IRC log of pf on 2009-10-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:00:25 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #pf
15:00:25 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/10/02-pf-irc
15:00:32 [janina]
zakim, this will be pf
15:00:32 [Zakim]
ok, janina; I see WAI_PFWG(HTML)11:00AM scheduled to start now
15:00:38 [janina]
zakim, call janina
15:00:38 [Zakim]
ok, janina; the call is being made
15:00:39 [Zakim]
WAI_PFWG(HTML)11:00AM has now started
15:00:40 [Zakim]
+Janina
15:00:58 [janina]
rrsagent, make log public
15:01:07 [janina]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:01:07 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Janina
15:01:36 [Zakim]
-Janina
15:01:36 [Zakim]
+Janina
15:01:36 [Zakim]
+Cooper
15:01:59 [Zakim]
+??P2
15:02:06 [Joshue]
zakim, ??P2 is Joshue
15:02:07 [Zakim]
+Joshue; got it
15:02:52 [Stevef]
Stevef has joined #pf
15:03:06 [Zakim]
+??P1
15:03:22 [Stevef]
zakim, ??P1 is me
15:03:22 [Zakim]
+Stevef; got it
15:04:11 [janina]
Meeting: PF/HTML_Caucus telecon
15:04:11 [janina]
Chair: Janina_Sajka
15:04:11 [janina]
agenda: this
15:04:11 [janina]
agenda+ identify scribe
15:04:11 [janina]
agenda+ Recent Developments: Joint TF Status
15:04:12 [janina]
agenda+ WCAG HTML5 Comments
15:04:14 [janina]
agenda+ next and future meetings
15:04:16 [janina]
agenda+ be done
15:04:53 [Joshue]
ScribeNick: Joshue
15:04:58 [Joshue]
zakim, mute me
15:04:58 [Zakim]
Joshue should now be muted
15:05:17 [Joshue]
TOPIC
15:05:38 [Joshue]
JS: There is a request for consensus on our joint TF on a11y
15:06:08 [Joshue]
JS: Members should reply. PF have discussed who our rep could be. The minutes seems unfinished
15:07:04 [Joshue]
MC: Maciej said he had overlooked a couple of things - revised call for consensus. He says he has sent it. The new period is next Thurs. We are delayed by a week again.
15:07:07 [Joshue]
JS: Ok
15:07:18 [Zakim]
+Cynthia_Shelly
15:08:28 [Joshue]
<process discussion>
15:08:39 [Laura]
Call for HTMLWG volunteers for accessibility task force facilitator
15:08:39 [Laura]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/1202.html
15:08:42 [Joshue]
JS: What do you sense from the meeting?
15:09:07 [Joshue]
CS: No one said anything about that (last call). They are working on the process but the doc is not ready.
15:09:53 [Joshue]
SF: They won't have it ready in four weeks. Hixie is closing down issues from the bug tracker, some things are moved to HTML issue tracker. We'll see.
15:10:15 [Joshue]
JS: Anyone have a pointer to MS extensibility proposal?
15:10:49 [Joshue]
SF: I'll find it and post it.
15:11:27 [Laura]
Distributed Extensibility Submission from Microsoft - 30 September 2009
15:11:35 [Stevef]
html issue 41 Decentralized-extensibility http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/41
15:11:35 [Laura]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/att-1216/MicrosoftDistributedExtensibilitySubmission.htm
15:11:42 [Joshue]
thanks Laura
15:12:00 [Joshue]
JS: That will help
15:12:48 [Joshue]
JS: We need to figure out facilitators etc we will work it out. I want to discuss that with Judy as she is very involved in this on behalf of the TF.
15:13:33 [Joshue]
JS: I hope we are soon at the end of the HTML WG process, and we are looking at the time for the call. This or some other hour.
15:13:58 [Joshue]
SF: Opera responded to Maciejs email - to say they support it
15:14:46 [Joshue]
JS: Good
15:15:28 [Laura]
Opera's support: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/1210.html
15:15:40 [Joshue]
TOPIC: Moving the API call
15:16:03 [Joshue]
CS: Steve would you be up for moving the call an hour earlier?
15:16:06 [Joshue]
SF: Yes
15:16:46 [Joshue]
zakim, unmute me
15:16:46 [Zakim]
Joshue should no longer be muted
15:17:17 [janina]
http://www.w3.org/mid/824e742c0908171632j77c6551fh66bfbe50a269b4f2@mail.gmail.com
15:18:43 [janina]
scribe: janina
15:19:09 [janina]
lg on 3.2.1
15:19:25 [janina]
lg: do not use elements/attribs/values other than as intended
15:19:39 [janina]
lg: does this forbid ARIA? Could it be misconstrued that way?
