IRC log of ua on 2012-06-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:13:16 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ua
16:13:16 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-irc
16:13:18 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:13:18 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ua
16:13:20 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WAI_UAWG
16:13:20 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_UAWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 47 minutes
16:13:21 [trackbot]
Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
16:13:21 [trackbot]
Date: 21 June 2012
16:14:33 [JAllan]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:14:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html JAllan
16:14:49 [JAllan]
chair: jimallan, kelly ford
16:15:31 [JAllan]
Agenda+Jan Proposal - Changes to 2.8 Provide toolbar configuration
16:15:43 [JAllan]
Agenda+ 3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan
16:16:32 [JAllan]
Agenda+ 2.3.3 (direct activation) was written on white board with no description. no action. WHY?
16:16:43 [JAllan]
Agenda+ SVG images (Greg)
16:29:54 [JAllan]
JAllan has joined #ua
16:55:16 [sharper]
sharper has joined #ua
16:56:32 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has now started
16:56:39 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
16:57:01 [Zakim]
+Jim_Allan
16:57:14 [kford]
kford has joined #ua
16:57:25 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:57:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html kford
16:57:36 [JAllan]
zakim, Microsoft is really kford
16:57:36 [Zakim]
+kford; got it
16:57:42 [Zakim]
+Jeanne
17:00:57 [sharper]
zakim, code?
17:00:57 [Zakim]
the conference code is 82941 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), sharper
17:01:22 [Jan]
Jan has joined #ua
17:01:28 [Zakim]
+??P4
17:01:32 [sharper]
zakim, ??P4 is sharper
17:01:32 [Zakim]
+sharper; got it
17:02:14 [Zakim]
+??P2
17:03:21 [JAllan]
zakim, agenda
17:03:21 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'agenda', JAllan
17:03:29 [JAllan]
zakim, agenda?
17:03:30 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
17:03:30 [Zakim]
1. Jan Proposal - Changes to 2.8 Provide toolbar configuration [from JAllan]
17:03:32 [Zakim]
2. 3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan [from JAllan]
17:03:33 [Zakim]
3. 2.3.3 (direct activation) was written on white board with no description. no action. WHY? [from JAllan]
17:03:35 [Zakim]
4. SVG images (Greg) [from JAllan]
17:04:33 [Jan]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2012AprJun/0123.html
17:04:47 [JAllan]
zakim, open item 1
17:04:47 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Jan Proposal - Changes to 2.8 Provide toolbar configuration" taken up [from JAllan]
17:04:57 [Jan]
builds on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2012AprJun/0105.html
17:04:57 [Zakim]
+Greg_Lowney
17:05:04 [kford]
Scribe: kford
17:05:36 [kford]
JR: reads his definition. Prefaced with not entirely happy but maybe we can adjust.
17:05:47 [kford]
zakim, agenda?
17:05:47 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
17:05:48 [Zakim]
1. Jan Proposal - Changes to 2.8 Provide toolbar configuration [from JAllan]
17:05:48 [Zakim]
2. 3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan [from JAllan]
17:05:48 [Zakim]
3. 2.3.3 (direct activation) was written on white board with no description. no action. WHY? [from JAllan]
17:05:48 [Zakim]
4. SVG images (Greg) [from JAllan]
17:05:57 [kford]
zakim, take up item 1
17:05:57 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Jan Proposal - Changes to 2.8 Provide toolbar configuration" taken up [from JAllan]
17:06:45 [kford]
JR: One concern I have is all the things that might be hidden and what counts as top level functionality. Open, save, bold, these might not be user agent but what about when you are saving, say as PDF or text.
17:08:01 [kford]
JR: When Greg did this he assumed thereJR: My concern with the previous definiton was that it was too broad.
17:08:21 [Greg]
Greg has joined #ua
17:08:46 [Zakim]
+Kim_Patch
17:08:59 [kford]
JR: I tried to get at the problem by saying we felt it was important to have fast access to key features that were in nested menus or functions in general.
17:10:10 [KimPatch]
KimPatch has joined #ua
17:11:22 [kford]
JR: Greg went with the approach if you have tool bars do x. I'm taking the approach that we want to have toolbars to make commands easier to get to.
