HTML Accessibility Task Force Media Sub-Group

<trackbot> Date: 02 June 2014

Identify Scribe

<scribe> scribe: MarkS

TV & Web: Use Cases and Requirements (update)

<kaz> Web&TV minutes

KAZ: Talked about new use cases on May 28. Everyone was very impresed and interest
... TV Broadcast chair, volunteered to take the lead and check the use cases in detail.
... need to identify what is new and which ones are just extensions.
... may need to reword a bit to fit the IGs use cases better
... the IG has started to review use cases submitted by john and mark. The new use cases submitted by janina will be added to 2nd generation.

JS: I have a new one that is related to timescale modification. think it would be good to have a use case for it
... useful for people who watch videos in a non-domininant language
... to slow it down

KAZ: Might want to mention advantages to i18n as well

JS: useful for travellers as well

MS: do you think we will be able to provide feedback on the outcome of that work soon?

KAZ: yes
... no date yet, will let you know soon.
... AC meeting is next week, so it may take longer than expected.

MS: anyone attending AC that would be useful to talk to?

KAZ: i will ask

JS: i will be there on Monday

KAZ: I wanted to thank everyone for your work. great use cases.

Processing Media Accessibility User Requirements Comments

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/media-a11y-reqs/

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/media-a11y-reqs/#KA-1

SM: what are we doing with references to other documents?

MS: Keeping an eye and doing our best to predict stability at this point

JS: Three steps before we publish
... Need to make sure we are happy with this heartbeat.
... we need to respond to all commenters
... we might want to update vocabulary used since it has changed
...RE: section 4.8 might be a good time to re-write that section. Shouldn't taken long.
... know what we need to say and have gotten feedback
... know we can at least change the title, which is very awkward. Can probably use new term, second screen

JF: That is very awkward. probably shorten it down. If we are going to use second screen, we want to indicate that it refers to one or more screens/devices

JS: If you look at Sylvia's response to my email, that addresses that.
... there is understanding that it it more than one or two or three additional devices.
... I wonder if there is a definition somewhere that we can reference

JF: there is a second screen community group

KAZ: that group is converting to a working group

<JF> http://www.w3.org/community/webscreens/

JF: the CG has a definition

KAZ: Use Cases and requirements were discussed in the Web & TV IG, and some of the participants launched a Community Group based on the requirements

JF: This is a very quiet group. There are some knowlegeable and experienced participants.
... lot of people watching it, but not a lot going on.

JS: so there may be an API?

KAZ: yes

JS: That is important

<kaz> Presentation API

JF: If we're going to use this term, we need to have it clearly defined
... there is a concise defintion here. we may want to have a more formal definition somewhere

JS: it could be a set of bluetooth headphones...

SM: maybe we should call it secondary device

JS: I'm not picky about the distinction, but understand its not always literally a visual display

JF: so, the discussion is whether or not we want to use the term second screen, but based on this convo, it might be too limiting

SM: It's not second, its secondary

<JF> suggestion: 4.8 Requirements on the parallel use of alternative content on secondary screens and other devices

<janina> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014May/0099.html

JS: I think we can take out alternative. Secondary screens and other devices is circular, self-referential

<ShaneM> suggestion: 4.8 Requirements on secondary screens and other devices

JS: I like that

JF: I like that

MS: me too

JS: the rest of the section needs to be improved as well
... take out references to UAAG and put it in the document directly
... I propose I take an action to rewrite this section

JF: Looking at comment from Jim Allen, the title and intro should be changed.
... we can remove that comment and make sure the rest of the comments from UAAG have been addressed.

JS, MarkS, and JF will not be available next week. Propose skipping next weeks meeting. Review rewritten text for this section in two weeks

JF: I think we just need to focus on the title and the preamble. I think we can work on this via email

JS: Has there been any discussions in other groups regarding this section, or were they not aware that this applies to 2nd screen

KAZ: the idea of 2nd screen itself is not necessarily a secondary device. During the Munich workshop, some participants mentioned iPhone or iPad, usually 2nd screen could be the primary device.
... need to be careful how we refer to these devices
... perhpas we can ask them to clarify
... multiple devices or multiple modalities

JF: its not talking about screens, its talking about multiple devices, consuming the same media stream, different ways on different devices.
... the group is probably focused on video, not audio.
... I think the preamble is where it needs to be cleaned up.
... its deliberately broad. need to expand on it in the introduction

MS: any other sections that need work before we publish next draft?

JF: i don't remember reviewing the long list of feedback from UAAG.

JS: I think we did that already

<JF> (UAAG feedback here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jul/0108.html)

JF: we should remove link to that sentence then.

<scribe> ACTION: MarkS to remove reference to UAWG email in seciton 4.8 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/06/02-html-a11y-media-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-264 - Remove reference to uawg email in seciton 4.8 [on Mark Sadecki - due 2014-06-09].

JS: EO will look at section two before our fall heartbeat (hopefully LC)

JF: Comment 33: CA-4, support filters. Clean audio, still refers to pre-emphasis filters. Did we agree/disagree?
... I think we need to go through these again to make sure they were all addressed
... there are 83 comments

JS: We did not accept all of them

JF: we refer to pre-emphasis filters. comment suggested we shoudl just use filters

JS: i think that was a spelling mistake

JF: I will take a quick look at these to make sure they were all addressed.

JS: I'll look at minutes to see when we took these comments up

Full Transcript

JS: we have two proposals

https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Full_Transcript

scribe: Plan 2014 specifies that we can create an extension spec

JF: Adrian expressed interest in this. I will have a chat with him.

JS: I will look for minutes

MS: suggest adding any historical work to this wiki page so we can make an informed decision on how to move forward.

next meeting in two weeks