IRC log of svg-a11y on 2015-05-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:00:20 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #svg-a11y
13:00:20 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-irc
13:00:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #svg-a11y
13:00:36 [LJWatson]
zakim, this is 2742
13:00:37 [Zakim]
LJWatson, I see WAI_SVGTF()9:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be 2742".
13:00:46 [LJWatson]
zakim, this will be 2742
13:00:46 [Zakim]
ok, LJWatson; I see WAI_SVGTF()9:00AM scheduled to start now
13:00:54 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, set logs world-visible
13:01:04 [LJWatson]
chair: Fred Esch
13:01:09 [LJWatson]
present+ Fred Esch
13:01:15 [LJWatson]
present+ Doug Schepers
13:01:20 [LJWatson]
present+ LJWatson
13:01:27 [LJWatson]
zakim, agenda?
13:01:27 [Zakim]
I see nothing on the agenda
13:02:39 [LJWatson]
agenda+ Roles for ARIA 1.1
13:02:41 [Zakim]
WAI_SVGTF()9:00AM has now started
13:02:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.512.286.aaaa
13:03:06 [fesch]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_roles_for_graphics
13:03:18 [LJWatson]
present+ Amelia BR
13:03:35 [LJWatson]
scribenick: LJWatson
13:03:39 [LJWatson]
zakim, take up item 1
13:03:40 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Roles for ARIA 1.1" taken up [from LJWatson]
13:04:39 [LJWatson]
ABR: There is currently only one role for SVG graphics, and it assumes all child components are presentational.
13:05:06 [LJWatson]
... At the least we need to propose a role that respresents structured SVG images.
13:05:26 [LJWatson]
s/respresents/represents/
13:06:13 [Amy]
Amy has joined #svg-a11y
13:06:39 [LJWatson]
... My basic proposal was a "graphic" role, that could be applied to the whole or part of a structured image.
13:07:27 [fesch]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_roles_for_graphics
13:08:44 [LJWatson]
... I also suggested "figure" to represent a figure in the sense of a technical document figure.
13:09:25 [shepazu]
q+
13:09:28 [fesch]
q?
13:09:55 [fesch]
q+
13:10:25 [LJWatson]
... Another suggestion is the "icon" role, with dual roles as a stand-alone icon in the page, and icons as symbols within a chart or other complex SVG.
13:11:19 [LJWatson]
... Final suggestion was a "shape" role, to represent simple geometric shapes.
13:11:53 [fesch]
q?
13:11:54 [LJWatson]
... The "shape" role would need an attribute to enable the type of shape to be conveyed.
13:11:58 [fesch]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_roles_for_graphics
13:12:00 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:12:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:12:10 [shepazu]
(note that "figure" may be confused with HTML <figure> unless they have the same semantics
13:12:20 [fesch]
ack shepazu
13:13:30 [LJWatson]
DS: Wouldn't the <title> be the way to indicate shape?
13:13:46 [fesch]
q?
13:14:25 [LJWatson]
TOPIC: The shape role
13:14:52 [AmeliaBR]
q+
13:15:30 [LJWatson]
LW: Tend to agree with Doug. The <title> would be a good way to provide that information, at least as a first step.
13:16:07 [LJWatson]
FE: +1
13:16:56 [LJWatson]
ABR: Happy to go along with the idea that it's up to the author to express what sort of shape it is.
13:17:19 [LJWatson]
... If the author doesn't, should the browser be able to infer a name based on the actual geometry though?
13:17:53 [LJWatson]
FE: Amelia, you're happy if we don't include a shape role right now?
13:18:21 [LJWatson]
RESOLUTION: We will not propose the shape role for ARIA 1.1.
13:18:29 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:18:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:18:56 [LJWatson]
TOPIC: The img role
13:19:22 [LJWatson]
ABR: We can't change the existing img role. We can chip away at it by excluding certain things from it.
13:19:25 [fesch]
ack me
13:19:31 [LJWatson]
... Specifically that children are presentational.
13:20:20 [LJWatson]
LW: If we do change the role's characteristics, do we need to indicate it's specifity to SVG?
13:20:38 [LJWatson]
DS: We're addressing different use cases.
13:20:44 [LJWatson]
LW: So we need a new role?
13:20:47 [LJWatson]
DS: Yes.
13:21:45 [LJWatson]
TOPIC: Structured image role
13:21:54 [LJWatson]
ABR: Key question is what we call it.
13:22:00 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:22:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:22:50 [LJWatson]
LW: A role called "graphic" seems too general.
13:22:57 [shepazu]
q+
13:23:14 [LJWatson]
ABR: Concern with including "img" in the name, for example "structuredimg", is that it's confusing.
