IRC log of wai-wcag on 2005-04-21
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:59:16 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:16 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/04/21-wai-wcag-irc
- 19:59:21 [wendy]
- RRSAGent, make log world
- 19:59:46 [wendy]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0170.html
- 19:59:49 [wendy]
- Chair: John
- 19:59:53 [wendy]
- Meeting: WCAG WG weekly
- 20:00:02 [wendy]
- agenda+ Agenda Review (John - 5 minutes)
- 20:00:09 [wendy]
- agenda+ TTF Update (Wendy - 5 min.)
- 20:00:19 [wendy]
- agenda+ issue summary on guideline 2.4 (Yvette- 25 min.)
- 20:00:26 [wendy]
- agenda+ issue summary on guideline 1.3 (Joe- 25 min.)
- 20:00:32 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:00:33 [wendy]
- agenda+ 4.2/UAAG summary and issues (Loretta- 25 min.)
- 20:00:35 [Zakim]
- +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 20:00:44 [wendy]
- agenda+ issue summary on guideline 1.1 (Wendy- 25 min.)
- 20:00:51 [wendy]
- agenda+ Looking ahead: Proposed planning framework
- 20:00:52 [ben_]
- ben_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:01:16 [Zakim]
- +Wendy
- 20:01:50 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 20:01:58 [ChristopheStrobbe]
- ChristopheStrobbe has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:02:16 [Zakim]
- +Matt
- 20:02:16 [Becky_Gibson]
- Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:02:19 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
- 20:02:19 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 20:02:32 [Zakim]
- +Christophe_Strobbe
- 20:02:46 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 20:03:12 [Michael]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:03:12 [Zakim]
- Michael_Cooper should now be muted
- 20:03:36 [Zakim]
- +Katie_Haritos-Shea
- 20:03:56 [Zakim]
- +Tim_Boland
- 20:04:04 [Zakim]
- +??P12
- 20:04:13 [ben_]
- zakim, ??P12 is Gregg_and_Ben
- 20:04:13 [Zakim]
- +Gregg_and_Ben; got it
- 20:04:19 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:04:19 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, John_Slatin, Yvette_Hoitink, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Wendy, Bengt_Farre, Matt, Christophe_Strobbe, Becky_Gibson, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Tim_Boland,
- 20:04:23 [Zakim]
- ... Gregg_and_Ben
- 20:04:31 [Zakim]
- +JasonWhite
- 20:04:35 [Tim]
- Tim has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:05:29 [wendy]
- scribe: Michael
- 20:05:36 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 1
- 20:05:36 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Agenda Review (John - 5 minutes)" taken up [from wendy]
- 20:05:43 [gregg]
- gregg has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:07:13 [Michael]
- js: harvest feedback on issue summaries of 2.4, 1.3, 4.2, 1.1
- 20:07:36 [Michael]
- js: get stuff on table for people to incorporate into revised proposals
- 20:07:49 [Michael]
- js: then look at planning framework
- 20:08:08 [Michael]
- zakim, close this item
- 20:08:08 [Zakim]
- agendum 1 closed
- 20:08:09 [Zakim]
- I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 20:08:10 [Zakim]
- 2. TTF Update (Wendy - 5 min.) [from wendy]
- 20:08:13 [Michael]
- zakim, take up item 2
- 20:08:13 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "TTF Update (Wendy - 5 min.)" taken up [from wendy]
- 20:08:20 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/04/20-wai-wcag-minutes.html
- 20:08:38 [Michael]
- wac: discussed Becky's categories of scripting techniques
- 20:09:01 [RylaDog]
- RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:09:12 [Michael]
- wac: Becky has more action items
- 20:09:20 [Michael]
- wac: discussed planning framework
- 20:09:34 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 20:09:52 [Michael]
- wac: actions to work out details
- 20:10:17 [Michael]
- wac: assignment templates - for people to use as they work on proposals
- 20:10:25 [Michael]
- wac: discussions on <object> issues
- 20:10:44 [Michael]
- wac: technique using <link> from PF group (based on DHTML roadmap)
- 20:10:56 [Michael]
- wac: more action items to investigate
- 20:10:58 [bengt]
- bengt has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:11:19 [Michael]
- wac: discussed structure of guide doc, re proposals sent last week
- 20:11:39 [Michael]
- wac: more work to do on those to harmonize and re-propose
- 20:11:43 [wendy]
- q?
