IRC log of mobile-a11y on 2015-10-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:56:40 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #mobile-a11y

14:56:40 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/10/15-mobile-a11y-irc

14:56:42 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs public

14:56:42 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #mobile-a11y

14:56:44 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be WAI_MATF

14:56:44 [Zakim]

I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot

14:56:45 [trackbot]

Meeting: Mobile Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

14:56:45 [trackbot]

Date: 15 October 2015

14:56:51 [Alan-Smith]

Alan-Smith has joined #mobile-a11y

14:57:01 [Kathy]

chair: Kathy Wahlbin

14:57:11 [Kathy]

rrsagent, make log world

14:57:25 [Detlev]

Detlev has joined #mobile-a11y

15:01:46 [Kathy]

+ Kathy

15:02:04 [Kathy]

http://kwahlbin.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/

15:04:00 [David]

David has joined #mobile-a11y

15:04:37 [marcjohlic]

marcjohlic has joined #mobile-a11y

15:06:26 [Kathy]

http://kwahlbin.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/

15:06:29 [Alan-smith]

Alan-smith has joined #mobile-a11y

15:08:33 [marcjohlic]

scribe: marcjohlic

15:08:39 [Kathy]

http://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-TF-Note/TouchProposal_Discussion.html

15:08:41 [marcjohlic]

present+ marcjohlic

15:09:13 [marcjohlic]

TOPIC: Continuation of the Discussion of Touch Proposal

15:10:07 [David]

lost audio will come back

15:10:07 [marcjohlic]

KW: Discussing whether or not we can save this once AT is turned out - all functionality still available with AT on.

15:11:00 [jon_avila]

jon_avila has joined #mobile-a11y

15:12:25 [David]

back

15:12:27 [marcjohlic]

KW: Also talked about all functions vs taking some language from Keyboard success criteria where there are some exclusions

15:13:35 [marcjohlic]

DF: Possibly an equivelence when a gesture doesn't work w/ AT, but user can still access alternate menu that brings the same functions

15:14:03 [jon_avila]

iOS native apps solve this through the actions rotor which is automatically set to the actions rotor option for example in native email app

15:14:16 [marcjohlic]

KW: Agree - but extends beyond that - for example device manipulation - for example user has to shake the device. Will need alternates to do that - so that functions are still available. We should define what that means.

15:14:20 [jon_avila]

But this would be an issue for web apps which don't have a way to exposing actions

15:16:58 [marcjohlic]

DM: At the end of last session we id'd 4.1.2 as a precedent in this area

15:17:20 [marcjohlic]

DM: Also talked about reporting to the API - can we require that it reports to the API rather than it works with AT

15:18:04 [marcjohlic]

DM: Jan suggest we may need to limit to screen reader, however we know what of the criticism of WCAG is it's focus on screen readers

15:18:30 [marcjohlic]

DM: Any tool that lets you look at the API similar to Inspect for iOS?

15:18:57 [marcjohlic]

JA: iOS has the Accessibility Inspector - but it is limited to things like label, hint, trait etc

15:19:17 [marcjohlic]

JA: There are some automated tools

15:19:59 [marcjohlic]

DM: If there's not an app that will let you see as you go through everything it sounds like it would be a difficult thing to test.

15:21:32 [marcjohlic]

DM: Is the requirement that we have in the language - that all functions available by touch and button presses is still available by touch and button presses once AT is turned on - is that too wide?

15:21:57 [marcjohlic]

DF: Are there any ATs for mobile that are not system technologies?

15:22:22 [marcjohlic]

DM: All kinds of possibilities. For example Windows mobile MAY wind up w/ a version of JAWS at some point

15:22:34 [marcjohlic]

DM: What we are seeing is that most of the basic AT is built right into the OS

15:23:41 [marcjohlic]

AS:: Another challenge is that we may say touch is still available when touch is on, but someone with a switch may want focus still on - not as concerned with touch.

15:25:02 [marcjohlic]

DM: Probably covered by other WCAG checkpoints at a base level - and with talk currently that will need to meet AA to get into the extensions

15:25:26 [marcjohlic]

KW: Our current statement may fall apart for switch users

15:25:53 [marcjohlic]

KW: Heard it said that it doesn't work if touch is available because switch works differently

15:26:23 [marcjohlic]

JA: I think we're saying that in addition to programmatically working we're saying that it has to work with system AT on.

15:26:55 [marcjohlic]

DM: Some people may ask "what is system assistive technology" - so we will have to define that.

