See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 24 October 2013
<janina> Meeting: HTML-A11Y Task Force Teleconference
<scribe> scribe: aardrian
JS: Reminds us that the US and Europe will be out of sync during time change during next week.
JS: If you have not already rejoined the HTML-WG, please do so ASAP. Participation in a11y TF is dependent on it.
MS: Will be sending out reminder to TF participants. Will be on agenda for a few weeks.
JS: Steve Faulkner is resigning
role as co-facilitator of a11y TF, effective immediately. Will
otherwise still be part of TF.
... Chaals and Janina wil continue as co-facilitators, a third
may be added in the future.
... A hearty thanks to Steve for all he has done.
JB: Also thanks Steve, as well as Janina and Chaals for their work.
<Judy> JB: and thanks to Steve also for his commitment to stay with the TF documents and as a participant in the TF as well
JS: PFWG is happy with procedures, at HTML-WG for consideration. CfC just started by Paul Cotton.
PC: Forwarding CfC to TF as an FYI.
JS: Looking for last call
comments on Longdesc, please go fill out the form. URI in
agenda.
... Survey runs to midnight Boston time Monday.
MS: Longdesc tests submitted to repository, first round of feedback on naming convention. Awaiting results.
<MarkS> AAPI Test results
MS: Conducted AAPI testing, recorded results. https://rawgithub.com/chaals/longdesc-tests/master/test-results.html#muftapi
JS: Have completed all tests?
MS: Agreed.
JS: Hoping we can progress
through CR to Proposed Rec?
... Need to write it up, schedule interview, then can
demonstrate requirements met.
JB: Probably not before TPAC. Documentation can be a bunch of work. Falls to Mark.
MS: Accepts the challenge.
PC: Are we proposing skipping CR? It contains call for implementations.
JS: Essentially, yes.
JB: Anticipated implementation was good enough going into CR, needs verification.
PC: Notes that skipping CR wasn't
mentioned in last call, may be surprise to others not tracking
closely.
... Is July 16 last call draft?
<paulc> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-html-longdesc-20130716/
MS: Correct.
PC: How does TF plan to handle
running through both parent groups? Notify HTML-WG ASAP to
avoid surprise.
... First time he has heard assertion to skip CR, acknowledges
not being at every call.
... 3rd question: Does TF have view on whether it should be
free-standing REC or folded back into HTML 5.0?
JB: Wanted to wait until clearing
LC before discussion with TF on preference for either.
... Timing suggests it could be published as stand-alone, then
re-integrated before HTML 5.0 closes CR.
PC: Plan 2014 is silent on this,
does not preclude it.
... Go to CR, prove it has met exit criteria before first
quarter 2014 to fold it back in.
JB: Hoping in next week's meeting
to frame out discussion to follow right steps for either
path.
... Let's make sure this is clear on agenda for follow-up
meetings.
PC: Suggesting this should be a face-to-face topic for TPAC. Will add it to wiki.
JS: Raises concern of packed agenda, may be though to get all the players at the table.
<paulc> See http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2013-11-Agenda#F2F_Topics
JS: Has heard 2 things from CR period, more implementations and more visibility.
PC: More implentations important to prove 3rd party can implement. Considered in call for implementations.
JB: No clear discussion on exit requirements for CR, this can be topic of discussion for next week.
PC: Happy to meet separately on this, considering travel schedule.
<Zakim> Judy, you wanted to reflect on Paul's comment
JS: FYI - new Ruby Extension
coming, flagging as something of interest for a11y
reasons.
... Have someone to review, falls under plan 2014 to discuss
technical issues on TF.
... Shane has taken up reading spec. Early in process.
... Use case requirements seemed strange.
JB: Curious at timeline for Shane given that it's FPWD.
<paulc> For information on the extension spec integration decision policy: see http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v3.html#cr-integration
JS: Assigned action yesterday, but nothing specific.
<Judy> JB: ...as Wu Wei may be interested in looking at this as well
MS: Has looked at spec in past, seems like may be a challenge for AT to implement. Doesn't see too big a problem.
<paulc> The Use Cases document was published at a Note: http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby-use-cases/
PC: Asking about use case document on recommendation track; was published as note.
JS: May have an old one he is reviewing. Note makes sense.
PC: Ruby spec resolves 5 of 25
open bugs on HTML. May be folded back into HTML 5 if it can
catch up in the process.
... Could replace existing normative material in HTML5.
... Was published under CCBy licensing experiment. Mentioned in
CfC.
JS: Noting that New Media
Community Group should be of interest to a11y TF.
... It's getting traction/membership. Some of TF may want to
participate.
JS: Come to point of stasis on 'alt.' Cleared WCAG about a week ago. Should be ready to move forward.
MS: Last week decided to clone
accesskey bugs to HTML.next, has done that, left notes on old
bugs.
... Has changed status, asking about appropriateness.
PC: Check with editorial
team.
... Asking about meeting for canvas interoperability items.
JS: Scheduled for next week.
PC: Noting that's two significant topics for next week.
JB: Need information to identify which is critical before TPAC.
PC: Do we take canvas to LC immediately and then back to CR with list of features at risk.
JB: Suggests organizing/gathering information for conversations, prioritizing.