13:23:58 [fesch]
ack Amel
13:24:13 [LJWatson]
... I want something flexible, that can cover different kinds of structured graphic.
13:24:36 [LJWatson]
LW: I liked Chaals suggestion of "compoundImage".
13:24:51 [LJWatson]
ABR: My concern is whether people will recognise that it could be nested groups?
13:25:15 [LJWatson]
FE: Thinks a separate role for nested images would be good.
13:25:31 [LJWatson]
DS: Will people understand "compound image" in the real world?
13:25:36 [LJWatson]
FE: I don't think so.
13:26:24 [LJWatson]
LW: I think "compound" is familiar enough in the English language to be understood.
13:26:39 [LJWatson]
ABR: We could use "complex".
13:26:50 [LJWatson]
FE: But "complex" also means hard to understand.
13:26:58 [LJWatson]
LW: These images need not be complex either.
13:27:37 [LJWatson]
DS: I don't see why some of the examples on the wiki couldn't just be an image?
13:28:14 [LJWatson]
DS: The house example... what is the benefit of defining it as a compound?
13:28:28 [LJWatson]
ABR: The limitation that if you define it as an "img" you cannot explore its child components.
13:29:03 [LJWatson]
DS: Léonie, you say "graphic" is too ambiguous?
13:29:14 [LJWatson]
... Isn't that the intention of this proposed role?
13:29:49 [LJWatson]
LW: To the average person a graphic and an image are the same thing.
13:30:00 [LJWatson]
FE: If we add more specific roles later, those would be specific, no?
13:30:19 [LJWatson]
LW: Yes, but that wouldn't help me understand the difference between a graphic and an image.
13:31:14 [Zakim]
- +1.512.286.aaaa
13:31:15 [Zakim]
WAI_SVGTF()9:00AM has ended
13:31:15 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.512.286.aaaa
13:31:34 [LJWatson]
ABR: The problem is you need to understand the difference without reading the spec?
13:31:37 [LJWatson]
LW: Yes.
13:31:57 [LJWatson]
ABR: We need to indicate the explorability of the image.
13:32:05 [LJWatson]
FE: So "chart", "map"...
13:32:12 [LJWatson]
ABR: We need something more generic.
13:32:55 [shepazu]
q+
13:33:01 [LJWatson]
LW: If someone said something was a "compound image", what would you interpret it to mean?
13:33:12 [LJWatson]
FE: A collage or something artistic.
13:34:07 [LJWatson]
ABR: If you use complex markup to represent a graphic, but it only makes sense as a composite unit, you want a way to convey that.
13:34:19 [LJWatson]
JW: So let's do that with an attribute instead.
13:34:22 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:34:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:34:33 [LJWatson]
DS: Another problem is that we can't change image.
13:34:40 [LJWatson]
ABR: Right, it's already out there.
13:34:51 [LJWatson]
JW: Not concerned about that. It's never used correctly.
13:35:05 [LJWatson]
DS: There will be lots of different opinions about that.
13:35:53 [LJWatson]
DS: Suggest we set this aside for now, have more discussion on the mailing list.
13:35:54 [LJWatson]
+1
13:36:12 [LJWatson]
TOPIC: The figure role
13:36:23 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:36:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:36:28 [LJWatson]
present+ Jason White
13:36:52 [LJWatson]
ABR: Need a way to identify a graphic, and at the same time its position within the larger document.
13:37:06 [LJWatson]
... Concerns are that it will get confused with HTML figure.
13:37:35 [LJWatson]
LW: Is the conceptual idea the same as with HTML?
13:37:48 [LJWatson]
ABR: Yes, but the HTML interpretation is broader.
13:38:07 [LJWatson]
... One option would be to match the HTML figure role.
13:38:20 [LJWatson]
FE: So it would be used for something like a plan view or an overhead view?
13:38:24 [LJWatson]
DS: No.
13:38:57 [LJWatson]
ABR: In HTML <figure> allows for non-graphical content.
13:39:31 [LJWatson]
DS: HTML treats figure as a point of reference... "See fig. 3" for example.
13:39:55 [AmeliaBR]
The HTML5 figure: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/grouping-content.html#the-figure-element
13:40:11 [LJWatson]
... Think ARIA should have this role. It might not encompass everything we want to do with SVG, but that's not the point.
13:40:33 [LJWatson]
... Agree with Léonie, we should leave the HTML meaning of figure as the default meaning.
13:40:39 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:40:39 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:41:09 [LJWatson]
ABR reads figure definition from HTML spec.
13:41:27 [LJWatson]
DS: Right, all of which can be done in SVG. So the figure role "as is" is totally appropriate.
