IRC log of html-a11y on 2011-05-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

21:20:59 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #html-a11y
21:20:59 [RRSAgent]
logging to
21:21:01 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
21:21:01 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #html-a11y
21:21:03 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 2119
21:21:03 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_PFWG(A11Y)5:30PM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
21:21:04 [trackbot]
Meeting: HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
21:21:04 [trackbot]
Date: 11 May 2011
21:21:22 [JF]
zakim, this is 2119
21:21:22 [Zakim]
JF, I see WAI_PFWG(A11Y)5:30PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be 2119".
21:21:38 [JF]
zakim, this will be 2119
21:21:38 [Zakim]
ok, JF; I see WAI_PFWG(A11Y)5:30PM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
21:22:02 [JF]
Meeting: HTML-A11Y telecon
21:22:03 [JF]
21:22:05 [JF]
21:22:06 [JF]
agenda+Identify Scribe
21:22:08 [JF]
agenda+Next Steps on Multitrack: Listing Kinds/Types
21:22:09 [JF]
agenda+Actions Review
21:22:11 [JF]
agenda+ Media Alt Technologies
21:22:12 [JF]
agenda+Other Business?
21:22:14 [JF]
agenda+ be done
21:22:17 [silvia]
silvia has joined #html-a11y
21:22:49 [plh]
plh has joined #html-a11y
21:23:19 [Zakim]
WAI_PFWG(A11Y)5:30PM has now started
21:23:27 [Zakim]
21:24:37 [JF]
scribe: JF
21:25:44 [JF]
zakim, agendum 1
21:25:44 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'agendum 1', JF
21:26:07 [JF]
zakim, take up agendum 1
21:26:07 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Identify Scribe" taken up [from JF]
21:26:20 [JF]
scribe: JF
21:27:55 [janina]
janina has joined #html-a11y
21:28:31 [janina]
trackbot, start meeting
21:28:33 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
21:28:35 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 2119
21:28:35 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_PFWG(A11Y)5:30PM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
21:28:36 [trackbot]
Meeting: HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
21:28:36 [trackbot]
Date: 11 May 2011
21:30:32 [mark]
mark has joined #html-a11y
21:31:10 [mark]
zakim, who is here ?
21:31:10 [Zakim]
I notice WAI_PFWG(A11Y)5:30PM has restarted
21:31:11 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JF, mark, ??P2
21:31:13 [janina]
zakim, who's here?
21:31:13 [Zakim]
On IRC I see mark, janina, plh, silvia, Zakim, RRSAgent, JF, MikeSmith, MichaelC, [tm], trackbot
21:31:15 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JF, mark, ??P2
21:31:17 [Zakim]
On IRC I see mark, janina, plh, silvia, Zakim, RRSAgent, JF, MikeSmith, MichaelC, [tm], trackbot
21:31:24 [janina]
zakim, agenda?
21:31:24 [Zakim]
I see 6 items remaining on the agenda:
21:31:25 [Zakim]
1. Identify Scribe [from JF]
21:31:27 [Zakim]
2. Next Steps on Multitrack: Listing Kinds/Types [from JF]
21:31:31 [Zakim]
3. Actions Review [from JF]
21:31:34 [Zakim]
4. Media Alt Technologies [from JF]
21:31:35 [Zakim]
5. Other Business? [from JF]
21:31:37 [Zakim]
6. be done [from JF]
21:32:03 [Zakim]
21:32:03 [JF]
zakim, take up agendum 1
21:32:04 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Identify Scribe" taken up [from JF]
21:32:09 [JF]
scribe: JF
21:33:59 [Sean]
Sean has joined #html-a11y
21:35:23 [Zakim]
21:35:56 [silvia]
zakim, mute me
21:35:56 [Zakim]
silvia should now be muted
21:36:02 [silvia]
zakim, who is here?
