13:51:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:51:21 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/08/07-wcag2ict-irc
13:51:23 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:51:23 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #wcag2ict
13:51:25 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 2428
13:51:25 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_(WCAG2ICT)10:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
13:51:26 <trackbot> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:51:26 <trackbot> Date: 07 August 2012
13:51:38 <Andi> chair: Andi_Snow-Weaver
13:53:38 <greggvanderheiden> greggvanderheiden has joined #wcag2ict
13:54:13 <Zakim> WAI_(WCAG2ICT)10:00AM has now started
13:54:20 <Zakim> +Andi_Snow_Weaver
13:56:11 <Kiran> Kiran has joined #wcag2ict
13:58:14 <Zakim> +Kiran_Kaja
13:59:40 <BBailey> BBailey has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:42 <Andi> zakim, Kiran_Kaja is Kiran
13:59:42 <Zakim> +Kiran; got it
14:00:13 <Andi> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:00:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see Andi_Snow_Weaver, Kiran (muted)
14:00:20 <Zakim> + +1.202.272.aaaa
14:00:30 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
14:00:38 <Andi> zakim, +1.202.272.aaaa is Bruce_Bailey
14:00:38 <Zakim> +Bruce_Bailey; got it
14:00:48 <Andi> zakim, [Microsoft] has Alex_Li
14:00:48 <janina> janina has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:49 <Zakim> +Alex_Li; got it
14:01:04 <Zakim> +??P11
14:01:05 <Zakim> +??P12
14:01:13 <David> David has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:15 <Judy> Judy has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:23 <Andi> zakim, ??P11 is Gregg_Vanderheiden
14:01:23 <Zakim> +Gregg_Vanderheiden; got it
14:01:34 <alex> alex has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:35 <Andi> zakim, ??P12 is Janina_Sajka
14:01:35 <Zakim> +Janina_Sajka; got it
14:01:37 <Zakim> +David_MacDonald
14:03:09 <Mike> Mike has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:18 <korn> korn has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:54 <Andi> regrets: Loïc_Martínez_Normand, MaryJo_Mueller
14:04:05 <Zakim> +[Oracle]
14:04:14 <korn> Zakim, Oracle has Peter_Korn
14:04:14 <Zakim> +Peter_Korn; got it
14:04:37 <Andi> topic: Survey for August 7th meeting: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/AUG072012/results
14:05:12 <Zakim> +??P4
14:05:14 <korn> q+
14:06:15 <Andi> ack korn
14:07:03 <korn> q+
14:07:29 <Andi> scribe: Andi_Snow-Weaver
14:07:51 <Andi> discussion about whether we need to use some flavor of "UI Context" in this provision
14:08:37 <Andi> in some cases, there is no need to use a term like "UI context" - so we are trying to use the simplest language that we can
14:08:45 <Mike> q+
14:09:32 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:09:51 <Andi> ack korn
14:10:02 <Zakim> +Judy
14:11:27 <Andi> ack Mike
14:11:43 <Andi> we're on 3.1.1 Language of Page
14:11:51 <Andi> ack gregg
14:13:02 <greggvanderheiden> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/ui-context-in-context
14:13:07 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:13:25 <Mike> q+
14:13:58 <Andi> ack gregg
14:15:47 <Andi> ack Mike
14:16:09 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:16:59 <Andi> q+
14:17:13 <Andi> ack gregg
14:17:18 <greggvanderheiden> Not all software technologies support a method to programmatically expose the human language of the software user interface. Applications implemented in technologies where Assistive technologies cannot determine the human language and that do not support the platform "local language setting" may not be able to meet this success criterion.
14:17:39 <korn> q+
14:19:41 <Andi> ack andi
14:20:35 <Andi> eventually assistive technologies may be able to determine the human language of the document or software user interface
14:20:39 <Mike> q+
14:20:55 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:20:56 <Andi> but AT may not be able to automatically get the human language 100% of the time
14:20:59 <Andi> ack korn
14:21:36 <Andi> ack Mike
14:22:13 <Andi> ack gregg
14:23:03 <Andi> our guidance is not the right place for a note about ATs being able to automatically detect human language - since this would also apply to web pages, it's more appropriate in the WCAG 2.0 INTENT 
14:23:55 <korn> q+
14:25:17 <Andi> "software user interface" might no be sufficient because people might not think it includes the application content
14:25:36 <Andi> s/no be/not be/
14:25:43 <greggvanderheiden> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "each Web page" with "the document or software user interface".
