IRC log of ag on 2017-04-18
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:06:13 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #ag
- 15:06:13 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/18-ag-irc
- 15:06:15 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 15:06:18 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
- 15:06:18 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot
- 15:06:18 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
- 15:06:18 [trackbot]
- Date: 18 April 2017
- 15:06:19 [AWK]
- Zakim, agenda?
- 15:06:19 [Zakim]
- I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
- 15:06:19 [Zakim]
- 3. COGA: Support Personalisation SC [from AWK]
- 15:06:25 [laura]
- present+ Laura
- 15:06:36 [laura]
- Scribe: Laura
- 15:06:46 [AWK]
- Zakim, agenda+ TPAC – meeting in November. Book your hotel room!
- 15:06:46 [Zakim]
- agendum 4 added
- 15:06:50 [laura]
- Zakim, next item
- 15:06:50 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "TPAC – meeting in November. Book your hotel room!" taken up [from AWK]
- 15:06:58 [bruce_bailey]
- present+ Bruce_Bailey
- 15:07:19 [MichaelC_]
- https://www.w3.org/2017/11/TPAC/
- 15:07:32 [laura]
- AWK: We are planning to meet.
- 15:07:46 [Ryladog]
- Ryladog has joined #ag
- 15:08:04 [Ryladog]
- Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
- 15:08:10 [laura]
- AWK: Book your room now.
- 15:08:43 [JF]
- JF has joined #ag
- 15:08:43 [AWK]
- agenda+ Adapting text options survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results)
- 15:08:57 [JF]
- present+ JF
- 15:09:12 [JF]
- agenda?
- 15:09:14 [AWK]
- agenda+ Accessible Authentication: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq10
- 15:09:30 [AWK]
- agenda+ Resize Content: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq6
- 15:09:32 [Rachael]
- q+
- 15:09:42 [AWK]
- agenda+ Top items for week of April 16: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Top3_18Apr2017/
- 15:09:47 [AWK]
- ack ra
- 15:10:02 [laura]
- Racheal: What days are we meeting?
- 15:10:05 [Jake]
- Jake has joined #ag
- 15:10:16 [laura]
- AWK: Not known yet.
- 15:10:23 [Jake]
- Present+ Jake
- 15:10:44 [steverep]
- steverep has joined #ag
- 15:10:46 [laura]
- …Book for the week then adjust as needed.
- 15:10:53 [steverep]
- present+steverep
- 15:10:56 [AWK]
- +AWK
- 15:10:58 [AWK]
- Chair: AWK
- 15:11:50 [laura]
- Zakim, next item
- 15:11:50 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "Adapting text options survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results)" taken up [from AWK]
- 15:12:06 [AWK]
- zakim, agenda?
- 15:12:06 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
- 15:12:07 [Zakim]
- 5. Adapting text options survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results) [from AWK]
- 15:12:07 [Zakim]
- 6. Accessible Authentication: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq10 [from AWK]
- 15:12:07 [Zakim]
- 7. Resize Content: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq6 [from AWK]
- 15:12:07 [Zakim]
- 8. Top items for week of April 16: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Top3_18Apr2017/ [from AWK]
- 15:12:11 [Wayne]
- q+
- 15:12:16 [bruce_bailey]
- https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results#xq1
- 15:12:32 [Jake]
- Zakim, who is here?
- 15:12:32 [Zakim]
- Present: allanj, Laura, AWK, Glenda, Greg_Lowney, ScottM, JF, Katie_Haritos-Shea, MichaelC, KimD, jasonjgw, dboudreau, Lauriat, shwetank, Makoto, Melanie_Philipp, Detlev, Rachael,
- 15:12:37 [Zakim]
- ... Wayne, MikeGower, marcjohlic, Bruce_Bailey, Jake, steverep
- 15:12:37 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see steverep, Jake, JF, Ryladog, RRSAgent, AWK, Wayne, gowerm, KimD, marcjohlic, david-macdonald, Makoto, Lauriat, bruce_bailey, dboudreau, shwetank_, MelanieP, Rachael,
- 15:12:37 [Zakim]
- ... Detlev, Greg, Mike_Elledge, laura, allanj, ChrisLoiselle, Michael, kirkwood, Zakim, csarven, jasonjgw, yatil-away, trackbot
- 15:12:39 [laura]
- AWK: Laura sent a question to the list.
