IRC log of ua on 2009-05-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:49:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ua
16:49:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:49:31 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:49:31 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ua
16:49:33 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WAI_UAWG
16:49:33 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_UAWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
16:49:34 [trackbot]
Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
16:49:34 [trackbot]
Date: 21 May 2009
16:49:56 [KFord]
Chair: Jim_Allan
16:51:43 [KFord]
Agenda+ Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)?
16:51:43 [KFord]
Agenda+ Finish 5/14 survey
16:51:43 [KFord]
Agenda+ Review any new proposals sent to list.
16:54:23 [jeanne]
jeanne has joined #ua
16:57:19 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has now started
16:57:26 [Zakim]
16:57:38 [KFord]
zakim, microsoft is KFord
16:57:38 [Zakim]
+KFord; got it
16:57:47 [KFord]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:57:48 [Henny]
Henny has joined #ua
16:57:57 [KFord]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:57:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate KFord
16:59:27 [sharper]
sharper has joined #ua
16:59:30 [jeanne]
be right there, I'm trying to get ATAG published. I'll be a few minutes.
16:59:56 [sharper]
zakim, code?
16:59:58 [Zakim]
the conference code is 82941 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), sharper
17:00:38 [Zakim]
17:00:41 [sharper]
zakim, ??P2 is sharper
17:00:41 [Zakim]
+sharper; got it
17:01:18 [sharper]
present+ Harper_Simon
17:02:01 [Zakim]
17:02:44 [Jan]
Jan has joined #ua
17:03:13 [KFord]
Let's give folks a couple more minutes to arrive.
17:03:43 [Zakim]
17:03:53 [jeanne]
on my way...
17:04:35 [Zakim]
17:04:44 [Zakim]
17:05:09 [KimPatch]
KimPatch has joined #ua
17:05:22 [Zakim]
17:05:31 [Jan]
zakim, ??P10 is really Jan
17:05:31 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
17:05:54 [Zakim]
17:06:27 [Zakim]
17:06:41 [mhakkinen]
mhakkinen has joined #ua
17:08:23 [sharper]
scribe: Harper_Simon
17:08:23 [sharper]
ScribeNick: sharper
17:08:36 [Zakim]
17:08:48 [sharper]
zakim, agenda?
17:08:48 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
17:08:49 [Zakim]
1. Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)? [from KFord]
17:08:51 [Zakim]
2. Finish 5/14 survey [from KFord]
17:08:52 [Zakim]
3. Review any new proposals sent to list. [from KFord]
17:09:01 [sharper]
zakim, take up item 1
17:09:01 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)?" taken up [from KFord]
17:09:21 [Zakim]
17:10:38 [sharper]
present+ Lowney_Greg
17:10:56 [Zakim]
17:11:20 [sharper]
present: Allan_James, Spellman_Jeanne, Ford_Kelly, Swan_Henny Richards_Jan, Hakkinen_Mark
17:11:36 [sharper]
present+ Patch_kim
17:11:39 [mhakkinen]
mark is p12
17:11:40 [sharper]
zakim, close item 1
17:11:40 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Logistics (Regrets, agenda requests, comments)?, closed
17:11:41 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:11:42 [Zakim]
2. Finish 5/14 survey [from KFord]
17:11:50 [sharper]
zakim, take up item 2
17:11:50 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Finish 5/14 survey" taken up [from KFord]
17:13:27 [sharper]
KF: Moving to point
17:13:29 [sharper]
#78. (Re 4.2.3 **) ""Activate all input device event handlers""
17:13:53 [sharper]
17:13:53 [KFord]
Greg's feedback item 78.
