17:15:52 RRSAgent has joined #ua 17:15:52 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/02/26-ua-irc 17:15:54 RRSAgent, make logs public 17:15:54 Zakim has joined #ua 17:15:56 Zakim, this will be WAI_UAWG 17:15:56 ok, trackbot; I see WAI_UAWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 45 minutes 17:15:57 Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 17:15:57 Date: 26 February 2015 17:16:05 rrsagent, set logs public 17:18:25 agenda+ meeting next week? (CSUN) 17:18:34 Agenda+ Exit Criteria - start with C) 17:18:36 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2015JanMar/0024.html 17:18:37 Agenda+ implementations 17:18:39 http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/work/wiki/Main_Page#Implementation 17:59:34 WAI_UAWG()1:00PM has now started 17:59:40 +Jim_Allan 18:01:39 +Jeanne 18:01:58 Greg has joined #ua 18:02:09 Jan has joined #ua 18:02:51 +[IPcaller] 18:04:19 zakim, [ipcaller] is really Jan 18:04:19 +Jan; got it 18:04:25 +Greg_Lowney 18:04:50 scribe: allanj 18:05:47 zakim, agenda 18:05:47 I don't understand 'agenda', allanj 18:05:56 zakim, agenda? 18:05:56 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda: 18:05:57 1. meeting next week? (CSUN) [from allanj] 18:05:57 2. Exit Criteria - start with C) [from allanj] 18:05:57 3. implementations [from allanj] 18:07:21 +Kim_Patch 18:07:31 open item 1 18:09:17 topic: Meeting Next week - CSUN? 18:09:21 Kim has joined #ua 18:10:29 RESOLUTION: no meeting next week 18:10:40 close item 1 18:10:56 topic: Exit Criteria review 18:11:08 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2015JanMar/0024.html 18:11:48 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2015JanMar/0038.html 18:12:39 follow up from http://www.w3.org/2015/02/19-ua-minutes.html 18:13:48 js: need examples for c) Success criteria that are implemented by extensions can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same user agent. 18:14:05 jr: is d. excluded? 18:14:24 js: should be included in the note 18:14:45 jr: is an overarching principle, ok to see it go 18:15:33 The goal is to have independent implementations (i.e. different codebases) for each success 18:15:33 js: do we need to add "different code bases"? 18:15:34 criteria, while taking into account that other software components that 18:15:36 are not connected to the success criteria being tested may be shared. 18:16:53 ja: different code bases = different browser applications - separate from rendering engines 18:17:41 Is 1.1.2 really a good example for (a) because a browser's UI may or may not expose this rendering engine behavior. 18:18:14 Sorry, I was confused there for a second. This is only for exit criteria, so it's fine. 18:18:31 jr: different code-bases are explained in a) and b) 18:19:23 The goal is to have independent implementations (i.e. different codebases) for each success criteria, while taking into account that other software components that are not connected to the success criteria being tested may be shared. 18:19:45 +1 18:20:24 gl: not goal but requirement 18:22:31 Implementations features that satisfy a specific success criteria (plugins, extensions or user agents) must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent, while taking into account that other software components that are not connected to the success criteria being tested may be shared. 18:23:20 Implementations features that satisfy a specific success criteria (plugins, extensions or user agents) must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criteria being tested may be shared. 18:24:03 ja: what does that mean? 18:24:48 gl: can text an SC in 2 different browsers (different UIs) but they may use the same rendering engine. 18:25:02 s/can text/can test 18:26:01 a...criterion or (no a) ...criteria 18:26:41 Implementations features that satisfy a specific success criterion (plugins, extensions or user agents) must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criteria being tested may be shared. 18:27:16 Implementations features that satisfy specific success criteria (plugins, extensions or user agents) must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criteria being tested may be shared. 18:27:44 Implementations features that satisfy specific success criteria (plugins, extensions or user agents) must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criterion being tested may be shared. 18:29:15 Implementations (plugins, extensions or user agents) of a feature that satisfy a specific success criterion must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criterion being tested may be shared. 18:30:39 Implementations (plugins, extensions or user agents) of a feature that satisfy a specific success criterion must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criterion being tested can be from shared code bases. 18:32:19 Implementations (plugins, extensions, user agents, or rendering engines) of a feature that satisfy a specific success criterion must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criterion being tested can be from shared code bases. 18:33:05 Implementations (rendering engines, user agents, plugins, or extensions) of a feature that satisfy a specific success criterion must be from different code bases in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criterion being tested can be from shared code bases. 18:34:07 topic: c) Success criteria that are implemented by extensions can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same user agent. 18:34:25 js: need examples 18:37:20 gl: reword c) 18:37:30 Not great wording but here's the idea: Success criteria can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same or different user agents, or by a combination of an extension and a native feature in the same or different user agent. 18:38:13 ja: would also add "or plugins" to maintain parallel with note 18:38:16 We don't want to imply that an SC has to be addressed by two extensions. 18:39:20 use plug-ins 18:39:21 That is, an SC needs to be addressed by two independent implementations, each of which can be an extension or plug-in, or natively implemented in a browser or rendering engine. 18:39:47 That is, an SC needs to be addressed by two independent implementations, each of which can be an extension/plug-in, or natively implemented in a browser/rendering engine. 18:40:46 Success criteria can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same or different user agents, or by a combination of an extension and a native feature in the same or different user agent. 18:41:50 Success criteria can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same or different user agents, or by a combination of an extension and a native feature in the same or different user agent, or by native features in two different user agents. 18:42:34 Success criteria can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same or different user agents, by a combination of an extension and a native feature in the same or different user agent, or by native features in two different user agents. 18:43:50 gl: combination - native feature, but extension does it better. 18:45:34 gl: need a description rather than just a listing to explain a, b, c 18:46:56 I'm not sure, for example, that Maintain Point of Regard is entirely handled by the rendering engine, rather than the user agent UI being involved. Thus is it really a good example for (a)? 