- 15:12:49 [laura]
- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017AprJun/0225.html
- 15:13:09 [laura]
- …The SC needs to be testable from the text of the SC, but the specific technique to accomplish it may vary by technology, which is why we have techniques.
- 15:13:15 [david-macdonald]
- Success Criteria - For each guideline, testable success criteria are provided to allow WCAG 2.0 to be used where requirements and conformance testing are necessary such as in design specification, purchasing, regulation, and contractual agreements. In order to meet the needs of different groups and different situations, three levels of conformance are defined: A (lowest), AA, and AAA (highest). Additional information on WCAG levels can be foun[CUT]
- 15:13:44 [laura]
- Andrew’s: email: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017AprJun/0226.html
- 15:14:04 [JF]
- +1 to AWK
- 15:14:08 [laura]
- …need to make it testable from the text of the SC
- 15:14:22 [adam_solomon]
- adam_solomon has joined #ag
- 15:14:34 [LisaSeeman]
- LisaSeeman has joined #ag
- 15:14:47 [LisaSeeman]
- not manging to join the meeting
- 15:14:53 [laura]
- …Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results
- 15:15:25 [laura]
- David: I've chose H and I because for J and K, I don't know how I could test an SC that requires ALL functionality and information to work regardless of what font or what background was overridden.
- 15:15:28 [Michael]
- zakim, ping AWK in 20 minutes
- 15:15:28 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'ping AWK in 20 minutes', Michael
- 15:15:37 [laura]
- …needs to be testable.
- 15:15:41 [Michael]
- zakim, ping me in 20 minutes to tell AWK there is a timer
- 15:15:41 [Zakim]
- ok, Michael
- 15:15:58 [laura]
- …There has been a lot of discussion of wide vs. narrow. My suggestion has been that if a user can override one font or one background color or one text color, it is highly likely (but not certain) that they can over ride MANY others. On the other hand the testing and conformance statements for J would be impossible as far as I can see.
- 15:16:19 [Wayne]
- q+
- 15:16:20 [AWK]
- q?
- 15:16:29 [laura]
- Bruce: like 145 shift.
- 15:16:38 [marcjohlic]
- q+
- 15:16:48 [laura]
- Katie: strongly agree.
- 15:17:03 [AWK]
- ack w
- 15:17:10 [laura]
- …H is clear and testable as written.
- 15:18:09 [jon_avila]
- jon_avila has joined #ag
- 15:18:13 [laura]
- Wayne: did some research. font sizes are normative. Some are bigger. Variance is small.
- 15:18:15 [jon_avila]
- present+jon_avila
- 15:18:35 [laura]
- …could have one test for everything.
- 15:18:54 [Ryladog]
- q+
- 15:19:03 [laura]
- …could have ranges.
- 15:19:16 [AWK]
- ack ry
- 15:19:25 [laura]
- …need to look at the data.
- 15:19:26 [AWK]
- q+ ryladog
- 15:19:33 [AWK]
- ack marc
- 15:19:48 [laura]
- marc: agree with david.
- 15:19:54 [Wayne]
- q+
- 15:20:00 [JF]
- Q+ to ask about internationalization (CJK, etc.)
- 15:20:09 [laura]
- …really like D but bullets in H.
- 15:20:35 [AWK]
- q+
- 15:20:43 [AWK]
- ack ry
- 15:20:52 [laura]
- …if that is not an otion would go with H&I
- 15:21:07 [AWK]
- s/otion/sption
- 15:21:17 [AWK]
- s/sption/option
- 15:21:54 [AWK]
- ack wayne
- 15:21:55 [laura]
- Katie: don’t think it is for no reason. Can’t get into specific font types. Must work for all languages.