15:28:55 [marcjohlic]

DF: What is the reasoning why something like scalable font is not considered system AT? Zoom is - but scalable font is not - where do you draw the line?

15:29:17 [marcjohlic]

DM: We don't have a good line right now - think that's an area where we need to explore that definition.

15:30:12 [marcjohlic]

JA: For this particular case, large print isn't an issue because it's not an interactive thing. That's why we almost need a different definition for this one.

15:30:25 [marcjohlic]

JA: Even if we agree on it - others will push back

15:34:39 [marcjohlic]

Jan's reference from last week for adding gestures: Hammer.js http://hammerjs.github.io/

15:36:27 [marcjohlic]

JA: Concern is that folks will come up with all sorts of keyboard alternatives

15:36:51 [marcjohlic]

DM: We could try to come up with a Failure, but where would we map it to? Seems to me that we need to go with a Success Criteria

15:38:13 [marcjohlic]

KW: Kind of at a roadblock with this - maybe it needs more exploration. The touch access on website for touch end - isn't that a problem also? Are there other things on the web where this would applicable. Touch end comes to mind

15:38:57 [marcjohlic]

AS: In the past WCAG guidelines were not necessarily specific, but now we're trying to come up w/ device specific (mobile).

15:40:09 [marcjohlic]

DM: One issue we could plug quickly is that right now if you have a responsive design and you have a desktop view and a mobile view - the desktop view can server as the conforming view. Often devs will get desktop correct, but the mobile version is a disaster.

15:40:23 [marcjohlic]

KW: And I've had a client w/ the exact opposite

15:41:10 [marcjohlic]

DM: I think that's another success criteria that I haven't put in yet, but I think for this mobile extension we should get rid of that conforming desktop piece.

15:42:21 [marcjohlic]

DM: We want things to work when AT is turned on - I don't know of any other breaks outside of screen reader - there may be. But is the big question now around using the term "system AT"?

15:42:31 [marcjohlic]

JA: Have we discussed this w/ WCAG wg?

15:42:50 [marcjohlic]

KW: Not yet, but we can start bringing things to them - try to get some wider feedback

15:43:39 [marcjohlic]

KW: We should start collecting other scenarios - we've been focused on this one - but if we think about other scenarios that would be affected we may see another way around this

15:44:03 [marcjohlic]

KW: Will add that to the survey - we may be able to get some more feedback

15:45:16 [marcjohlic]

DF: May be other ARIA constructs that were conceived before mobile was considered

15:47:25 [marcjohlic]

KW: We need to be careful about posting "hey here's a new success criteria" - we don't have the extension model finalized in WCAG - but we can start getting some feedback

15:48:50 [marcjohlic]

JA: I was looking for the term "assistive technology" in WCAG. There is some precedent in 4.1.2 - so maybe if we could say somehting about programmatically or available to assistive technologies. I think what we really want to say is that it doesn't require a physical keyboard.

15:49:17 [marcjohlic]

KW: One thing I'm hearing that is different is that we're saying it needs to be operable w/ AT - and what you're saying is that it's programmatically available.

15:49:30 [marcjohlic]

KW: That might be a little nuance that we want to explore further

15:51:25 [marcjohlic]

DM: What if we just say ".. with a screen reader on"

15:52:06 [marcjohlic]

KW: But we have to see if there are other issues outside of screen reader. Also we've been focused on touch, but what if other methods of operation come around

15:52:31 [marcjohlic]

KW: We may get push back because there are other modes of interaction

15:52:48 [marcjohlic]

DM: Certainly voice

15:53:46 [marcjohlic]

KW: Trying to think of all of the different things that go into this - what's coming - where is it going - we'll be constantly inventing interaction models.

15:55:31 [marcjohlic]

KW: Next steps:

15:55:36 [marcjohlic]

KW: No meeting next week

15:55:53 [marcjohlic]

KW: Will send out a survey on the touch proposal to gather more feedback

15:56:11 [marcjohlic]

KW: Survey will also be going through extension document - see what's missing - getting some feedback

15:57:37 [marcjohlic]

KW: Take a look at these things over the next two weeks and we'll see what are the outstanding questions we have so that we can get this outline going

15:57:51 [marcjohlic]

trackbot, end meeting

15:57:51 [trackbot]

Zakim, list attendees

15:57:51 [Zakim]

As of this point the attendees have been Kathy, marcjohlic

15:57:59 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, please draft minutes

15:57:59 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/10/15-mobile-a11y-minutes.html trackbot

15:58:00 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, bye

15:58:00 [RRSAgent]

I see no action items