User Agent Weekly Teleconference -- 28 Aug 2008

<AllanJ> title: UAWG conference call

ok, but the one thing holding it up as far as process is concerned is the lack of the answer to the question: "how to signify that a keybinding has changed when the character which indicated the keybinding is no longer valid" and are looking everywhere for assistance in solving that problem, which is something we've addressed in the past

<AllanJ> are you saying, the users keyboard does not have the author supplied key, so the UA makes a substitution, and how to communicate that to the user

that as well as the scenario where a user has rebound the key, but would like reassurance and a reminder of the keybinding through some sort of indicator

<AllanJ> yes that is an issue. It will come up when we discuss 4.1.10

great!

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008JulSep/0120.html

Administrivia

JA: what is trackbot

JS: result of an action item from several weeks ago - asked to set up tracking system for UAWG - done tuesday - trackbot looks for keywords, such as "ACTION: " and then assigns action to the person and a due date attached, with email to list
... will pick up issues in subject lines on list which will be added to the issue or action item

<jeanne> instructions for trackbot http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc

JS: more tightly integrated with mailing list agendas and IRC

GJR: each person should be able to bookmark a "My Tracker" link

<jeanne> The main page for Tracker is http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/

JA: haven't heard from alanC -
... agenda - finish GL 4.1

JB: discussion last week?

JA: great success
... leftovers are action items that had to be re-branched
... 4 action items to deal with - hopefully resolve last 4 things had issue with last week, and then 4.1 issues and 3 more SCs

JB: circulation for feedback to browser devs who haven't shown up as regularly

JA: send to them individually?

JB: relook into it today - may be better to get draft published first and then have people review that

JS: Kelly had action to ping Microsoft employees, and he reported back on that on-list

JB: need to ensure getting perspective of developers

JA's Action Item to update 4.1.9

JA: got a bit confused - tried to update and rewrite - update is 4.1.9 re-writen and put into 4.1.2 so should be tabled and all comments ported to 4.1.10
... 4.1.9 - precedence of keyboard processing discussed last week; haven't decided anything about user configuration and persistence that belong to 4.1.10
... reviewed lots of discussion and minutes and discovered that 4.1.9 had been rewritten and included in 4.1.2

JB: so unintended redundancy

JA: caught and fused last week

JB: today examine in purer form

JA: voted and approved 4.1.2 last week - remove 4.1.9

JB: objections?

KF: no

JA: no

GJR: no

JB: JA, you are sure is covered?

JA: yes

JB: remove it then

RESOLUTION: Remove redundant 4.1.9

proposed ACTION: Jeanne - remove redundant 4.1.9

JA: JR to review 4.5

<jeanne> ACTION: JS will update the 4.1 Guidelines to remove 4.1.9 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/28-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1 - Will update the 4.1 Guidelines to remove 4.1.9 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-09-04].

JR: 4.1.5

JR Review of 4.1.5

<AllanJ> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008JulSep/0125.html

JR: sent post to list; concern last week was that was too difficult to read; tried to simplify -
... quotes from post cited directly above
... concern too visually oriented so used "display"
... not thrilled with mashing together chrome/UI keyboard commands with others
... bothers me because standard in windows to display keyboard commands for UI, but not standard to display keyboard commands in content

JA: 2 that said same thing - 1 for content, 1 for UI - merged them
... comments?

JB: what would liked def of recognized say?

JR: differentiate HTML controls with control done in AJAX that grabs keyboard shortcuts and UA doesn't know it is doing that

JB: plain english version?

JA: use "recognize" in many checkpoints - issue: what UA knows about and what UA doesn't know about;
... in UAAG 1.0 whole set of events that UA doesn't know about

JR: "recognized" is term in UAAG1 - didn't uniformly apply term where needed to be applied

JA: 2 issues: JR did his tersification - have that to decide; JR also raised concern over conflation of issues (UI and content in same gl)

JB: looking through what was dropped - "close proximity" "presentation" - "display with associated controls" a VERY good improvement - more understandable
... no problem tying together aviable UI and content controls - willing to await feedback
... concern: easily discoverable with AT is ok, but able to be activated with single keystroke might be that one has to jump through 3 hoops to do that - what is history of dropping able to be activated with single keystroke? too extreme for developers?
... happy that abandoning note verbiage - seems gratuitous and over-proscriptive
... able to be activated with single keystroke - nothing about "readily activatable" in this

JR: dropped "single keystroke" because overly proscriptive - if UA has setting ok, but not always the case - let UA set options the way they set options

JB: having problem parsing JR's comment

JR: throughout doc say "users have option for x" - can mean go into mode or go into Tools > Options > Accessibility and turn a11y options on

JB: understand JR's point now

JA: kelly?