14:25:43 <greggvanderheiden> Where software platforms provide a "local language" setting, applications that follow that setting would comply with this success criterion. Applications that do not follow the platform "local language setting" but instead use an assistive technology supported method for exposing the human language of the software user interface would also comply with this success criterion. Applications implemented in technologies where Assistive 
14:25:44 <greggvanderheiden> technologies cannot determine the human language and that do not support the platform "local language setting" may not be able to meet this success criterion. 
14:25:51 <korn> q-
14:25:55 <Andi> q+
14:26:32 <Andi> ack Andi
14:27:27 <Mike> q+
14:27:32 <Andi> ack Mike
14:28:20 <David> q+
14:28:37 <korn> q+
14:28:42 <greggvanderheiden> software user interface including any content
14:28:58 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:29:06 <Mike> q+
14:29:27 <Andi> M376 team liked "software user interface" because it makes it clear that it doesn't include software that doesn't have a UI
14:29:32 <Andi> ack David
14:30:28 <Andi> ack korn
14:30:55 <Mike> q-
14:31:03 <alex> +1 on Peter
14:31:08 <korn> q-
14:31:08 <greggvanderheiden> how about we  do   [software /user interface]  to make this a placeholder
14:31:20 <korn> q+
14:31:27 <Andi> ack gregg
14:31:46 <Andi> ack korn
14:31:57 <greggvanderheiden> then lets use software user interface including content
14:32:18 <Andi> add a note to ourselves that we need to review this later once we settle on the term for "software"
14:32:26 <Andi> q+
14:32:44 <korn> q+
14:32:54 <Andi> ack Andi
14:32:59 <greggvanderheiden> I see what you mean
14:33:12 <greggvanderheiden> you mean other peoples content
14:33:21 <Andi> ack korn
14:33:58 <Mike> q+
14:34:09 <Andi> ack Mike
14:34:41 <greggvanderheiden> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "each Web page" with "the document or software user interface".
14:34:41 <greggvanderheiden> Where software platforms provide a "local language" setting, applications that follow that setting would comply with this success criterion. Applications that do not follow the platform "local language setting" but instead use an assistive technology supported method for exposing the human language of the software user interface would also comply with this success criterion. Applications implemented in technologies where Assistive 
14:34:42 <greggvanderheiden> technologies cannot determine the human language and that do not support the platform "local language setting" may not be able to meet this success criterion. 
14:35:24 <greggvanderheiden> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "each Web page" with "the document or software".
14:35:25 <greggvanderheiden> Where software platforms provide a "local language" setting, applications that follow that setting would comply with this success criterion. Applications that do not follow the platform "local language setting" but instead use an assistive technology supported method for exposing the human language of the software user interface would also comply with this success criterion. Applications implemented in technologies where Assistive 
14:35:25 <greggvanderheiden> technologies cannot determine the human language and that do not support the platform "local language setting" may not be able to meet this success criterion. 
14:35:46 <greggvanderheiden> this is Andi's with new last sentence and using software
14:37:04 <Andi> RESOLUTION: Accept Proposal #8 for 3.1.1
14:37:05 <greggvanderheiden> This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "each Web page" with "the electronic document or software".
14:37:05 <greggvanderheiden> Where software platforms provide a "local language" setting, applications that follow that setting would comply with this success criterion. Applications that do not follow the platform "local language setting" but instead use an assistive technology supported method for exposing the human language of the software user interface would also comply with this success criterion. Applications implemented in technologies where Assistive 
14:37:06 <greggvanderheiden> technologies cannot determine the human language and that do not support the platform "local language setting" may not be able to meet this success criterion. 
14:39:20 <Andi> 3.1.2 Language of Parts
14:39:43 <Andi> change "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) with “document or software” substituted for "content". " "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "content" with "electronic document or software" substituted for "content". "
14:40:10 <Andi> change "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) with “document or software” substituted for "content". " "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "content" with "electronic document or software" 
14:40:56 <greggvanderheiden> doing this we now get
14:40:57 <greggvanderheiden> "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "content" with "electronic document or software"
14:40:57 <greggvanderheiden> Note that some document formats can use separate human languages for output and input purposes. In such cases both languages should be programmatically determinable.
14:40:58 <greggvanderheiden> There are some software and document technologies where there is no assistive technology supported method for marking the language for the different passages or phrases in the document or software, and it would not be possible to meet this success criterion with those technologies.