17:13:54 [KFord]
#78. (Re 4.2.3 **) ""Activate all input device event handlers""
17:13:54 [KFord]
17:13:54 [KFord]
#78. (Re 4.2.3 **)
17:13:54 [KFord]
""Activate all input device event handlers"" is unclear: I'm afraid that I can't understand this success criterion based on its title (""Activate All"")
17:13:55 [KFord]
or its text ( ""The user can activate, as a group, all event handlers of the same input device event type, for the same control""), nor is it clear how
17:13:58 [KFord]
it is different than 4.2.1. Both require the user be able to activate event handlers, but they differ in: (a) although 4.2.1 applies to ""(content) elements""
17:14:01 [KFord]
that take content focus while 4.2.3 applies to ""(user interface) controls"" (per glossary definitons); (b) 4.2.1 requires that the user can activate them
17:14:03 [Zakim]
17:14:03 [KFord]
with the keyboard while 4.2.3 doesn't specify the means, presumably making it OK if the user has to click a mouse to activate a mouse-click event handler
17:14:07 [KFord]
(which seems to remove the point); (c) 4.2.3 says ""as a group"" while presumably 4.2.1 finds it enough if they can be activated separately; (d) 4.2.1
17:14:10 [KFord]
only applies to the event handlers that are ""explicitly associated"" with the element that has content focus, while presumably 4.2.3 requires it for all
17:14:13 [KFord]
UI controls that handle events even if they ""bubble up"" to the control rather than being ""explicitly associated"" with it; (e) 4.2.1 requires the user
17:14:16 [KFord]
be able to navigate to and then trigger event handlers for an element, while 4.2.3 would presumably be met by providing an entirely separate facility that
17:14:19 [KFord]
merely allowed the user to pick UI controls and their event handlers from a master list; (f) etc., etc. As you can see, I find 4.2.3 (and probably 4.2.1)
17:14:22 [KFord]
need significant changes to be made both clear and useful. I recommend that the two SC be combined into a single SC that (a) applies to both content elements
17:14:25 [KFord]
that have the content focus AND to UI controls that have the UI focus, (b) lets the user activate, in a single operation, ""all"" of the event handlers
17:14:27 [KFord]
for the user's choice of input device event handlers ""explicitly associated"" with that element or control. (Priority: 1 High) (Type: Clarify)"
17:14:31 [Jan]
17:15:29 [Zakim]
17:17:09 [sharper]
JR: What do we mean when there are a number of specific handlers on a control and there can be multiple events (ie 2 mouse downs) - what is the use case for a keyboard user?
17:17:10 [KFord]
ack jan
17:17:13 [KFord]
17:17:46 [Jan]
17:18:09 [KFord]
ack kford
17:18:31 [sharper]
KF: Know of no uA who will do the all thing. my question is what is our end goal - what do we want the end user to experience.
17:18:48 [Greg]
I'd say the high-level goal is that a keyboard (etc.) user be able to access all the functionality that content provides for mouse (etc.) users. The means is to let the user emulate mouse input via the keyboard.
17:19:31 [sharper]
JR: all not such a problem - who flow is the problem - eg tabbing a document - come across a control, how does the system know that there is more than mouse down - how can they react?
17:19:33 [sharper]
zakim, who's noisy
17:19:33 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who's noisy', sharper
17:19:38 [Jan]
ack Jan
17:20:17 [Greg]
I believe the idea of the guideline may be that the user can emulate mouse input more efficiently if it's implemented by the user agent and tied directly to its functionality, as opposed to making the user rely on a general-purpose mouse emulator (e.g. MouseKeys).
17:20:42 [sharper]
KF: HTML eg - DIV with on click - do we want a tab stop enforced on all onclicks on div
17:21:09 [sharper]
zakim, who is talking
17:21:09 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is talking', sharper
17:21:55 [sharper]
who is noisy
17:22:40 [Greg]
I support the notion that UA should provide keyboard access to all content elements that accept input of any sort. However, I believe that's already specified by 4.1.1, but maybe it important enough to call out explicitly.
17:23:43 [sharper]
KP: can mouse by speech but harder than anything else - need keyboard to be used - can we switch mouse to regular cursor - would this be useful?
17:25:00 [sharper]
KP: Caret browsing is really useful - if you could snap the caret to where the mouse is this could be a good option.
17:27:48 [sharper]
JR: Physical order of mouse actions which happen with a real mouse - there is an event sequence in which events are processed, how can this be done via the keyboard if a request occurs out of sequence?
