15:20:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
15:20:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/06/01-ag-irc
15:20:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:20:06 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
15:20:06 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
15:20:06 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
15:20:06 <trackbot> Date: 01 June 2017
15:20:07 <AWK> rrsagent, set logs public
15:20:13 <AWK> Chair: AWK
15:20:17 <AWK> Present: AWK
15:20:25 <AWK> Zakim, agenda?
15:20:25 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
15:20:26 <Zakim> 9. orientation https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/MATF_orientation/results [from AWK]
15:20:26 <Zakim> 10. change of content: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCreview_May_17/results#xq10 [from AWK]
15:20:43 <AWK> zakim, clear agenda
15:20:43 <Zakim> agenda cleared
15:20:47 <AWK> agenda+ orientation https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/MATF_orientation/results
15:21:24 <AWK> agenda+ Help: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/COGA_help/results
15:24:24 <interaccess> interaccess has joined #ag
15:24:39 <Joshue108> zakim, agenda?
15:24:39 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
15:24:40 <Zakim> 1. orientation https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/MATF_orientation/results [from AWK]
15:24:40 <Zakim> 2. Help: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/COGA_help/results [from AWK]
15:29:19 <shadi> shadi has joined #ag
15:29:29 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #ag
15:31:04 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:31:17 <shadi_> shadi_ has joined #ag
15:31:34 <Alex_Li> Alex_Li has joined #ag
15:32:12 <davidmacdonald> davidmacdonald has joined #ag
15:32:20 <davidmacdonald> Present+ Davidmacdonald
15:32:39 <Detlev> I can do it
15:32:50 <AWK> Scribe: Detlev
15:33:06 <jasonjgw> present+
15:33:17 <Detlev> zakim, take up next
15:33:17 <Zakim> agendum 1. "orientation https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/MATF_orientation/results" taken up [from AWK]
15:33:38 <KimDirks> KimDirks has joined #ag
15:34:02 <marcjohlic> “orientation” vs “display orientation”  vs  “screen orientation”
15:34:04 <Detlev> AWK: mixed bag 5 in favour, 6 seeing editorial issues, 1 sees problems
15:34:12 <marcjohlic> Is this applicable only at launch or throughout the app running
15:34:15 <Kim> Kim has joined #ag
15:34:38 <Crystal_Jones> Crystal_Jones has joined #AG
15:34:59 <Detlev> AWK: first question: is it device orientation, screen orientation?
15:35:18 <Detlev> AWK: So it is display orientation (portrait/landscape)
15:35:24 <jasonjgw> q+
15:35:36 <Detlev> Kathy: conforms: display orientation
15:35:46 <MichaelC> present+
15:35:55 <KimDirks> present+ KimDirks
15:36:14 <Detlev> AWK: so it is not about physical hardware in space
15:36:15 <AWK> ack ja
15:36:36 <Detlev> Jason: Prefers addition of "display orientation"
15:36:41 <JF> JF has joined #ag
15:36:57 <AWK> zakim, ping us in 24 minutes
15:36:57 <Zakim> ok, AWK
15:37:16 <Detlev> Jason: Are there cases where users want to lock orientation via controls in web site
15:37:32 <Detlev> ...ie on the app level not ua level
15:37:41 <Detlev> ...this would need an exception
15:37:44 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #ag
15:37:49 <Alex_Li> q+
15:38:00 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
15:38:02 <JF> present+ JF
15:38:09 <AWK> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:38:09 <Zakim> Present: AWK, Davidmacdonald, jasonjgw, MichaelC, KimDirks, Katie_Haritos-Shea, JF
15:38:11 <davidmacdonald> comments https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/193
15:38:19 <Kathy> present+ Kathy
15:38:22 <davidmacdonald> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/265
15:38:30 <marcjohlic> q+
15:38:33 <davidmacdonald> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/235
15:38:46 <AWK> ack al
15:38:55 <Detlev> Jason: So the requirement would be: Don't lock orientation unless requested by user
15:39:23 <AWK> ack marc
15:39:25 <Detlev> Alex: if a particulat piece of content does not affored rotation does that quality for an exception?
15:39:45 <Detlev> Marc: Might fall under the 'essential' exception
15:40:32 <Detlev> Alex: Talking about a type of device where rotation is not supported - and content is made more that device (like a projector)
15:40:49 <Detlev> ...would that be an essential exception?
