<jallan> list

<scribe> Scribe: JR

WCAG 2.0 official last call review conformance section

JA: My reading of new conformance text is that it is the same as before...
... They still say you choose the technologies and you conform assuming that supporting user agents and AT's exist.
... Our comment deadline is May 31

CL: Does UAAG say UA needs to conform by itself without AT.

?

DP: Actually think UA can team up with an AT

CL: We need to update our conformanceref - it mentions WCAG 1.0

JA: A uA can conform to a subset UAAG (e.g. visualtext, etc.)

<jallan> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/conformance.html#conformance-wcag1

JR: A UAAG v.1.1 could change its conformance scheme to allow the developer to choose to point to WCAG 1.0 or 2.0 - their choice...

<jallan> specific reference to WCAG 1.0 in UAAG conformance http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-UAAG10-20021217/uaag10.html#conformance-claims

JR: WCAG pointed to in only 2 places in UAAG
... Could change is fairly easily in a v1.1

JA: Back to the table...

zikim, close current agendum

<jallan> WCAG 2.0 understanding baseline http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/baseline/

CL comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2006AprJun/0040.html

CL: noticed inconsistencies in organization
... UAAG 9.10 EXTENDS WCAG 2.4.1

<jallan> CL: UAAG 9.8 Support WCAG 2.4.2

JR: WCAG seems to be assuming the UA has an intra-page text search capability

CL: UAAG 10.6 supports WCAG 2.4.3

JR, JA: UAAG 10.7 EXTENDS WCAG 2.4.7

JA: How should we frame these comments to WCAG?]
... this initiall came up in discussion with CMN.

DP: Also this is a gap analysis...

JR: Also CMN saying UA's could do some of the things that WCAG asking of users.

DP: Now WCAG says don't flash, in case uaag we say control flashing...if UA's conformed to UAAG then WCAG wouldn't have to say don't flash...
... What are we asking of WCAG...

<jallan> JR: UAWG soucle say here are WCAG cp (p1), here are the UAAG checkpoints that support these cp.

<jallan> if you want to claim conformance to wcag cp, then you must have identified a UA that conforms to the UAAG checkpoints

<jallan> yes, UAAG may be too much, but there is a basic set of functionalities assumed/required by WCAG in a useragent

<jallan> and these set of functionalities must/should conform to UAAG

JA: Next step is to cross reference list with reports

to see if user agents are already meeting them.

<jallan> ACTION: Jim, cross reference the table with the conformance reports [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/04-ua-minutes.html#action01]

JR: its important not just that a uaag checkpoint be on the list but that it be associated with the highest wcag priority

JA: 4.5 maybe should be added for 2.2.2

<scribe> ACTION: JR to Take updated alignment page from JA and re-org to show Priority view from WCAG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/04-ua-minutes.html#action02]

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: JR
Inferring ScribeNick: JR
Default Present: DPoehlman, Jim_Allan, [IBM], Jan_Richards
Present: DPoehlman Jim_Allan [IBM] Jan_Richards

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 4 May 2006
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/05/04-ua-minutes.html
People with action items: jim jr

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.