W3C

WCAG WG weekly telecon

27 Oct 2005

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Sofia_Celic, Bengt_Farre, Wendy Chisholm, Makoto_Ueki, Yvette_Hoitink, David_MacDonald, Christophe_Strobbe, Gregg Vanderheiden, Ben Caldwell, Alex_Li, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Gez_Lemon, Becky_Gibson, Michael_Cooper, Lisa_Seeman, John_Slatin, Roberto_Castaldo, Andi_Snow-Weaver, Matt_May, Kerstin_Goldsmith, Gian_Sampson-Wild
Regrets
Don_Evans, Sandy_Bartell, Rob, Haverty, Sebastiano Nutarelli, Luca_Mascaro, Roberto Scano, Roberto Ellero, Takayuki Watanabe
Chair
Gregg
Scribe
wendy

Contents


 

 

Status and updates

last week's face-to-face. people worked long hours (~8:30-7:30 each day, with 15 minute breaks and 45 minute lunches) for 4 days.

changes made to wiki. gregg sent two lists of items. The first list - are these ready to go out for the next draft?

The second list - are these changes acceptable? e.g., ok to delete a SC or to combine a couple.

the third list are those things we still need to do - that hasn't been sent yet.

First block of guides - are they ready for publication?

resolution: first block of items are ready for publication list at: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005OctDec/0121.html>

Guideline 1.2 L3 SC3 - audio descriptions (live multimedia)

Proposal to delete this success criterion

RATIONALE: because it is almost impossible to do unless the live multimedia is scripted so you know when people are not talking so you can speak audio descriptions. In that case we are only talking about live plays or something and that was not seen as a major enough type of content on the Web for us to have a success criteria all about it.

resolution: delete Guideline 1.2 L3 SC3 - audio descriptions (live multimedia)

Guideline 1.4 L1 SC1

proposal: remove

Rationale: if you conform to other success criteria (1.1 and 1.3) then there are no further requirements. we're assuming that user agents should or could change color of text and background for contrast as long as the text is programmatically determined.

resolution: remove Guideline 1.4 L1 SC1

Guideline 3.1 L3 SC1

proposal: delete

Rationale: SC2 covers everything but very common words that are in a standard dictionary. people with cognitive disabilities would be better off using a dictionary that is tuned for them or that they are at least used to than having each author specifying a different dictionary. it is better for the user to pick the dictionary - something they are used to.

concern about disambiuity of words. feeling that it is handled in separate criterion.

there is a work item about pronunciation (for languages where something else is provided).

that's not the issue was trying to raise.

cites WWAAC work on concept coding.

original idea was about lexicon but evolved to dictionary due to lack of comfort with lexicon.

discussion if covered by existing level 3 sc 2 (terms used in restricted way)

not disambiguating words, it's concept coding

reminder that this SC does not cover concept coding - only that you point to a dictionary.

suggestion to keep this as because 1. a "placeholder" for something related to concept coding 2. concern that watering down guidelines wrt cognitive disabilities

need to work on guide document to reflect issues raised today

no consensus. ask for someone to write a proposal and act on at next meeting.

<scribe> ACTION: bengt and lisa proposal for success criterion and guide document by monday to address concept coding. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/27-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action01]

Guideline 4.2 L2 SC1

proposal to delete

Rationale: moved to a general technique for 4.2 L1 sc6. Also, the implication of the wording is that accessibility conventions would need to be used even if they are not appropriate (e.g., "accesskey").

resolution: delete Guideline 4.2 L2 SC1

Guideline 3.2 L3 SC1

proposal to combine with 3.2 L2 SC3

clarification - not combine the 2 criteria, but delete the level 3 because it is covered by the level 2 criterion.

and then combine the guide documents since there are good techniques in the l3 guide doc.

this is in guideline 3.2 - about predictable functionality. concern about definition of function. does it include convey information?

proposal - leave both of them in since what they mean is unclear. someone needs to look at what they say and propose a clarification.

concern about how this applies to a site that provides a simplified version

resolution: combine Guideline 3.2 L3 SC1 and 3.2 L2 SC3 with proviso that we work on using the guide documents to clarify what is covered.

Guideline 1.3 L3 SC2

ready to go?

http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Guide_to_1.3_L3_SC_2

it's a new SC that hasn't previously been published.

concern that it should be at level 2

proposal, "do not depend solely..." so as not to discourage the practice (similar to practice). don't want to say people can't use, but if they do be redundant with other encoding.

scribe: in another way that does not depend on shape or location.

<gregg> When Instructions convey information using visual characteristics such as shape or visual location of components the information is also provided in a way that does not rely on shape or visual location of components.

<gregg> When Instructions convey information using visual characteristics such as shape or visual location of components the information is also provided in a way that does not rely on visual characteristics such as shape or visual location of components.

<gregg> Instructions for understanding or operating a delivery unit do not depend solely on users' ability to perceive visual characteristics such as shape or visual location of components.

concern about tactile markup and other haptic devices that could be used in the future

proposal: When instructions for understanding or operating a delivery unit use (refer to?) shape or visual location , the instructions do not solely rely on these visual characteristics (i.e. shape and visual location)..

<David> tactile map link http://tactile.nrcan.gc.ca/page.cgi?url=index_e.html

"user's ability to perceive" is not testable

Instructions for understanding or operating a delivery unit do not depend solely on visual characteristics such as shape or visual location of components.

if narrow to shape or visual location, should also include size

concern that it needs more investigation

proposal: instructions do not rely on vision for understanding

as compared to JIS: our current wording limits to instructions but is broader (to all visual characteristics)

<scribe> ACTION: kerstin and makoto work on rewording of SC of about "shape and locaiton" and guide doc. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/27-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action02]

<Andi> Information required to understand and operate Web content does not rely on shape and location alone.

<Andi> Information required to understand and operate Web content shall not rely on shape or location alone.

resolution: adopt at level 2 with guide doc on the way from kerstin and makoto - Information required to understand and operate Web content does not rely on shape or location alone.

<scribe> ACTION: katie "next round we should..." wrt Guideline 1.3 L3 SC2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/27-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action03]

things for next week

guideline 1.2 l1 sc1 captions - level 1 or 2?

guideline 1.2 l1 sc 2 audio descriptions - level 1 or 2

guideline 3.1 L3 SC2, SC3, and SC5 - move from level 3 to level 2?

we will send survey on these items.

guides that need work and who's working on them

latest notes. rough.

http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Proposed_Guide_to_2.4_L2_SC4

guideline 2.4 L2 SC4 - decided to wait for discussion. think it's ready to discuss.

survey both wordings in survey

Guideline 4.2 L1 SC6 http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Guide_to_4.2_L1_SC_6

michael sent email to list

michael to work on 4.2 L1 SC6

instead of "guide" call "intent and best practice"

what about "explation and examples"

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: bengt and lisa proposal for success criterion and guide document by monday to address concept coding. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/27-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: katie "next round we should..." wrt Guideline 1.3 L3 SC2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/27-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: kerstin and makoto work on rewording of SC of about "shape and locaiton" and guide doc. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/27-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action02]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/10/28 18:00:15 $