- 20:12:31 [Michael]
- zakim, close this item
- 20:12:31 [Zakim]
- agendum 2 closed
- 20:12:32 [Zakim]
- I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 20:12:33 [Zakim]
- 3. issue summary on guideline 2.4 (Yvette- 25 min.) [from wendy]
- 20:12:37 [Michael]
- zakim, take up item 3
- 20:12:37 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "issue summary on guideline 2.4 (Yvette- 25 min.)" taken up [from wendy]
- 20:13:19 [Michael]
- js: reminder, just take questions, and take comments and responses, goal not to close today
- 20:14:16 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 20:14:21 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
- 20:14:21 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 20:14:49 [Michael]
- yph: found items to close, some that need small amount of discussion, some proposals for new SC, and some proposals for deletions
- 20:15:03 [Michael]
- yph: a major problem is overlap between 2.4 and 1.3
- 20:15:37 [Michael]
- 1.3 is separate structure from presentation (or behaviour), 2.4 is structural stuff for navigation
- 20:15:56 [Michael]
- yph: 434 propose to close
- 20:16:07 [ben_]
- q+
- 20:16:14 [Michael]
- ack ben
- 20:16:49 [Michael]
- bbc: fact we have a level 1 SC doesn't necessarily deal with overlap with 1.3
- 20:17:08 [Michael]
- yph: some suggestions to make L3 items L1, propose to postpone until those are handled
- 20:17:27 [wendy]
- zakim, ping me in 20 minutes
- 20:17:27 [Zakim]
- ok, wendy
- 20:18:03 [Michael]
- gv: artifact from back when we designated as Core or not, therefore can close this as overcome by events
- 20:18:17 [Michael]
- bbc: not opposed to closing issue, just want to be sure of rationale
- 20:18:44 [Michael]
- js: objection to closing on above rationale?
- 20:18:51 [Michael]
- <none>
- 20:19:30 [Michael]
- yph: 829 move linear reading order to L1
- 20:19:50 [Michael]
- yph: now reworded as re sequence
- 20:20:12 [Michael]
- yph: related item we might want to delete - issue 1441
- 20:20:37 [Michael]
- yph: can't test if sequence matters (author decision), and also covered by 1.3, therefore remove SC
- 20:20:52 [gregg]
- q+
- 20:21:08 [wendy]
- q+
- 20:21:31 [Michael]
- js: 1 proposal to promote, 1 to delete, discuss
- 20:22:07 [Michael]
- gv: current wording doesn't make sense, not sure why necessary
- 20:22:30 [Michael]
- gv: need to be sure whatever we do is conditional re sequence, because much content can be read in many correct ways
- 20:23:04 [Michael]
- ack gregg
- 20:23:06 [Michael]
- ack wendy
- 20:23:17 [Michael]
- wc: relates to 1214 and 1391
- 20:23:48 [Michael]
- wc: 1391 is programatic determination of sequence is too vague, maybe needs to be always programatically determined
- 20:24:00 [Michael]
- wac: perhaps sensible keyboard navigaiton overlaps
- 20:24:30 [Michael]
- wac; 1214 is skipping groups of links, also relates to order making sense
- 20:24:42 [Michael]
- wac: we need something at level 1 but could make it more broad
- 20:24:44 [Michael]
- ack john
- 20:25:27 [Michael]
- js: example of online newspaper with sidebars etc. in general techniques
- 20:26:03 [Michael]
- js: intent not to assume all conditions but to deal with when screen readers make gobbledegook
- 20:26:26 [Michael]
- js: perhaps wording to clarify that needed
- 20:26:55 [Michael]
- tb: concern of objectivity of "meaningful" - author and user may disagree
- 20:27:13 [Michael]
- tb: can it be objectively evaluated?
- 20:27:21 [Michael]
- js: can be evaluated by human
- 20:28:11 [Michael]
- yph: 1214 promote to L1 for harmonizing with Section 508
- 20:28:23 [Michael]
- yph: is harmonizing something we want to consider?
- 20:28:27 [wendy]
- q+
- 20:28:57 [Michael]
- gv: propose we hold off because one of the WAI metagroups is discussing
- 20:29:35 [wendy]
- ack wend
- 20:30:10 [Michael]
- wac: if we agree to move navigating items in sequence to level 1, this really just falls into techniques so we can remove SC
- 20:30:27 [Michael]
- wac: need to be sure we discuss grouping things, then discuss navigating in sequence
- 20:31:05 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:31:14 [Michael]
- wac: some ohter changes outlined in a post re this
- 20:31:36 [Michael]
- js: discussion of <link> to provide such features another technique, supporting Wendy's position
- 20:32:23 [Michael]
- gv: not clear on Wendy's proposal
- 20:32:30 [Michael]
- js: discuss on list
- 20:33:15 [Michael]
- yph: progressive complexity - easy to understand summary, then other stuff
- 20:33:57 [Michael]
- yph: was proposed to go under 2.4
- 20:34:03 [Michael]
- yph: bug 1132
- 20:34:05 [ben_]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1132
- 20:34:09 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:34:28 [Michael]
- js: should be addressed by a proposal working on
- 20:34:28 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:34:55 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 20:35:08 [Michael]
- yph: 1137 increase prioirty of divide blocks of information in to manageable units
- 20:35:14 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 20:35:17 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
- 20:35:17 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 20:35:23 [Michael]
- yph: 2 SC for this - text as paragraphs and hierarchical sections
- 20:35:25 [ben_]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1137
- 20:35:32 [Michael]
- yph: perhaps we should have a more generic version
- 20:36:19 [Michael]
- yph: re need to divide blocks of info into manageable units
- 20:36:55 [Michael]
- gv: recursive - when you divide blocks you still have blocks that need to divide. Need a divide when "too large" and how do you define threshold.
