00:00:04 AWK: the benefit for people using GitHub is that they can see results of their efforts more easily 00:00:18 AWK: the refactoring lowers the barrier further 00:00:24 LS: Is XML really a barrier? 00:00:44 SAZ: some part is psychological 00:03:30 GV: we're concerned about the time on MC and what else won't be able to be done 00:06:25 LGR: Concerned about having a format that would be able to be serviced if MC not around 00:06:37 MC: Format documentation is a concern, yes 00:09:33 AWK: Will document the process for using current techniques with the XML 00:13:23 agenda? 00:13:35 zakim, take up item 7 00:13:35 agendum 7. "Criteria for techniques" taken up [from AWK] 00:13:43 close item 3 00:13:47 close item 4 00:13:51 close item 6 00:15:06 KHS: thinks that we need to be aware about not leaving people behind as we push new agendas 00:15:56 GV: It isn't about whether we have the technique but whether it is sufficient or not 00:16:05 q+ 00:17:27 KHS: Wants to be able to say that some alternate version is supported for some period of time 00:17:30 Q+SAZ 00:17:35 ack jame 00:18:02 JN: If it doesn't always fail then the failure needs to go or be modified 00:18:53 GV: past criteria was if the technique worked in one free cross-platform browser then the technique was ok 00:22:26 GV: and is the technique supported by enough AT 00:23:11 AWK: and that's what we need for our techniques. Indicate the criteria and make sure that authors know that their needs may be greater than that 00:23:39 ack s 00:23:47 ack S 00:24:35 SAZ: in wai-acc we were looking for examples of how aria-label was better than alt. couldn't find any 00:24:41 GV and LS have ideas 00:24:48 ack s 00:24:51 queue? 00:25:45 SAZ: Wilco on the wai-acc is working on looking at techniques. feedback to him is helpful 00:26:08 GV: for ARIA we have less experience for testing 00:26:21 SAZ: also authoring guidelines for writing test cases 00:27:47 DMac: tangent but what about techniques for Word documents 00:28:24 DM: people are posting PDF instead of Word because there are no Word techs 00:28:39 LGR: That's a problem with their policy 00:29:55 DM: Is there an opinion from WCAG that the documents are web content when posted on a web server? 00:31:09 LGR: users don't care about distinction between accessible on web and desktop 00:31:28 GV: that's a nice thing about the new rules from the access board - removes this distinction 00:34:57 DM: groups don't think that they can post Word/Excel docs 00:38:09 AWK: What configurations would work for a word doc with browser/AT? 00:40:26 KW: Big question is "what is accessibility supported"? 00:43:35 KW: people do look at techs and think "that must be accessibility supported" 00:43:49 KW: not necessarily true though 00:44:24 GV: goes back to what is the level of support for techniques 00:44:41 LGR: and we are very english-focused in techniques 00:45:19 LS: Israeli requirements leave out some AA 00:45:26 JN: and add in some AAA 00:46:54 KW: we need to help end users communicate about issues to AT vendors 00:48:31 KW: get questions every day about accessibility supported question 00:49:03 KW: testers always finding issues with browsers and AT 00:49:27 SAZ: Acc support DB is still early phase but the results are suprising 00:50:26 SAZ: how the support varies 00:50:49 SAZ: hope that it succeeds so we can get better feedback to AT vendors and browsers 00:51:07 queue? 00:51:51 KW: gets into how much testing testers can reasonably do 00:54:10 GV: Concept of AT push was previously discussed. 01:02:07 Joshue108 has joined #wai-wcag 02:31:00 GreggVan has joined #WAI-WCAG 03:27:30 GreggVan has joined #WAI-WCAG 04:53:36 GreggVan has joined #WAI-WCAG 04:54:11 GreggVan has left #wai-wcag 05:14:15 David has joined #wai-wcag 05:17:50 David_ has joined #wai-wcag 06:03:51 David has joined #wai-wcag 16:50:03 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 16:50:03 logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/03/19-wai-wcag-irc 17:16:31 MichaelC has joined #wai-wcag