User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference -- 20 Jan 2011

<trackbot> Date: 20 January 2011

<jeanne> simon, are you joining us?

liaison to HCG working group

<mhakkinen> Mark is on irc... will be calling in shortly

<JAllan> Meetings for the next 2 weeks to start 2 hours earlier and will run 11-3 eastern, pending bridge availability

<jeanne> http://www.w3.org/2010/12/audio-wg-charter.html

Janina Sajka, the head of PF is interested in audio accessibility. In the coordination group meeting yesterday she asked UA to participate in the new Audio Working Group.

Their goal is to create APIs for audio in the browser. What WAI would like to do it position them to use UAAG among their requirements.

They'd like UAWG to have a liaison to the AWG.

The meeting schedule has not been established yet.

Mark would like to participate, IF it meets at a tie that works for him.

Doug Schepers will be the W3 team contact for AWG, and so the one to talk to about their schedule.

AWG goals include giving the browser control over volume, speed, and pitch, as well as transformational filtering (e.g. filtering specific frequencies), etc.

Simon deals with audio for blind users, but does not believe he has time to take on another working group right now.

Mark also believes there may be another person in his department who is an expert on audio, and may be appropriate as an invited expert.

<mhakkinen> Antti pirhonen, university of jyvaskyla

This discussion was started last week. Comes from HTML5 WG Accessibility Task Force. They want the browser to notify the user if captions are requested but for some reason cannot be found or displayed. They want this to be a UAAG requirement rather than in the HTML5 spec.

A concern brought up last week was where would it stop: would UAAG call out everything that could go wrong and that the user agent should inform the user of?

Jeanne suggests a more generic success criterion saying that if there is a problem rendering alternative content, there is some indication given to the user.

Probably not an alert (dialog box), but some passive feedback (equivalent to the broken image icon).

Question is would it be good enough if it's hidden by default, such as in a developer panel?

<JAllan> gl: would it be visible in the default configuration? would the user have to hunt for it?

<JAllan> if hidden in the developer panel no user (99%) will find it

Jim asks if there's a difference between "this video has no captions" vs. "this video has captions but they're broken".

Jan suggested the error be displayed in a developer panel, which could have many other similar errors as well.

General agreement that we should have a generic SC saying that the user can tell when alternative content cannot be displayed, and the Intent and Examples make clear that it is not recommended that the notice require user response.

<JAllan> level AA or AAA

Also that the user should be able to have the status presented to them instead of having to look it up in a separate context (such as an error log)?

"The user can be notified (informed) when user user agent cannot render alternative content (e.g. when captions are broken)." ?

Title: Broken Alternative Content?

Example: _____ has images turned off and replaced by their alt text. When alt text is missing, an error icon is presented in its place.
... _____ is watching videos embedded in a Web page. The browser enables a Captions button when it detects that a caption stream is available. The user clicks this to turn on display of captions, but the browser finds the caption stream is invalid. Instead of merely showing blank space, it displays a small message or icon in the caption area to inform the user that the requested...
... captions cannot be displayed.

<JAllan> This seems to fit in GL 1.2 Repair missing content

Intent: Users who have chosen to have alternative content presented to them greatly appreciate understanding, when their request does not seem to be working, whether that is due to a source error, user error, or merely a delay.

Note that it is generally recommended that this type of notification NOT require user response.

scribe: so as not to interrupt the user's experience.

<KimPatch> Intent: Users who have chosen to have alternative content presented to them greatly appreciate understanding whether a non-working requests is due to a source error, user error, or merely a delay.

<mhakkinen> +1

<JAllan> +1

<KimPatch> Copy error fix:Intent: Users who have chosen to have alternative content presented to them greatly appreciate understanding whether a non-working request is due to a source error, user error, or merely a delay.

<JAllan> should this be AA?\

<mhakkinen> +1

<KimPatch> +1

<Jan> +1

+1 (but would be fine with AAA)

<jeanne> +1

<JAllan> +1 (fine with AAA also)

<sharper> +1

<Jan> (fine with AA as well)

<Jan> (fine with AAA as well)

I must admit that it's *nice* but lack of it would never prevent a person from using the document/browser.

<JAllan> kp: this is informational, giving the user a mental map of what is happening

1.2.x Broken Alternative Content: The user can be notified when user user agent cannot render alternative content (e.g. when captions are broken).

Intent:

Users who have chosen to have alternative content presented to them greatly appreciate understanding whether a non-working requests is due to a source error, user error, or merely a delay. Users who lack this information may incorrectly conclude that a particular site is not accessible to them, or may waste time either waiting for content or attempting to find a non-existent problem in their...

scribe: browser or configuration.

Note that it is generally recommended that this type of notification NOT require user response, so as not to interrupt the user's experience.

Examples:

* _____ has images turned off and replaced by their alt text. When alt text is missing, an error icon is presented in its place.

* Example: _____ is watching videos embedded in a Web page. The browser enables a Captions button when it detects that a caption stream is available. The user clicks this to turn on display of captions, but the browser finds the caption stream is invalid. Instead of merely showing blank space, it displays a small message or icon in the caption area to inform the user that the requested...

scribe: captions cannot be displayed.

Related Resources: Success criterion 1.1.3 requires that the user be informed when the document indicates that alternative content is present, but the browser may not know that the alternative content is broken until the user actually attempts to render or play it.

(Actually that could be in the Intent paragraph.)

<jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne to add the above to the documents as 1.2.x [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/01/20-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-488 - Add the above to the documents as 1.2.x [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2011-01-27].

Jeanne feels we're close to last call, need to finish the Intent document. Plan is to work on those during the next two conference calls.

GL4 has all IER (Intent, Examples, Related Resources) done.

When we complete the IER for 3.4.2 then all of GL3 will be done.

1.9 is about focus, and Kim and Greg have done a lot on that but not entirely finished.

They'll schedule time to continue working on that together.

<JAllan> 3.4.2 (former 5.4.2) Unpredictable focus:

<JAllan> The user is informed when the user agent changes focus. The user agent provides a global option to block uninitiated focus changes.

That's really two SC.

All of 3.4 is about focus, which is also the topic of 1.9.

<JAllan> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/ED-IMPLEMENTING-UAAG20-20101215/#gl-focus-mechanism

Question about whether we should merge the two guidelines together.

Since "consistent behavior" (3.4) is a valid recommendation we'd like to convey to developers, perhaps we can keep it around, even if its only content is cross-references to SC in other guidelines (particularly in 1.9 Effective Focus).

Jim notes that 1.8 also has a lot of focus-related criteria.

- DRAFT -

User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

20 Jan 2011

Attendees

Contents

liaison to HCG working group

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output