- 20:37:16 [Michael]
- ack j
- 20:37:27 [Zakim]
- wendy, you asked to be pinged at this time
- 20:37:37 [Michael]
- js: work on 3.1 might be relevant
- 20:37:52 [Michael]
- js: relative to size of task user has
- 20:38:06 [Michael]
- js: exist generally accepted ways of discussing that stuff, will send to list
- 20:38:27 [Michael]
- js: may be advisory too
- 20:38:43 [Michael]
- gv: many of the things we look at we "harvest out" into advisory techs
- 20:39:09 [Michael]
- ack l
- 20:39:25 [Zakim]
- +Mike_Barta
- 20:39:36 [Michael]
- lgr: agree not only text that needs structure, but concerned re house example
- 20:39:49 [gregg]
- q?
- 20:39:54 [Michael]
- lgr: zoom in vs explore
- 20:40:02 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 20:40:21 [Michael]
- yph: yes, need manageable
- 20:40:45 [Michael]
- js: yvette should write up as functional outcome, then we can look at techniques to achieve, e.g., separate steps, zooming, etc.
- 20:41:02 [Michael]
- zakim, close this item
- 20:41:02 [Zakim]
- agendum 3 closed
- 20:41:03 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 20:41:05 [Zakim]
- 4. issue summary on guideline 1.3 (Joe- 25 min.) [from wendy]
- 20:41:21 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 5
- 20:41:21 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "4.2/UAAG summary and issues (Loretta- 25 min.)" taken up [from wendy]
- 20:42:05 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:42:51 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 20:42:54 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
- 20:42:54 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 20:43:16 [Michael]
- js: process pause - we want to get to a proposal, which should allow us to close bugs
- 20:43:52 [RylaDog]
- RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:44:52 [Michael]
- gv: may need to modify proposals for some things based on discussion, things too controversial might need to be re-raised
- 20:44:54 [Michael]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:44:54 [Zakim]
- Michael_Cooper should now be muted
- 20:45:54 [Yvette]
- I'll take over
- 20:45:56 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 20:45:56 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Michael_Cooper (muted), John_Slatin, Yvette_Hoitink, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Wendy, Matt, Christophe_Strobbe, Becky_Gibson, Katie_Haritos-Shea (muted), Tim_Boland,
- 20:45:58 [Yvette]
- zakim, mute me
- 20:45:59 [Zakim]
- ... Gregg_and_Ben, JasonWhite, Mike_Barta (muted), Bengt_Farre
- 20:46:00 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 20:46:12 [Yvette]
- js: Since Joe's not here, let's go on with Loretta's item
- 20:46:24 [Yvette]
- scribe: Yvette
- 20:46:29 [Yvette]
- lgr: 4.2
- 20:46:46 [Yvette]
- lgr: summary from subgroup work in overview message
- 20:46:55 [Yvette]
- lgr: difference between web application and user agent
- 20:47:35 [Yvette]
- lgr: based on that distinction that Wendy wrote, we tried to walk through UAAG level 1 to see what was involved and see if WCAG already covered that or things needed to be added
- 20:47:44 [Yvette]
- lgr: feedback anyone?
- 20:48:15 [Yvette]
- gvdh: is the distinction in the post?
- 20:48:42 [Yvette]
- js: listed in the agenda, includes Wendy's message with distinction between web application and user agent
- 20:48:46 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0160.html
- 20:49:10 [Yvette]
- js: sorry for the URL mix up, wrong URL was in the agenda
- 20:50:05 [Yvette]
- lgr: is definition of web application appropriate for what we want with this guideline?
- 20:50:36 [Yvette]
- js: that's two questions: 1. definition of web application clear and accurate? 2. is this appropriate for our purposes?
- 20:50:48 [Yvette]
- js: anyone have a different definition for web app?