14:40:59 <greggvanderheiden> NOTE: Inheritance is one common method.  For example a document or application provides the language that it is using and it can be assumed that all of the text or user interface elements within that document or application will be using the same language unless it is indicated. 
14:41:00 <Andi> q?
14:43:03 <korn> q?
14:43:46 <Kiran> q+
14:43:57 <Kiran> q-
14:44:11 <Mike> +q
14:45:48 <Kiran> q+
14:45:49 <Andi> ack Mike
14:45:52 <Andi> ack Kiran
14:46:22 <Andi> dicussion about marking the human language of the user's input
14:46:41 <korn> q+
14:47:15 <greggvanderheiden> I think it is an edge case and one that raises problems
14:47:16 <Kiran> q+
14:47:21 <Mike> q+
14:47:23 <korn> q-
14:47:33 <Andi> example is forms (immigration forms) that may be in one language but require the input to be in another language (language of country being entered)
14:47:45 <janina> Wouldn't a software/web version of the U.S. Visa form employ a drop-down with countries spelled the way the U.S. Dept of State wants to see them?
14:47:46 <Andi> ack korn
14:48:24 <Andi> suggestion that extending this to input may go beyond the SC
14:48:27 <Andi> ack Kiran
14:48:29 <Andi> ack Mike
14:48:30 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:48:46 <Andi> ack gregg
14:49:02 <Andi> remove the 2nd paragraph
14:50:32 <greggvanderheiden> Proposal #6 ( FROM meeting --  this is #5 above with first sentence changed and insert/del applied and sentence about input removed since it is beyond SC) ========================
14:50:32 <greggvanderheiden> Additional guidance when applying to Electronic Documents and Software Aspects of Products
14:50:33 <greggvanderheiden> "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0  (above) replacing "content" with "electronic document or software"
14:50:34 <greggvanderheiden> There are some software and document technologies where there is no assistive technology supported method for marking the language for the different passages or phrases in the document or software, and it would not be possible to meet this success criterion with those technologies.
14:50:35 <greggvanderheiden> NOTE: Inheritance is one common method.  For example a document or application provides the language that it is using and it can be assumed that all of the text or user interface elements within that document or application will be using the same language unless it is indicated. 
14:50:41 <Andi> action: Mike to discuss issue of identifying the language of the input with M376 team and come back with a proposal if necessary 
14:50:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-46 - Discuss issue of identifying the language of the input with M376 team and come back with a proposal if necessary  [on Mike Pluke - due 2012-08-14].
14:51:16 <Andi> RESOLUTION: Accept Proposal #6 for 3.1.2
14:53:01 <Andi> RESOLUTION: Accept that no further guidance is needed on 2.2.1 and 3.3.4 
14:53:22 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:53:27 <Andi> ack gregg
14:53:50 <Judy> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/AUG072012/results#xq4
14:55:14 <Andi> 3.2.1 On Focus
14:55:20 <korn> q+
14:55:43 <Andi> discussion about Pierce's comment
14:56:31 <Judy> q+
14:56:35 <Andi> ack korn
14:57:35 <Andi> ack Judy
14:57:57 <korn> q+
14:59:23 <Andi> ack korn
14:59:40 <Judy> Judy suggesting that if we are holding this to check on that we do so for specific issues or questions, and for specific periods of time, rather than leaving things open 
15:02:07 <Andi> keep 3.2.1 open - follow up with Pierce to try to close by Friday
15:02:11 <Andi> 3.2.2 On Input
15:02:24 <Andi> keep 3.2.2 open - follow up with Pierce to try to close by Friday
15:03:45 <greggvanderheiden> q+
15:03:59 <Andi> ack gregg
15:04:34 <korn> q+
15:04:47 <korn> q-
15:05:15 <Mike> q+
15:05:20 <korn> q+
15:05:32 <korn> How about "Form controls provided by many document formats..."?
15:06:14 <Andi> 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value
15:07:29 <Andi> in many technologies standard controls that are used according to specification are not accessible
15:08:40 <korn> q+
15:09:05 <Andi> ack Mike
15:10:12 <korn> We already say "For conforming to this success criterion, it is usually best practice for  software user interfaces to use the accessibility services provided by  platform software."  Why not continue in that direction?  "For conforming to this success criterion, it is usually best practice for document authors to use the controls  provided by the document format."  