- 15:22:04 [LisaSeeman]
- in israel the populer fonts are things like "david"
- 15:22:10 [shwetank_]
- +1 to laura
- 15:22:19 [laura]
- wayne: has written a program to do it.
- 15:22:49 [laura]
- …been making a big problem out of nothing.
- 15:23:01 [AWK]
- ack jf
- 15:23:01 [Zakim]
- JF, you wanted to ask about internationalization (CJK, etc.)
- 15:23:02 [laura]
- …should send back to the LVTF.
- 15:23:18 [laura]
- JF: +1 to Katie
- 15:23:38 [jon_avila]
- we have differences already SC 1.4.8 has different requirements for CJK
- 15:23:39 [kirkwood]
- +1 also to Katie regarding naming font faces
- 15:23:40 [laura]
- JF: we are international organization.
- 15:23:43 [shwetank_]
- also devanagari for hindi and other indian languages
- 15:23:46 [AWK]
- ack AWK
- 15:23:47 [jon_avila]
- this has been done before in WCAG 2.0
- 15:23:55 [kirkwood]
- +1 to JF
- 15:23:59 [Wayne]
- FamilyGirthGirt32 Andale Mo--32--32-1 Arial321 Arial Black381.18 Avant Garde--32-1 Bookman--32-1 Century Schoolbook351.09 Comic Sans MS351.09 Consolas351.09 Courier381.18 Courier New381.18 Euclid351.09 Garamond321 Georgia351.09 Helvetica321 Impact28 .87 Lucida Sans Typewriter351.09 Palati—32--32-1 Tahoma331.03 Times321 Times New Roman321 Verdana381.18 Wide Latin621.9
- 15:24:14 [laura]
- AWK: Trouble with naming fonts.
- 15:24:59 [JF]
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CJK_fonts
- 15:25:47 [laura]
- …ineed to reasonable test.
- 15:25:57 [laura]
- wayne: I think we can.
- 15:26:19 [JF]
- Cyrillic fonts: https://www.linotype.com/6731/cyrillic.html
- 15:27:01 [laura]
- we can measure for each language.
- 15:27:29 [kirkwood]
- q+
- 15:27:38 [Greg]
- q+ to ask in what ways you anticipate pages will fail when fonts are changed
- 15:27:46 [JF]
- "There are over 800 fonts available through Google Fonts' main website" (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fonts)
- 15:27:53 [Michael]
- q+ JamesN
- 15:27:54 [AWK]
- q+ james
- 15:28:00 [AWK]
- ack james
- 15:28:04 [AWK]
- ack kirkw
- 15:28:29 [laura]
- JK: Issue from coga.
- 15:28:38 [Wayne]
- q+
- 15:28:39 [AWK]
- ack greg
- 15:28:39 [Zakim]
- Greg, you wanted to ask in what ways you anticipate pages will fail when fonts are changed
- 15:28:43 [laura]
- …trouble with naming fonts.
- 15:30:08 [gowerm]
- Let's just do H and K (to address concerns with specifying fonts) and get it out there.
- 15:30:11 [laura]
- Greg: Don’t understand the problem people are having with fonts.
- 15:30:38 [laura]
- Greg: don’t see the problem.
- 15:31:17 [JF]
- +1 to the "well designed" ideal
- 15:31:21 [Wayne]
- +1
- 15:31:24 [AWK]
- ack james
- 15:31:54 [laura]
- James: when a product doesn’t work it would be a bug against the product.
- 15:32:25 [Wayne]
- q+
- 15:32:35 [gowerm]
- q+
- 15:32:40 [AWK]
- ack wayne
- 15:32:54 [laura]
- …need requuirements on what the fonts need to support.
- 15:33:22 [laura]
- wayne: we can define tolerances.
- 15:33:42 [adam_solomon]
- present+ adam_solomon
- 15:33:53 [laura]
- …we need to reseach this for a few weeks.