21:36:02 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JF, mark, ??P2, Judy, silvia (muted)
21:36:03 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Sean, mark, janina, plh, silvia, Zakim, RRSAgent, JF, MikeSmith, MichaelC, [tm], trackbot
21:36:14 [Zakim]
21:36:15 [janina]
zakim, ??P2 is Janina
21:36:16 [Zakim]
+Janina; got it
21:37:51 [silvia]
zakim, unmute me
21:37:51 [Zakim]
silvia should no longer be muted
21:37:53 [JF]
zakim, take up next item
21:37:53 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Next Steps on Multitrack: Listing Kinds/Types" taken up [from JF]
21:38:09 [Zakim]
21:38:26 [JF]
JS: looking to summarize outstanding issues
21:38:31 [Zakim]
+ +1.890.9.aaaa
21:38:33 [Zakim]
21:38:42 [JF]
SP: Navigation with full descriptions is solved, but not heirarchal navigation
21:39:16 [JF]
SP: But we've put this on the back-burner until we can start to do some expermentation - there is a bug in the tracker already
21:39:51 [JF]
zakim, aaaa is Judy
21:39:51 [Zakim]
+Judy; got it
21:40:03 [janina]
zakim, aaa is Judy
21:40:03 [Zakim]
sorry, janina, I do not recognize a party named 'aaa'
21:40:10 [janina]
zakim, who's here?
21:40:10 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JF, mark, Janina, silvia, Eric, Judy.a, Judy
21:40:11 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Sean, mark, janina, plh, silvia, Zakim, RRSAgent, JF, MikeSmith, MichaelC, [tm], trackbot
21:40:20 [Sean]
could be me
21:40:32 [silvia]
zakim, aaaa is Sean
21:40:32 [Zakim]
sorry, silvia, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
21:40:36 [Sean]
my mic doesnt seem to be working
21:40:46 [janina]
zakim, judy.a is Sean
21:40:46 [Zakim]
+Sean; got it
21:40:59 [Sean]
I'm working on it
21:41:40 [JF]
SP: the 2 open issues are hierarchical navigation, and the second is alt technologies
21:42:08 [JF]
which is on the list and agenda today, and to finish of the @kind listing for inband
21:42:31 [mark]
21:42:35 [silvia]
zakim, mute me
21:42:35 [Zakim]
silvia should now be muted
21:42:40 [JF]
JS: Picking up from last weeks conversation
21:43:05 [JF]
not sure how to steer this - are we happy with this list on the wiki? Is it sufficently defined?
21:43:20 [JF]
Mark: what we are left with is 3 new kids to be proposed
21:43:34 [JF]
we seem to almost agree to re-open the original bug and request to have them added
21:43:49 [JF]
the only other thing is to decide what to do with the questions from 3GPP
21:44:08 [JF]
JS: do we need to worry if our list is 100% accurate before we file another bug?
21:44:30 [JF]
JF: thought mark suggested that we re-open existing bug
21:44:40 [JF]
JS: is there disagreement to doing that? who can do it?
21:45:14 [JF]
mark: whomever is best suited to crafting bug text that the editor is sympathetic too
21:45:21 [Zakim]
21:45:23 [silvia]
zakim, unmute me
21:45:23 [Zakim]
silvia should no longer be muted
21:45:24 [JF]
JB: perhaps Silvia could do that?
21:45:46 [JF]
SP: I could, but i don't think I should be the one - suggest that perhaps mark could do it as well
21:45:51 [JF]
JB: support that
21:46:16 [JF]
Mark: concerned about process, but can take a stab at it
21:46:35 [JF]
SP/JB: circulate draft prior to submission for ffeedback
21:46:51 [JF]
JS: is there more to discuss? are we pretty happy with it?
