SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 25 Sep 2008

<jallan> Title: UAWG telecon 25 Sept 2008

<jeanne> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2008/WD-UAAG20-20080925/WD-UAAG20-20080925.html#principle-operable

<KFord> JAllen: deal with agenda for face to face.

<KFord> agreement from all.

<jallan> issues list http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008JulSep/0144.html

<KFord> llen: came up with some issues printing and such. JAllen posting list.

<KFord> Discussion of printing proposal.

<KFord> JBrewer: Do we need to do things to preparee

<KFord> JAllen: review proposal, ensure we have everything outlined.

<KFord> discussion of who will be attending.

<KFord> SHarper traveling, may be calling.

<KFord> JAN, still working details out.

<KFord> KFord hopefully know more after tomorrow.

<KFord> trackbot, start telecon

<trackbot> Sorry, KFord, I don't understand 'trackbot, start telecon'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

<KFord> JAllen: other issue is keyboard.

<KFord> JAllen: anything else?

<KFord> silence.

<KFord> JAllen: The other issue is video.

<KFord> JAllen: We had done some back in March, had some discussion. Not sure we moved beyond the presentation.

<KFord> Scribe: KFord

JAllen: Have concern around currnet guideline assumes we have an external player.
... With HTML5 we are looking at native playing in the browser itself.
... How do we cover something that's in such a state of flux?

JAN: I think as a general rule any content can be handled either natively or by a plug-in. We cover this situation in general.
... Gave example of some native things Firefox does today.

<jallan> KF: guidelines cover this

kford: Our guidelines do kind of assume this today. Could be more explicit.

JAllen: does this go down a bunny trail where you have some native player but then you can open a full player with more accessibility.
... does this go down a bunny trail where you have some native player but then you can open a full player with more accessibility.JAllen: Do we have enough to put video on the agenda?
... does this go down a bunny trail where you have some native player but then you can open a full player with more accessibility.JAllen: Do we have enough to put video on the agenda?JBrewer: Think we put it on the agenda.
... does this go down a bunny trail where you have some native player but then you can open a full player with more accessibility.JAllen: Do we have enough to put video on the agenda?JBrewer: Think we put it on the agenda./me can someone scribe for one second.

<judy> scribe: judy

JA: the other thing we had from the Wiki was the reworking of principle 2
... the DOM, the -- it's a huge area

JS: the f2f is a great place to do that. could network with many other people at the TPAC.

JA: and right now we have only 1 non-team member observer. any more?

JS: looking...

JA: are we allowed to invite people?

JB: if you mean to invite people already attending the TPAC to join a specific part of the meeting to discuss a topic, yes

JA: want to get some fresh technical eyes to look at principle 2

<KFord> Scribe: KFord

<scribe> ACTION: kford look at section 2 and see what questions we need answered at face to face. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - kford

<jeanne> ACTION: KF to review Principle 2 and look for issues that the team will need to discuss at the F2F. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-16 - Review Principle 2 and look for issues that the team will need to discuss at the F2F. [on Kelly Ford - due 2008-10-02].

JBrewer: We might benefit by identifying 5 questions when doing a top to bottom review of document.
... Comprehensiveness, do we note any big gaps now that we've been looking at this?
... Clarity: Are there areas where the provisions seem unclear.
... Organization: We are at a good stage to look at this. Does anything need to move to new sections.
... Conciseness (sp): Document seems to complex at times.

JBreewer: Are we being consistent in the document and phrasing.

JBrewer: Compatibility: Are we the same as other W3C accessibility specs.
... I think there's benefit to doing a document review but we need to have some structure.

JAllen: Thanks, Judy, good list.

JBrewer: Does it make sense to talk about this list, anything missing, order?

JAllen: Summarizes JBrewer's items, consistency, organization, compat, complexity.
... Consiseness.

<judy> Comprehensiveness, clarity, conciseness/simplicity, organization, compatability.

JAN: Someplace, maybe with clarity, needs to be realism of the checkpoint.
... Kind of what WCAG is dealing with where they maybe are finding some things are not as realistic as they thought.

<judy> feasibility, testability

JBrewer: WCAG doing reasonably well but for a couple things that bubbled up in recent coordination call. Need to ensure we think about testability and Feasability

Some discussion around agenda items and such. Defining Feasability and testability.

JAllen: Let's talk about this a bit more.
... You might be great to start looking at clarity.

SHarper: Comprehensiveness might be good to look at with the gaps we've been talking about. If we make sure everything's there, we can organize it.

<jeanne> +1 with Simon

<jeanne> Comprehensiveness, clarity, conciseness/simplicity, organization, compatability, feasibility, testability

Jeanne: I volunteer for calrity and compat.

<jeanne> I will also do organization

JAllen: Feasability and testability.

SHarper: Feasability

JAN: testability
... Compatability

Judy: Clarity, con and comprehensiveness.

kford: clarity, organization and testability

<Jan> ACTION: JA to Feasibility and testability [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-17 - Feasibility and testability [on Jim Allan - due 2008-10-02].

<Jan> ACTION: JR to Compatibility & testability [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-18 - Compatibility & testability [on Jan Richards - due 2008-10-02].

<Jan> ACTION: KF to Clarity, conciseness, testability [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-19 - Clarity, conciseness, testability [on Kelly Ford - due 2008-10-02].

<Jan> JB: Clarrity, conciseness, comprehensiveness

Meeting pauses while JAN hands out work.

