IRC log of ua on 2014-03-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:52:48 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ua
17:52:48 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-irc
17:52:50 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
17:52:50 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ua
17:52:52 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WAI_UAWG
17:52:52 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_UAWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
17:52:53 [trackbot]
Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
17:52:53 [trackbot]
Date: 06 March 2014
17:52:59 [allanj]
rrsagent, set logs public
17:53:06 [allanj]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:53:06 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-minutes.html allanj
17:53:16 [allanj]
chair: JimAllan, KellyFord
17:53:23 [allanj]
regrets: jeanne
17:53:42 [allanj]
Agenda+ OP06 "important elements"
17:53:51 [allanj]
Agenda+ OP07 2.3.2 present direct command in rendered content
17:56:40 [allanj]
Agenda+ LG03 Alternative content search (2.4.5, 2.11.2, 2.11.3)
17:58:45 [Greg]
Greg has joined #ua
18:00:03 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has now started
18:00:09 [Zakim]
+Jim_Allan
18:01:00 [Jan]
Jan has joined #ua
18:01:06 [Jan]
zakim, code?
18:01:08 [Zakim]
the conference code is 82941 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), Jan
18:01:40 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
18:01:59 [Zakim]
+Greg_Lowney
18:02:31 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jan
18:02:31 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
18:04:08 [Joshue]
Joshue has joined #ua
18:04:29 [Zakim]
+Kim_Patch
18:06:26 [Zakim]
+[Microsoft]
18:07:25 [KimPatch]
KimPatch has joined #ua
18:07:57 [allanj]
zakim, Microsoft is really Kelly
18:07:57 [Zakim]
+Kelly; got it
18:08:40 [allanj]
http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2014/LCcomments.html
18:08:56 [allanj]
zakim, agenda ?
18:08:56 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
18:08:57 [Zakim]
1. OP06 "important elements" [from allanj]
18:08:57 [Zakim]
2. OP07 2.3.2 present direct command in rendered content [from allanj]
18:08:57 [Zakim]
3. LG03 Alternative content search (2.4.5, 2.11.2, 2.11.3) [from allanj]
18:09:37 [allanj]
zakim, open item 1
18:09:37 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "OP06 "important elements"" taken up [from allanj]
18:09:49 [allanj]
scribe: allanj
18:10:48 [allanj]
Guideline 2.3 "important elements" Since important elements have been left at the discretion of the user (and will vary from user to user, and from web page to web page) ... It will be quite the task for the user agent to determine from the user which elements he/she thinks is important and have the proper facilities to navigate directly to it. Can make the criteria of 'important elements'...
18:10:49 [allanj]
...more objective or easily definable?
18:11:24 [kford]
kford has joined #ua
18:11:37 [allanj]
jr: we meant to leave it to the UA developer as to the definition of "important elements"
18:12:02 [allanj]
gl: Glossary: important elements are up to the UA
18:12:04 [Greg]
Definition of important elements
18:12:06 [Greg]
Elements determined as important by the user to facilitate the user's navigation of the content. UAAG 2.0 intentionally does not identify which important elements must be navigable because this will vary by user needs and technologies being used.
18:13:19 [Greg]
2.5.3 Allow Elements to be Configured for Structural Navigation: The user can configure a set of important elements (including element type) for structured navigation and hierarchical/outline view. (Level AAA)
18:14:04 [Jan]
important elements: Elements determined as important for users by the user agent to facilitate the user's navigation of the content. UAAG 2.0 intentionally does not identify which important elements must be navigable because this will vary by user needs and technologies being used.
18:14:09 [Greg]
The definition says the user defines the set of important elements, but the SC saying the ability to define set is only AAA.
18:14:23 [allanj]
gl: 2.3.1 navigate to important elements (AA), but not defined by user (2.5.3 AAA)
18:14:39 [Jan]
important elements: Elements determined as important for users by the user agent to facilitate the user's navigation of the content. UAAG 2.0 intentionally does not identify which important elements must be navigable because this will vary depending on the web technology.
18:14:49 [allanj]
gl: html does not define 'important elements'
18:14:57 [Jan]
important elements: Elements determined as important for users by the user agent to facilitate the user's navigation of the content. UAAG 2.0 intentionally does not identify which important elements must be navigable because this will vary depending on the user agent design and the web technology.
