IRC log of html-a11y on 2012-10-04

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:56:52 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #html-a11y

14:56:52 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-html-a11y-irc

14:56:54 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

14:56:54 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #html-a11y

14:56:56 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be 2119

14:56:57 [trackbot]

Meeting: HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

14:56:57 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see WAI_PFWG(HTML TF)10:00AM scheduled to start 56 minutes ago

14:56:57 [trackbot]

Date: 04 October 2012

14:57:47 [MichaelC]

agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Oct/0003.html

14:58:19 [MichaelC]

Meeting: HTML-A11Y Task Force Teleconference

14:58:20 [MichaelC]

Chair: Janina_Sajka

14:58:21 [MichaelC]

agenda+ Sec. 7.1 Hidden http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Oct/0001.html

14:58:23 [MichaelC]

agenda+ Plan2014 (Revision 2) Discussion https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2012JulSep/0312.html

14:58:24 [MichaelC]

agenda+ Subteam Reports: Bug Triage; AAPI Mapping; Text

14:58:26 [MichaelC]

agenda+ The Task Force at the TPAC

14:58:27 [MichaelC]

agenda+ Other Business

14:58:29 [MichaelC]

agenda+ Actions Review http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open

14:58:31 [MichaelC]

agenda+ Identify Scribe for the next TF teleconference http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Scribe_List

14:59:12 [janina]

janina has joined #html-a11y

14:59:33 [Zakim]

WAI_PFWG(HTML TF)10:00AM has now started

14:59:37 [Zakim]

+??P50

14:59:41 [Zakim]

+??P14

14:59:52 [MichaelC]

zakim, ??P50 is Michael_Cooper

14:59:52 [Zakim]

+Michael_Cooper; got it

15:00:02 [MichaelC]

zakim, ??P14 is Janina_Sajka

15:00:02 [Zakim]

+Janina_Sajka; got it

15:00:13 [Judy]

Judy has joined #html-A11y

15:00:41 [Zakim]

+John_Foliot

15:00:45 [Zakim]

+hober

15:00:52 [rubys]

zakim, what is the passcode?

15:00:57 [Zakim]

+Judy

15:01:01 [Zakim]

the conference code is 2119 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), rubys

15:01:02 [janina]

Sam, passcode is 2119#

15:01:38 [plh]

plh has joined #html-a11y

15:01:56 [paulc]

paulc has joined #html-a11y

15:02:05 [Zakim]

+Plh

15:02:40 [Zakim]

+Sam

15:02:43 [janina]

zakim, who's on the phone?

15:02:47 [Zakim]

-hober

15:03:16 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Janina_Sajka, Michael_Cooper, John_Foliot, Judy, Plh, Sam

15:03:31 [Zakim]

+hober

15:03:44 [MichaelC]

scribe: MichaelC

15:03:48 [Zakim]

+[Microsoft]

15:04:06 [Zakim]

+Cynthia_Shelly

15:04:15 [paulc]

zakim, [Microsoft] has paulc

15:04:15 [Zakim]

+paulc; got it

15:04:47 [Zakim]

+James_Craig

15:05:30 [MichaelC]

zakim, take up item 2

15:05:30 [Zakim]

agendum 2. "Plan2014 (Revision 2) Discussion https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2012JulSep/0312.html" taken up [from MichaelC]

15:05:56 [MichaelC]

js: there are ongoing discussions about specifics of the plan

15:06:19 [MichaelC]

here to solicit input on approach and role of this task force

15:06:52 [MichaelC]

formalities of relationship between the TF, PFWG, and HTML WG

15:07:57 [Judy]

q+

15:08:42 [MichaelC]

ack j

15:09:00 [rubys]

current plan 2014 link: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html

15:09:09 [MichaelC]

jb: for Plan2014 to work, the TF must have more clear ability to produce its deliverables

15:09:25 [rubys]

section on a11y tf: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html#a11y-tf

15:09:50 [MichaelC]

there's been discussion on clarification to TF work statement

15:10:02 [rubys]