KF: listening mode right now

JB: no other issues with provisions

JS: alright with that - how does play out for speech input user? a bit of concern, but think would be fine

JA: straw poll to see if ok with JR's wording - "user has the option to have direct keyboard command displayed..."

<AllanJ> 4.1.5 User has the option to have any *recognized* direct keyboard

<AllanJ> commands displayed with their associated controls.

JB: tersification and simplification desireable

JS: like it

<AllanJ> +1

JB: is understandable

JA: nicely done, jan

<jeanne> =1

<KFord> good stuff.

KF: good

GJR: plus 1

JA: send to access board - key thing stuck on last year

RESOLUTION: accept JR's verbiage for 4.1.5

Review of 4.1 and 4.7

<jeanne> ACTION: JS Update 4.1 to include the wording above for 4.1.5 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/28-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2 - Update 4.1 to include the wording above for 4.1.5 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-09-04].

KF: how to consolidate and whether to consolidate
... think we need them both in the end, because they serve 2 separate purposes
... 4.1 says "do everything from keyboard" but doesn't say needs to be discoverable from kbd
... 4.7 is about discoverability
... 4.1.1 could end up with UA with hotkeys but no discoverability method

JA: interesting...

KF: did a deep data dive - may be changing former opinioin

JA: had action item in july to review 4.1.1, 4.1.6 and 4.1.7 -- at time, decided that 4.1.7 handled by 4.1.1 so should be removed

JR: talked about 4.1.7 last week - important notification as kelly said

JA: question is: are we fine in leaving it?

KF: yes

JR: yes

JA: plus 1

<jeanne> +1

GJR: plus 1

JA: good distinction

JB: need to see everything in context to declare opinion

<AllanJ> status document http://www.tsbvi.edu/technology/uawg/status41.htm

JB: today's stuff not available in context, but only as individual bits to consider

JA: status document from last week - what i've been able to pull out of all agenda and action items, etc. - here was wording, here is status, for 4.1
... come full circle - remove 4.1.7 because included, but issues raised last week, KF reviewed and presented arguments as to why to include

JS: rather than keep with different title - would clarify 2 are related if state 4.1.1 keyboard operation and 4.1.7 keyboard operations enhanced

JR: only problem is when WCAG uses "enhanced" spread over A and double-A, but like the idea -

JS: keyboard operation navigation?

KF: keyboard navigation, full stop

JA: operation in 4.1.1, in 4.1.7 granular - specifically keyboard navigation

GJR: plus 1

<jeanne> +1

<AllanJ> +1

JA: do we change name from UI interface navigation to keyboard navigation and leave text as is?

GJR: plus 1

<AllanJ> 4.1.7 Keyboard Navigation: The user can use the keyboard to traverse all of the controls forwards and backwards, including controls in floating toolbars, panels, and user agent extensions using the navigation conventions of the platform (e.g., via "tab", "shift-tab", etc. ")

JB: review what we have: 4.1 - ensure full keyboard access; 4.1.1 is keyboard operation; 4.1.2 lacks a title; 4.1.3 no keyboard trap; 4.1.4 separate presentation, 4.1.5. UA keyboard commands; 4.1.x. content-derived keyboard commands; 4.1.6 conventions, 4.1.7 navigation
... problem: no consistency in structure/syntax for these items - most noun phrases, some verbs
... no real objections at this point, but will need to align titling in document when more stability

<jeanne> 4.1.7 Keyboard Navigation: The user can use the keyboard to traverse all of the controls forwards and backwards, including controls in floating toolbars, panels, and user agent extensions using the navigation conventions of the platform (e.g., via "tab", "shift-tab", etc. ")

JB: no objections to keyboard navigation for 4.1.7

JR: going to get new version of this reflecting last week's and this week's decisions

JA: will do that

JS: i will update them all

JA: THANK YOU!