18:16:25 [Greg]
Editorial rewrite of Jan's: "Elements that the user agent identifies as important for facilitating the user's navigation of the content."
18:16:52 [kford]
Rewrite is good to me.
18:17:25 [Jan]
important elements: Elements that the user agent identifies as important for facilitating the user's navigation of the content. UAAG 2.0 intentionally does not identify which important elements must be navigable because this will vary depending on the user agent design and the web technology.
18:18:07 [allanj]
ja: 2.5.3 allows user to choose any element
18:18:29 [allanj]
jr: no...choose from the important element list provided by the UA
18:18:39 [allanj]
ja: thats not clear in the SC
18:18:48 [allanj]
gl: could add to the intent
18:20:16 [allanj]
gl: to comply with 2.3.1 the UA provides the user the ability to navigate by at least one element (h1)
18:23:34 [allanj]
ja: suggest removing 2.5.3 because no one will do it.
18:25:05 [allanj]
gl: hopes mouseless browsing would add heading nav in addition to link navigation.
18:27:17 [allanj]
jr: wonders if with heading and table navigation (2.5.2) and enabled elements (2.3.3) thinks we have important elements covered.
18:28:26 [allanj]
... perhaps can eliminate 2.3.1 (it is so basic, UA could provide 1 choice) and 2.5.3
18:29:05 [allanj]
kp: OK with removing 2.3.1.
18:29:52 [allanj]
gl: 1.9.1 outline view of important elements.
18:31:10 [allanj]
jr: allowing users to choose which elements could get difficult for the UA
18:31:45 [allanj]
kp: want to keep 2.5.3.
18:32:05 [allanj]
jr: what is the work 2.5.3 is doing.
18:32:41 [allanj]
... want something in the notes for 1.9.1 that outline views are more usable when they are configurable.
18:33:32 [allanj]
gl: 2.3.1 is redundant to 2.3.3 and 2.5.2
18:34:26 [allanj]
... what else might 2.3.1 used for... what elements?
18:35:37 [allanj]
jr: 2.3.3 is navigate to and activate - separate actions for enabled elements
18:37:43 [allanj]
jr: 2.5.2 is nav by headings and tables, 1.9.1 is outline view of important elements
18:37:56 [allanj]
kf: this is a bit confusing.
18:38:23 [allanj]
... end goal direct nav and activate enabled elements
18:40:05 [allanj]
kp: need to nav to and nav + activate in one step
18:40:38 [allanj]
kf: want default behavior of whatever UA does.
18:41:05 [allanj]
kp: the user doesn't know what the UA will do when something gets focus.
18:41:24 [allanj]
kp: mouseless browsing is nav+activate
18:41:53 [allanj]
kf: tabbing gives focus with out activation.
18:45:22 [allanj]
action: Jan with create a proposal for 1.9.1, 2.3.1, 2.3.3, 2.5.2, 2.5.3 with definition for 'important elements"
18:45:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-956 - With create a proposal for 1.9.1, 2.3.1, 2.3.3, 2.5.2, 2.5.3 with definition for 'important elements" [on Jan Richards - due 2014-03-13].
18:46:26 [allanj]
gl: Word is a UA that allow granular navigation move forward 3 graphics, or up 2 sections, etc. so it is possible to do this type of navigation
18:46:38 [allanj]
close item 1
18:46:59 [allanj]
open item 2
18:47:16 [allanj]
2.3.2 Present Direct Commands from Rendered Content: The user can have any recognized direct commands in rendered content (e.g. accesskey, landmark) be presented with their associated elements (e.g. Alt+R to reply to a web email). (Level AA)
18:47:43 [allanj]
comment: based on intent of 2.3.2 However, if we are to have proper documentation of the accessibility functionality (Guideline 3.3) then, presumably, there it will be made discoverable. Users will just need to go through the documentation to discover all relevant controls.
18:48:49 [allanj]
ja: this is a misunderstanding, we are talking about Rendered content, not UI content
18:49:33 [allanj]
The UA can not have documentation for Author supplied Direct Commands (accesskey)
18:52:57 [allanj]
action: Jeanne to add response to OP07 - his is a misunderstanding, we are talking about Rendered content, not UI content. The UA can not have documentation for Author supplied Direct Commands (accesskey) [amith as necessary]
18:52:57 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-957 - Add response to op07 - his is a misunderstanding, we are talking about rendered content, not ui content. the ua can not have documentation for author supplied direct commands (accesskey) [amith as necessary] [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-03-13].