15:20:08 [janina]
sf: current spec fairly clear about aria use
15:20:39 [janina]
sf: lg's question should be considered vis a vis what the spec currently does say about ARIA
15:21:25 [janina]
mc: think lg looked at this when there was no aria integration yet in html spec
15:21:44 [janina]
mc: phps this is where strong vs weak semantics is described
15:22:00 [janina]
sf: may i say i have concerns re strong vs weak?
15:22:05 [janina]
cs: please elaborate
15:22:28 [janina]
sf: e.g. form control, text box, would be strong and not overwritten
15:22:42 [janina]
sf: but when part of popup would be different
15:22:49 [janina]
cs: true, phps we need an inheritance model
15:23:29 [janina]
sf: <li> elements not overwritten
15:23:45 [janina]
cs: phps a limited number, checkbox, etc
15:24:13 [janina]
sf: yes, a limited set should be mappable
15:24:52 [janina]
sf: any element may have something like 'onclick' attached,
15:25:04 [janina]
sf: if on heading, isn't it more important to know about the heading?
15:25:29 [janina]
cs: button, checkbox, radio, select ...
15:26:12 [janina]
cs: i've been reading interactive elements section; they already have this concept
15:26:23 [janina]
cs: think apple wrote this section--feels like apple
15:26:35 [janina]
cs: treat menu items as buttons
15:26:47 [janina]
cs: already have the concept of dependence on context
15:27:45 [janina]
sf: many of the new controls, because there's no description of how invoked, will depend on implementation
15:27:56 [janina]
js: isn't that a bug?
15:28:03 [janina]
cs: think so.
15:28:31 [janina]
cs: think color picker will have this problem
15:29:46 [janina]
sf: spec generally doesn't want to define ui -- whether a button should be a button, etc
15:30:42 [Joshue]
+q
15:31:27 [janina]
js: seems to me a basic principle for at is standardization under the hood and let browsers compete on look & feel and clever functionality
15:32:05 [janina]
jo: seems the more edge cases come to the fore which are problematic will demonstrate the problems of this
15:32:56 [janina]
cs: there two kinds of semantics here ...
15:32:59 [Joshue]
-q
15:33:02 [janina]
cs: not override api mapping
15:33:07 [janina]
cs: and dom mapping
15:33:19 [janina]
cs: i believe text level things should be overwritable
15:33:32 [janina]
cs: that's not about building an ui
15:33:45 [janina]
cs: bot form elements build ui, and overwriting could quickly create problems
15:33:57 [janina]
cs: text box is so generic, may need overwrite often
15:34:22 [janina]
cs: text processing not generally through api, so not problem for at
15:34:23 [Joshue]
interesting point cynthia - again it depends on context of use. Maybe seperating document semantics from more input controls type things would help?
15:34:46 [janina]
jo: separating doc semantics from input controls is the disconnect here
15:35:12 [janina]
jo: does this help us understand what we need?
15:35:21 [janina]
cs: yes, and html originally a doc lang
15:36:17 [janina]
js: returning to lg's point ... consensus that no longer an issue as aria addressed sufficiently in html spec
15:37:13 [janina]
lg: on h group
15:37:36 [janina]
jo: some thoughts, just now looking at ...
15:37:44 [Joshue]
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/semantics.html#sections
15:38:15 [janina]
jo: huge number of new elements ..
15:38:17 [Joshue]
4.4.7 The hgroup element
15:38:48 [Joshue]
How will that work in practice with screen readers? Will child headings contained in the <hgroup> be ignored? In particular legacy UAs? Will legacy UAs just not parse the <hgroup> element and just parse the contained headings?
15:40:40 [Joshue]
Here s asample
15:40:40 [Joshue]
<hgroup>
15:40:40 [Joshue]
<h1>The reality dysfunction</h1>
15:40:40 [Joshue]
<h2>Space is not the only void</h2>
15:40:40 [Joshue]
</hgroup>
15:40:41 [Joshue]
<hgroup>
15:40:43 [Joshue]
<h1>Dr. Strangelove</h1>
15:40:45 [Joshue]
<h2>Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb</h2>
15:40:47 [Joshue]
</hgroup>
15:41:09 [Joshue]
I don't know if this should be correct?
15:42:24 [janina]
mc: seems to address title plus subtitle, but they're really just the title.