- 15:33:58 [Mike_Elledge]
- pre
- 15:34:01 [david-macdonald]
- q+
- 15:34:04 [Mike_Elledge]
- Present+ Mike Elledge
- 15:34:05 [Rachael]
- q+
- 15:34:12 [AWK]
- zakim, close the queue
- 15:34:12 [Zakim]
- ok, AWK, the speaker queue is closed
- 15:34:29 [AWK]
- ack gowerm
- 15:34:49 [Greg]
- I don't think a page would fail because the user chooses a font that displays a lot of rectangles for characters. Every character would still be displayed, regardless of whether or not the user could understand it, and therefore it complies. An user's ability to read it is not part of the requirement.
- 15:34:57 [laura]
- MG: we are boiling the ocean.
- 15:35:04 [JF]
- Q+ to ask about the impact of this on ruby annotation... (https://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/)
- 15:35:05 [AWK]
- ack dav
- 15:35:07 [Ryladog]
- +1 to that
- 15:35:19 [laura]
- ...they are very similar.
- 15:35:39 [jon_avila]
- Agree with David
- 15:35:42 [laura]
- Dvid: then it will be in a narrow range.
- 15:35:42 [Zakim]
- Michael, you asked to be pinged at this time to tell AWK there is a timer
- 15:35:49 [AWK]
- ack r
- 15:36:26 [jon_avila]
- CSS does have rules
- 15:36:36 [steverep]
- q+ to comment about
- 15:36:47 [steverep]
- q-
- 15:36:50 [laura]
- Rachael: Phrasing is confusing on the intro statement.
- 15:37:12 [Detlev]
- Happy to shift support to H if language is addressed
- 15:37:31 [Wayne]
- +1
- 15:37:31 [laura]
- AWK: Font and color seem to be the problematic bullets.
- 15:37:48 [laura]
- …we could drop them.
- 15:37:54 [steverep]
- q+
- 15:38:27 [Mike_Pluke]
- Mike_Pluke has joined #ag
- 15:38:37 [laura]
- Steve: Would be okay with dropping font. But not color.
- 15:39:48 [laura]
- AWK: can anyone not live with H&I?
- 15:39:52 [MelanieP]
- MelanieP has joined #ag
- 15:40:08 [Detlev]
- +1 can live with H& I
- 15:40:23 [Mike_Pluke]
- present+ Mike_Pluke
- 15:40:48 [laura]
- Katie: leave the bullets.
- 15:41:00 [laura]
- …get it out there.
- 15:41:32 [laura]
- …more input is helpful.
- 15:42:37 [laura]
- AWK: concerns about font.
- 15:42:43 [JF]
- I can live with "H", but I am opposed to "I"
- 15:42:59 [laura]
- steve: what are the objections to color?
- 15:43:13 [laura]
- AWK: David had issues.
- 15:43:35 [gowerm]
- Nope, Bruce, I can hear fine
- 15:43:43 [KimD]
- *It's ok for me Bruce
- 15:44:14 [JF]
- +1, we cannot "forbid" stupidity...
- 15:44:26 [laura]
- David: okay with color bullet.
- 15:44:50 [laura]
- wayne: could compute color.
- 15:45:11 [david-macdonald]
- "If the technology being used has the ability to override text styles, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows:" To address Rachel's wording concern perhaps this "If the technologies relied upon allow the text styles to be overridden, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows:"
- 15:45:15 [Greg]
- +1 to allow user flexibility even if they can choose configs they cannot use
- 15:45:35 [Greg]
- s/they can choose/the user can choose/
- 15:45:48 [laura]
- JF: don't restrict the user.
- 15:46:02 [LisaSeeman]
- q+
- 15:46:40 [jon_avila]
- Agree. Stupid was poor choice or word
- 15:47:10 [Greg]
- That is why I don't like saying just one or two color choices, or fonts: we should not allow a page to conform just by providing two predesigned color schemes, which would certainly not support a sufficiently wide range of users.
- 15:47:21 [Greg]
- s/colo choices/color choices/
- 15:48:33 [laura]
- Laura: Text is : If the technology being used has the ability to override text styles, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows: font family to one different font family
- 15:50:08 [Greg]
- As I've said before, it would help to separate the question of the main paragraph wording from that of the list wording.