15:41:47 <Detlev> AWK: if that is part of your conformance claim (tailored to a particular environment) then yes? But you may not be able to prevent it?
15:42:08 <Detlev> Alex: May be prevented in things like virtual / augmented reality contexts
15:42:40 <Detlev> Alex: Is that essential? If not we need an alternative exception
15:43:48 <AWK> q?
15:43:48 <Detlev> AWK: With a display with headset (goggles with phone) you don't want the display to flip 90 degrees when you tip your head, so it sounds like an essential aspect
15:44:06 <Detlev> DmD: another case: using an ipad in bed
15:44:11 <Joshue108> q?
15:45:08 <Detlev> goverm: A device may detect orientation OR an authir may restrict change of orientation - the author would not be dealing with that situation if the devcie restricts it
15:45:26 <Detlev> goverm: It is only when the author tries t ooverride that
15:45:29 <Ryladog> q+
15:45:58 <Detlev> Alex: If the content is not locked to some orientation - will the exception apply? If not we have a problem
15:46:39 <Detlev> goverm: But in a device situation (headset on) this is specific - in another context it would be good if orientation can change
15:47:12 <Detlev> Alex: If content is only available to the VR environment the content is locked to one orientation - it would not go to a laptop
15:47:47 <JF> Q+
15:47:53 <Detlev> goverm: there is no signal from the OS to flip orientation so the SC would not be applicable
15:48:24 <Detlev> AWK: In another context where authors lock orientation on an ipad or phone would you fail?
15:48:34 <JF> ack me
15:48:48 <AWK> ack ry
15:49:06 <Detlev> AWK: some hold that in those situation the orientation is essential so the exception would apply
15:49:57 <Detlev> Katie: there are specific requirements in VR to prevent nausea (under user safety)
15:50:05 <jasonjgw> q+
15:50:17 <AWK> ack JF
15:50:25 <Detlev> katie : if safty is involved it would be essential
15:51:08 <Detlev> JF: many situations where smartphone and box makes up the goggle (hybrid solution) - but if covered by exception I'm OK with it
15:51:11 <AWK> ack j
15:51:31 <Detlev> Jason: Do we need a VR example to remove ambiguity?
15:51:38 <AWK> AWK proposes to make a specific example in Understanding to address the VR question or adding a bullet to the definition
15:52:01 <Detlev> Marc: yes we can add that in the 'essential' definition
15:52:14 <Detlev> Alex: Projecting a slide would be a more common exception
15:52:30 <Detlev> AWK: Any suggestions for phrasing tzhat as bullet?
15:52:58 <Detlev> AWK: either put it in definition or in the understanding doc
15:53:12 <marcjohlic> Is this applicable only at launch or throughout the app running
15:53:38 <Detlev> Marc: next Question: only applicable at launch or the entire time the app is running
15:54:09 <Detlev> AWK: Would it fail when turned and orientation remains?
15:54:17 <Detlev> Alex: App or content?
15:54:45 <Detlev> AWK: When the content not locked to a specific orientation
15:55:06 <Detlev> AWK: would you reset or does it do it automatically ?
15:56:02 <jasonjgw> q+
15:56:10 <Detlev> goverm: 508 refresh has user info not interrupted by the OS - should apply all the time, not just at launch
15:56:22 <marcjohlic> Oracle comment:  https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/235
15:56:45 <Detlev> DmD: One comment referring to device mounted in a particular orientation why would it need to support re-orientation?
15:56:50 <AWK> ack ja
15:56:55 <Alex_Li> q+
15:57:06 <gowerm> gowerm has joined #ag
15:57:09 <gowerm> present+ MikeGower
15:57:33 <Detlev> Jason: If the content has ways of locking the orientation it looks like it should be activated by the user
15:58:38 <Detlev> ...if orientation lock is a problem for people they can lock it at OS level or have a control inside the app to lock it
15:59:24 <AWK> ack a
15:59:28 <chriscm> chriscm has joined #ag
15:59:34 <Detlev> AWK: Oracle's point is the situation where device is mounted and they want access to content that supposes a different orientation
15:59:43 <gowerm> Content is not locked to a specific orientation, and functionality of the content is operable in all orientations, except where orientation is essential for use of the content or is set by a user preference.
