W3C

- DRAFT -

User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

26 Mar 2009

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Harper_Simon, kford, Jim_Allan, Jan_Richards, Mark_Hakkinen, Jeanne_Spellman
Regrets
Henny_Swan
Chair
Jim_Allan
Scribe
JR

Contents


 

 

<trackbot> Date: 26 March 2009

<KFord> rrs agent, make minutes

<KFord> zakim microsoft is kford

<KFord> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-agenda.rdf

<KFord> zakim take up item 1

<scribe> Scribe: JR

<KFord> zakim list agenda

Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)?

KF: I'm still waiting for JB to make me offical...
... JA is asking me to be more active in running meetings

Consensus on alt http://esw.w3.org/topic/PF/XTech/HTML5/TextAlternativeProposal

JS: I have extended the attendance survey

KF: We started on the alt concensus - overall WAI feedback to HTML5
... What feedback do we have? SHould figure it out today
... Any thoughts

JS: I like what you were saying Kelly about it being too complicated
... I've been asking people about that

MH: Question...has this doc been sent to HTML5 yet?

KF: My understanding...it has not been sent yet
... WAI-CG asking for WAI feedback first

JR: KF is correct

KF: So do we think we can stand behind this?

JR: Not perfect but I can stand behind it

MH: bottom line?

JR,JS: Some form of alt is required

JR: But still may not meet HTML5's hope for validity without alt

MH: Bug me: absence of something is said to be indicator of the image
... I'd like to see role required to resoundingly say image is an image

<jeanne> JR: It was a difficult discussion because some said that whatever we did had to be backwards compatible. If we made "role" required, it would break every image on the Web.

MH: Understood

<jeanne> JR: The absence of a value for alt was the crux of the problem, that there wasn't a way to show whether it was missing from being ignored or whether it was a decorative image

KF: My perspective...assuming a lot of intelligent people...but I'm not comfortable
... IN HTML4 I know what I have to do
... For accessibility
... I would be ok with 1) use alt="meaningful" and 2) use role="presentation" along with alt=""

MH: I'd support that

KF: clarify 2) is a warning

<jeanne> JR: alt is still required, and if alt="" then also use role = "presentation"

<jeanne> JR: alt="" cannot have two means - 1) I want validity and don't care about accessibility OR 2) I care about accessibiliy and this image is decorative.

<jeanne> KF: I have a concern that role="presentation" may be removed from the DOM and lost.

KF: There is concern with role=presentation
... We could take this up later

<jeanne> KF: We can take that up as part of ARIA last call discussion.

JR: Points out the need for repetitive alt if author wants to use labelled-by

KF: That's my concern...going to aria forces users to have latest and greatest

JA: Process for commenting?

JR: Indiv or group.

JA: Suggestions wanted?

JR: Yes

JA: Ofk so could we vote on UA proposals next week

KF: Two actions 1) communicate to CG - we do not have concensus, we will be looking at alternatives
... One alternative could be not concensus form UAAG
... We owe them a mail before wed. that KF will do

<KFord> ACTION: kford communicate current alt opinion to CG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action01]

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

<scribe> ACTION: JR to Formulate simplified version with alt still required [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-163 - Formulate simplified version with alt still required [on Jan Richards - due 2009-04-02].

<jeanne> ACTION: KF to communicate current alt opinion to CG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-164 - Communicate current alt opinion to CG [on Kelly Ford - due 2009-04-02].

<KFord> ACTION: kford update CG on alt status [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action04]

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

KF: Other thoughts

MH: Will send thoughts to list
... Concerned with less capable device fallback
... How much ARIA support

KF: Firefox, IE8, Safari, not sure about Opera
... HTML5 itslef...bits and pieces in all browsers

CSUN Discussion

KF: Most of JA's thoughts in post

JA: Henny wanted to know where slides are?

JS: I could send PDF to group then figure out how to post

JA: Thought presentation went well
... Tough week for me, but went well - got thoughts across
... Heard some people say "onerous"...but not constructive...
... But maybe we can have another drfat out by end of May

KF: Anyone we should target for recruitment?

JS: I had a lot of followup
... Mentions Microsoft, Mozilla, NVDA, Apple
... Also spoke with someone who was on TEITAC

JA: I got some other contacts

KF: Anything we can do to recruit them would be great.

Survey Results http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20090223/

KF: Let's leave survey to next week

Web security last call http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/

KF: Jim sent some thoughts.

JA: I just thought there were a bunch of concepts we could use..."primary, secondary interfaces"...
... Couple things to communicate to web security people...they should reference UAAG as well as just WCAG
... Other than that, just some definitional concerns
... One was level of alerts
... e.g., Caution alrets, danger alerts....how to communicate these

KF: Sounds good

JA: I think we can use this to make our GL better and give them some stuff too

Current editors draft actions and comments http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2009/UAAG20-20090121-ED/

KF: THing to note is that we did release a draft...any feedback yet?

JS: Not sure

KF: please evangelize this draft...blogs...social networking etc.
... UAAG still important...we need to get the word out
... We need to succeed

JS: Agree+much greater interest than in the past
... No feedback yet

WAI-ARIA last call review http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/

KF: Date moved to April ??
... Prob we'll ask a couple people at next call

JA: I volunteer

KF: I'm willing to look as well
... Mark?

MH: Yes

<scribe> ACTION: JA to and JA and MH to come up with inital LC comments on ARIA [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-165 - And JA and MH to come up with inital LC comments on ARIA [on Jim Allan - due 2009-04-02].

KF: Let's move rest to next week

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: JA to and JA and MH to come up with inital LC comments on ARIA [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: JR to Formulate simplified version with alt still required [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: KF to communicate current alt opinion to CG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: kford communicate current alt opinion to CG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: kford update CG on alt status [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html#action04]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/03/26 18:00:43 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
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
Present: Harper_Simon kford Jim_Allan Jan_Richards Mark_Hakkinen Jeanne_Spellman
Regrets: Henny_Swan
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2009JanMar/0091.html
Found Date: 26 Mar 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/03/26-ua-minutes.html
People with action items: alt communicate current ja jr kf kford opinion

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


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]