- 15:51:16 [jon_avila]
- but we need a failure on how to mark icon fonts properly and if they don't mark it properly then it fails
- 15:52:28 [Detlev]
- q+
- 15:52:34 [Detlev]
- q-
- 15:52:54 [Greg]
- Wayne, a well-designed page should not break when a wide font is selected: if it's well designed nothing will overlap.
- 15:52:59 [laura]
- Wayne: Don't think the language works.
- 15:54:06 [laura]
- AWK: Font seems to be holding us up.
- 15:54:34 [laura]
- David: think we are clear to move forward.
- 15:55:31 [kirkwood]
- present+
- 15:55:35 [laura]
- MG: Maybe H and K?
- 15:55:54 [JF]
- I can support H & K
- 15:56:56 [laura]
- AWK reads H&K
- 15:57:00 [david-macdonald]
- If the technologies relied upon allow the text styles to be overridden,
- 15:57:13 [AWK]
- instead of "If the technology being used has the ability to override text styles"
- 15:57:14 [Greg]
- I will not veto H, but I strongly prefer J's bullets on fonts and colors to those of H.
- 15:58:21 [laura]
- David: amandment to H "If the technologies relied upon allow the text styles to be overridden, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows:”
- 15:58:41 [marcjohlic]
- q+
- 15:59:20 [steverep]
- q+
- 15:59:58 [laura]
- AWK: K would require a widget.
- 16:00:46 [laura]
- GL: intent is requiring a widget.
- 16:01:51 [laura]
- AWK: K doesn’t require a widget.
- 16:02:43 [laura]
- AWK: lets talk about this on Thursday.
- 16:02:57 [laura]
- Zakim, next item
- 16:02:57 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "Accessible Authentication: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq10" taken up [from AWK]
- 16:03:07 [bruce_bailey]
- http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/results#xq10
- 16:04:11 [gowerm]
- https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/results
- 16:04:11 [laura]
- AWK reads results
- 16:04:44 [laura]
- Lisa: Kind of surpised. Gave people 2 options.
- 16:05:30 [gowerm]
- q+
- 16:05:40 [jamesn]
- jamesn has joined #ag
- 16:05:53 [jamesn]
- q?
- 16:05:56 [ChrisLoiselle]
- ChrisLoiselle has left #ag
- 16:05:57 [jamesn]
- q+
- 16:05:58 [laura]
- Lisa: Tons of mechanisms that people can use to conform.
- 16:06:04 [Ryladog]
- q+
- 16:06:08 [JF]
- QW+ to ask that we have this particular SC reviewed by the W3C Security WG
- 16:06:21 [JF]
- Q+
- 16:06:22 [laura]
- …seems to have stepped back.
- 16:07:18 [laura]
- …to james, no one is saying we should encourage the ability to retrieve a password.
- 16:07:52 [laura]
- James: reset is okay. Drop the word retrieve. Easy to fix.
- 16:08:02 [Kathy]
- Kathy has joined #ag
- 16:08:13 [AWK]
- ack gower
- 16:08:14 [laura]
- Lisa: Happy to change that word.
- 16:08:15 [Kathy]
- present+ Kathy
- 16:08:17 [jamesn]
- ack me
- 16:08:51 [laura]
- MG: Problems clarifying with the 2 bullets
- 16:09:02 [laura]
- …Do you have examples?
- 16:09:06 [Rachael]
- q+
- 16:09:51 [laura]
- Lisa: Yes. W3C password. Sends me a link. Can be sent to form. Can be a token.
- 16:10:17 [AWK]
- isn't a method that uses a token requiring copying information?
- 16:10:28 [laura]
- Lisa: Facebook & Google conform on the 2nd bullet.
- 16:11:08 [Mike_Pluke]
- q+
- 16:11:08 [laura]
- Lisa: Banks could have biometrics.
- 16:11:30 [Greg]
- q+ to say the issue about "retrieve" may actually be about the ambiguity introduced by "or". I don't think it is intended to mean both have to be supported, just at least one of them. It could be reworded to clarify that.