18:53:11 [allanj]
zakim, close item 2
18:53:11 [Zakim]
agendum 2, OP07 2.3.2 present direct command in rendered content, closed
18:53:13 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
18:53:13 [Zakim]
3. LG03 Alternative content search (2.4.5, 2.11.2, 2.11.3) [from allanj]
18:55:04 [allanj]
zakim, close item 3
18:55:04 [Zakim]
agendum 3, LG03 Alternative content search (2.4.5, 2.11.2, 2.11.3), closed
18:55:06 [Zakim]
I see nothing remaining on the agenda
18:58:06 [allanj]
Topic: MS03 1.4.1 Separation between browsers and OS
18:58:17 [allanj]
comment: While it is understood that the separation between browsers features and OS features can be blurry at times, there are functions that are generally expected to be provided by the OS to facilitate accessibility. We do not expect the working group to delineate the responsibility of OS and browsers since it is contextual and fluid. But we expect the working group to recognize such...
18:58:18 [allanj]
...separation of responsibility. For example, success criterion 1.4.1 (Text Scale, Color, Font) should be separated into two criteria—one simply asking the browsers to follow the OS text size and such at level A and another to provide its own options if the OS fails to provide text options at level AA.
19:01:18 [Greg]
The general statement is too vague to be actionable. That is, I don’t expect any disagreement on the sentiment, but rather on the details. I disagree with this example provided: if a browser does not provide adjustable font sizes, it is neither fully accessible nor as accessible as users have come to expect. If the operating system does not provide the features in any standardized way, it is...
19:01:19 [Greg]
...up to each application to provide them on its own, and if the feature is useful and common enough to be expected, whether it is provided in a consistent way or not is less important.
19:03:14 [allanj]
jr: aren't you agreeing with them. current situation. mobile allow setting text size and color, most UAs allow font size change
19:03:32 [allanj]
... but, don't agree with creating 2 SCs
19:03:54 [allanj]
gl: UA allow following OS font and colors, or let user do their own.
19:04:11 [allanj]
... this should still be level A.
19:05:00 [Greg]
That is, if a feature such as customizable colors is important (which it is), the browser can be expected to provide it at Level A regardless of whether or not it's implement at the OS level.
19:05:19 [allanj]
ja: all browsers already do this. it is up to the UA to decide to do it on its own or use the OS
19:05:34 [Greg]
The feature should not be relegated to Level AA just because the OS did not provide a standardized implementation.
19:07:35 [Greg]
If there are specific success criteria that you feel should be split into separate levels for when the OS supports it and when it doesn't, please enumerate these and we will try to address your concerns.
19:10:05 [Greg]
Do we have both “follow OS colors” and “allow user to the override them”?
19:10:40 [Jan]
5.1.3 Implement Accessibility Features of the Platform:
19:10:41 [Jan]
If the user agent contains non-web-based user interfaces, then those user interfaces follow user interface accessibility guidelines for the platform. (Level A)
19:10:43 [Jan]
Note: When a requirement of another specification contradicts a requirement of UAAG 2.0, the user agent may disregard the rendering requirement of the other specification and still satisfy this guideline.
19:12:28 [allanj]
ja: font size and color is an accessibility setting
19:12:43 [allanj]
jr: thats where you find it on android OS
19:13:37 [allanj]
Applicability note: if the OS provides the features the UA does not need to duplicate as long as the features trickle through
19:14:52 [KimPatch]
Suggested edit:
19:14:53 [KimPatch]
Applicability note: if the OS provides a feature the UA does not need to duplicate it as long as user agent supports the OS feature
19:15:21 [Greg]
We could have an SC that explicitly said something like "For the following presentation attributes, the user can choose which of the following take precedence (a) user global settings specified by the platform, or (b) author-specified settings, or (c) user-specified settings. * Foreground and background colors..."
19:17:21 [Greg]
That is reflecting the features already in desktop browsers (e.g. Firefox).