- 20:51:17 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 20:51:35 [Yvette]
- gvdh: do web applications have interface controls? 4.2 is meant to handle the included interface. Example: flash
- 20:51:39 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:51:48 [wendy]
- q+ to say "interface covered by other WCAG guidelines"
- 20:52:15 [Yvette]
- gvdh: we never said that it _was_ a user agent, just that it has interface controls so we said rather than make our own rules we refer to UAAG
- 20:52:27 [wendy]
- ack q
- 20:52:35 [Michael]
- ack w
- 20:52:35 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say "interface covered by other WCAG guidelines"
- 20:52:49 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 20:52:56 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
- 20:52:56 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 20:53:05 [Yvette]
- wc: we were looking at UAAG because we were looking at interface. However if you look at our guidelines, we actually cover interfaces pretty well in our guidelines
- 20:53:37 [Yvette]
- wc: main issues: name widgets, make sure widgets can be accessed, provide role and state information
- 20:53:51 [Zakim]
- -Katie_Haritos-Shea
- 20:54:14 [Yvette]
- wc: we matched all the UAAG to WCAG 2 criteria and realized that there are places where authors need to provide the input the user agent needs to provide the interface
- 20:54:16 [Zakim]
- +Katie_Haritos-Shea
- 20:54:22 [Becky_Gibson]
- q+
- 20:54:33 [Yvette]
- wc: there are some additions we need to make, without re-inventing the wheel of UAAG.
- 20:54:43 [Yvette]
- wc: interface _is_ covered by our guidelines, with some possible additions
- 20:55:09 [RylaDog]
- RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:55:15 [wendy]
- ack john
- 20:55:17 [Yvette]
- js: confirm what wc said
- 20:55:39 [Yvette]
- js: there are analyses of how UAAG relates to WCAG
- 20:55:50 [wendy]
- ack becky
- 20:56:06 [Yvette]
- bg: Questions about Wendy's message about web app and user agent
- 20:56:14 [Yvette]
- bg: I'll get back to that later
- 20:56:22 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 20:56:24 [Yvette]
- jw: Agree with wc
- 20:56:40 [Yvette]
- jw: in analysis it became clear we couldn't just refer to UAAG
- 20:57:06 [Yvette]
- jw: it's not possible to conform to UAAG with web content
- 20:57:34 [Yvette]
- jw: we need to find out what's missing from the guidelines for user agents to work with
- 20:57:36 [wendy]
- zakim, ping me in 10 minutes
- 20:57:36 [Zakim]
- ok, wendy
- 20:57:56 [Yvette]
- bg: I didn't get some of the examples Wendy gave like the Javascript one.
- 20:58:18 [Yvette]
- wc: examples were to illustrate web applications that were not user agents
- 20:58:26 [Yvette]
- zakim, unmute me
- 20:58:26 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
- 20:59:25 [wendy]
- what the author needs to provide in the delivery unit so that the user agent can generate an accessible perceivable unit
- 21:00:10 [Yvette]
- gvdh: if I understand correctly, most of that is already in our guidelines
- 21:00:23 [Yvette]
- gvdh: so rather than sending people off to UAAG, just include what's missing in our guidelines
- 21:00:39 [ben_]
- q+
- 21:00:40 [Yvette]
- gvdh: so we suspend the reference to UAAG until we figure out what's missing
- 21:00:45 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:01:53 [Yvette]
- gvdh: need to make sure people creating web applications put the right stuff in so they're accessible
- 21:01:55 [Zakim]
- -Mike_Barta
- 21:02:06 [Yvette]
- gvdh: make sure all the information is available to screen readers
- 21:02:11 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 21:02:17 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:02:22 [Yvette]
- js: that's exactly what the analysis calls for
- 21:02:31 [Yvette]
- js: analysis tells where in our guidelines we need to specify that
- 21:03:27 [Yvette]
- q?
- 21:03:40 [wendy]
- ack ben
- 21:04:09 [Yvette]
- bc: In the UAAG analysis there are examples that talk about requiring that things be available programatically
- 21:04:15 [Zakim]
- +Mike_Barta
- 21:04:36 [Yvette]
- bc: confused by what was meant by some of those f.e. "require to determine background images programatically"
- 21:04:45 [Becky_Gibson]
- q+
- 21:05:08 [Yvette]
- lgr: the idea is to make sure that no matter the form, the user agent will be able to get at the information
- 21:05:22 [Yvette]
- lgr: if it's HTML source, that's programatically available to the UA
- 21:05:36 [Yvette]
- lgr: it's a way to say that the source expresses the information about these relationships.
