<janina> agenda: this

canvas Status Update

<janina> scribe: janina

[discussion on getting the review done before escalating issue 131]

<LeonieWatson> scribe: Léonie Watson

<LeonieWatson> JB: It would be great if you could help move things on.

<LeonieWatson> PC: I'll work on this, but I can't promise anything.

<LeonieWatson> RS: I could submit this with the change proposal, but I don't want to have another 11th hour problem to deal with again. I'd prefer to reach out to the chairs for input before wesubmit our proposal.

<LeonieWatson> PC: That's why I'm here, so things don't ferment.

<LeonieWatson> RS: I could ask to open issue 131 and submit this before a vote?

<LeonieWatson> PC: I can't hypothesise what the co-chairs might do.

<LeonieWatson> RS: Time has been put into this proposal. I don't have time to go over it again. I wish I did, but...

<LeonieWatson> RS: I'm writing a spec change for bindings to fall back content.

<LeonieWatson> JS: The TPAC agenda is pretty much done. The slot that works best for HTML discussions PF wants to have is after lunch on the Monday.

<LeonieWatson> CS: I'll be there for part of it at least.

<LeonieWatson> JS: We could start with HTML.mappings?

<LeonieWatson> JS: We could end that discussion with canvas?

<LeonieWatson> JS: From 9am through 3pm we'll be on ARIA.

<LeonieWatson> JS: We have several Microsoft people asking to observe.

TPAC Planning Discussion

<LeonieWatson> JS: Let's be specific to the TF part of things.

<LeonieWatson> JS: Work will begin on mappings. What else do we want to focus on?

<LeonieWatson> JS: I was thinking about actions, particularly from the text sub team.

<LeonieWatson> JS: There are two change proposals under review.

<LeonieWatson> JS: Steve Faulkner is making some final minor tweaks to the metaname generator and title proposals.

<LeonieWatson> CS: Canvas follow ups?

<LeonieWatson> JS@ Longdesc and table summary are also active.

<LeonieWatson> JS: John Foliot has posted a response to Jonas, and I'm close to completing my response to Matt.

<LeonieWatson> JS: I have an action to review the table summary response to ensure it addresses the points from the original objection.

<LeonieWatson> JS: On the text telecon I suggested allowing longdesc to be used as a replacement for table summary.

<JF> +Q

<LeonieWatson> CS: longdesc or describedby and describedat?

<LeonieWatson> JS: Longdesc.

<LeonieWatson> JS: This is on our agenda for Tuesday morning.

<LeonieWatson> JS: Longdesc for a couple of reasons. Perhaps the biggest reason is that longdesc already exists, it's familiar, and it's available to ATs.

<LeonieWatson> CS: You could do that with describedby or describedat too.

<LeonieWatson> JS: There's plenty for us to discuss on Tuesday morning.

<LeonieWatson> JF: The problem with describedby and described at, is that they're only available through accessibility APIs. They could be useful to people with other disabilities.

<LeonieWatson> CS: It's markup, how would that not be available?

<LeonieWatson> JF: There isn't an interaction model.

<LeonieWatson> CS: There wouldn't have been an interaction model for longdesc originally though.

<LeonieWatson> JF: The larger problem is that we don't have the support from the browser vendors.

<LeonieWatson> JF: It's what we get from the element or attribute or whatever that's important.

<LeonieWatson> JF: An issue was described on the text call - the first time a blind user encounters a table summary it's useful, after that it's less helpful.

<LeonieWatson> JF: It's about choice. Do you want to access the supplemental information? Yes or no.

<LeonieWatson> JF: If the browsers can give us that functionality through describedby or describedat, that would be great.

<LeonieWatson> CS: Longdesc isn't implemented in browsers that well though.

<LeonieWatson> JF: The best of breed we have at the moment is longdesc.

<LeonieWatson> CS: I agree we need the behaviour, but think we may be getting too tied up in the implementation.

<LeonieWatson> JF: You're right. Legacy support is important. Just look at the <b> <i> etc. It's not going to go away.

<LeonieWatson> JF: If, generally speaking, the wider community thinks four quarters for a dollar is worth the effort, so be it. There's still a need to provide legacy support.

<LeonieWatson> JS: It's clear we'll talk about this more at TPAC. Interestig to hear no-one has dismissed my longdesc idea out of hand.

<LeonieWatson> JS: We understand the desire for describedat, and that's going to move forward.

<LeonieWatson> JS: Meanwhile, there is this moment. Longdesc is more accepted at this time. There is also the storm we'll inherit if we say we want to rely on a mechanism that doesn't exist yet.

<LeonieWatson> JF: The requirements have been clarified - discoverability and interaction. If we're talking about table summary as obsolete but conforming whilst we migrate to another mechanism, I don't care what that is, but would support something along those lines.

<LeonieWatson> JS: I think we're showing consistency, and good response to positive feedback.

<LeonieWatson> CS: I agree consistency is important.

<LeonieWatson> JB: It sounds like a useful solution. You want to be aiming for what will technically work. Legacy realities are an important piece of this. We want to be moving forward, but we don't want to move forward with the floor missing.

<LeonieWatson> JS: Ok, TPAC... We have our agenda, and other formal and informal sessions and conversations.

<LeonieWatson> JB: FYI. I'll be a guest observer for the PF sessions. Will try to interesect on Tuesday where possible.

Subteam Reports: Media; Bug Triage; Canvas; ARIA Mapping; Text;

<LeonieWatson> JF: Will generated content be on the agenda?

talking about meta name generator

<LeonieWatson> JF: There seems to be two points of view within our community. I don't know which is which.

<LeonieWatson> JF: We need to walk through this, make sure it's clear in our own minds.

<LeonieWatson> +1 to JF.

<LeonieWatson> JF: You can use the before and after CSS selectors to write text to the screen. The argument is that this is content written to the presentation layer.

<LeonieWatson> JB: These are old issues being raised again by the sound of things.

<LeonieWatson> JS: We'll be meeting with CSS. I don't ant it to be our top item, but I'll aim to include it at some point.

<LeonieWatson> CS: I'm a member of the CSS WG, so can raise it if that's helpful. I'm concerned about it too.

<scribe> scribe: janina

leonie, apologizing for any confusion on priority requests

leonie, complete on priority review

leonie, looking for next steps guidance from pf

<paulc> I am chairing the WG meeting today and have to leave now to get ready.

<paulc> exit

janina, please make sure I bring this up Monday during PF's html discussion

leonie, OK

<LeonieWatson> JS: John can we talk next week about media?

<LeonieWatson> JF: Yes. There is activity from the community group regarding time tracker. It would be useful to touch base with various browser implementations as well, in terms of support for track.

<LeonieWatson> JS: We have a meeting on Tuesday with the Web TV interest group. There is going to be a panel on this whole topic on Wednesday.

<LeonieWatson> JS: This is a good opportunity, and it should help set things up for some useful discussions on Thursday and Friday.

<JF> Web and TV Interest Group: http://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/

Other Business

<LeonieWatson> JS: Any volunteers to scribe our next meeting, two weeks from today?

<LeonieWatson> JS: Alright, we'll take it up next time.

<LeonieWatson> rrsagent stop

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Steve/Steve Faulkner/
Succeeded: s/allowig/allowing/
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina
Found Scribe: Léonie Watson
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina
Scribes: janina, Léonie Watson

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: CS JB JF JS Joshue Judy LeonieWatson PC RS inserted janina paulc
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 27 Oct 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/10/27-html-a11y-minutes.html
People with action items: 

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