See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: clapierre
Jeanne sent Deborah and Charles the Mobile A11Y TF documentation, a W3C Note
… all work on Techniques was helpful in creating the Note
George: are we dealing with content and User Agent?
Deborah: expected to be supported by the User Agent.
Liam: our goal is to find out the needs of Digital Publishing and could be broader than the WAI work at W3C.
Deborah: from TPAC, a desire here is a document that we put up that content creators and others can look up and comment on.
Charles: Robin is chair of BISG, and Charles and Robin are co-chairs of Born Accessible
Deborah: Robin said that BISG is working on a document that our A11Y TF can reference and absorb.
Charles: what is the next step once the WCAG documents are completed
Jeanne: what was missing in WCAG for mobile and concentrate on those issues. then add the the WCAG techniques specific to mobile as an appendix.
George: has been asked to chair a session edupub about certification of content/reading systems. the main issue is where is the bar on accessibility, and WCAG (A,AA,AAA) some say AAA can never be obtained. As far as publication industry is concerned is where is that Bar? He is wondering how BISG, DPUB, work will contribute to that.
Jeanne: question. what is the structure of the BISG document.
George: they are just starting.
jeanne: should agree on a structure / goals. Approach this more functionally.. DPUB vs. A11Y functionally
Deborah: DPUB functionally seems appropriate (aimed at content creators)
… the note we collaborate with BISG would be on DPUB content creator.
George: 1. Content creator, 2. User Agents(Kindle, ibooks etc..), 3. authoring tools
… Publishers want their content to be consumed by everyone they comment out MathML and put in an image
Jeanne: that is an important point for DPUB Note
George: so specifications must support everything that is needed, in our review of all the techniques. When Publishers are faced with practical decisions of what they have to do and that might be where the bar is for. (ie. do we have to have Math ML or not..)
Mia: couldn't we do best best practices? There may be places that they can't do MathML but you would have to at least do an image with longdesc.
George: but since we are the authority on this that may be setting the bar too low for publishers?
Deborah: but this will be a lot higher than we ever had before.
Mia: with this rating system in place then a Single A (image + longdesc) and AAA would be full MathML with ARIA describedby attributes are fully accessible.
George: reading systems don't support MathML and this is why publishers use images.
Jeanne: remember longdesc is not yet a recommendation
Deborah: if there is a standard markup in that field then use that. If there is no markup (eg. architecture document) then there needs to be a description added for accessibility
Jeanne: we want to address images and media
… Perceivable, Opperable, Understandable, Robust should be the main guiding corner stone of this document.
Deborah: lowest bar would be just the bare basics for describing this image. The next level up would be giving you more information but may not be totally describing the image. Then the current long full description, and AAA would be if there is a markup language to describe this element (MathML, ChemML, …) would be the gold standard.
George: This group needs to work with BISG and IDPF as to where we can set this bar.
… We need to set up these requirements for A, AA, and AAA.
Jeanne: we may need to shy away from these level designations A, AA, AAA as a starting point (we may get there later)
<Zakim> liam, you wanted to say bars are for drunks
liam: need to find out what is specific to DPUB because most of what we need is already defined by WCAG etc.
… a "bar" may be one such problem area
George: if we can't get access to the text/alt-text for images DPUB for people with disabilities will be a failure.
Deborah: for DPUB sees every books coming in to safari all images have no descriptions. We need to show publishers and Content creators, want to know what is "good enough" and what is "good / great"
George: what would prevent a school from buying something at a below grade level of accessibility
Mia: an image for education, is different than an image just as a decoration for example. Eg: engineering code screen shot vs. an atmospheric image to set the mood of a novel.
Jeanne: HTML WG has a document on describing images.
<liam> http://rawgit.com/w3c/alt-techniques/master/index.html maybe?
<liam> beware, the html a11y tf not yet 100% happy with this doc
George: Diagram Center harmonize with W3C since there is overlap and errors.
… example of DPUB is different than web, the guidance to publishers eliminates image maps.
… Daisy WG, Diagram WG need to fix this for descriptions (were using describedby) need to wait for decisions by W3C on longdesc / aria describedat etc...