4.1.8

<jeanne> ACTION: JS Updates 4.1 Guideline to include new wording for 4.1.7 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/28-ua-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-3 - Updates 4.1 Guideline to include new wording for 4.1.7 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-09-04].

<KFord> 4.1.8 Direct keyboard commands in the form of single key access with or without modifiers are provided to use primary user agent functionality for the following classes of operations where the user agent offers such functionality and the operating environment supports appropriate keybord access:

<KFord> (a) navigation related functions (e.g., back/forward within the user navigation history for the current browsing session, enter a URI for a new resource, stop/refresh the loading of a resource, etc.) (b) display-related functions (e.g., increase/decrease text size, volume, etc.) (c) content related functions (move focus to next/previous enabled element in document order, activate the content item with focus, scroll the viewed content by a measure appropriate to the

JS: resolved to update list for 4.1.7

<AllanJ> link for 4.1.8 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008JulSep/0122.html

RESOLUTION: update 4.1.7

KF: 4.1.8 listed very specific features
... new version broke down, but didn't list features
... revised further to break into different classes of features some of which are already there, some of which i added
... there are a few different classes of things one can do with UA - attempt to reflect that; would include all definitions
... is this finished, or still half-baked?

JR: getting pretty detailed - but not sure catching everything
... if media player, play stop and fast forward should be covered, but am not sure if falls under navigation

JA: still cogitating

GJR: trying to cogitate

KF: if you have something important to do in UA, ensure easy to do in UA with one keystrok
... quantifying what is important in UA is key factor, then

JS: like what KF has done; grouped well but left open for different types of UAs is big improvement over list

KF: question for UA is: control of display of information - am i missing other interactive classes?

JR: wondering if trying to be specific on intervention classes is too inclusive may miss one, but if we keep high-level, the essence is single key access which is making things quick to get to; if offer mouse way of moving, but not keyboard way, have to explain why not

KF: impossible - mouse is freeform - can't have single key access to all mouse functionalities
... better not be more than 3 or 4 keystrokes at worse - what are highest profile things one can do

JB: back up a bit - enumeration of classes important, but first need to remove some unecessary text in draft provision itself - hard to evaluate base requirement
... want to read through the wording suggested by KF word by word an suggest changes

KF: sure

JB: starting at top of provision
... 4.1.8 - needs a short handle - direct keyboard commands probably works, but possible that direct keyboard commands may not be as self-evident as we hope
... single key access: requires only a single keystroke?

KF: or one modifier key

JB: wanted to toss with or without modifiers, but without it, single key access will be misunderstood
... agree can't drop with or without modifiers

GJR: agree

JA: agree

JB: guess is that phrase "with or without modifiers" could be phrases more clearly
... streamline intro to classes -- qualified several ways, but not at level of parsimonious elegance that JR achieved in 4.1.5 -- conceptually has right stuff, but needs wordsmithing
... still a stage away from geting to most essential comments as parsimoniously as possible
... take what KF has distilled down to another level, then return to clases of operation

JR: we used to say "key-plus-modifier-key (or single-key)"

JB: that's a mouthful and mindful - might do better

KF: build up - start at zero and build up definition; zero starting point is "important UA functions have to be achievable in one keystroke" -- that is core

JB: important keyboard functions need to be done with one keystroke
... important command functions or keyboard functions?

KF: command functions

JB: essence is: "important command functions" - could be handle

<AllanJ> Important keyboard commands. Primary user agent operations are operable with a single keystroke.

JB: are modifiers always a key?

KF: believe so

JB: actually, sticky keys is a mode, so modifier isn't right

JA: using stickyKeys to do modifier combo

JB: set mode and then that mode is default mode for duration
... "important command functions should be available via a single keystroke with or without a modifier"

KF: could break modifier in own section

JB: important command functions should be available via single keystroke
... put rest in note
... what lost: modifiers, primary user agent functionality for following class of operations....
... where the user agent provides such functionality - second qualifier is "can do if we can"

JA: nod toward devices with limited keypads (mobile numbers only)

JB: might be better addressed as note
... just have one long note and covers 3 things at least but with a simple elegant requirement statement

<jeanne> Important Command Functions: Important Command Functions are available in a single keystroke

JR: different classes could go into techique - which are your important commands; what are intended classes

JA: would be good

JB: look at classes 1 by 1

JR: dropping operating environment?