15:42:28 [Joshue]
yes
15:42:31 [janina]
mc: we also have this problem in w3.org
15:43:10 [janina]
mc: this would be confusing to current at, but phps needs to be resolved
15:44:21 [janina]
sf: doesn't h2 will be seen as separate heading?
15:44:28 [Joshue]
Yes, Steve. The spec states "The point of using hgroup in these examples is to mask the h2 element (which acts as a secondary title) from the outline algorithm."
15:44:34 [janina]
mc: this says don't put auxiliary content in the main h
15:45:22 [janina]
jo: if at learns this is parsed differently, that's fine, but believe this may be problematic for at that doesn't support h group
15:45:52 [janina]
jo: possibly not a big issue
15:46:17 [janina]
mc: seems h group offers more clarity for sub headings
15:46:31 [Joshue]
I guess that its use makes sense it AT can handle it correctly
15:47:06 [janina]
consensus here is no problem with h group
15:47:11 [janina]
sf: what was lg's concern?
15:47:19 [janina]
mc: that we'll have to adjust headings guidance
15:47:44 [janina]
mc: we'll have to adjust lots of guidance, because html5 is new, and there will be many 5 vs earlier issues
15:48:06 [janina]
lg 3.1.2 elemnts in dom -- already a different section number
15:48:33 [janina]
cs: part of command elements -- and they are labeled, have both text and icon
15:48:54 [janina]
cs: possibly it's elsewhere, but in commands it's ok
15:51:02 [janina]
mc: seems ok
15:51:13 [janina]
cs: actually nice that every command can have label and icon
15:52:04 [janina]
cs: if label attrib not required, we should ask for that
15:53:15 [janina]
lg; next is 3.2.3.2 -- still valid as of date
15:53:34 [janina]
lg: recommended uses of title esp subtrees
15:53:44 [janina]
mc: we've always had this problem, is this an opportunity to fix/
15:53:59 [janina]
sf: issue?
15:54:04 [Joshue]
I agree about trying to fix the @title. Or at least work out what we should be doing with it.
15:54:11 [janina]
mc: that data important for at is recommended for title
15:54:19 [janina]
sf: i've been on this, it's moved to tracker
15:54:46 [janina]
sf: bug is alg for defining conforming images -- a non empty title is one you can have
15:55:00 [janina]
sf: ok for at, since title becomes accessible name without alt
15:55:13 [janina]
sf: visual users with keyboard can't access
15:55:21 [janina]
sf: not displayed like alt
15:55:33 [janina]
sf: suggest remove from alg or change advice for title
15:56:51 [janina]
mc: suspect html4 had this listed for lack of better knowledge
15:56:57 [janina]
cs: way it's done in command is correct
15:57:01 [Stevef]
document conformance and device dependent display of title attribute content http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/80
15:57:50 [janina]
lg: next 3.2.3.7 style attrib
15:58:18 [janina]
lg: we should be sure this doesn't contradict wcag -- but may be it's ok
15:58:31 [janina]
mc: more a wcag techniques question
15:59:08 [janina]
mc: personally don't care for hidden text -- bad design and a maint problem
15:59:16 [janina]
cs: also controversial
15:59:47 [Zakim]
-Cynthia_Shelly
16:00:31 [janina]
consensus this is not html, but wcag adjustment
16:02:28 [janina]
sf: my concern is it may be hidden from at as well
16:02:39 [janina]
mc: phps more reliance on css media types in wcag techniques
16:03:16 [janina]
sf: does any at support media types?
16:03:34 [janina]
mc: this is actually exploiting a bug
16:04:26 [janina]
mc: better to have better style sheed and media types support
16:04:50 [janina]
lg: 3.2.3.8 embedding custom nonvisible
16:05:01 [janina]
lg: suggest we can ignore if we want -- may not be a11y
16:05:22 [janina]
sf: this is about stopping an extention point
16:05:41 [janina]
sf: can put js data binding, but not a back door extensibility
16:05:46 [janina]
sf: that's why it's there
16:06:21 [janina]
js: so better to have a defined extensibility mechanism
16:06:30 [janina]
mc: specs define what's conforming, not what works
16:08:58 [janina]
so ... title attribute and making label required are our two actions to escalate from lg's comments?
16:09:01 [janina]
consensus
16:09:30 [Zakim]
-Cooper
16:09:31 [Zakim]
-Janina
16:09:32 [Zakim]
-Joshue
16:09:38 [janina]
zakim, bye
16:09:38 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were Janina, Cooper, Joshue, Stevef, Cynthia_Shelly
16:09:38 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #pf
16:09:45 [janina]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:09:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/10/02-pf-minutes.html janina