- 16:11:45 [laura]
- Lisa: many site are conforming.
- 16:12:19 [AWK]
- ack ryla
- 16:12:34 [Ryladog]
- Suggestion: "Accessible Authentication Methods: A mechanism is available to reset any authentication method that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information."
- 16:12:41 [laura]
- Lisa: to Josh, have spoken to other WG.
- 16:12:54 [AWK]
- ^does not rely?
- 16:13:53 [AWK]
- s/^does not rely?/
- 16:14:03 [AWK]
- ack JF
- 16:14:04 [Wayne]
- +1
- 16:14:05 [laura]
- Katie: could reword.
- 16:14:15 [shwetank_]
- I like katie/david's suggestion
- 16:14:20 [jamesn]
- q+
- 16:14:46 [Wayne]
- q+
- 16:14:48 [laura]
- JF: Different levels of security. Need to be mindful.
- 16:15:03 [AWK]
- ack rach
- 16:15:25 [KimD]
- +1 to JF - different levels, based on target audience perhaps?
- 16:15:27 [laura]
- Rachael: seems we have lost info.
- 16:15:50 [laura]
- …”retireve or”
- 16:16:21 [AWK]
- ack mike
- 16:17:18 [AWK]
- ack greg
- 16:17:18 [Zakim]
- Greg, you wanted to say the issue about "retrieve" may actually be about the ambiguity introduced by "or". I don't think it is intended to mean both have to be supported, just at
- 16:17:20 [laura]
- MK: need to be clear. Important and doable
- 16:17:22 [Zakim]
- ... least one of them. It could be reworded to clarify that.
- 16:17:51 [david-macdonald]
- A mechanism is available to reset or retrieve authentication information that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information.
- 16:18:17 [laura]
- Greg: the “or” introduces an ambiguity.
- 16:18:38 [jasonjgw]
- q+
- 16:18:45 [AWK]
- ack jamesn
- 16:18:50 [marcjohlic]
- I like the rewrite - but I don't like "retrieve" in there - and think to AWK's point we should better define "that"
- 16:19:14 [Mike_Pluke]
- +1
- 16:19:15 [JF]
- +1 to JamesN
- 16:19:20 [gowerm]
- +1 to removing "retrieve"
- 16:19:23 [AWK]
- ack way
- 16:19:24 [marcjohlic]
- +1 to james - drop "retrieve"
- 16:19:28 [laura]
- James: object to the word retrieve.
- 16:19:29 [shwetank_]
- +1 to James
- 16:19:43 [AWK]
- ack jason
- 16:19:53 [laura]
- Wayne: agree with James.
- 16:20:40 [Ryladog]
- q+
- 16:20:49 [AWK]
- ack ry
- 16:20:51 [laura]
- Jason: Would responding to personal questions qualify?
- 16:21:01 [laura]
- Katie: there are options.
- 16:21:07 [Greg]
- I agree with Jason: personal questions tend to require memorization even if that's not the author's intention.
- 16:21:19 [david-macdonald]
- A mechanism is available to reset authentication information that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information.
- 16:21:27 [laura]
- …doesn't have to be memorization.
- 16:21:39 [Greg]
- That could be addressed in the supporting documents as a specific failing example.
- 16:21:50 [laura]
- Lisa: Jason, should be a failure.
- 16:22:35 [laura]
- …has to be something that doesn't rely on memory.
- 16:23:05 [dboudreau_]
- dboudreau_ has joined #ag
- 16:23:05 [Ryladog]
- "Accessible Authentication Methods: A mechanism is available to reset any authentication method that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information."
- 16:23:28 [laura]
- …to katie, okay with removing retrieve
- 16:23:49 [dboudreau_]
- +1 to removing “retrieve” as well
- 16:23:51 [jamesn]
- isn't coming in a mechanism?
- 16:24:22 [laura]
- Lisa: Requiring reset seems to put burden on author.
- 16:24:36 [laura]
- …we have given people an option.
- 16:24:38 [Wayne]
- A mechanism ... operate authentication...?