17:28:16 [sharper]
KF: what if we had a browser in which you could step through in the order of your choice?
17:28:17 [sharper]
zakim, who's talking?
17:28:28 [Zakim]
sharper, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: KFord (90%), Kim_Patch (25%), Jan (5%)
17:29:17 [sharper]
JR: act of tabbing could be the same as mousing over it?
17:30:28 [sharper]
GL: 4.1.1 already accomplishes this as a high level goal
17:32:44 [sharper]
GL: We seem to be getting into spec. details (in regard to event handlers). For instance Mousekeys would allow the user to trigger events in their proper order, several ways of going about it - don't need to specify which one is used - just need the high level goal.
17:33:25 [sharper]
GL: Rewrite all this into the keyboard section to provided all functionality including event handlers to the keyboard
17:33:54 [sharper]
KP: need to be careful regarding tab order and malformed contents
17:34:52 [sharper]
KF: WCAG guidelines say that you should not get people into this situation - need to do something - but not over spec.
17:35:16 [Greg]
In response to the spoken comment, I think the issue of making navigation that can be navigated more efficiently is important but should be somewhere other than 4.2.
17:35:36 [Jan]
17:37:18 [sharper]
zakim, who's talking?
17:37:29 [Zakim]
sharper, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: KFord (49%), Kim_Patch (4%), Greg_Lowney (4%), Jan (29%)
17:37:39 [Greg]
I agree that in general the UA should have features that help compensate for bad page design, and we can require features that mitigate negative effects of inaccessible content.
17:37:50 [Jan]
JR: to say +1 to GL - that event handlers can be brought into 4.1 as a higeher level SC, +1 to Kim re: routing mouse to keyboard focus
17:39:12 [Greg]
+1 to Kim's suggestion of ability to route mouse to focus and vice versa.
17:39:13 [Jan]
ack Jan
17:39:44 [sharper]
KF: If you have 10 events - how should I show them all.
17:40:10 [sharper]
JR: not sure you need to show all, as the author has a model of the universe which may dictate and order.
17:40:33 [Greg]
Does anyone have reservations about moving 4.2 (make events available via keyboard) into 4.1 (make everything available via the keyboard)?
17:40:46 [sharper]
JR: may not exist until used, or are predicated on some other sequential action
17:41:37 [sharper]
KF: In summary, Move to 4.1 then condense and make a sub-point of keyboard access.
17:42:22 [Jan]
Action Jan: Propose rewording of event handling requirements into higher level language for 4.1
17:42:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-189 - Propose rewording of event handling requirements into higher level language for 4.1 [on Jan Richards - due 2009-05-28].
17:42:27 [sharper]
RESOLVED: Move to 4.1 then condense and make a sub-point of keyboard access. Actions to be taken by JR.
17:42:45 [sharper]
ACTION-149 to write proposal for 'default settings of UA should be accessible'
17:42:59 [sharper]
KF: 3 accepts and 3 needs more discussion
17:43:14 [sharper]
Discussion points
17:43:15 [sharper]
Does the first part mean that Tools>Options needs a keyboard shortcut? Is the second part necessary? Maybe I wasn't there when this was discussed but ( ACTION-149 to write proposal for 'default settings of UA should be accessible') sounds like it was meant to mean that certain accessibility settings were going to be on by default.
17:43:23 [sharper]
This may be beyond the scope of this item, but it's also important that the user be able to save reconfigured default settings. Even better if there's some way to share these settings.
17:43:34 [sharper]
The globally accessible key combination as to bring up a configuration dialog. Is it necessary to add this point?
17:44:07 [KFord]
Simon's proposal
17:44:25 [Zakim]
17:44:46 [Greg]
This sounds like an expanded version of the existing requirement for persistent keyboard settings--a general requirement for persistent user preference settings. Is that correct?
17:48:30 [Greg]
I think that we should not force the UA to instruct the user in accessibility features, or prompt them for accessibility settings. Perhaps UA documentation should be available outside of the product, so that one can get to it and read about accessibility-affecting features without being blocked by the product's inaccessible default settings.