18:47:28 jr: need insider (developer) knowledge as to whether a feature is in the rendering engine or the UI 18:48:43 js: how do we know what is from a shared codebase 18:51:51 X.X.X can have an implementation in the native user agent, and also have an extension that provides a more feature-rich implementation that satisfies the success criterion. 18:52:14 ja: use 1.8.12 Allow Same User Interface instead of 1.8.6 18:53:06 js: by codebase we recognize that 2 different browsers may share a rendering engine, 2 different extensions may share a user agent 18:53:39 ... how do we prove different code bases 18:54:18 jr: if 2 different UAs that appear very different... 18:55:52 ja: are there 2 browsers with same UI base but are different browsers? 18:56:32 gl: FF and TOR (copyright free firefox) 18:57:16 Implementations (rendering engines, user agents, plugins, or extensions) of a feature that satisfy a specific success criterion must be different in order to be considered independent. Other software components that are not connected to the success criterion being tested can be from shared code bases. 18:58:51 http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/public-permissive-exit-criteria.html 18:59:01 Independent: Each implementation must be developed by a different party and cannot share, reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation. Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of this specification are exempt from this requirement. 19:00:44 Implementations (rendering engines, user agents, plugins, or extensions) of a feature that satisfy a specific success criterion must be different in order to be considered independent. Each implementation must be developed by a different party and cannot share, reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation. Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of... 19:00:45 ...a success criterion would be exempt from this requirement. 19:01:43 Each implementation (e.g. rendering engine, user agent, plugin, or extension) must be developed by a different party and cannot share, reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation. Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of a success criterion would be exempt from this requirement. 19:03:19 js: each implementation of a success criteria... 19:03:45 In order to be considered independent, each implementation (e.g. rendering engine, user agent, plugin, or extension) of a success criterion must be developed by a different party and cannot share, reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation. Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of a success criterion would be exempt from this requirement. 19:04:20 In order to be considered independent, each implementation (e.g. rendering engine, user agent, plugin, or extension) of a success criterion must be developed by a different party and cannot share, reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation. Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of the success criterion would be exempt from this requirement. 19:05:30 gl: concern over "qualifying" implementation. 19:05:52 Success criteria can be demonstrated by two independent extensions to the same or different user agents, by a combination of an extension and a native feature in the same or different user agent, or by native features in two different user agents. Examples include: 19:05:52 X.X.X can have an implementation in the native user agent, and also have an extension that provides a more feature-rich implementation that satisfies the success criterion. 19:06:48 2.3.1 can have an implementation in the native user agent, and also have an extension that provides a more feature-rich implementation that satisfies the success criterion. 19:10:24 Example: A browser has a built-in feature that allows direct navigation to links, thus complying with 2.3.1. If an extension provides a different, perhaps more feature-rich method of doing the same thing, that can count as a second qualifying implementation even if it is for the same browser. 19:13:47 Example for (A): Two browsers based on the same rendering agent may both provide the ability to replace images with their Alt text. These would not count as independent implementations, even though the user interface to turn that feature on and off may be implemented very differently in the two browser's user interfaces. 19:15:15 js: concents 19:15:30 s/concents/concerns 19:15:59 js: this draws a very hard line, with no wiggle room 19:16:42 jr: wiggle room is better 19:21:19 Example for (B): Two browsers based on the same rendering agent may both provide the ability to allow pop-up windows (1.8.3) to have the same User Interface as the parent user agent. This would count as two independent implementations, even though the rendering engines are the same. 19:22:15 (B): Two browsers based on the same rendering engine may both provide the ability to replace images with their Alt text. These would count as independent implementations, because the user interface to turn that feature on and off may be implemented very differently in the two browser's user interfaces. 19:22:32 s/(A): Two browsers based on the same rendering agent may both provide the ability to replace images with their Alt text. These would not count as independent implementations, even though the user interface to turn that feature on and off may be implemented very differently in the two browser's user interfaces.// 19:25:07 Here's my original example that accidentally got deleted from the minutes: Example for (A): Two browsers based on the same rendering agent may both provide the ability to replace images with their Alt text. These would not count as independent implementations, even though the user interface to turn that feature on and off may be implemented very differently in the two browser's user interfaces. 19:25:13 ja: focus on the concrete for a) and b) leave the convolutions of SC with UI and rendering engine components out of the exit criteria 19:26:56 (B): Two browsers based on the same rendering engine may both provide the ability to require pop-up windows (1.8.3) to have menus and scrollbars. This would count as two independent implementations, even though the rendering engines are the same. 19:27:56 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trident_%28layout_engine%29 19:29:53 I don't think we have consensus on whether Chrome and Opera (or IE and Tencen's) would count as independent implementations for an SC that is implemented in their shared rendering engine but adjusted through their different UIs. 19:31:39 rrsagent, make minutes 19:31:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/26-ua-minutes.html allanj 19:32:51 -Greg_Lowney 19:32:52 -Jan 19:32:52 -Jim_Allan 19:33:04 zakim, please part 19:33:04 leaving. As of this point the attendees were Jim_Allan, Jeanne, Jan, Greg_Lowney, Kim_Patch 19:33:04 Zakim has left #ua 19:33:10 rrsagent, make minutes 19:33:10 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/26-ua-minutes.html allanj 19:35:09 chair: JimAllan 19:35:13 rrsagent, make minutes 19:35:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/26-ua-minutes.html allanj 19:35:22 rrsagent: please part 19:35:22 I see no action items