W3C

- DRAFT -

WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference

13 Jul 2012

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
David_MacDonald, Judy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Alex_Li, Kiran_Keja, Bruce_Bailey, Loic_Martinez_Normand, Mike_Pluke, Al_Hoffman, Peter_Korn, Janina_Sajka, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Pierce_Crowell
Regrets
Chair
Andi_Snow-Weaver
Scribe
Andi, David, Judy

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 13 July 2012

<Andi> scribe: Andi

Action items https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/track/actions/open

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/track/actions/18

leave action 18 open but will probably be resolved as part of the UI Context work

<scribe> ACTION: Judy to draft Introduction section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-31 - Draft Introduction section [on Judy Brewer - due 2012-07-20].

<scribe> ACTION: Judy to finish drafting Frontmatter [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-32 - Finish drafting Frontmatter [on Judy Brewer - due 2012-07-20].

leave actions 22 and 25 open to be resolved with action 24

<David> scribe: David

<Andi> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/home/1-perceivable/12-provide-alternatives-for-time-based-media/122-captions-prerecorded

1.2.2 and 1.2.4

<Judy> scribe: Judy

RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG 2.0 proposal on 1.2.2 and 1.2.4 to remove the note about players [& fix closing quote]

1.4.4 Resize Text

<Andi> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/home/1-perceivable/14-make-it-easier-for-users-to-see-and-hear-content---including-separating-foreground-from-background/144-resize-text

<korn> This success criterion applies directly as written and as described in intent from Understanding WCAG 2.0.

<korn> Electronic content and electronic documents that have software players, viewers or editors with a 200 percent zoom feature would automatically meet this SC unless the content or document will not work with zoom.

<korn> The INTENT refers to the ability to allow users to enlarge the text on screen at least up to 200 % without needing to use assistive technologies. This means that either the application itself, or one of the platforms under it, provides some means for enlarging the text 200% (zoom or otherwise) without loss of content or functionality. If a platform capability is relied upon, the application supports the platform capability.

<Andi> WCAG asked us to remove this sentence: If a platform capability is relied upon, the application supports the platform capability.

Discussion about what was the WG concern regarding platform capability

<Pierce> +q

Was is circuitous, or non-essential? Possibly reword as a note? Seems that it just needed clarification of the wording.

<Andi> http://www.w3.org/2012/07/05-wai-wcag-minutes.html#item03

<Andi> If a platform capability is provided, the application supports the platform capability.

Checking WG survey responses. Seems that it's an essential concept that is not addressed in the paragraph clearly or sufficiently.

<Zakim> BBailey, you wanted to say that "the application supports the platform capability" is a statement, not a *requirement"

<Andi> This means that the application provides some means for enlarging the text 200% (zoom or otherwise) without loss of content or functionality or that the application supports the platform features that meets this requirement.

If one solely relies on the platform, it foregoes the possibility that a developer would go beyond the platform support.

Discussion of other interpretations. WG captured the following, though: this seems insufficiently clear, and the TF is invited to re-word and re-submit. That was the conclusion from WG discussion.

We talked about relying on zoom -- when you rely on that, you need not to defeat that. You need to _work with_ the zoom feature.

<Andi> This means that the application provides some means for enlarging the text 200% (zoom or otherwise) without loss of content or functionality or that the application works with the platform features that meets this requirement.

But it needs not to be worded with "support" since that might confuse people wrt to accessibility support.

Perhaps re-word the sentence before? General comments of, 'that works'...

RESOLUTION: Accept 1.4.4 as amended (New Proposal from TF meeting 13July12)

<Andi> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/home/3-understandable/33-help-users-avoid-and-correct-mistakes/331-error-identification

3.3.1 Error Identification

Discussion on error identification.

Perhaps just position as an explanatory note. Some people may not think about how input errors are processed, but not really part of the intent.

<korn> +1

Shall we send the WG a note to modify the intent? They approved this, with the exception of those paragraphs.

Andi takes action to draft the modification proposal.

<Andi> ACTION: Andi to draft proposal to modify WCAG intent for 3.3.1 to replace note about definition of input error [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-33 - Draft proposal to modify WCAG intent for 3.3.1 to replace note about definition of input error [on Andi Snow-Weaver - due 2012-07-20].

RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG proposal to remove last two paragraphs of 3.3.1

2.4.6 Headings and Labels AND 4.1.1 Parsing

Discussion of Parsing; the WG didn't accept our wording, and asked us to try again.

<korn> Andi - I volunteer for both... Can I have those AIs in this tracker?

Reminder of pending actions assigned at the WG meeting. Re-record those here.

<Andi> ACTION: Peter to draft new proposal for 2.4.6 taking into consideration the WCAG survey comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-34 - Draft new proposal for 2.4.6 taking into consideration the WCAG survey comments [on Peter Korn - due 2012-07-20].

<Andi> ACTION: Peter to work with Loretta, James, Michael, and Bruce to draft new proposal on 4.1.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-35 - Work with Loretta, James, Michael, and Bruce to draft new proposal on 4.1.1 [on Peter Korn - due 2012-07-20].

Checking on which items to add to the WCAG WG survey... yes, we're sending them item 1.3.1.

Work items to be completed for publication of first public working draft

Maybe also our 3.1.1 note.

<Andi> 1.3.2 Meaningful sequence https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/home/3-understandable/33-help-users-avoid-and-correct-mistakes/331-error-identification

<Pierce_> l

<korn> +1

<Loic> +1

<Andi> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/project-plan

Discussion of what we need to get done before publishing our first public WD. Probably won't yet have consensus on user interface context. Other pieces, perhaps to be sent up with simpler language.