21:47:03 [JF]
Mark: regarding Clear Audio, should we link to the wiki page
21:47:03 [silvia]
zakim, mute me
21:47:03 [Zakim]
silvia should now be muted
21:47:31 [JF]
JS: we have discussed the status of that page in the past, but current status is unclear
21:48:40 [Zakim]
21:48:42 [JF]
JB: have been wondering about this as well. the user reqs and tech reqs in this sub-group have been referenced widely
21:48:59 [JF]
however this is a wiki, and anyone can make changes without our knowing it - so it is not stable
21:49:20 [JF]
the preferable thing to do is to stabilize it, but the a11yTF don't have publication authorization
21:49:29 [JF]
without going through the full HTML WG
21:49:43 [JF]
so there are a number of different routes to follow
21:49:52 [JF]
21:49:59 [JF]
JS: the other parent group is PF
21:50:20 [JF]
JB: yes was formally set up as a joint TF
21:50:27 [JF]
PF can work on this in public
21:50:34 [JF]
ack JF
21:50:48 [JF]
PF could possibly take this on
21:52:12 [JF]
JS: question - would people mind if this was published by PF rather than HTML WG?
21:54:11 [silvia]
zakim, unmute me
21:54:11 [Zakim]
silvia should no longer be muted
21:54:57 [JF]
SP: not too concerned where it is published, PF could handle this, but if people want it to get through the HTML WG process as a tech report or something we could follow that prodess
21:55:07 [JF]
believe that PF would be appropriate
21:55:07 [silvia]
zakim, mute me
21:55:07 [Zakim]
silvia should now be muted
21:55:21 [JF]
+1 to have this in PF (public) space
21:55:40 [JF]
JS: any objections then?
21:56:10 [JF]
JS: will take that on then and move towards a permenant URI
21:56:30 [silvia]
zakim, unmute me
21:56:30 [Zakim]
silvia should no longer be muted
21:56:40 [JF]
ACTION: Janina to take the user reqs and tech reqs and get that published under PF
21:56:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-126 - Take the user reqs and tech reqs and get that published under PF [on Janina Sajka - due 2011-05-18].
21:57:25 [JF]
JB: I think there is one section that needs some minor editing, so before it becomes more formal a quick pass would be appropriate
21:57:32 [JF]
but we could likley lock the page
21:57:40 [JF]
SP: prefer not to lock the page
21:57:48 [JF]
as we continue to add clariffication
21:57:59 [JF]
while those changes are minor, they are useful
21:58:22 [JF]
suggest that taking it to PF, and in that process to clean up the wording, etc., that would be good
21:59:35 [JF]
JS: I have tried to search for a good clear explanation of how/what Clear Audio is, but have only found annecdotal content
22:00:04 [JF]
perhaps we can find more clarification, as it seems incomplete in our document
22:00:13 [JF]
SH: I can check at BBC for that
22:00:52 [JF]
JS: thanks mark for helping us move the document forward/
22:00:54 [JF]
22:01:25 [JF]
JS: any other questions on the topic and the wiki?
22:01:42 [JF]
JB: are we looking to do this on both user reqs and tech reqs?
22:02:04 [JF]
my recollection was that we got more traction with the mapping exercise
22:02:14 [JF]
believes there is a technical list
22:03:05 [silvia] <- this one?
22:03:06 [JF]
JB: remembers a list of technical requirements as well as user requirements
22:03:54 [JF]
SP: don't think we kept that document up to date
22:04:09 [JF]
JB: OK, that sounds right, retract the suggestion
22:04:16 [silvia]
zakim, mute me
22:04:16 [Zakim]
silvia should now be muted
22:04:36 [janina]
ack jf
22:05:09 [JF]
JF: what to do with the 3GPP issue?
22:05:22 [JF]
Mark: questions are on the @trak kinds page
22:05:57 [JF]
Questions from 3GPP
22:05:59 [JF]
In [1] they ask:
22:06:00 [JF]
whether our hope to recommend use of W3C ‘role’ names, in our specification, seems achievable and reasonable, in your opinion;
22:06:02 [JF]
your thinking on the set of names;
22:06:03 [JF]
your schedule for defining at least a stable initial set of names;
22:06:05 [JF]
whether you will define a URN to identify the set you define.