17:49:32 [Greg]
Similarly, the ability to change the accessibility settings from outside the product would be extremely useful, although it's hard to do so certainly could not be higher than AAA.
17:54:13 [Greg]
-1; I think Simon's original wording needs some more work before being approved.
17:55:04 [Greg]
The ISO/ANSI guidelines for accessible software design include a Level AAA success criteria about providing "user settings schemes" designed for accessibility. I suggest we compare with those.
17:57:58 [KFord]
With respect to Jim's point
17:58:12 [KFord]
4.1.8 Important Command Functions: Important command functions (e.g. related to navigation, display, content, information management, etc.) are available
17:58:13 [KFord]
in a single keystroke. (Level AA)
18:00:15 [sharper]
GL: Problem with this is that most products have many config options scattered through the panels / dialogues
18:00:35 [sharper]
KF: needs to not be hard to get to config options via the keyboard
18:00:45 [sharper]
KF: defined as less than 5 keystockes
18:01:20 [KFord]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:01:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate KFord
18:02:01 [Greg]
Kelly, are you suggesting that *all* user preferences options be available within five keystrokes, or just, say, the main dialog or menu or wizard?
18:02:41 [sharper]
KF: not a standard but a rule of thumb
18:04:45 [Greg]
The current discussion seems to be about making everything important efficiently available through the keyboard, which is a good goal but is it related to 4.5?
18:06:06 [Greg]
I do not support requiring the UA to prompt the user to make configuration changes on first run, mainly because studies all show that users hate it.
18:06:12 [sharper]
KF: Is it important on first launch about default configurations wrt to accessibility settings?
18:06:17 [sharper]
JA: no
18:06:42 [sharper]
JR: useful in an ideal word but imposes overheads
18:07:12 [sharper]
KF: Not an absolute must - a UA could decide to do this.
18:07:25 [sharper]
KP and HS agree.
18:08:33 [Henny]
Should not prompt automatically, real focus should be on discoverability of how you can configure defaults.
18:09:02 [sharper]
RESOLVED: Don't believe that a UA does not need to prompt re accessibility configurations.
18:09:46 [sharper]
KF: is the first part covered by other parts of the guidelines?
18:09:47 [Greg]
I am not convinced that a configuration dialog box is so special that it should always have a single keystroke. For example, using a key sequence such as Office's Alt+T,O is not significantly harder than a single key combination.
18:10:05 [sharper]
KF: do we need the first part of the proposal?
18:10:58 [sharper]
JA: Happy with just the first part: The user agent will allow its default settings to be reconfigured by the user
18:11:35 [Jan]
18:11:53 [Greg]
What do you mean by default. Is it what the user encounters the first time they run the product, or the next time they run the product? The latter is already covered by 4.5.1.
18:12:37 [sharper]
KF: OK to leave in the first sentance
18:12:41 [sharper]
ack Jan
18:13:20 [sharper]
JR: aren't configuration settings already configurable by the user anyhow.
18:14:12 [sharper]
KP: sometimes settings don't stick, ie size of a window or dialogue - sometimes the size is importance and we shouls be able to make settings stick.
18:14:23 [sharper]
KP: not sure if they stick - not explicit.
18:14:33 [Greg]
I can agree that there may be problems from 4.5 being too broad and requiring ALL settings to be saved. Most should be persistent, but there are certainly rare cases where temporary settings are appropriately.
18:15:06 [Jan]
JR: Likes Kim's idea that window resizings are stored between sessions
18:15:42 [KFord]
We have Kinm.
18:15:42 [KFord]
4.5.3 Portable Profiles: Sets of preferences are stored as separate files (allowing them to be transmitted electronically). (Level AAA)
18:17:05 [sharper]
KF: We should list in a technical note the settings w=that have an impact on accessibility, list why, and put in window size
18:17:31 [Greg]
I agree that window size and position should be persistent, but the UA should also automatically correct saved settings that are no longer appropriate (e.g. the window is now off the screen because the screen resolution has changed between sessions).
18:17:32 [sharper]
JR: does the single keystoke open 1 dialogue or multiple ones.