- 21:06:02 [Yvette]
- bc: that helps a bit, I can see that there are cases where it's more difficult to distuinguish between foreground and background
- 21:06:08 [Yvette]
- bc: I can see where you're going
- 21:06:13 [wendy]
- ack becky
- 21:06:26 [wendy]
- q+
- 21:06:49 [Yvette]
- bg: Issue I have with this (will post) is about requiring ATAG for web apps that allows content generation
- 21:07:27 [Yvette]
- bg: for example: mail input web app that would require asking for alt-text
- 21:07:29 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 21:07:37 [Zakim]
- wendy, you asked to be pinged at this time
- 21:07:42 [Yvette]
- bg: scares me as web app developer
- 21:08:04 [Yvette]
- wc: only web apps that involve creating content that is meant for the web would need to conform to ATAG
- 21:08:45 [Yvette]
- wc: hairy issue: for example, our IRC client logs to the web, so would our IRC program have to confrom to ATAG?
- 21:09:01 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:09:04 [Yvette]
- wc: we could say "if your app generates web content, go to ATAG"
- 21:09:18 [Yvette]
- wc: doesn't clarify when web content needs ATAG or WCAG
- 21:09:30 [bengt]
- zakim, drop bengt_farre
- 21:09:30 [Zakim]
- sorry, bengt, I do not see a party named 'bengt_farre'
- 21:09:36 [Zakim]
- -??P5
- 21:09:38 [Yvette]
- bg: an e-mail application could generate web content too, but you mean specifically web content generating applications?
- 21:09:45 [Yvette]
- wc: Yes, blogger for example
- 21:09:55 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 21:09:57 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
- 21:09:57 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 21:10:13 [Yvette]
- bg: I'll post my example to the list
- 21:10:29 [Yvette]
- tb: ATAG meeting next week. I'll take it to that group.
- 21:11:08 [Yvette]
- mm: from the ATAG perspective everything is well defined already. I'm missing what the grey area is
- 21:11:58 [Yvette]
- wc: the current def of AT doesn't exclude content that isn't necessarily meant for the web
- 21:12:12 [Yvette]
- wc: when we participate in mailing list, we are generating web content
- 21:12:43 [Yvette]
- mm: not true, the W3C tools are creating web content. They are taking content not meant as such and creating web content from it. IRC client is not an authoring tool
- 21:13:06 [Yvette]
- js: Loretta, can you make 4.2 proposal by Tuesday?
- 21:13:11 [Yvette]
- lgr: SURE!
- 21:13:36 [Yvette]
- js: There's a number of important messages about 4.2. PLEASE READ THEM
- 21:14:10 [Yvette]
- lgr: Would like comments by end of day Monday
- 21:15:00 [wendy]
- scribe: Becky_Gibson
- 21:15:10 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 21:15:10 [Zakim]
- agendum 5 closed
- 21:15:11 [Yvette]
- zakim, mute me
- 21:15:12 [Zakim]
- I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 21:15:13 [Zakim]
- 4. issue summary on guideline 1.3 (Joe- 25 min.) [from wendy]
- 21:15:14 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 21:15:19 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 6
- 21:15:19 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "issue summary on guideline 1.1 (Wendy- 25 min.)" taken up [from wendy]
- 21:15:26 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0172.html
- 21:15:43 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: when started 1.1 revies serveral issues about definitions
- 21:16:01 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: depending on defs. SC can mean very different things
- 21:16:43 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: started with definitions to get grounded and felt first SC is most contentious and affects baseline
- 21:18:01 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: main ques. is if we define text content as ...... and functional text content as ..... (see post)
- 21:18:39 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: also proposed defs for content
- 21:18:59 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: don't want 4.2 to morph into just how to label widgets
- 21:19:42 [Tim]
- Tim has left #wai-wcag
- 21:19:48 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: separate out non-text content is anything not rep. via unicode characters - feels like good def - are there any concerns?
- 21:19:56 [Becky_Gibson]
- bc: what about ascii art?
- 21:20:24 [Yvette]
- zakim, unmute me
- 21:20:24 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
- 21:20:24 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: is ascii art represented as string of unicode characters?
- 21:20:33 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:20:48 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: going to need a sub def for each type on non text content
- 21:20:54 [bengt_]
- zakim, drop bengt_farre
- 21:20:54 [Zakim]
- Bengt_Farre is being disconnected
- 21:20:55 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:21:07 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: functional non-text, non-text to create a sensory info and .....
- 21:21:10 [Zakim]
- +Luca_Mascaro
- 21:21:24 [bengt]
- zakim, Luca_Mascaro is Bengt_Farre
- 21:21:24 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 21:21:25 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: ascii art is used to convey info so I think def holds
- 21:21:26 [Zakim]
- -Mike_Barta
- 21:21:34 [Yvette]
- zakim, mute me
- 21:21:34 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
- 21:22:07 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: 3 text def: functional non-text, not-text to convey info; and to convey sensory exp.
