesn't say must support scripts,
22:26:29 <wendy> related to defn of non-text content (issue 587)
22:27:02 <David> UAAG compliance as baseline would say script need not be supported...
22:27:31 <David> Mat May..but that is the users own fault for not using a browser that supports scripts
22:28:06 <wendy> gv: UAAG says, if you support scripts, you need to do x, y, z. It does not say, you must support scripts.
22:28:24 <David> gv: if uaag is baseline we must assume scripts are not accommodated...we would hve to make a special provision in our baseline to accomodate this
22:29:24 <David> jw; uaag not designed to accept any technology including html???
22:30:00 <David> the developer makes a decsion on what they will support, 
22:30:31 <David> one way is to recognize uuag does not require speicif technolgy 
22:30:51 <David> content dev. will make those associaitons
22:31:39 <David> gv:that leaves our guidlines ambiguous
22:32:02 <David> wendy: in doublin we should expicitlysay our assumption...
22:32:37 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/conformance.html#conformance-claims
22:33:25 <Zakim> -Alex_Li
22:34:03 <David> this is still in the air....jason have problem with expliit technology..stuff..
22:34:34 <Zakim> -Avi
22:34:48 <Zakim> -Mike_Barta
22:35:02 <David> jason guidleines should not be technology specif
22:36:00 <David> wendy...we are not oracles but we must say what aour assumptions are,,esp for HTML techniques...ie do we assume scriting is supprted or not,
22:36:18 <David> Jason : the content author should e allow to assume what they want
22:37:05 <David> GV this is a hydra and we will come back to it
22:38:23 <David> wendy is working on 1.2 and we will come back to it
22:38:53 <David> thx everyone and we are closing....
22:39:19 <wendy> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:39:26 <wendy> Scribe: David
22:39:30 <wendy> Chair: Gregg
22:39:35 <wendy> Meeting: WCAG WG telecon
22:39:39 <wendy> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:40:38 <rellero> Bye
22:40:38 <Zakim> -Andi
22:40:40 <Zakim> -John_Slatin
22:40:41 <Zakim> -Wendy
22:40:41 <Zakim> -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
22:40:42 <Zakim> -Trace
22:40:42 <Zakim> -Bengt
22:40:43 <Zakim> -David
22:40:45 <ChrisR> ChrisR has left #wai-wcag
22:40:45 <Zakim> -Alan
22:40:46 <Zakim> -JasonWhite
22:40:47 <Zakim> -Chris
22:40:49 <Zakim> -Takayuki
22:40:51 <Zakim> -rellero
22:41:53 <nabe> nabe has left #wai-wcag
22:44:37 <Zakim> -Matt
22:44:38 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
22:44:39 <Zakim> Attendees were Alan, Wendy, [IPcaller], Mike_Barta, John_Slatin, Matt, Bengt, David, JasonWhite, rellero, Trace, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Chris, Takayuki, [IBM], Andi, Avi, Becky,
22:44:41 <Zakim> ... Kerstin, Alex_Li
22:45:32 <wendy> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:46:30 <wendy> Present: Alan, Wendy,  Mike_Barta, John_Slatin, Matt, Bengt, David, JasonWhite, rellero, Gregg, Ben, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Chris, Takayuki, Andi, Avi, Becky, Kerstin, Alex_Li
22:47:29 <wendy> Regrets: Yvette, Roberto Castaldo, Sailesh 
22:47:31 <wendy> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:48:44 <wendy> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0086.html
22:49:02 <wendy> Date: 13 January 2005
22:49:06 <wendy> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:49:51 <wendy> david - thank you for minuting!
22:55:44 <Andi> bye Wendy
22:55:53 <Andi> have a good weekend!
22:56:03 <Andi> Andi has left #wai-wcag
22:56:42 <wendy> zakim, bye
22:56:42 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wai-wcag
22:56:48 <wendy> RRSAgent, bye
22:56:48 <RRSAgent> I see 2 open action items:
22:56:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: wendy propose a new benefit based on this response [1]
22:56:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/01/13-wai-wcag-irc#T21-23-42
22:56:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: andi propose definition of 'explicitly associated' [2]
22:56:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/01/13-wai-wcag-irc#T22-15-43