16:00:56 <chriscm> present+ chriscm
16:00:58 <Zakim> AWK, you asked to be pinged at this time
16:01:08 <gowerm> q+
16:01:08 <Detlev> Alex: Thoughts on use case of moutned display: when the user locks orientation - some phones home screen won't change orientation
16:01:34 <Detlev> ...would it make sense to follow device conventions?
16:01:50 <AWK> ack gower
16:02:37 <AWK> AWK: worth noting that in a browser on small iPhone the direction of the device is used in the display
16:02:51 <Detlev> goverm:  iPhone position its good to have a dialogue over what constitutes essential
16:03:13 <Detlev> ..some users have the device locked in a particular position so they need flexibility
16:03:30 <jasonjgw> q+
16:04:07 <Detlev> AWK: confirming iphone home screen does not re-orient - so home screen would fail
16:04:08 <AWK> ack jason
16:05:01 <Detlev> Jason; We need clarification terminology needs to be clearer regarding the interaction of content / UA / system level
16:05:05 <gowerm> Jason, this is an authoring guide. it refers to authoring content
16:06:02 <Detlev> Marc: it's advice for authors: don't lock orientation - we cannot pick up UA and OS level
16:06:24 <Detlev> ..unless is essential
16:06:46 <Detlev> ...so we just need to add display orientation and things should be fine
16:06:47 <gowerm> "...operable in all display orientations..."
16:06:48 <Ryladog> +1
16:06:50 <Detlev> +1 to Marc
16:06:54 <gowerm> +1
16:06:57 <marcjohlic> +1
16:06:58 <chriscm> +1
16:07:08 <KimDirks> +1
16:07:18 <Detlev> Jason: specifying that we need a definition of what 'lock' means
16:07:44 <gowerm> 	Content is not locked to a specific orientation, and functionality of the content is operable in all display orientations, except where orientation is essential for use of the content or is set by a user preference.
16:08:13 <Detlev> Marc: restating: "don't lock orientation in content unless it is essential"
16:08:25 <Joshue108> +1 to Marc
16:08:27 <AWK> +1
16:08:32 <Kathy> +1
16:08:43 <marcjohlic> Please add your suggested definition for "lock" to the comments here:  https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/70
16:08:44 <Detlev> AWK: Will revidit on Tuesday
16:08:56 <Detlev> ZaZakim, take up next
16:09:05 <Detlev> Zakim, take up next
16:09:05 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Help: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/COGA_help/results" taken up [from AWK]
16:09:55 <Detlev> AWK: less consensus: 5 see significant issues, 3 see minor editorial issues
16:10:09 <Detlev> AWK: Lisa has been on holidays so not much has changed
16:10:33 <JF> Q+
16:10:39 <Detlev> AWK: concerns were what constituted a long document, a non-standard control
16:10:49 <AWK> ack jf
16:10:50 <Detlev> AWK: any additional points?
16:10:56 <gowerm> q+
16:10:57 <Alex_Li> q+
16:10:57 <MichaelC> q+ to address long doc and non-standard control
16:11:37 <AWK> ack gow
16:11:41 <Detlev> JF: It looks like we want to cover two issues in one SC: understanding content, interacting with controls - two different problem spaces, should better be split into two separate SCs
16:11:42 <MichaelC> q+ to address splitting
16:12:18 <jasonjgw> q+
16:12:19 <Detlev> mgower: needs scrutiny, going through comments in issue thread and responding to them
16:12:46 <Detlev> mgower: please address comments
16:12:48 <AWK> ack alex
16:13:56 <Detlev> Alex: the issue is that there is no one-stop solution to solve the problem - cannot be solved by imposing requirements on authors
16:14:20 <Detlev> Alex: direction seems mistaken
16:14:41 <MichaelC> q+ to say wording intended to allow automated supports
16:14:45 <MichaelC> ack me
16:14:45 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to address long doc and non-standard control and to address splitting and to say wording intended to allow automated supports
16:14:53 <Detlev> AWK: discussion has touched on killer AT - links to the role of AI
16:15:03 <AWK> ack MichaelC
16:15:20 <davidmacdonald> IBM is working on this on the IT side. http://www-03.ibm.com/able/content-clarifier.html
16:16:00 <Detlev> MichaelC: there is a definition long documents that should help - another definition is not yet there
