See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 12 October 2012
<Andi> trackbot, start meeting
<trackbot> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 12 October 2012
<Andi> scribe: Mary_Jo_Mueller
<Andi> scribenick: MaryJo
<Andi> zakimk, who is on the phone?
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/OCT112012/results#xq1
Discussion on example of a document that has repeated links after every section. These would need to have a way to skip over them.
If this applies to a singular document, that that should be captured in the notes for this SC.
Discussion on the case where a large amount of information is copied (e.g. a long table) and repeated in multiple places in a document. Since this is a table, a screen reader user can bypass it - though not by an active mechanism.
This is ok, because this SC only requires 'a means to bypass', not a 'navigation mechanism' which is only used in SC 3.2.3.
How could this be applied to a single document when this SC is for 'multiple Web pages' and not for a single Web page?
This should be changed to something like 'in a set of documents' rather than 'in non-embedded content'.
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/OCT112012/results#xq2
The WCAG working group discussed whether the name of the software application is sufficient for a title, and they agreed.
A specific note will have to be proposed to them to approve which will occur next week.
The draft of the proposed note can be found at http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Purpose_and_doc/app_names
<Andi> "As described in the WCAG intent (above), the name of a software application is a sufficient title."
RESOLUTION: Accept 2.4.2 in proposal #11 as amended in the meeting.
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/OCT112012/results#xq3
Discussion about the survey comments and went over additional notes proposed in Gregg's survey answer.
Discussed that you can't rely on headings to be used for navigation. That is because the navigation handled by the user agent, and headings aren't interactive elements.
Discussed the intent of the SC that uses this term (and whether it is really strictly to be applied to multiple Web pages, or if it applies within a single web page as well. This is important when you try to apply to documents to know if it means 'set of documents' or a single document.
<Andi> "Small repeated sections such as individual words, phrases or single links are not considered navigation mechanisms for the purposes of this provision."
<greggvanderheiden> "Small repeated sections such as individual words, phrases or links occurring in running text are not considered navigation mechanisms for the purposes of this provision."
<Andi> "Small repeated navigation mechanisms such as phrases or links embedded in paragraph text are not considered navigation mechanisms for the purposes of this provision."
<Andi> I think what WCAG really intended was "When navigation mechanisms are repeated on multiple Web pages within a set of Web pages, [THE ELEMENTS OF THE NAVIGATION MECHANISM] occur in the same relative order each time they are repeated, unless a change is initiated by the user."
Discussion on the wording of 'focus of reading and/or action' and change it to be more clear, 'reading focus and/or action focus'.
Keyboard shortcuts are not covered by this SC because this covers the order in which navigation mechanisms are presented to the user.
Discussed software example of the file explorer where user actions in the left-hand pane doesn't always cause a change of focus.
What constitutes a navigational mechanism? One way of using file explorer is a navigational mechanism and another is not, depending on whether the actions cause a change in focus.
When a change in focus does occur, the SC 3.2.3 would apply.
The left hand pane of file explorer, when you activate certain things you don't change focus but the content in the right pane changes - a browse mode.
If you're in the right pane and you activate items in that pane, focus will change. By this definition, this is a navigational mechanism.
We'll have to discuss this more next time.
<Zakim> Judy, you wanted to comment on schedule and to comment on schedule with regard to next Tuesday's meeting
The amount of technical issues we can close on Tuesday is important for next Thursday's WCAG working group meeting. We might want to plan a longer Tuesday call.
We need to try to close out as much as possible.
Tuesday's call will be extended to 2 hours.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137 of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/is repeated in multiple places/and repeated in multiple places/ Succeeded: s/There is a proposed note can/The draft of the proposed note can/ Succeeded: s/me, Short and sweet!// Succeeded: s/on Tues is important for next Thursday's/on Tuesday is important for next Thursday's WCAG working group/ Found Scribe: Mary_Jo_Mueller Found ScribeNick: MaryJo Default Present: Janina, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Judy, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Alex_Li, Kiran_Kaja, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Bruce_Bailey, David_MacDonald Present: Janina Andi_Snow_Weaver Judy Mary_Jo_Mueller Alex_Li Kiran_Kaja Gregg_Vanderheiden Bruce_Bailey David_MacDonald Regrets: Pierce_Crowell Peter_Korn Found Date: 12 Oct 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/10/12-wcag2ict-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]