At the end of the "Scope of Work" section, add the following paragraph:

15:10:02 [rubys]

> The task force may also create specifications that extend deliverables of the HTML Working Group, in the area of accessibility. The Accessibility Task Force will have decision authority over the contents of such extension specifications. Any such specifications will be considered jointly produced by the HTML Working Group and PFWG, for purposes of W3C Publication. This means that, as with any w3c joint task force deliverable, both Working Groups must approve

15:10:11 [MichaelC]

jb: there is still stuff we're trying to sort out

15:10:20 [rubys]

current TF statement: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/html-task-force

15:10:41 [rubys]

The task force may also create specifications that extend deliverables of the HTML Working Group, in the area of accessibility.

15:10:56 [rubys]

The Accessibility Task Force will have decision authority over the contents of such extension specifications. Any such specifications will be considered jointly produced by the HTML Working Group and PFWG, for purposes of W3C Publication.

15:11:09 [rubys]

This means that, as with any w3c joint task force deliverable, both Working Groups must approve transitions such as First Public Working Draft or Last Call.

15:11:23 [rubys]

It also means that documents will create Patent Policy obligations in both groups.

15:11:33 [rubys]

Members of either Working Group who have technical comments or objections on Task Force publications are expected to raise them in the context of the Task Force

15:11:36 [rubys]

-- done

15:11:39 [MichaelC]

s/> The task force may also create specifications that extend deliverables of the HTML Working Group, in the area of accessibility. The Accessibility Task Force will have decision authority over the contents of such extension specifications. Any such specifications will be considered jointly produced by the HTML Working Group and PFWG, for purposes of W3C Publication. This means that, as...

15:11:40 [MichaelC]

...with any w3c joint task force deliverable, both Working Groups must approve //

15:11:56 [richardschwerdtfe]

richardschwerdtfe has joined #html-a11y

15:12:13 [Zakim]

+Rich

15:12:29 [MichaelC]

jb: accounts for things that can become standalone specs or reintegrated into HTML

15:12:46 [MichaelC]

who produces

15:12:52 [MichaelC]

implications for Patent Policy

15:13:29 [MichaelC]

right now it's clear that PFWG sign-off is needed, but whether under PFWG Patent Policy is open question

15:13:33 [Stevef]

Stevef has joined #html-a11y

15:13:51 [MichaelC]

expectation that objections from either group would be taken to the task force to be worked out there

15:13:54 [Zakim]

-hober

15:14:05 [Zakim]

+[Apple]

15:14:07 [hober]

Zakim, Apple is me

15:14:07 [Zakim]

+hober; got it

15:14:11 [MichaelC]

so we'd like input on approval sign-off, patent policy, and anything else

15:14:32 [Zakim]

+David_MacDonald

15:15:11 [MichaelC]

js: so we're talking about joint publication between PFWG and HTML WG

15:15:28 [MichaelC]

accessibility issues with HTML would start as extensions

15:15:33 [MichaelC]

worked on in this task force

15:16:00 [David]

David has joined #html-a11y

15:16:03 [MichaelC]

normal W3C Recommendation development lifecycle applies

15:16:04 [Zakim]

+??P29

15:16:20 [MichaelC]

opportunity to integrate into HTML at particular milestones

15:16:43 [Stevef]

zakim, ??p29 is me

15:16:43 [Zakim]

+Stevef; got it

15:16:54 [MichaelC]

need to work out when WGs might legitimately oppose publication

15:17:01 [jcraig]

jcraig has joined #html-a11y

15:17:24 [MichaelC]

vs when the answer would be that the concerns need to [be|have been] worked out in TF

15:17:43 [jcraig]

Zakim, who is on the call?

15:17:43 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Janina_Sajka, Michael_Cooper, John_Foliot, Judy, Plh, Sam, [Microsoft], Cynthia_Shelly, James_Craig, Rich, hober, David_MacDonald, Stevef

15:17:44 [paulc]

q+

15:17:46 [Zakim]

[Microsoft] has paulc

15:17:54 [MichaelC]

not giving carte blanche to TF, but need a basis for deciding

15:17:57 [MichaelC]

ack p

15:18:00 [janina]

q?