18:18:25 [sharper]
KF: not going to have the single keystroke - how do we say we are going to prompt or allow configuration. Need something to say 'configure it'.
18:18:34 [sharper]
GL: first sentance covers it.
18:19:36 [Greg]
(I don't think I said anything like "first sentence covers it".)
18:19:44 [sharper]
SH: In the introduction of the draft we say.../
18:19:45 [sharper]
A default user agent
18:19:45 [sharper]
setting may be useful for one user but interfere with accessibility
18:19:46 [sharper]
for another, therefore this document prefers configuration
18:19:46 [sharper]
requirements rather than requirements for default settings
18:20:37 [Greg]
-1; I cannot vote for adding this until you define defaults".
18:21:49 [sharper]
JR: would be ok if accessibility settings is inserted
18:22:06 [sharper]
Questions: how to define accessibility settings.
18:23:02 [sharper]
KF: how about, we change 4.5 to configure and store accessibility setting - and add accessibility to the guidelines and tehn add the first sentence.
18:23:09 [Greg]
The danger of changing it to "configure and store accessibility preference settings" is that developers tend to wrong distinguish between mainstream (useful) and accessibility (obscure) features.
18:23:13 [sharper]
JA: works for me.
18:24:21 [sharper]
GL: risk whenever you apply something to only accessibility settings that these get un-implemented. As a general approach it makes sense.
18:24:49 [sharper]
KF: most UA do everything we want here today.
18:25:19 [sharper]
KF: Do we need it in a survey to get final sign off.
18:26:01 [sharper]
RESOLVED: Change 4.5 to configure and store accessibility setting - and add accessibility to the guidelines and then add the first sentence.
18:27:10 [Zakim]
18:27:44 [sharper]
topic: ACTION-181 Investigate / review interactive and enabled for contradictions.
18:28:22 [sharper]
5 accepts and 2 neutrals
18:28:44 [KFord]
Resolved: Interactive element removed
18:28:54 [sharper]
RESOLVED: Interactive element removed
18:29:01 [KFord]
Action: JS to remove interactive element from glossary
18:29:01 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-190 - Remove interactive element from glossary [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-05-28].
18:31:09 [KFord]
Action: KF Update guideline 4.5 to reflect accessibility changes. Include first sentence of Simon's proposal 149 and make all items reflect accessibity settings.
18:31:09 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-191 - Update guideline 4.5 to reflect accessibility changes. Include first sentence of Simon's proposal 149 and make all items reflect accessibity settings. [on Kelly Ford - due 2009-05-28].
18:31:11 [Greg]
I see useful distinction between static vs. interactive elements, and the latter can be in two states, enabled and disabled.
18:31:27 [KFord]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:31:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate KFord
18:34:10 [Greg]
I agree we can take 'interactive element' out for now; we can always add it back in if we later decide to use the term.
18:35:52 [Zakim]
18:35:58 [mhakkinen]
mhakkinen has left #ua
18:35:59 [Zakim]
18:36:01 [Zakim]
18:36:01 [Zakim]
18:36:03 [Zakim]
18:36:27 [sharper]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:36:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate sharper
18:36:45 [Zakim]
18:36:50 [Zakim]
18:36:55 [Zakim]
18:36:56 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has ended
18:36:57 [Zakim]
Attendees were KFord, sharper, Kim_Patch, Greg_Lowney, Jeanne, Jan, Jim_Allan, Allanj
18:37:30 [sharper]
zakim, please part
18:37:30 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ua
18:38:09 [sharper]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:38:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate sharper
18:38:32 [sharper]
rssagent, please part
18:38:53 [sharper]
rrsagent, please part
18:38:53 [RRSAgent]
I see 3 open action items saved in :
18:38:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jan to Propose rewording of event handling requirements into higher level language for 4.1 [1]
18:38:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:38:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: JS to remove interactive element from glossary [2]
18:38:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:38:53 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: KF Update guideline 4.5 to reflect accessibility changes. Include first sentence of Simon's proposal 149 and make all items reflect accessibity settings. [3]
18:38:53 [RRSAgent]
recorded in