JB: put in note with an example at least instead of general statement - "for instance, the operating environment of a mobile phone may not allow...."

JR: definition of keystroke

GJR: check latest access module draft for language

JB: classes of operations - bear in mind may end up in techniques or note
... first is a substantive class - are all examples necessary?

JR: great explanation for techniques

JB: "b) display related functions"
... could be that the note would contain the generic / abstract categories, and examples coupled with techniques
... c) content related functions
... d) information related functions
... interesting distinction

KF: rationale: usually read content, but increasingly UAs have facilities for managing info - favorites, rrs subscriptions, FF "awesome bar" - similar feature in IE8; UAs starting to add a lot of information management controls

JB: call them information management features?
... what is diff between content and information - nothing from terms juxtaposed unless for examples following - if use "information management functions"

<jeanne> +1

RESOLUTION: change point d0 to "information management functions"

JB: state "this is a non-exhaustive list of functions"

JR: what if grab headers and use them in an e.g. clause
... important command functions (e.g. content related, information management functions, etc.) then push rest to techniques

JB: built-into provision, not note?

JR: yes

JB: "imporant command functions (e.g. [...])" - what do people think?

GJR: like e.g. clause solution advanced by jan

JS: how would we test it?
... as long as leaving it up to the developer to say what is important, is very successful,but need to keep that in mind

<AllanJ> Important Command Functions: Important Command Functions (e.g. navigation related functions, display-related functions, content related functions, information management related functions) are available in a single keystroke

JR: maybe not all 4 in the e.g. clause

JB: friendly ammendment -

<AllanJ> Important Command Functions: Important Command Functions (e.g. related to navigation, display, content, and information management) are available in a single keystroke

<judy> Important command functions: Important command functions (e.g. navigation-related, display-related, content-related, information-management) are available in a single keystroke.

JB: wiped out capitalization
... status review should be capitalized, but not after that
... JA's much more graceful

JA: then can comma etc. - to achieve balance and cover a host of evils

<judy> Important Command Functions: Important command functions (e.g. related to navigation, display, content, information management, etc.) are available in a single keystroke.

<Jan> +1

<AllanJ> +1

<KFord> I like.

GJR: plus 1

<judy> +1

<jeanne> +1

<jeanne> ACTION: JS to update 4.1 Guidelines to add wording for 4.1.9 Important Command Functions: Important command functions (e.g. related to navigation, display, content, information management, etc.) are available in a single keystroke. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/28-ua-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-4 - Update 4.1 Guidelines to add wording for 4.1.9 Important Command Functions: Important command functions (e.g. related to navigation, display, content, information management, etc.) are available in a single keystroke. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-09-04].

review 4.1.10

proposed RESOLUTION: definition of Important Command Functions: Important command functions are available in a single keystroke; e.g., related to navigation, display, content, information management, etc.

<AllanJ> new - 4.1.10 User Override of Keyboard Commands: The user can override any keyboard shortcut binding that is part of the user agent default input configuration except for conventional bindings for the operating environment (e.g., for access to help). The keyboard combinations offered for rebinding include single key and key plus modifier keys if these are available in the operating environment.

proposed RESOLUTION for 4.1.9: definition of "Important Command Functions" Important Command Functions: Important command functions are available in a single keystroke; e.g., related to navigation, display, content, information management, etc.

JA: split 4.1.10 into 2 to avoid confusion
... first part is easy (overriding user interface) - opera does well
... several issues arise with overriding content function like access key
... 2 situations: author uses accented character as accesskey, not available on keyboard, so UA remaps - how does user know?
... second: if user rebinds keybindings, how does user get notification of previo;usly made changes

KF: and what if author has changed keys so remapping now moot

JB: essence of what we are trying to say?
... don't think essence is user-override but user notification and control

JR: override is part of it

JB: yes, part of it, but what is abosulte reduction?

JR: person who can only use part of keyboard

GJR: limit to homerow a use case

JB: only part of it - what is available and what was used last

JS: another aspect - screen reader users to remap key so doesn't conflict with AT command frequently invoked with keybinding

GJR: discoverability and notification when there is NOT an AT being used is important

JB: split help or hurt?