22:07:01 [JF]
JS: believes that a) yes, we can respond, likely in a few weeks, and that PF would provide the URN for referencing the list
22:07:40 [silvia]
zakim, unmute me
22:07:40 [Zakim]
silvia should no longer be muted
22:07:48 [JF]
JS: so responding here, formally on behalf of the group, likely falls to JF and JS
22:08:01 [JF]
SP: just to note that the request for clarification came to the HTML WG
22:08:15 [JF]
wonder if we need to pass it through that group first
22:08:53 [JF]
SP: came via PLH - but think it should go through HTML WG
22:09:10 [JF]
JB: if it is a liason query, then it would likley be through staff
22:09:19 [JF]
Judy and PLH work together on those often
22:10:01 [JF]
Mark: notes that the request was addressed to the a11yTF group, addressed to David singer
22:10:43 [JF]
JB: David, PLH and I will be together next week and will walk this through to the end
22:11:08 [mark]
correction: the 3GPP contact person is David Singer
22:11:10 [JF]
JS: any other questions with @kind?
22:11:18 [JF]
zakim, next agendum item
22:11:18 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'next agendum item', JF
22:11:25 [JF]
zakim, take up next agendum
22:11:25 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Actions Review" taken up [from JF]
22:12:32 [silvia]
22:12:54 [JF]
JS: still working on this, but yes, still active
22:12:57 [silvia]
22:13:11 [JF]
next item:
22:13:18 [JF]
on Sean
22:13:29 [JF]
SH: I believe this is done, and can be closed
22:13:30 [silvia]
close action 109
22:13:40 [JF]
zakim, take up next agendum
22:13:40 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Media Alt Technologies" taken up [from JF]
22:14:39 [JF]
SP: have looked at alt technologies when video and audio are not playing
22:14:45 [JF]
similar to no image display
22:15:03 [JF]
so what do we do with the empty space in particular for people who cannot see the empty space
22:15:19 [JF]
may also be a useful situation for people who may still want to know what audio and video is
22:15:30 [JF]
ie; low bandwidth, deaf/blind, etc.
22:15:41 [JF]
so that is the background that I have approached it from
22:16:06 [JF]
another is, what if there are 20 videos on the page, when tabbing through we need an indication as to what these videos represent
22:16:17 [JF]
which to a sighted user comes from the placeholder frame
22:16:26 [Zakim]
22:16:34 [JF]
but for non-sighted needs a text alternative
22:16:40 [JF]
22:16:50 [JF]
being careful not to use the term poster
22:17:24 [JF]
SP: so that is the background, and the wiki page is linked here
22:17:39 [Zakim]
+ +44.844.800.aabb
22:17:40 [JF]
saw that this could be a problem to solve
22:17:50 [JF]
have discussed this with other developers and blind users
22:18:00 [JF]
also needed to understand the alt technologies available
22:18:12 [Sean]
Sean again
22:18:21 [JF]
as this is related to where we have gone in the past
22:18:23 [janina]
zakim, aabb is Sean
22:18:23 [Zakim]
+Sean; got it
22:18:45 [JF]
SP: so I have identified 3 use cases
22:18:53 [JF]
that I think needs to be catered for
22:19:04 [JF]
but anything that is time-aligned is not pertinent here
22:19:15 [JF]
as this has already been addressed via the track element
22:19:50 [JF]
JS: so we have 2 tiypes of transcript, one that is time-stmped and one that is not
22:19:53 [JF]
SP: yes
22:20:12 [JF]
perhaps start with the @transcription proposal
22:20:28 [JF]
a new attribute proposed has the use of linking to an off-page transcription file
22:20:46 [JF]
use case is that we have a very long and detailed transcription, but too long to be cited on the page
22:21:28 [JF]
this would be most useful for deaf/blind and/or low-bandwidth users
22:21:50 [JF]
while talking with people at google, they have had this request for a long time
22:22:05 [janina]
22:22:28 [JF]
ie: non-timed-aligned text, currently YouTube strips time-alignment from text when they receive the request
22:23:05 [JF]
SP: so we can either provide an "in the clear" link on the page, either visible or positioned off-page
22:23:20 [JF]
or having the attribute
22:23:48 [JF]
don't like the position off page solution, so would prefer to see it as a link in the video element
22:24:09 [janina]
ack jf
22:25:46 [JF]
ack: jan
22:25:55 [JF]
ack jan
22:26:17 [JF]
JS: agrees that a contextual menu would likely be the better solution
22:26:31 [JF]
SP: yes, I think that this would be the most useful as well
22:26:52 [JF]
JS: one question - if we call this transcription, what do we call the text file with the time-stamp
22:27:21 [mark]
22:27:31 [JF]
JS: we need to be very clear on how we name this
22:28:08 [JF]
Mark: does it make any sense if the UA could strip the time-stamp data, could we repurpose this?