17:13:05 [kford]
JA: This has become complicated. Goes over where Greg started from and JR's now means you have to have them.
17:13:53 [Greg]
Configurable toolbars have numerous benefits, including but not limited to: (a) providing quicker (i.e. with fewer actions) access to commands that are normally hidden or nested; (b) providing pointer access to commands that normally have only keyboard access; (c) providing reminders of available options for people with memory limitations; (d) providing keyboard access for commands that are...
17:13:54 [Greg]
...normally done only with the pointing device (in UI that doesn't provide menus); (e) providing graphic items for commands that might otherwise only have text; (f) provide persistent visual display of information that would normally be hidden or nested (e.g. a drop-down list box showing font size or name); etc.
17:14:06 [kford]
JR: Thnis gives you more ability to do whatever you want with your UI but does demand that you have this one area that's configurable.
17:14:20 [kford]
JA: Anything that does this?
17:14:46 [kford]
KP: Word. Kim goes over the Office Quick Access toolbar that allows you to add almost any command.
17:15:25 [JAllan]
can also create unique ribbons with own most used commands or anything else
17:18:01 [kford]
JA: I think we now have two separate items. One is now talking about creating your own toolbars and one talking about being able to show/hide and such.
17:19:40 [Greg]
Should it also address commands that are available through the keyboard but not through nested menus?
17:20:58 [Greg]
One could have it apply to commands available through menu items or keyboard shortcuts. That would avoid accidentally requiring every checkbox in dialog boxes to be covered.
17:24:06 [kford]
Group continuing to talk about toolbar definition. Missed a couple items in the scribing as they refine.
17:25:08 [Greg]
The risk of combining all the existing SC into a single SC is that, for example, a UA would fail the entirety if it fails to provide "reset", even if it provides wonderful, fully configurable toolbars.
17:25:29 [kford]
JA: What confused me was the talk of the nexted menus.
17:25:45 [Greg]
s/nexted/nested/
17:26:36 [kford]
JR: What I was saying that if your user interface was so simple that you have no toolbars, I was trying to say you didn't need them. But if you had things hidden then you would need toolbars.
17:27:08 [kford]
GL: Menus in today's GUI environment are all nested then.
17:29:24 [jeanne]
jeanne has joined #ua
17:30:17 [kford]
KP: What makes the original idea hard????????
17:31:17 [Greg]
It's not hard if the app is designed to be scriptable, with separation of function from UI, but it would be prohibitively difficult if the app was designed with no abstraction layer.
17:31:22 [kford]
GL: Word was designed with this idea in mind from the ground up. If this isn't done, then things are almost impossible.
17:35:25 [kford]
GL goes over various aspects of toolbars and what we might expect.
17:35:54 [kford]
This is in reference to fully configurable.
17:36:29 [Greg]
Potentially problematic example is if app distinguishes between status bar where things are displayed vs. toolbar where input takes place. Would we expect the app to let the user move things between the two?
17:36:59 [kford]
JR: There/me anyone else willing to scribe, I'm just not getting it today.
17:38:03 [kford]
JR: I think I'm OK with a customizable toolbar as long as you don't have to have everything. Gives example of not having to have a report bad web site from Mozilla.
17:38:10 [Greg]
Discussion of whether or not configurability is as important as providing a toolbar at all.
17:39:43 [kford]
Greg, Jan and Kim agree to work on this area further.
17:40:28 [kford]
zakim, close item 1
17:40:28 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Jan Proposal - Changes to 2.8 Provide toolbar configuration, closed
17:40:31 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:40:31 [Zakim]
2. 3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan [from JAllan]
17:40:41 [kford]
zakim, take up item 2
17:40:41 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan" taken up [from JAllan]
17:42:23 [kford]
zakim, take up item 4
17:42:23 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "SVG images (Greg)" taken up [from JAllan]
17:42:37 [kford]
JA: Greg this is one you and I.
17:42:47 [kford]
JA: This was on the board from the F2F.
17:44:03 [kford]
JA: We have a guideline that says User Agent can do different things with images e.g. turn them off/on.