- 21:22:17 [wendy]
- q?
- 21:22:51 [ChristopheStrobbe]
- q+
- 21:23:01 [wendy]
- ack jason
- 21:23:08 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: have to consider spatial arrangement - will post a def
- 21:24:03 [Becky_Gibson]
- jw: issue of meaning of content; ordinarily content in delivered unit is considered content; it is not always a stream of ordered unicode characters
- 21:24:25 [Becky_Gibson]
- jw: not all of those may be presented - we need to make a disctinction about what is content that is presented to the user
- 21:24:42 [Becky_Gibson]
- jw: need to be specific as to what content wcag applies
- 21:25:22 [Becky_Gibson]
- jw: example is a pdf file structure of the document is not represneted as seq. of unicode characters even though the text is
- 21:25:27 [wendy]
- q+ to say non-text content refers to perceivable unit. content refers to delivery unit.
- 21:25:41 [Becky_Gibson]
- jw: don't want to req. the structure to require text alternative
- 21:25:48 [gregg]
- q+
- 21:25:54 [wendy]
- ack chris
- 21:26:14 [Becky_Gibson]
- cs: concerned that req. unicode is controversial
- 21:26:31 [Becky_Gibson]
- cs: issues with Japanese and chinese in particular
- 21:26:57 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: to address CS will take action to check with WT and Makoto
- 21:27:10 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: but thinks unicode should cover
- 21:27:18 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: but we are not req. unicode, right?
- 21:28:02 [wendy]
- action: wendy to check with makoto and takayuki other w3c people.
- 21:28:07 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 21:28:07 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say non-text content refers to perceivable unit. content refers to delivery unit.
- 21:28:12 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: correct; document does not have to be documented in unicode but must represent unicode character
- 21:28:34 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: non text content refers to what is in perceivable unit; content refers to what is in delivery unit
- 21:28:40 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: will tweak defs
- 21:28:42 [wendy]
- ack gregg
- 21:28:56 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: I think we are req. unicode- if not what else are we req text to be in?
- 21:29:08 [wendy]
- q+ to say "unicode does not require utf8 - that's just one encoding"
- 21:29:18 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: if not req. unicode then what is our def. of text?
- 21:29:45 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: jason's pt is excellent - talked about separating structure of info from the info
- 21:30:11 [wendy]
- zakim, ping me in 5 minutes
- 21:30:11 [Zakim]
- ok, wendy
- 21:30:12 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: structure is content so can't define all next content to incude;
- 21:30:26 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: what do we call content that is not part of structure?
- 21:30:29 [mcmay]
- mcmay has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:30:36 [mcmay]
- q+ structure is metainformation
- 21:30:44 [mcmay]
- q+ to say structure is metainformation
- 21:30:46 [wendy]
- ack lor
- 21:30:54 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:30:55 [Zakim]
- +Mike_Barta
- 21:31:04 [Becky_Gibson]
- lgr: i think we are saying that unicode rep of text should be programmatically determined
- 21:31:14 [bengt_]
- zakim, drop bengt_farre
- 21:31:14 [Zakim]
- Bengt_Farre is being disconnected
- 21:31:15 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:31:30 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre
- 21:31:32 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: want it to be in unicode when AT accesses it; can be encrypted, compressed and UA would pull it out
- 21:31:42 [ChristopheStrobbe]
- q+ to say that 'text' is unicode or other character set / character encoding scheme defined by a standardization org
- 21:31:47 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: has to be in fashion that when it goes thru UA it gets presented as unicode
- 21:32:06 [Zakim]
- -Tim_Boland
- 21:32:40 [Becky_Gibson]
- lgr: thinks wendy's def that talks about any encoding can be used but must be able to be mapped into unicode
- 21:33:00 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: but mapping is issue - are we req. all UA to convert everything to unicode
- 21:33:13 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: have Vander
- 21:33:34 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: have VanderEncryption so now UA is req. to map that to unicode?
- 21:33:40 [Becky_Gibson]
- lgr: you must provide mapping/apis
- 21:33:47 [Yvette]
- q+ to say "How is unicode an accessibility issue?"