- 16:24:51 [Wayne]
- q+
- 16:25:05 [AWK]
- ack wayne
- 16:25:05 [laura]
- …at a loss why this hasn’t gotten through.
- 16:25:06 [david-macdonald]
- q+
- 16:25:11 [marcjohlic]
- q+
- 16:25:34 [marcjohlic]
- q-
- 16:26:18 [laura]
- wayne: wondering if the terms are the problem. Maybe use operate authentication?
- 16:26:31 [Mike_Pluke]
- q+
- 16:26:43 [laura]
- ..without having to rely on memory.
- 16:26:48 [LisaSeeman]
- q+
- 16:26:51 [AWK]
- ack david
- 16:26:58 [JF]
- Would a link "Forgot my password" be sufficient?
- 16:27:15 [JF]
- Q+
- 16:27:28 [LisaSeeman]
- if the reset the password does not rely on memory you are ok
- 16:27:28 [laura]
- David: could live with in with his edit on the second bullet.
- 16:27:31 [Greg]
- q+ to say I'm somewhat concerned that the choice of two bullets can lead to sites requiring people having to go through a password reset procedure every time they need to log in, because that's easier for the author than providing a method that does not require memorization. Also, it should be "at least one of" rather than "one of".
- 16:27:54 [AWK]
- ack mike
- 16:28:04 [laura]
- …open to let it go to public review with his suggestion.
- 16:28:07 [LisaSeeman]
- Andrew can we go for a quick revote, if we take out the word reset
- 16:28:28 [laura]
- MP: Maybe an add exception.
- 16:28:32 [AWK]
- There's no such thing as a quick revote!
- 16:28:32 [jasonjgw]
- q+
- 16:28:40 [LisaSeeman]
- a hands up +1
- 16:28:40 [AWK]
- zakim, close the queue
- 16:28:40 [Zakim]
- ok, AWK, the speaker queue is closed
- 16:28:53 [Ryladog]
- +1 to another SC for that
- 16:29:08 [Greg]
- Sites not allowing reset due to security concerns is not a problem, as the site can comply with the first bullet instead.
- 16:29:11 [jamesn]
- I totally agree with JF that this needs further review from security groups - but think that can maybe happen once it goes into FPWD.
- 16:29:20 [AWK]
- ack lisa
- 16:29:43 [laura]
- MP: Maybe SC with new across the board text. not tied to authentication.
- 16:30:24 [laura]
- AWK: Lisa make edits and send it to the list.
- 16:31:46 [AWK]
- RESOLUTION: leave open
- 16:31:55 [laura]
- andrew will followup with Lisa and SC manager.
- 16:32:32 [LisaSeeman]
- present+
- 16:32:34 [Michael]
- present+
- 16:32:39 [david-macdonald]
- PRESENT + DAVIDMACDONALD
- 16:32:40 [dboudreau]
- present+
- 16:32:46 [LisaSeeman]
- present+ lisa seeman
- 16:32:52 [AWK]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:32:52 [Zakim]
- Present: allanj, Laura, AWK, Glenda, Greg_Lowney, ScottM, JF, Katie_Haritos-Shea, MichaelC, KimD, jasonjgw, dboudreau, Lauriat, shwetank, Makoto, Melanie_Philipp, Detlev, Rachael,
- 16:32:55 [Zakim]
- ... Wayne, MikeGower, marcjohlic, Bruce_Bailey, Jake, steverep, jon_avila, adam_solomon, Elledge, Mike_Pluke, kirkwood, Kathy, LisaSeeman, Michael, seeman
- 16:32:57 [david-macdonald]
- PRESENT+ DAVID
- 16:32:59 [laura]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:32:59 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/18-ag-minutes.html laura
- 16:33:08 [Mike_Elledge]
- bye all
- 16:39:21 [laura]
- bye.
- 16:42:47 [kirkwood__]
- kirkwood__ has joined #AG
- 17:18:04 [kirkwood__]
- kirkwood__ has joined #AG
- 17:24:47 [KimD]
- KimD has left #ag
- 18:49:36 [shwetank]
- shwetank has joined #ag