15:10:26 <Andi> discussion about Mike's proposed note: Note: For many document formats, standard user interface components already meet this success criterion when used according to the general design and accessibility guidance for the document format.
15:11:09 <Andi> ack korn
15:12:15 <Andi> Note: For many document formats, standard user interface components would commonly meet this success criterion when used according to the general design and accessibility guidance for the document format.
15:12:35 <Andi> Note: For many document formats, standard user interface components commonly meet this success criterion when used according to the general design and accessibility guidance for the document format.
15:13:14 <Andi> For many document formats, standard user interface components may meet this success criterion when used according to the general design and accessibility guidance for the document format.
15:13:48 <David> q+
15:13:54 <Andi> ack David
15:16:03 <Andi> For document formats that support interoperability with AT, standard user interface components often meet this success criterion when used according to the general design and accessibility guidance for the document format.
15:16:21 <korn> +1
15:16:24 <greggvanderheiden> +1
15:16:54 <Andi> RESOLUTION: Accept additional note for 4.1.2: Note: For document formats that support interoperability with AT, standard user interface components often meet this success criterion when used according to the general design and accessibility guidance for the document format.
15:17:36 <korn> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/user-interface-context/ui-context-examples
15:18:02 <Andi> topic: User Interface Context discussion
15:20:43 <korn> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/user-interface-context/ui-context-examples
15:20:52 <Andi> proposal that in a UI where content changes over time constitutes a change of UI context and therefore invokes 2.4.1 and 3.2.2
15:21:44 <korn> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/user-interface-context/ui-context-examples
15:23:32 <BBailey> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/user-interface-context/ui-context-examples/how-many-two-document-windows
15:23:36 <korn> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/user-interface-context/ui-context-examples
15:23:42 <BBailey> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/user-interface-context/ui-context-examples/change-exampe-1-simple-tree-expansion-only-text-in-tree-nodes
15:24:14 <BBailey> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/user-interface-context/ui-context-examples/changed-example-2-complex-tree-expansion
15:26:05 <Andi> would we all agree on the number of UI contexts in the examples and whether or not there was a change in UI context in the examples?
15:26:32 <Mike> q+
15:26:56 <greggvanderheiden> q+
15:26:59 <David> q+
15:27:25 <Andi> ask industry developers and Access Board to look at these examples also - if we get consistent answers, validates the concept of UI Context
15:27:28 <Andi> ack Mike
15:28:17 <Andi> suggestion that developers only need to understand UI Context when trying to interpret a particular success criterion
15:30:45 <Andi> ack gregg
15:30:56 <Mike> +1
15:32:47 <greggvanderheiden> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/ui-context-in-context
15:33:56 <David>  (2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.5) are the ones that need any distinction of context...
15:35:02 <korn> q?
15:35:13 <Andi> ack David
15:35:31 <janina> janina has left #wcag2ict
15:35:32 <Andi> rrsagent, make minutes
15:35:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/07-wcag2ict-minutes.html Andi
15:35:33 <Zakim> -Bruce_Bailey
15:35:33 <David> 2.4.1 bypass blocks, 2.4.2 Page titled,, 2.4.5 multiple ways are the ones that need context al else is context
15:35:34 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
15:35:35 <Zakim> -Janina_Sajka
15:35:36 <MichaelC_> MichaelC_ has joined #wcag2ict
15:35:36 <Zakim> -Kiran
15:35:36 <Zakim> -Judy
15:35:38 <Zakim> -??P4
15:35:41 <Zakim> -Andi_Snow_Weaver
15:35:42 <Zakim> -[Oracle]
15:35:51 <Zakim> -David_MacDonald
15:35:59 <Andi> zakim, bye
15:35:59 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees were Andi_Snow_Weaver, Kiran, Bruce_Bailey, Alex_Li, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Janina_Sajka, David_MacDonald, Peter_Korn, Judy
15:35:59 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
15:36:05 <Andi> rrsagent, make minutes
15:36:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/07-wcag2ict-minutes.html Andi
15:36:29 <Mike> -
15:58:31 <korn> korn has left #wcag2ict
16:13:18 <greggvanderheiden> greggvanderheiden has joined #wcag2ict
17:23:02 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #wcag2ict
17:27:52 <MichaelC_> MichaelC_ has joined #wcag2ict
17:52:12 <MichaelC_> MichaelC_ has joined #wcag2ict
17:54:08 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #wcag2ict