16:16:40 <Detlev> ... definition for non-standard-controls - intend is to make this SC workable
16:17:35 <Detlev> MichaelC: might be split into more than two SCs - could become a 'pillar' - the concept is still a work in progress - attempts to cover the issues related to help / understanding
16:18:11 <AWK> q+ to talk about pillars and "or" relationships
16:18:23 <Detlev> MichaelC: putting advice in OR relationships might things easier - but it is a difficult one
16:19:02 <Detlev> ..what can we ask from authors? SC tries to say if it is long and complex do something to summarise, clarify
16:19:27 <AWK> ack ja
16:19:28 <Alex_Li> q+
16:19:31 <Detlev> ...wording is intended to allow for AI support, but support is not available yet
16:20:30 <Detlev> Jason: seems some agreement that the last two bullets are problematic - to include them you would need to be more specific, or gthey would be moved to level AAA
16:21:20 <Detlev> ...there also seems agreement that the distinctions (long/short, simple/complex) are not well grounded now
16:21:23 <shadi> present+
16:21:46 <Detlev> ...no clarity of what a summary would be and whether it should be separate or part of the document
16:22:09 <Detlev> ...abstract of a scientific paper would qualify as summary
16:22:55 <AWK> ack AWK
16:22:55 <Zakim> AWK, you wanted to talk about pillars and "or" relationships
16:22:56 <Detlev> ...issues can be addressed but looks like a lot of work is needed - the numerical info and the cardinal directions seem most problematic and should better be moved to level AAA
16:24:03 <JF> +1 to AWK - "Pillars" remains a vague and un-agreed-upon term
16:24:16 <Detlev> AWK: views on what constitutes a pillar are not yet consolidated - better not discuss now. What did MichaelC mean with OR relationship?
16:24:48 <Detlev> MichaelC: would meeting just one bullet option be sufficient - but that is difficult since different bullets address different things
16:25:25 <jasonjgw> q+
16:25:27 <Detlev> ...idea was that if one of the thigs is done at least *something* is done - not clear whether there is consensus on that in Coga TF
16:26:02 <Detlev> AWK: would be easier to implement but people woul draise concerns whether that make ssense
16:26:10 <AWK> ack alex
16:26:11 <Joshue108> q?
16:27:08 <Detlev> Alex: Still disturbed by the notion that authors should do something because you can - hammer looking for a nail - nothing of that would help, this is not helpful for end users, authors should not be requested to do this
16:27:34 <MichaelC> q+ to say the satisfying outcome won´t be met by SC alone
16:28:00 <AWK> ack jason
16:28:11 <Detlev> ..there are APIs to summaries, to extract keywords, can easily be integrated in personal assistants, even though solutions are not quite ready it should not be fostd on authors
16:28:59 <Detlev> Jason: research says that automatic summaries can noe compete with author-written summaries, so that gives reason for caution
16:29:51 <Detlev> jason: The problem withe the metadata solution is the potential misuse by authors as already seen in the often incorrect application o dWAI-ARIA
16:30:23 <MichaelC> ack me
16:30:23 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say the satisfying outcome won´t be met by SC alone
16:30:23 <Detlev> ...so we need to be clear what is really suitable and effective for author intervention
16:30:25 <AWK> ack mic
16:31:26 <Detlev> MichaelC: Agrees with Alex that proposal does not squarely address needs of users - the attemt was to come up with hooks / starting point, and details would be in the supplementary guidance
16:31:49 <Detlev> ...so if there are automatic tools would be available the SC should be automattically met
16:32:29 <Detlev> AWK: will update status of SC on status page
16:32:39 <Detlev> rrsagent, make minutes
16:32:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/01-ag-minutes.html Detlev
16:32:52 <AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_SC_status
16:33:01 <davidmacdonald> thanks AWK
16:33:33 <laura> laura has left #ag
16:34:42 <KimDirks> KimDirks has left #ag
16:36:24 <chriscm_> chriscm_ has joined #ag
17:27:56 <laura> laura has joined #ag
19:54:08 <interaccess> interaccess has joined #ag
20:41:53 <allanj> allanj has joined #ag