- 21:34:07 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: unicode is very "general" term - there are several encodings you can use to get to unicode characters
- 21:34:24 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: but lgr was going further saying any coding
- 21:34:38 [Becky_Gibson]
- lgr: think misinterpretting programmatically determinable
- 21:34:50 [ChristopheStrobbe]
- q- will follow up on mailing list
- 21:34:54 [ben_]
- q+
- 21:34:54 [Becky_Gibson]
- lgr: suggest taking off list
- 21:34:54 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 21:34:56 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say "unicode does not require utf8 - that's just one encoding"
- 21:35:05 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: wendy has discovered imp. whole
- 21:35:11 [Zakim]
- wendy, you asked to be pinged at this time
- 21:35:23 [Yvette]
- q-
- 21:35:48 [ChristopheStrobbe]
- q-
- 21:35:55 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: think some of issues we are discussing with tweaks from JW that defs proposed are still heading in right direction
- 21:36:14 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: see Jason's issues as biggest - use of word content
- 21:36:28 [wendy]
- ack mc
- 21:36:28 [Zakim]
- mcmay, you wanted to say structure is metainformation
- 21:36:30 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: we can use what is in delivery unit vs perceivable unit to help clarify
- 21:36:44 [Becky_Gibson]
- mm: disagree that structure is info - structure is meta info.
- 21:37:01 [Becky_Gibson]
- mm: if have a doc with only structure there is no info being conveyed
- 21:37:15 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: structure is not information
- 21:37:29 [wendy]
- ack john
- 21:38:01 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: markup is information about the document - that is one kind of info we are trying to preserve across changes in presentation
- 21:38:35 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: markup is meta info about the content and how it is organized so we need to be able to talk about both that and the material that is not pure structure
- 21:38:52 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: but is presenting substance of what we want users to interact with
- 21:39:03 [Becky_Gibson]
- bc: want to ask about the labeling and flickr app
- 21:39:25 [Becky_Gibson]
- bc: curious of how baseline ques. fit in - right approach to force labels for each function
- 21:39:26 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:39:39 [bengt_]
- bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
- 21:39:44 [wendy]
- q+ to say, "not description of each. label of each for one baseline, otherwise functionality of each"
- 21:39:45 [bengt]
- zakim, drop bengt_farre
- 21:39:46 [Becky_Gibson]
- bc: if my baseline includes support for flash I assume flash player deals with desc. of information
- 21:39:46 [Zakim]
- sorry, bengt, I do not see a party named 'bengt_farre'
- 21:39:47 [wendy]
- ack ben
- 21:39:55 [Becky_Gibson]
- bc: with it
- 21:39:58 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 21:39:58 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say, "not description of each. label of each for one baseline, otherwise functionality of each"
- 21:40:04 [gregg]
- q+
- 21:40:12 [Zakim]
- +??P5
- 21:40:19 [bengt]
- zakim, ??P5 is Bengt_Farre
- 21:40:19 [Zakim]
- +Bengt_Farre; got it
- 21:40:40 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: each widget must be labeled for the baseline that assumes web apps; for lower baseline would provide the alternative mech to provide functionality
- 21:41:21 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: if have flash that has controls and exposes them to screen rdr then they would have labels
- 21:41:42 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: if controls are not exposed to screen reader then would have alternatives
- 21:42:25 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: all the way down to the widget level there is text
- 21:42:31 [Zakim]
- -Bengt_Farre
- 21:43:00 [wendy]
- ack gregg
- 21:43:02 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: describe the widget at the level that it occurs (editor didn't capture this very well - sorry)
- 21:43:17 [Zakim]
- -Mike_Barta
- 21:43:44 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: thinking that role and state stuff fits under 1.3
- 21:44:13 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: 1.1 labelling the function, - keyboard access; 1.3 - behavior
- 21:45:12 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: please read and respond to Joe Clarks issue summary - deals with GL and not SC so will ask him to address SC in relation to issues he summarized
- 21:45:40 [Becky_Gibson]
- wc: can you post what you just said about 1.3 and role and state
- 21:46:02 [wendy]
- action: wendy suggest role/state as part of new 1.3 (ala joe's proposal)
- 21:46:41 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: more comments or concerns about info already discussed?
- 21:46:46 [Zakim]
- -Katie_Haritos-Shea
- 21:46:53 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: any objections to Wendy pursuing her approach on 1.1?