13:41:30 [LJWatson]
LW: +1
13:41:54 [LJWatson]
FE: Thought point was if you wanted to focus someone's view on a figure?
13:42:46 [LJWatson]
ABR: Mostly it's how some SVG relates to the larger document in which it sits.
13:42:53 [LJWatson]
FE: Would the role go on the <svg>?
13:42:58 [LJWatson]
ABR: Yes.
13:43:05 [LJWatson]
FE: What about inside an SVG?
13:43:14 [LJWatson]
ABR: If you had a multi-part graph for example, yes.
13:43:33 [LJWatson]
FE: Like a 3D technical drawing, you could use figures to indicate different views of the schematic?
13:43:36 [LJWatson]
ABR: Yes.
13:44:07 [LJWatson]
DS: Wouldn't try to yoke it to the idea of a "view". A "figure" is more generic.
13:44:13 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:44:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:45:01 [LJWatson]
DS: It's a generic and long standing concept. We shouldn't try to change it.
13:46:05 [LJWatson]
JW: What does it map to for the <figure> element?
13:46:09 [LJWatson]
LW: Believe it's group.
13:46:39 [AmeliaBR]
http://www.w3.org/TR/html-aam-1.0/#html-element-role-mappings
13:47:28 [LJWatson]
RESOLUTION: We propose a figure role HTML5 concept of figure.
13:47:36 [fesch]
+1
13:48:22 [LJWatson]
s/RESOLUTION: We propose a figure role HTML5 concept of figure./RESOLUTION: We propose a figure role based on the HTML5 concept of figure./
13:48:30 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:48:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:49:02 [LJWatson]
ABR: Should anyone follow up with the group responsible for the HTML acc roles?
13:49:20 [LJWatson]
FE: We'll discuss later.
13:49:24 [LJWatson]
TOPIC: The icon role
13:49:47 [shepazu]
q+
13:49:51 [LJWatson]
ABR: Key question is whether icon and symbol should be different roles?
13:50:02 [LJWatson]
DS: Think it's useful to have both.
13:50:04 [LJWatson]
+1
13:50:27 [fesch]
+1
13:50:35 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:50:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
13:51:05 [LJWatson]
DS: An icon usually represents a point of interaction, or a stand-in for something else.
13:51:23 [LJWatson]
FE: It's atomic.
13:51:44 [LJWatson]
ABR: We could use img as the 1.0 fallback.
13:52:21 [LJWatson]
... We need to think about icons used in a widget role. Don't think we could specify something was both a button and an icon for example?
13:52:31 [LJWatson]
... There are other icon use cases though.
13:52:47 [LJWatson]
... Like a weather status for example.
13:52:53 [LJWatson]
FE: I'd call that a symbol.
13:53:03 [LJWatson]
ABR: If it was part of a set of icons in a web page, no.
13:53:36 [LJWatson]
LW: Does anyone disagree with having an icon role?
13:53:50 [LJWatson]
RESOLUTION: We will propose an icon role for ARIA 1.1.
13:54:19 [LJWatson]
DS: If it's atomic does it mean that the <title> and <desc> would not both be read?
13:54:33 [LJWatson]
FE: No, only that there are no child components to explore.
13:54:51 [LJWatson]
TOPIC: The symbol role
13:55:42 [LJWatson]
ABR: Similar to an icon, but typically used within a more complex graphic - like symbols to represent categories in a scatter graph.
13:56:10 [LJWatson]
... Is there agreement this is a useful role to have?
13:56:12 [LJWatson]
+1
13:57:13 [LJWatson]
DS: Yes. Want to share the difference between an icon and symbol...
13:57:14 [shepazu]
http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-icon-and-vs-symbol/
13:57:45 [LJWatson]
... an icon looks like the thing it represents, a symbol does not.
13:57:57 [LJWatson]
ABR: So a symbol is more abstract.
13:58:28 [LJWatson]
DS: Think the key differentiation must be that a symbol is a reference to something else within a larger graphic.
13:58:58 [LJWatson]
ABR: When the distinction is based on context, what happens if the role is used outside of that context?
13:59:14 [LJWatson]
FE: We could limit the roles scope.
13:59:20 [LJWatson]
DS: Seems functional.
13:59:38 [LJWatson]
LW: I hesitate to add restrictions.
13:59:54 [LJWatson]
ABR: Yes, you could have a complete SVG UI that included icons for example.
14:00:22 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:00:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson
14:01:39 [LJWatson]
Meeting: SVG A11y TF meeting
14:02:00 [LJWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:02:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-svg-a11y-minutes.html LJWatson