22:28:33 [JF]
JB: the text, where-ever you pause, my be widely un-aligned with the media
22:28:56 [JF]
we are dealing with the question of 'appropriateness' without to much analysis
22:29:55 [janina]
22:30:04 [janina]
ack ma
22:30:08 [JF]
Mark: the question is, can the entire timestamp text also fufill the need of the transcript - if the UA can strip the timestamping
22:30:17 [janina]
22:30:29 [JF]
SP: caption file only captures what is being spoken plus with a bit of sound-effects
22:30:42 [JF]
but a transcript also captures what is happening on screen
22:31:01 [JF]
transcript is more a combination of captions and audio description
22:31:32 [mark]
22:31:33 [JF]
ie: a caption file does not explain what is on screen - all you get is what the dialog is
22:32:15 [JF]
it *could* be automatically be done by merging the caption and description file, but this sounds complex/complicated
22:32:41 [JF]
JS: to my mind transcript is much closer to script in the classical theatrical use
22:32:55 [JF]
it has both dialog and "stage" direction
22:33:06 [JF]
but may not include descriptive audio text
22:33:23 [JF]
SP: I think the author needs to determine what is appropriate
22:33:44 [JF]
JS: I agree, what I am suggesting is that the transcript needs to be aligned to the running media
22:34:06 [JF]
if it is not a caption file, or a descriptive audio/text file
22:34:30 [JF]
SP: this can be done already, don't believe that this is a use-case that needs to be addressed here
22:34:41 [JF]
JS: at the very least we need to disambiguate them
22:35:04 [JF]
we need to give them clear names so that we can easily tell what is time aligned and what is not
22:35:16 [janina]
22:35:21 [janina]
ack ja
22:36:13 [JF]
mark: I believe that the question was well answered. It just seems that i would be useful if the author could write once and have the UA do the 'splitting apart'
22:36:32 [JF]
SP: believes that this would be done on the server, not built into the browser
22:36:40 [mark]
I didn't necessarily mean the *UA* would do the splitting
22:37:18 [JF]
SP: YouTube calls their "timed transcript" their interactive transcript
22:37:43 [janina]
22:37:49 [JF]
Eric: don't think that "interactive" is appropriate, because it may not in fact be interactive
22:37:52 [janina]
ack ma
22:38:17 [JF]
JS: any other ideas of names?
22:38:45 [silvia]
22:38:47 [JF]
JB: would rather look at the different things on a page by definition, it might be easier to spot the differences and find a candidate name
22:39:09 [JF]
think that these terms that these terms already may be considered "reserved" terms in certain circles
22:39:49 [Zakim]
22:40:05 [JF]
we might consider to look at what was done with figcaption, so that it helps disambiguate the term
22:40:22 [JF]
JS: perhaps we need to set the naming aside, and perhaps move on
22:40:36 [janina]
ack sy
22:40:40 [janina]
ack si
22:40:40 [JF]
SP: wnated to ask Eric why he thinks it is not interactive
22:40:45 [Zakim]
22:41:18 [JF]
SP: so are we in agreement that adding a new attribute is the best way forward? perhaps poll the group?
22:41:20 [MikeSmith_]
MikeSmith_ has joined #html-a11y
22:42:57 [JF]
JF: is there anyone on the call opposed to introducing a new attribute mechanism to achieve this?