17:44:05 [Jan]
Action JR: With Greg and Kim to bring forward new toolbar SC wording.
17:44:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-740 - With Greg and Kim to bring forward new toolbar SC wording. [on Jan Richards - due 2012-06-28].
17:44:14 [kford]
JA: Question came up with SVG.
17:44:27 [kford]
JA: This won't be recognized as an image.
17:44:38 [kford]
JA: We then said recognized images?
17:45:01 [kford]
GL: The question is then for those SC we have on images, should we try and make them apply to SVG?
17:45:27 [jeanne]
q+ to say that there are people working on accessibility of SVG and SVG does have content beyond alt text.
17:47:28 [kford]
GL: Maybe we need a task to go over all SC to identify which will apply to non-html items like svg, math ml and such.
17:47:31 [Greg]
Perhaps we should make a pass over all the SC identifying which ones might cause complications with non-HTML formats such as SVG, MathML, etc.
17:48:38 [kford]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:48:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html kford
17:48:43 [Greg]
Specifically when SC are written with HTML in mind and it might not be clear if and how it applies to other web technologies. E.g. does the requirement to let the user turn off images apply to SVG?
17:49:27 [jeanne]
jeanne: I think that's a good idea, but its separate from the current issue of turning off images.
17:50:50 [jeanne]
Kim: in related resources, there is info on 1.2.1 - configure default rendering addresses this.
17:53:16 [kford]
GL: We are not able to completely ignore this area.
17:59:49 [JAllan]
ack
18:00:10 [Greg]
Benefits of being able to turn off images include but are not limited to: (a) helping users avoid distraction; (b) increasing the amount of information that can be displayed at one time, including for people who do not make use of the images due to visual impairments, people who want to reduce the amount of scrolling, people who need to keep information on the screen due to short-term memory...
18:00:12 [Greg]
...issues; (c) avoiding pain caused by high visual contrast; etc.
18:00:33 [kford]
JA: I'm lost. JS has a concern that turning off SVG could turn off more accessible content.
18:00:52 [kford]
JA: The original concern was that we needed to do something about SVG?
18:05:08 [kford]
Group is going to table this discussion
18:06:35 [kford]
zakim, close item 4
18:06:35 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, kford
18:06:41 [kford]
ack
18:06:45 [JAllan]
zakim, ack jeanne
18:06:45 [Zakim]
jeanne, you wanted to say that there are people working on accessibility of SVG and SVG does have content beyond alt text.
18:06:47 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
18:06:55 [kford]
zakim, close item 4
18:06:55 [Zakim]
agendum 4, SVG images (Greg), closed
18:06:56 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:06:56 [Zakim]
2. 3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan [from JAllan]
18:07:17 [kford]
zakim, agenda?
18:07:17 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
18:07:18 [Zakim]
2. 3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan [from JAllan]
18:07:18 [Zakim]
3. 2.3.3 (direct activation) was written on white board with no description. no action. WHY? [from JAllan]
18:07:35 [kford]
zakim, take up item 2
18:07:35 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "3.2 Action-644 - SC on Undo. Proposal from Jan" taken up [from JAllan]
18:08:51 [Jan]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2012AprJun/0028.html
18:09:28 [Jan]
3.2.X Text Entry Undo (Minimum): The user can undo text entry actions that have not undergone content processing. (Level A)
18:09:30 [Jan]
Note: Content processing can refer to server-side or client-side processing.
18:09:31 [Jan]
3.2.Y Settings Change Confirmation: If the user agent provides mechanisms for changing its user interface settings, then those mechanisms can reverse the setting changes, or the user agent requires user confirmation to proceed. (Level A)
18:09:33 [Jan]
3.2.Z Text Entry Undo (Enhanced): The user can undo a sequence of unprocessed text entry actions by character (or short character strings). (Level AA)
18:09:34 [Jan]
Note: Content processing can refer to server-side or client-side processing.
18:09:38 [jeanne]
jeanne has left #ua
18:09:49 [jeanne]
jeanne has joined #ua
18:10:39 [kford]
JR reads his text.