15:18:50 [MichaelC]

pc: my experience with XQuery and XSL WGs was that the concerns became moot if there was active representation from both sides

15:19:10 [janina]

q?

15:19:27 [MichaelC]

so one way to mitigate concerns is make sure TF is able to accommodate participation from both WGs

15:19:33 [janina]

q?

15:19:35 [MichaelC]

js: yes, we want to work on that

15:19:47 [Judy]

q+

15:20:02 [MichaelC]

ack j

15:20:19 [MichaelC]

jb: other questions on proposal?

15:20:29 [David]

q+

15:20:44 [MichaelC]

cs: sounds like a good step in the right direction

15:20:44 [JF]

+1 to cyns

15:20:48 [MichaelC]

ack d

15:21:12 [MichaelC]

dmd: no plan to remove anything from HTML, except perhaps the alt text advice?

15:21:42 [MichaelC]

js: that's current plan

15:22:05 [Stevef]

q+

15:22:06 [MichaelC]

any overall concerns?

15:22:15 [MichaelC]

ack s

15:22:50 [MichaelC]

sf: note the alt guidance is normative

15:23:02 [MichaelC]

js: right - I meant "non-lexical" earlier

15:23:07 [MichaelC]

<though scribe hadn't captured that>

15:23:42 [MichaelC]

expect proposed language to come out by email soon

15:24:02 [MichaelC]

sr: will run by HTML WG as well, then post by email

15:24:22 [MichaelC]

zakim, next item

15:24:22 [Zakim]

agendum 1. "Sec. 7.1 Hidden http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Oct/0001.html" taken up [from MichaelC]

15:24:43 [JF]

Q+

15:25:10 [MichaelC]

js: email exchange between RS and TOC

15:25:28 [MichaelC]

rs: discussed with ARIA team Monday, have a couple tweaks to meet concerns

15:25:36 [MichaelC]

toc: will review

15:25:51 [MichaelC]

rs: <technical notes in implementations>

15:26:03 [MichaelC]

sounds like @hidden not treated as in navigation

15:26:12 [MichaelC]

cs: will test IE10

15:26:19 [MichaelC]

rs: test file attached to message on list

15:26:27 [MichaelC]

sf: found not implemented in IE10

15:26:58 [JF]

Rich's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Oct/0011.html

15:27:24 [MichaelC]

ack j

15:27:44 [MichaelC]

jf: proposal is that elements are hidden from presentation but still active

15:27:50 [MichaelC]

yet not focusable

15:28:00 [MichaelC]

concerned about that

15:28:23 [MichaelC]

how does someone interact with form if they can't focus on element

15:28:25 [MichaelC]

rs: they can't

15:28:34 [MichaelC]

jf: so form is effectively disabled

15:28:38 [MichaelC]

rs: from user input, yes

15:28:47 [jcraig_]

jcraig_ has joined #html-a11y

15:28:55 [MichaelC]

jf: what about event handlers, are they disabled as well?

15:28:57 [Stevef]

q+

15:29:01 [janina]

q?

15:29:35 [MichaelC]

toc: they're technically still attached, but they can't be actuated

15:29:40 [MichaelC]

so effectively disabled

15:29:57 [MichaelC]

rs: you can't direct input to them, because they're no binding to the UI

15:30:06 [MichaelC]

though a script could still e.g., submit the form

15:30:44 [jcraig]

q?

15:31:11 [MichaelC]

consider hidden fallback content

15:31:34 [MichaelC]

it's in keyboard navigation order and events can be routed to it

15:31:35 [janina]

q?

15:31:45 [MichaelC]

<though you wouldn't land on it unless it's unhidden>

15:32:00 [MichaelC]

cs: what happens if you try to set focus on it?