19:17:50 [allanj]
jr: on mobile, platform does foreground/background (inverse color), the applications cannot over ride
19:18:24 [allanj]
... windows phone has high contrast mode, ie for mobile will use HCM
19:19:08 [allanj]
... windows could add a user setting to ignore HCM in the UA, but expect they would say turn off HCM.
19:21:02 [allanj]
jr: applicability notes are the loopholes and SC are the you musts
19:21:19 [allanj]
Applicability note: if the OS provides a feature the UA does not need to duplicate it as long as user agent supports the OS feature
19:22:18 [allanj]
gl: conformance claim you list the OS, UA, and extensions...that's not clear enough
19:22:41 [Zakim]
-Jan
19:22:45 [allanj]
jr: but MS make comment that its not clear, hence applicability note
19:23:23 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
19:23:41 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jan
19:23:41 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
19:23:44 [allanj]
gl: feature needs to be available regardless of the location of the feature OS, UA, or extension and are enumerated in the conformance claim
19:25:02 [allanj]
gl: mean to say platform (many layers within the platform)
19:25:40 [KimPatch]
KimPatch has joined #ua
19:26:45 [Greg]
A required behavior can be provided by the platform, user agent, extensions, and potentially other layers. All are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim.
19:28:10 [Zakim]
-Kelly
19:28:24 [Greg]
The user agent does not need to implement every behavior itself. A required behavior may be provided by the platform, user agent, user agent extensions, or potentially other layers. All are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim.
19:28:48 [Zakim]
-Jan
19:29:08 [Jan]
GL's wording works for me.
19:29:12 [allanj]
any objections to adding this as #6 in conformance applicability notes
19:29:19 [allanj]
+1
19:29:25 [allanj]
kp: +1
19:29:41 [allanj]
gl: +1
19:29:47 [allanj]
kelly:?
19:30:40 [allanj]
action: jeanne to add "6. The user agent does not need to implement every behavior itself. A required behavior may be provided by the platform, user agent, user agent extensions, or potentially other layers. All are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim." to applicability notes.
19:30:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-958 - Add "6. the user agent does not need to implement every behavior itself. a required behavior may be provided by the platform, user agent, user agent extensions, or potentially other layers. all are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim." to applicability notes. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-03-13].
19:31:29 [Zakim]
-Kim_Patch
19:31:32 [Zakim]
-Jim_Allan
19:31:33 [Zakim]
WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has ended
19:31:33 [Zakim]
Attendees were Jim_Allan, Greg_Lowney, Jan, Kim_Patch, Kelly
19:32:17 [allanj]
action: jeanne add to disposition document - that we added "6. The user agent does not need to implement every behavior itself. A required behavior may be provided by the platform, user agent, user agent extensions, or potentially other layers. All are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim." to document as a response to comment MS03
19:32:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-959 - Add to disposition document - that we added "6. the user agent does not need to implement every behavior itself. a required behavior may be provided by the platform, user agent, user agent extensions, or potentially other layers. all are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim." to document as a response to comment ms03 [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-03-13].
19:32:30 [allanj]
rrsagent, make minutes
19:32:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-minutes.html allanj
19:32:38 [allanj]
zakim, please part
19:32:38 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ua
19:32:45 [allanj]
rrsagent, make minutes
19:32:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-minutes.html allanj
19:33:19 [allanj]
rrsagent, please part
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-actions.rdf :
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jan with create a proposal for 1.9.1, 2.3.1, 2.3.3, 2.5.2, 2.5.3 with definition for 'important elements" [1]
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-irc#T18-45-22
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jeanne to add response to OP07 - his is a misunderstanding, we are talking about Rendered content, not UI content. The UA can not have documentation for Author supplied Direct Commands (accesskey) [amith as necessary] [2]
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-irc#T18-52-57
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jeanne to add "6. The user agent does not need to implement every behavior itself. A required behavior may be provided by the platform, user agent, user agent extensions, or potentially other layers. All are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim." to applicability notes. [3]
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-irc#T19-30-40
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jeanne add to disposition document - that we added "6. The user agent does not need to implement every behavior itself. A required behavior may be provided by the platform, user agent, user agent extensions, or potentially other layers. All are acceptable, as long as they are enumerated in the conformance claim." to document as a response to comment MS03 [4]
19:33:19 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/03/06-ua-irc#T19-32-17