18:11:36 [Greg]
For the first, what is processing? Spell-checking?
18:12:26 [Greg]
If spell-checking is a form of processing, then it would negate the requirement to undo text entry.
18:13:43 [kford]
JR: This is meant for the rich internet application where user input is grabbed immediately and the user agent has no idea that this has happened.
18:14:06 [kford]
JR: In those cases the user agent wouldn't be able to undo.
18:16:32 [kford]
Group talking about example of Googledocs where you can undo.
18:18:35 [kford]
Group talks further about who process the text and who's responsibility this is.
18:21:52 [Greg]
Jan believes Google Docs is a UA, while Kelly believes it is not; we should come back to that.
18:23:12 [Jan]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2012AprJun/0059.html
18:23:38 [Jan]
The link above is relevant to user agent-authoring tool intersection.
18:23:55 [Greg]
Re "3.2.Y Settings Change Confirmation", the SC should allow the UA to let the user turn off confirmation.
18:23:58 [KimPatch]
3.2.Y Settings Change Confirmation: If the user agent provides mechanisms for changing its user interface settings, it either allows the user to reverse the setting changes, or requires user confirmation to proceed. (Level A)
18:25:17 [KimPatch]
3.2.Y Settings Change Confirmation: If the user agent provides mechanisms for changing its user interface settings, it either allows the user to reverse the setting changes, or requires user confirmation to proceed. The user agent also includes a mechanism to let the user turn off confirmation. (Level A)
18:25:21 [Greg]
What are examples of UI settings that can't be reversed?
18:25:25 [Jan]
3.2.Y Settings Change Confirmation: If the user agent provides mechanisms for changing its user interface settings, it either allows the user to reverse the setting changes, or the user can require user confirmation to proceed. (Level A)
18:25:47 [Zakim]
-kford
18:27:26 [JAllan]
gl: if we can't come up with real examples, then we should remove it.
18:27:53 [JAllan]
kim: should keep this. idiot proofing
18:28:01 [Greg]
Would for example turning off the option for screen reader compatibility count as non-reversible, given that the user who relies on a screen reader would presumably not be able to turn it back on by themselves?
18:28:47 [JAllan]
jr: useful example, but not what I meant. i meant in any way they user could not reverse the setting
18:29:17 [Zakim]
-Kim_Patch
18:29:28 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:29:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html jeanne
18:30:35 [JAllan]
sh: a while ago, I wrote what it means to be a UA, app, plugin, extensions.
18:30:56 [JAllan]
js: all that is in the top of the document.
18:31:13 [jeanne]
jeanne: it's in the intro of the Implementing document.
18:31:30 [JAllan]
sh: don't want jan to duplicate effort
18:32:20 [Zakim]
-Jeanne
18:32:21 [Zakim]
-??P2
18:32:24 [Zakim]
-sharper
18:32:27 [Zakim]
-Greg_Lowney
18:32:31 [Zakim]
-Jim_Allan
18:32:33 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has ended
18:32:33 [Zakim]
Attendees were Jim_Allan, kford, Jeanne, sharper, Greg_Lowney, Kim_Patch
18:32:56 [JAllan]
jr: should have said recognized instead of processed with in 3.2.x,y,z
18:33:06 [JAllan]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:33:06 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html JAllan
18:33:47 [JAllan]
present: jim, kelly, jan, greg, kim, simon, jeanne
18:33:49 [JAllan]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:33:49 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html JAllan
18:34:13 [JAllan]
regrets: mark, wayne
18:34:15 [JAllan]
regrets: mark, wayne
18:34:20 [JAllan]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:34:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html JAllan
18:34:29 [JAllan]
zakim, please part
18:34:29 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ua
18:34:44 [JAllan]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:34:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-minutes.html JAllan
18:34:56 [JAllan]
rrsagent, plese part
18:34:56 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'plese part', JAllan. Try /msg RRSAgent help
18:35:01 [JAllan]
rrsagent, please part
18:35:01 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-actions.rdf :
18:35:01 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: JR to With Greg and Kim to bring forward new toolbar SC wording. [1]
18:35:01 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-ua-irc#T17-44-05