22:43:34 [JF]
SP: Eric, if we provide a time-stamped transcript on the page why would you be opposed to calling it 'interactive'
22:43:55 [JF]
Eric: because it may be that users could not actually 'interact' with the text
22:44:16 [JF]
if that is going to be a requirement, then we need to discuss, but don't believe that it will be one
22:44:54 [JF]
Eric: seems to me that time is what it's all about - I don't have a problem with this, but don't think this is a key issue at this time
22:45:25 [JF]
JS: OK so we should drop the naming question for now. will add a section to the wiki page to foster more discusssion
22:45:35 [janina]
22:45:59 [JF]
SP; another use-case is a short text alternative
22:46:16 [JF]
another is one that you tap onto a video, and you want to know if you should hit the play button or not
22:46:29 [JF]
for sighted users, this comes from looking at the image and the associated text
22:46:47 [JF]
for a11y reasons we have to replace what is being seen on thta image to non-sighted users
22:46:54 [JF]
so a textual alternative is required
22:47:10 [JF]
Marco (Zehe) suggests that this needs to be short and succinct
22:47:24 [janina]
22:47:35 [JF]
so that when a non-sighted users tabs through the images, the text is short and succinct
22:47:58 [JF]
looking at what might solve this problem I looked at the different options
22:48:26 [JF]
marco suggested aria-label and they all seem to agree that it is the most useful here
22:48:33 [JF]
JS: I think that marco is 50% correct
22:48:41 [JF]
we need to treat the image as any other image
22:48:43 [JF]
22:49:19 [JF]
we need both a short 'handle' as well as an ability to expose a longer description
22:50:03 [janina]
ack ja
22:50:06 [janina]
ack jf
22:50:28 [Zakim]
22:51:44 [JF]
JF: talked with Victor Tsaran at yahoo! and he disagrees that aria-label is appropriate
22:51:59 [JF]
problem is that label is for list and interactive content
22:52:19 [Zakim]
22:52:24 [JF]
as well, with @alt if images are not supported the text renders on screen, where as aria-lable text is not shown on screen
22:52:30 [Zakim]
22:52:51 [JF]
JS: Silvia, would you like me to ask PF to focus on this further
22:52:56 [Zakim]
22:53:02 [JF]
SP: this is new, so we can do whatever we want
22:53:30 [JF]
makes sense that we have one mechanism not 2, and believes we should be in sync with images
22:53:40 [JF]
but not married to either option
22:54:14 [JF]
but don't want an either/or scenario
22:54:23 [JF]
it should be clear, and one solution
22:54:51 [JF]
JS: believe that this would be an interesting use case discussion for WAI
22:55:07 [JF]
we have a need to support i18n, and ARIA is the better way of doing that
22:57:15 [JF]
JS: this is something useful to continue to discuss. We are also looking at a very short list of additions to ARIA
23:00:35 [JF]
JS: sad to note we are out of time
23:00:46 [JF]
SP: I would rather finish this discussion, but it seems we are out of time
23:00:56 [JF]
JS: we will start back up with this next week
23:01:12 [JF]
rrsagent, make logs public
23:01:31 [JF]
rrsagent, make minutes
23:01:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate JF
23:01:42 [JF]
JS: thi shas been a productive meeting
23:01:43 [Zakim]
23:01:46 [JF]
see you all next week
23:01:49 [Zakim]
23:01:52 [Zakim]
23:01:54 [Zakim]
23:01:59 [Zakim]
23:02:00 [Zakim]
23:02:00 [Zakim]
23:02:01 [Zakim]
WAI_PFWG(A11Y)5:30PM has ended
23:02:03 [Zakim]
Attendees were JF, mark, Judy, silvia, Eric, Janina, +1.890.9.aaaa, Sean, +44.844.800.aabb
23:02:19 [JF]
rrsagent, make minutes
23:02:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate JF
23:02:36 [JF]
zakim, bye
23:02:36 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #html-a11y
23:02:44 [JF]
rrsagent, make minutes
23:02:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate JF
23:02:55 [JF]
rrsagent, pleae part
23:02:55 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'pleae part', JF. Try /msg RRSAgent help
23:03:10 [JF]
rrsagent, please part
23:03:10 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in :
23:03:10 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Janina to take the user reqs and tech reqs and get that published under PF [1]
23:03:10 [RRSAgent]
recorded in