15:32:02 [MichaelC]

rs: not sure

15:32:08 [MichaelC]

jc: expect a runtime error

15:32:42 [MichaelC]

js: <clarification, missed>

15:33:13 [MichaelC]

jf: concern that user could get landed on hidden content

15:33:23 [MichaelC]

if that won't happen, then my concerns are allayed

15:33:35 [MichaelC]

just need to be really sure of edge cases

15:33:40 [MichaelC]

toc: <missed>

15:33:54 [MichaelC]

jf: my formal objection has been that an element with tab focus could be hidden

15:34:09 [MichaelC]

so your sentence addresses my concern

15:34:18 [jcraig]

If you set focus on a non-focusable element, you get a js runtime error. I expect the same of non-rendered elements such as elements contained in hidden="" nodes. (With the one notable exception for canvas shadow DOM.)

15:34:19 [MichaelC]

q+

15:34:35 [MichaelC]

ack s

15:34:37 [JF]

s/so your sentence addresses my concern/so that sentence addresses my concern/

15:34:46 [MichaelC]

q+ to ask what happen to focus if an element with focus is set to hidden

15:35:18 [MichaelC]

sf: @hidden is just a semantic marker that corresponds to css display:none

15:35:43 [MichaelC]

shouldn't it be treated exactly the same?

15:35:54 [MichaelC]

if you put display:block on a hidden element, it is displayed

15:36:48 [janina]

q?

15:36:57 [MichaelC]

jc: have observed this as well

15:37:19 [jcraig]

q+ to indicate the difference is with media presentations

15:37:19 [jcraig]

ack me

15:37:20 [Zakim]

jcraig, you wanted to indicate the difference is with media presentations

15:37:34 [MichaelC]

though note css is tied to a particular presentation, whereas @hidden is across all

15:37:42 [MichaelC]

sf: seems not implemented that way

15:38:08 [MichaelC]

want clarity

15:39:03 [MichaelC]

mc: perhaps should specify whether @hidden overrides CSS or vice versa

15:39:06 [MichaelC]

ack me

15:39:06 [Zakim]

MichaelC, you wanted to ask what happen to focus if an element with focus is set to hidden

15:39:23 [jcraig]

what about [hidden] { display: block !important; }

15:39:41 [MichaelC]

mc: ^

15:40:18 [MichaelC]

not sure what the answer should be, but we should address it explicitly

15:40:34 [Stevef]

q+

15:41:02 [MichaelC]

js: sometimes in a form a default action can still happen

15:42:23 [MichaelC]

mc: could say the focus should be automatically advanced to the next element

15:42:25 [MichaelC]

jf: or previous

15:42:49 [MichaelC]

mc: or we could say the focus is on a hidden element, next time user tries to advance they get to the next focusable element

15:42:52 [janina]

q?

15:42:58 [janina]

ack st

15:42:59 [MichaelC]

or focus could go to page overall, though less useful

15:43:01 [MichaelC]

sf:

15:43:27 [jcraig_]

jcraig_ has joined #html-a11y

15:43:42 [janina]

q?

15:44:03 [MichaelC]

it would be an authoring error

15:44:04 [janina]

q?

15:44:14 [MichaelC]

mc: should still specify error recover behaviour

15:45:11 [Judy]

q+

15:45:20 [MichaelC]

ack j

15:45:57 [MichaelC]

jb: JamesC can you run this discussion past Maciej?

15:46:16 [MichaelC]

toc: would like to have issues raised on mailing list so entire group can discuss

15:46:36 [MichaelC]

js: would ask someone to extract issues in the minutes to a list discussion starter

15:46:40 [Judy]

+1 to mailing list discussion; just don't want the detail to get lost, after this discussion

15:46:47 [janina]

q?

15:47:28 [janina]

q?

15:47:34 [MichaelC]

rs: <missed>

15:47:42 [MichaelC]

jf: question is of focusability

15:47:54 [MichaelC]

need to be sure focus [on @hidden elements] will never happen, period

15:47:59 [janina]

q?

