See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 27 March 2014
<paulc> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tests-cr-exit/
<MarkS> scribe: Cynthia Shelly
<MarkS> scribeNick: cyns
<MarkS> HTML WG F2F Agenda
<MarkS> Register for HTML WG F2F
<scribe> scribe: cyns
JS: several of us going to html 5
f2f next week
... goal is to clear 5.0
PL: will also make progress on 5.1.
<MarkS> Media Subteam Revival
<MarkS> Join the Media Sub-team
JS: consensus on date and time
from survey?
... I hear there was CSUN recruiting?
MS: survey closes today. best
time monday 11am EDT
... yes, made several contacts who are interested. should we
leave it open for new members to respond? that will take some
time
JS: lets go ahead and start, adjust later if needed
RESOLUTION: media sub team will resume teleconfereces mondays at 11AM EDT, starting next week
MS: Erik Carlson from Apple expressed interest in rejoining
JS: he was very active last time.
this is good.
... next stage is content to allow testing the user
requirements in user agents. media with video, captions,
recorded audio descriptions, level based navigation, etc.
JS: we need to respond to Sam.
MS: making progress in CG, progress on implemenation testing and reporting continues. April 17 may be difficutl to meet, probably first week of May instead.
JS: we expect to have a draft of exit criteria in about 2 weeks
MS: new draft of L1, hoping to
get to rec by end of year. continuing feedback from msft and
mozilla. waiting for for feedback from google. will ask dominic
for feedback this week.
... we will cooperate as much as possible with what-wg, but
will deviate in some places. we think these are legit issues in
that spec, and will also file bugs there
JS: need to let Sam know if we
are on track. we should know more after monday's draft.
... our 2 impl are mozilla and chrome.
PC: how close are those implemenations to what you're proposing?
MS: rick said it wouldn't take that long. i dont know about dominic. he plans to get to it soon, but doesn't have date.
JM: there is some concern from rick about changes making additional complexity. there may be more discussion.
PC: I think you should respond to Sam's email about what implementations you're using. Say how aligned they are, or that you need more time.
JS: would prefer to answer that
next week
... Mark has done a lot of work to get feedback from Dominic.
Thank you, Mark.
JS: need steve faulkner
PC: here's my concern. I asked if
steve's work is in 5.1 and how much needs to be moved to
5.0.
... 5.0 is now down to zero bugs. I don't want a cfc that says
we're done, and have a11y-tf say no, we're still working on alt
guidance.
JS: I agree.
PC: there are no bugs on alt text. that says there is no work. but steve's plan was to port back from 5.1.
DM: I talked to steve at csun, and I get the sense that he's done or almost done. I think we're close to moving it over.
JS: I need to ping him and find
out the status. time is running out.
... Looking at the content, it is close, if not fully synched
up. Need to verify taht work is done.
PC: once work is done, task force
can declare that we don't need the alt text doc. we can add
status to that saying that it's been incorporated.
... I don't want task force to discover late that the work
isn't done, and wg wants to move forward.
JS: we have 1 more tf call before the f2f. we need to close this next week.
PC: that would be good. I'm not insisting. chairs are assuming there are no more bugs except at risk features. if tf thinks there is more alt techniques work that needs to be done, best way to signal that is to open 5.0 bugs.
<SteveF> sorry I am here but also in a work meeting
<SteveF> AS far as I am concerned what is in 5.1 but not in 5.0 just needs to go into 5.0 and we are done
PC: steve enumerated bugs that were outstanding, there were some that weren't in 5.0
DM: can confirm that there are
things in 5.1 and not in 5.0
... there is still a port.
JS: I think Paul is asking for bugs for the ports.
<SteveF> There is an issue with the PF in regards adding a link to other advice - but a) no bug has been filed and b) its a minor editorial addition (form editors point of view)
PC: yes. I asked a month ago for which are being moved
<SteveF> I will go through and mark 5.1 bugs that have been resolved and need to be ported as CR bugs
PC: wg needs to knwo when backport is done. would like a clear statement about the changes made and to be made.
<SteveF> I would hazard that the remaining woll be back ported next time robin does a cherry pick to 5.0
PC: editors had an agreement to go to 0 bugs on 3/15 and we've known about this since feb. as soon as he marks these 5.0, we're out of 0 bugs, and I'm not happy about that
<SteveF> They will be resolved bugs - what is the issue?
JS: had a request in wai to aditional guidance.
JB: yes, tehre should be a bug on that
JS: we need a location to point to
PC: why is this not done? we're
in the end game here.
... Steve, I don't understand how Robin knows which items are
going to be back ported. are they marked editorial?
... I will start a thread with steve and robin on editors
list
... I expect html5 to go back to last call, as described in
plan 2014, in june. there will likely be a heartbeat after
april meeting. I would like no changes between heartbeat and
last call.
JS: at csun we talked about what issues might be left over. table summary needs some editorial work. close gap btwn wcag and html
MS: bug from Joshue Oconnor. one
to bring back summary. one that table examples need work
... we all agreed taht it wasn't worth the fight to bring back
summary. we have better alternaitves on teh horizon
... close old bug, open new one against 5.1 suggesting improved
examples. Josh will create some better techniques in
wcag.
... thoughts?
JS: one possible replacement in
aria draft
... aria 1.1
... don't hear any disagreement. If we get consensus fast
enough on 5.1, may ask to port back to 5.0.
DM: currently no solution.
MS: details/summary is no longer at risk. is that right?
DM: not programitcally associated with table, but implemented in chrome
MS: can put it in the caption
DM: don't think that works with AT.
MS: let's run some tests
... I think this may work in FF too
JS: also need to find out where we are with support for aria-describedat. I'll find out
MS: no quorum this week. summary was most pressing issue.
<David> http://www.davidmacd.com/test/details.html
<MarkS> http://caniuse.com/details
<David> above is the Table Summary tests
<MarkS> these are static test results. we should probably re run these
<David> They are tests from the time I made the files several moths ago
<David> Sure... I hope things are getting fixed...