See also: IRC log
<Jatin> Jatin Present+
Jatin: CSun new Android features
– verbosity, change name role state
... user issue – managing chat flow
Shadi: this applies more to
native apps but to apps in general, testing – a lot of
traditional web accessibility testing can be done by code
inspection. Right now all the framework of course – you do need
to test using ATs and functional testing still applies. But for
mobile apps it's a whole different game – devices in different
versions of devices. Testing becomes less source code...
... looking...
... – you need to test the output much more different modes
different devices. the evaluation site is so much more complex
now. Maybe we need new approaches on that front as well
Jatin: it's a challenge for native app
Shadi: native apps is pushing the borders a bit but I think that applies even to desktop apps – using so many frameworks now
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/track/
<marcjohlic> www.deque.com/csun17
Kathy: I did three presentations
on mobile – one was specific to the new success criteria
proposed in WCAG 2.1. Kim and shadi and I. Draft went out right
before – lots of conversation about it. Presentation received
positively. I didn't hear anything negative about any of the
success criteria that we proposed. I heard a lot about some of
the other ones. The big take away from the...
... conversations I
had at CSUN is there may be some scenarios that we didn't think about
Kathy: links together – I think
there are other scenarios we may have to go back and revisit –
just looking at tightening up the different success criteria.
But overall it was very positive. Mobile was definitely
something being talked about quite a bit. The BBC did their
update to their mobile accessibility guidelines which they
launched. Take a look at them. Big changes or more on...
... interaction not necessarily related to mobile. not just
mobile – applied everything. Doing a lot with games now –
additional things around games. For example if there's audio
you're not interrupting the screen reader.
... things that come into play when you have audio narration –
directly relate to the types of applications that they are
building. I talk to people other guidelines – Sweden. Everyone
interested in what's happening in 2.1.
... all 10 proposed success criteria went into 2.1. All those
are going into a survey, people are going to comment and we are
trying to finalize. Comment until March 31. Expecting comment
to come back that we will have to address. once they are
finalized we will start writing techniques and understanding
language that will go along with them
... so everything is moving forward, there is still a lot of
work that has to be done. They will try to address success
criteria that are ready in comments. A lot of ours are ready.
We may have additional comments we have to do. I highly
encourage everyone to monitor the comments that are there – if
you know an answer or have an opinion please comment – it's
helpful to have more comment
... if you have an answer answer and join in the
conversation
Chris: also those comments get long – if you see some thing that someone had a good point on in the past draw their attention to a specific thread or comment so they can answer
Kathy: next steps: the working
group is going to go through each of the success criteria – you
are all invited to attend the WCAG working group sessions and
talk about those. I will alert people to when the SCs will be
talked about in the group – you'll be able to decide whether
you want to attend. Right now there is not – I'll let you know
when some of those will be on the call
... the other initiative is proposed changes to WCAG 2.0. On
the last meeting we identified a number of areas where we
wanted to add things to the understanding, examples to the
techniques, other modifications. That is what we need to work
on. They will be regular pull request that we do against 2.0 in
Github, included in working group. Not clear about if 2.0 will
be updated – might just...
... be in 2.1 but best way to get them in is pull requests on
2.0 repository
... bottom line is CSUN was very successful – good opportunity
to talk to people about good work task force has done and happy
to see that 10 of the success criteria went into the draft. It
doesn't mean that they are final but it's a step in the right
direction
... questions?
... Kim went back and looked through all of the actions that we
had put together so if you're wondering what you are assigned
in the last few meetings you can go into the actions. Were also
going to put together a table that outlines what things we are
changing for which success criteria so that we have that also,
easier to track. Once we finish, review and do a pull request.
We will send...
... that out to survey so more people have the option of
commenting.
... a few things that we identified in the minutes that we
didn't have actions for. Touch target size changes went into
the draft – we rewrote that slightly in the final diversion
making an exception if it's not a primary action – one doesn't
have to have a primary touch target size of the other one does.
In the case of duplicate links and page layout. That's already
been changed
... the link in the appendix also went in
... 2.1 draft links out to all success criteria that were
proposed – it's in the introduction, not appendix
... list that Alistair put together around responsive design –
one of those was accessible hiding. I think we might want to
add a technique for it. On mobile there's a problem especially
when things are positioned offscreen were focus moves off when
you can't see it. Several things that pose challenges for
mobile. These came up at CSun – definitely things people have
questions on. So I...
... want to propose we write a technique specifically for that.
We need to figure out where that would go
... so if we have something that's visible but positioned off
screen and moves focus – that would be one thing. The other is
when you go to the responsively outset everything that
shouldn't be visible is actually hidden
... I haven't gone back to see if that exists so we want to
cross reference – I have been on my list to do
research
<scribe> ACTION: Kathy to do research on accessible hiding to determine what and where we should at about that [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/09-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Do research on accessible hiding to determine what and where we should at about that [on Kathleen Wahlbin - due 2017-03-16].
Kathy: volunteer for someone to write something on accessible hiding – how screen readers work for VoiceOver and android
<scribe> ACTION: Chris to write technique on accessible hiding [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/09-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - Write technique on accessible hiding [on Chris McMeeking - due 2017-03-16].
<marcjohlic> Kim: Subtle changes in language to show applicability
<marcjohlic> Kim: Josh went through first bunch and made some changes. Would be good to look at samples and see what was fixed. The second and fifth have changes.
<marcjohlic> Kathy: We need to go through Techniques - but Understanding documents as well
<marcjohlic> Kim: I was going through the whole thing, but didn't get very far.
<marcjohlic> Kathy: Maybe we put a list of all. I think we need to go through each of the SCs and go and make changes. For example if it says "Desktop" we make it non-specific.
<marcjohlic> Kim: I was going through Techniques applicable to Mobile w/o changes - but should go through the whole thing. Link above shows an example of what was done.
<marcjohlic> Kim: Should go through the whole thing and create a similar list in the wiki.
<marcjohlic> Kim: Made it up to G155
<marcjohlic> Kim: I will create a new wiki page - will point to these - but we can go through them all looking for this kind of language.
<marcjohlic> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/
<marcjohlic> Kathy: Just look at existing WCAG 2.0 - Maybe look at the GitHub repo for the latest
<marcjohlic> WCAG on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/wcag
<scribe> ACTION: Kim to set up wiki page for going through WCAG 2.0 to point out subtle language that might imply desktop and suggest changes so that it's inclusive to mobile [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/09-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Set up wiki page for going through wcag 2.0 to point out subtle language that might imply desktop and suggest changes so that it's inclusive to mobile [on Kimberly Patch - due 2017-03-16].
Kathy: we do want to just focus
on the changes that we have for 2.0. For 2.1 we will be writing
those but not until we get the success criteria finalized so
were not redoing work. leave action items open for 2.1 we will
get to them later
... I'll have action items for next week, we'll also talk about
Kim's setting up going through 2.0 for subtle changes
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152 of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Present: marcjohlic Kathy Kim Chris Jatin Shadi Regrets: Detlev Jon Patrick No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: Kim Inferring Scribes: Kim WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. Found Date: 09 Mar 2017 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/03/09-mobile-a11y-minutes.html People with action items: chris kathy kim WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]