15:47:59 [MichaelC]

rs: need to test that out

15:48:07 [MichaelC]

jf: need to be clear about expected outcome first

15:48:36 [janina]

q?

15:48:52 [MichaelC]

rs: have tested the current proposal on a number of browsers, though still need to exercise script tests

15:49:10 [MichaelC]

cs: can add text that focus method will fail

15:49:28 [jcraig]

ACTION: MichaelC to file two HTML defects on his raised issues: 1) to determine whether @hidden overrides all CSS, and 2) to determine where focus goes when a focused element becomes hidden.

15:49:29 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-141 - File two HTML defects on his raised issues: 1) to determine whether @hidden overrides all CSS, and 2) to determine where focus goes when a focused element becomes hidden. [on Michael Cooper - due 2012-10-11].

15:49:31 [MichaelC]

js: also that @hidden overrides CSS display values

15:49:47 [MichaelC]

and decide what happens if element with focus gets set to @hidden

15:50:13 [MichaelC]

cs: the CSS stuff should also be run past the CSS WG

15:50:42 [MichaelC]

do want to specify that certain methods should fail

15:50:53 [MichaelC]

note that may be different from current implementation

15:51:01 [MichaelC]

jc: can propose wording?

15:51:03 [MichaelC]

cs: yes

15:51:21 [MichaelC]

rs: <missed>

15:51:34 [MichaelC]

toc: this doesn't change the overall normative content so it's ok

15:53:31 [MichaelC]

action: cynthia to file HTML bug about methods that should fail when an element has @hidden set

15:53:31 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-142 - File HTML bug about methods that should fail when an element has @hidden set [on Cynthia Shelly - due 2012-10-11].

15:54:01 [MichaelC]

rs: objection to current text? (knowing it needs expansion)

15:54:26 [MichaelC]

toc: will get to that from my inbox

15:54:41 [MichaelC]

jf: sounds good, just need expansions from today's discussion

15:55:02 [MichaelC]

closing these loops will allow me to withdraw my Formal Objection

15:56:25 [MichaelC]

js: sounds like we'll be able to wrap this topic up soon

15:56:32 [Zakim]

-James_Craig

15:56:33 [Zakim]

-Rich

15:56:33 [Zakim]

-Michael_Cooper

15:56:34 [Zakim]

-Janina_Sajka

15:56:35 [Zakim]

-David_MacDonald

15:56:36 [Zakim]

-John_Foliot

15:56:36 [Zakim]

-hober

15:56:37 [Zakim]

-Stevef

15:56:38 [Zakim]

-Sam

15:56:41 [Zakim]

-Plh

15:56:48 [Zakim]

-Judy

15:57:37 [jcraig]

jcraig has left #html-a11y

15:58:13 [Zakim]

-Cynthia_Shelly

16:03:09 [Zakim]

-[Microsoft]

16:03:10 [Zakim]

WAI_PFWG(HTML TF)10:00AM has ended

16:03:10 [Zakim]

Attendees were Michael_Cooper, Janina_Sajka, John_Foliot, hober, Judy, Plh, Sam, Cynthia_Shelly, paulc, James_Craig, Rich, David_MacDonald, Stevef

16:22:25 [MichaelC]

scribeOptions: -final

16:22:28 [MichaelC]

rrsagent, make minutes

16:22:28 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-html-a11y-minutes.html MichaelC

16:25:44 [Judy]

Judy has left #html-A11y

16:26:37 [MichaelC]

zakim, bye

16:26:37 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #html-a11y

16:26:39 [MichaelC]

rrsagent, bye

16:26:39 [RRSAgent]

I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-html-a11y-actions.rdf :

16:26:39 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: MichaelC to file two HTML defects on his raised issues: 1) to determine whether @hidden overrides all CSS, and 2) to determine where focus goes when a focused element becomes hidden. [1]

16:26:39 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-html-a11y-irc#T15-49-28

16:26:39 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: cynthia to file HTML bug about methods that should fail when an element has @hidden set [2]

16:26:39 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-html-a11y-irc#T15-53-31