JA: helps
... 1 is a lot easeir to do than the other

KF: second one is almost undoable - doable, but fraught with complications

JB: how important is it?
... user can override any author provided keybinding....
... way to change req so more doable?
... if more doable, could be conflated - have it or not, regardless of source

<AllanJ> essence

<AllanJ> 1. user needs to know the current keybinding

KF: why should UA override author

<AllanJ> 2. user need to remap to avoid conflict, fill personal need

<AllanJ> 3. recall remap

<AllanJ> 4. ??what happens when content changes

GJR: author proposes, user disposes
... notes this has been addressed in Access Module
... new wording explicitly states that the key is an abstraction and is only a suggestion of the author

JA: if define accesskey binding that doesn't exist on user's hardware, what to do?

JR: do we really mean users need to be able to do on site by site basis
... users can disallow certain keys that pose problems - no accented keys allowed as configuration setting

JB: override is part of issue, but is it muddying issue by advancing solution rather than stating problem
... problem is 1) know what is happening and 2) how to exert control over it

GJR: suggest we re-examine latest Access Module draft wording

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20080820/

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20080820/#E_access

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20080820/#A_activate

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20080820/#A_key

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20080820/#A_media

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20080820/#A_order

"This attribute assigns one or more key mappings to an access shortcut. The value of is attribute is one or more single characters from the document character set."

"The key attribute represents an abstraction. The use of the name "key" for this attribute is historical and does not mean that there is any association with a specific "key" on a keyboard, per se. It is up to the user agent to provide a mechanism for mapping the document character set value(s) of the attribute to the input methods available to the user agent. For instance, on some systems a user may have to press an "alt" or "cmd" key in addition to the access

JR: agrees with what i was stating

"A user entering any of the keys defined in an access element moves focus from its current position to the next element in navigation order that has one of the referenced role or id values (see activate for information on how the element may be activated). Note that it is possible to deliver alternate events via [XMLEVENTS]. Note also that the concept of navigation order is a property of the Host Language, and is not defined in this specification."

"User agents MUST provide mechanisms for overriding the author setting with user-specified settings in order to ensure that the act of moving content focus does not cause the user agent to take any further action, as required by UAAG 1.0, Checkpoint 9.5. [UAAG1] The character assigned to a key, and its relationship to a role or id attribute SHOULD be treated as an author suggestion. User agents MAY override any key assignment (e.g., if an assignment interferes w

JS: spoken keyboard commands standardized by an AT

JR: assess keyboard options - which are your most prefered, less preferred, disallowed; in speech recognizition scenario, have the prefered keys used for remapping

JA: crux is: UA says i've remapped all these keys - how does it inform the user, when all it knows is assign keystroke to some function on page, but UA can only say "you only have these keys avaiable to you"

JR: handled in 4.1.5 - "have to display direct keyboard commands"

JR: in 4.1.5 say:

<AllanJ> GJR: concern. if a key is remapped. no matter who remapped. how does UA communicate to the user that the key changed, for which the labeling information has not been defined

JR: "user has option..." -- doesn't happen now, but asking UA to put in - floating label or status line message associated with control

KF: have to leave now, sorry

GJR: very important when considering users who are not using AT, but need notificatiion or are using native accessibility features of UA (zooming)

JA: reached end of our time - can some of us go futher

JB: figure out next steps towards zeroing in

<scribe> ACTION: JR to propose new wording for 4.1.10 and 4.1.11 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/28-ua-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-5 - Propose new wording for 4.1.10 and 4.1.11 [on Jan Richards - due 2008-09-04].

<scribe> ACTION: Gregory - post Access Module concerns to UA list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/28-ua-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-6 - - post Access Module concerns to UA list [on Gregory Rosmaita - due 2008-09-04].

JA: AlanC will be unavailable for a while
... will be out the next 2 weeks

WG: good luck jim

- DRAFT -

User Agent Weekly Teleconference

28 Aug 2008

Attendees

Contents

Administrivia

JA's Action Item to update 4.1.9

JR Review of 4.1.5

Review of 4.1 and 4.7

4.1.8

review 4.1.10

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output