<Jan> ACTION: JB to Clarrity, conciseness, comprehensiveness [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - Clarrity, conciseness, comprehensiveness [on Judy Brewer - due 2008-10-02].

<Jan> ACTION: SH to Feasibility and comprehensiveness [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - SH

<trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. sharper, shayes)

<Jan> ACTION: sharper to Feasibility and comprehensiveness [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action08]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Feasibility and comprehensiveness [on Simon Harper - due 2008-10-02].

<Jan> ACTION: JS to Organization, clarity and compatibility [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action09]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Organization, clarity and compatibility [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-10-02].

JAllen: Let's talk about structure. We have two days and about 6.5 hours each day.
... Good direction on top to bottom review. Could probably take a day.

JBrewer: Could take a day, or three days. How do we want to ensure this is successful.
... We could go through top to bottom n a day.
... We could select criteria in some order and go through. Cluster items.

?me Judy can you repeat your clusters?

<jallan> comprehensiveness-organization-compatibility, testability-feasibility, conciseness-clarity

kford: I like the idea of clustering.

JAllen: I like this.

<judy> First pass: comprehensiveness, compatability, organization; Second pass: feasibility, testability; Third pass: conciseness, clarity

<Jan> Scribe:Jan

<jallan> first day issues: printing, video, keyboard, Guideline2 (dom, api)

JB: Over to keyboard

Keyboard access

<jeanne> ACTION: JS to put the issues in a timeline and post it on the F2F page. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action10]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Put the issues in a timeline and post it on the F2F page. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-10-02].

http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2008/WD-UAAG20-20080925/WD-UAAG20-20080925.html#principle-operable

<jeanne> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2008/WD-UAAG20-20080925/WD-UAAG20-20080925.html#principle-operable

JA: Two 4.1.XX...
... 4.1.xx Specify preferred keystrok
... 4.1.xx User Override of Accesskeys
... Thought we talked about that last week
... So we had action last week...JS to edit to 4.1.10

<jallan> 4.1.xx Specify preferred keystrokes: The user has the option to establish a preferred set of keys that will be used to override *recognized* author supplied keybindings (i.e. access key).

JS: really seems like both are addressing same issue
... Maybe if clarified could be made into one

4.1.xx User Override of Accesskeys: The user can override any author supplied content keybinding (i.e. access key) that the user agent can *recognize*. The user must have an option to save the override of user interface keyboard shortcuts so that the rebinding persists beyond the current session.

JS: What is the difference here

KF: 2 weeks ago we talked about this
... One of them was about "I like alt-E"

JA: Other one saves your new configuration for when you revisit

JS: I think they can be merged
... Key issue is eestablishing prefs for remapping...then prefs are saved beyond current session

JA: Just from looking at it I think we should use the second one
... First one doesn't add anything unique

JS: First one talks about establishing prefs in advance

SH: Establish is fixing set of preferred keys

KF: To do the second you would do the first
... If you were actually implementing this
... Second one needed, first one us superfluous

<jeanne> +1 for keeping the second one.

<sharper> +1 for the first one

<jallan> +1 for second

<jallan> JR: combine them with a few bullets

<jeanne> scribe:jeanne

JR: two weeks ago, they aren't a set of keys that are preferred, it is that you have a key that is preferred for a particular function.

KF: I don't remember if I was referring to the web page, or the browser itself.

JR: In this case , we are talking about the content.
... there were two levels: One where you wanted to remap everything to one side of the keyboard, the other was to fine-tune specific keys that the user prefers

SH: The user has the option to assign a persistent set of keys to override the content...

JR: When do you do it? Pre-defined before you start working, or once you see the web page, you want to select keys?

SH: There are semantic issues. There is no knowledge in the markup, just executes.

<jallan> JS: use cases. speech users - map potential keystrokes base on a site.

<jallan> ... motor-issues, want to limit all sites to only left side of keyboard

<Jan> ACTION: sharper to To try to combine and clarify the wording of both of the 4.1.XX [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action11]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-24 - Try to combine and clarify the wording of both of the 4.1.XX [on Simon Harper - due 2008-10-02].

<Jan> JB: One more criteria in top to bottom review....consolidation possibilities.

<Jan> JA: Maybe fits in with conciseness

<Jan> JB: Or to "organization"

<Jan> JB: Seems that some people on the group are raising consolidation issues

<Jan> JA: I can do it

<Jan> ACTION: JA, JS to look at consolidation possibilities [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action12]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - JA,

<Jan> ACTION: jallan, jeanne to look at consolidation possibilities [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/25-ua-minutes.html#action13]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - jallan,

jeanne will also look at consolitation as part of organization

4.1.11

<Jan> JA: 4.1.11 Intergroup Navigation: Allow the user to navigate between and within groups of focusable controls (e.g., toolbars, dialogs, panels, etc.

<Jan> KF: Wrinkle...

<Jan> KF: In ARIA...funny thing is ARIA is about creating these rich controlks etc in content

<Jan> KF: But important that not enough to call things a tree, must behave like one

<Jan> JS: In Dave P. wanted us to use among instead of between

<Jan> JB: THen Al G. said Group-by group

<Jan> KF: THis was referring to the user interface

<Jan> KF: This is so you don't have to navigate by tabbing 20 times...can jump by groups

<jallan> AG editorial: So say from group to group and avoid the collision with correct cardinality usage (between for two, among for more than two).

- DRAFT -

SV_MEETING_TITLE

25 Sep 2008

Attendees

Contents

Keyboard access

4.1.11

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output