- 21:47:17 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: think it is good as it is exposing old issues - so think it is worthwhile continuing the exploration
- 21:47:59 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: but a bit worried about combining 4.2 into other places things will be too confusing - only a mathematician can understand
- 21:48:18 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: don't want it to be too confusing because defs are so precise- may need plainer language
- 21:48:46 [wendy]
- zakim, close this item
- 21:48:46 [Zakim]
- agendum 6 closed
- 21:48:47 [Zakim]
- I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 21:48:48 [Zakim]
- 4. issue summary on guideline 1.3 (Joe- 25 min.) [from wendy]
- 21:48:53 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 4
- 21:48:53 [Zakim]
- agendum 4 closed
- 21:48:54 [Zakim]
- I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
- 21:48:55 [Zakim]
- 7. Looking ahead: Proposed planning framework [from wendy]
- 21:49:08 [wendy]
- zakim, take up item 7
- 21:49:08 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "Looking ahead: Proposed planning framework" taken up [from wendy]
- 21:49:16 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: each thurs call will discuss 4 issue summaries and/or proposals
- 21:49:35 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: 2 step seq. first call will discuss and raise concerns about proposals sent to list two days earlier
- 21:49:50 [wendy]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0156.html
- 21:49:52 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: discussion will feed revised proposals and issues summaries to be sent to list on following tues
- 21:49:55 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Cooper
- 21:50:09 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: for hopeful resolution /consensus on following thurs
- 21:50:34 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: WC is putting this into an app and will be posting the calendar into planning section of WG site
- 21:50:57 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: is dynamic plan so we can get clear representation of what happens when we fall behind
- 21:51:19 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: hope this keeps us mindful of role we play and implications of missing deadlines
- 21:51:44 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: so as soon as you know you are going to miss a deadline please let someone know so we can plan and adjust
- 21:51:57 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: know this sounds very corporate but needs to be said
- 21:52:09 [Yvette]
- zakim, unmute me
- 21:52:09 [Zakim]
- Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
- 21:52:11 [Becky_Gibson]
- js: want to thank all who are working hard and participating
- 21:52:24 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: if any hope ot getting to end need to operate in such a fashions
- 21:52:48 [Becky_Gibson]
- gv: need to continue momentum to keep making progress - reiterates thanks
- 21:52:53 [Zakim]
- -Matt
- 21:52:55 [Zakim]
- -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:52:56 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 21:52:57 [Zakim]
- -Yvette_Hoitink
- 21:52:58 [Zakim]
- -Gregg_and_Ben
- 21:53:00 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 21:53:01 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 21:53:03 [Zakim]
- -Christophe_Strobbe
- 21:53:42 [ben_]
- ben_ has left #wai-wcag
- 21:54:37 [Zakim]
- -JasonWhite
- 21:54:38 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
- 21:54:40 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Michael_Cooper, John_Slatin, Yvette_Hoitink, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Wendy, Matt, Bengt_Farre, Christophe_Strobbe, Becky_Gibson, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Tim_Boland,
- 21:54:43 [Zakim]
- ... Gregg_and_Ben, JasonWhite, Mike_Barta
- 21:54:53 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 21:54:53 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/04/21-wai-wcag-minutes.html wendy
- 21:58:48 [mcmay]
- mcmay has left #wai-wcag
- 22:00:53 [joeclark]
- joeclark has joined #wai-wcag
- 22:01:11 [jslatin]
- 8Hi, Joe!
- 22:01:33 [jslatin]
- We just finished the call...
- 22:02:12 [jslatin]
- There should be minutes in a couple of days (that sounds odd).
- 22:02:29 [jslatin]
- We didn't discuss your 1.3 messages since you weren't available.
- 22:02:44 [jslatin]
- I did ask that people review your messages carefully and respond.
- 22:03:03 [jslatin]
- Also, I'll ask that you go one more step
- 22:03:38 [jslatin]
- and propose success criteria for 1.3 that (a) provide testable ways to implement the guideline as you propose it and
- 22:03:53 [jslatin]
- (b) address as many of the issues in your summary as possible;
- 22:04:02 [jslatin]
- and (c) address any concerns raised on the list.
- 22:04:18 [jslatin]
- Then we can go through it on Thursday's call next week.
- 22:04:50 [jslatin]
- I'll send email about this too.
- 22:05:01 [jslatin]
- Great minds think alike.
- 22:05:44 [ChristopheStrobbe]
- ChristopheStrobbe has left #wai-wcag
- 22:05:49 [jslatin]
- Also, Wendy is going to send something related to 1.3, so watch for that one too.
- 22:06:06 [jslatin]
- I'm heading home. Long day. I'll send mail.
- 22:16:55 [ben]
- ben has joined #wai-wcag
- 22:27:44 [ben]
- ben has left #wai-wcag
- 22:31:25 [joeclark]
- joeclark has left #wai-wcag
- 22:52:08 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 22:52:08 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 22:52:13 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 22:52:13 [RRSAgent]
- I see 2 open action items:
- 22:52:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy to check with makoto and takayuki other w3c people. [1]
- 22:52:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/21-wai-wcag-irc#T21-28-02
- 22:52:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy suggest role/state as part of new 1.3 (ala joe's proposal) [2]
- 22:52:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/21-wai-wcag-irc#T21-46-02