<Pierce_> +1

Considering 1.3.2, 1.4.2, 1.4.3... these were consensed without that term defined, but since consensus on the term was pending, proposing sending these anyway.

<Andi> also 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 3.3.2, 3.3.3

One sentence was a concern, regarding non-web context that doesn't have activity behind it. Specific concern regarding relation to a particular success criteria... re-examine before sending up? Wording around "interactive context" may need attention.

2.4.2 & 2.4.3 may be OK on this; 1.3.2 doesn't have it... nor 1.4.2, nor 1.4.3

<korn> E.g. for 3.3.3, remove the 2nd paragraph from:

<korn> Additional guidance when applying to Electronic Documents and Software Aspects of ProductsThis applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above).For non-web electronic documents without interactivity beyond hyperlinks - (no scripting or programming) - this SC would be automatically met. Note: The WCAG 2.0 definition of "input error" says that it is "information provided by the user that is not accepted" by

only 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 have the issue --

<korn> [sorry, paragraphs don't come through in IRC]

<korn> To make it easier: https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/home/2-operable/24-provide-ways-to-help-users-navigate-find-content-and-determine-where-they-are/242-page-titled && https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/home/2-operable/24-provide-ways-to-help-users-navigate-find-content-and-determine-where-they-are/242-page-titled

RESOLUTION: Remove paragraph about non-web documents automatically complying from 3.3.2 and 3.3.3

RESOLUTION: Send 1.3.2, 1.4.2, 1.4.3, 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 3.3.2, and 3.3.3 to WCAG for approval

Draft page now updated as well. Discussion of capturing resolution. Historical proposals still available.

Discussion of clean-up of 3.3.1 and 3.3.3

RESOLUTION: Remove note about the definition of input error from 3.3.3 and add 3.3.3 to the action item about proposing an edit to 3.3.1 intent

Discussion of other things we need to do before publishing

General intent or introductory section will be to reflect the context from the TF work statement, and to provide a succinct overview of the doc, and to reinforce the context of this document as differentiated from context of WCAG 2.0 and other supporting WCAG 2.0 docs.

Discussion of needing a "content" paragraph to refer back to in intro from items where we'd said we'd be referring back up to that paragraph.

Michael and Shadi will be pulling together the other parts of the draft to prepare for publication.

<Andi> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/quick-view

Discussion of existing language for the items that are pointing to the intended statement of content in the intro.

No objections to leaving those statements in the items that point to an intended definition of content that will be in the intro once consensed, even if that isn't stable yet.

Discussion of order change wrt discussion of software.

<Loic> First. I think that there is no general agreement on "software user interface".

<korn> +1 for Andi

<Loic> At least Gregg thinks that "software aspects of products" is better (I don't).

<Loic> So we should first agree on what terms to use before agreeing on replacing

<Loic> Ok, What's the deadline?

<alex> monday

<Loic> To Gregg: We could also use "software that provides a user interface". This is what we did in M 376.

<Loic> (I'm trying to reconnect to see I you can hear me)

Software user interface language should be consistent... But guidelines apply to web content; most people think of SW user interface controls, they don't think of the content. Software aspects of products may give a clearer scope. But some SW doesn't have a UI at all, or instance middleware. So, SW UI. Further discussion....

Would be helpful to pull together a page showing current inconsistencies in how we're using the terms, even where we may not be sure of final wording for all contexts.

<Andi> ACTION: Loic to create a page that collects all of the guidance that uses some variation of the "software" term [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Loic

Discussing examples of software-related terminology that we're using differently in different places.

<korn> +1

General happiness at Andi picking consistent terminology. Then we'll review it.

<korn> +1

And "document" should be "electronic document"? Multiple "yes" from around the room.

<Andi> the editor's draft doesn't have the date as part of the URL: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/

And our TF proposed draft, needs to link to the current WCAG WG Editor's Draft. Discussion of evergreen linking. Needs confirmation w/ Michael C. Gregg will ask linkage and production questions, cc'd.

<Loic> BYe

Lots to get through on Tuesday to prepare for publishing.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Andi to draft proposal to modify WCAG intent for 3.3.1 to replace note about definition of input error [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Judy to draft Introduction section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Judy to finish drafting Frontmatter [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Loic to create a page that collects all of the guidance that uses some variation of the "software" term [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Peter to draft new proposal for 2.4.6 taking into consideration the WCAG survey comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Peter to work with Loretta, James, Michael, and Bruce to draft new proposal on 4.1.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action05]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/07/14 00:48:05 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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/1.2.2/1.2.4/
Succeeded: s/2.3.2 has the issue,//
FAILED: s/Loïc_Martinez_Normand/Loic_Martinez_Normand/
FAILED: s/Andi - I volunteer for both... Can I have those AIs in this tracker?//
Found Scribe: Andi
Inferring ScribeNick: Andi
Found Scribe: David
Inferring ScribeNick: David
Found Scribe: Judy
Inferring ScribeNick: Judy
Scribes: Andi, David, Judy
ScribeNicks: Andi, David, Judy
Default Present: David_MacDonald, Judy, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Alex_Li, Kiran_Keja, Bruce_Bailey, Loic_Martinez_Normand, Mike_Pluke, Al_Hoffman, Peter_Korn, Janina_Sajka, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Pierce_Crowell
Present: David_MacDonald Judy Andi_Snow_Weaver Alex_Li Kiran_Keja Bruce_Bailey Loic_Martinez_Normand Mike_Pluke Al_Hoffman Peter_Korn Janina_Sajka Gregg_Vanderheiden Pierce_Crowell
Found Date: 13 Jul 2012
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/07/13-wcag2ict-minutes.html
People with action items: andi judy loic peter

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


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]