15:33:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
15:33:50 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/10/19-ag-irc
15:33:52 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:33:55 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
15:33:55 <trackbot> Date: 19 October 2017
15:34:10 <Joshue108> zakim, agenda?
15:34:10 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:34:11 <Zakim> 2. Survey  https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Oct_17th_agwg/ [from Joshue108]
15:48:24 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
15:52:20 <interaccess> interaccess has joined #ag
15:57:56 <interaccess> present+ Joshue108
15:59:07 <jimal> jimal has joined #ag
16:02:21 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #ag
16:02:28 <alastairc> present+ alastairc
16:02:32 <shadi__> present+
16:03:12 <Glenda> present+ glenda
16:03:13 <Roy> present+
16:03:15 <jasonjgw> present+
16:04:21 <KimD> KimD has joined #ag
16:05:24 <steverep> steverep has joined #ag
16:06:09 <Glenda> Scribe: Glenda
16:06:34 <Glenda> Zakim, who is here?
16:06:34 <Zakim> Present: jallan, JakeAbma, interaccess, bruce_bailey, Roy, Laura, jamesn, jasonjgw, Kathy, MikeGower, kirkwood, Makoto, KimD, Greg_Lowney, Mike_Elledge, Brooks, steverep, JF,
16:06:37 <Zakim> ... Katie_Haritos-Shea, Glenda, david-macdonald, marcjohlic, Detlev, Joshue108, alastairc, shadi__
16:06:37 <Zakim> On IRC I see steverep, KimD, Glenda, jimal, Joshue108, alastairc, RRSAgent, Brooks, david-macdonald, marcjohlic, laura, shadi__, kirkwood, Roy, Ryladog, Zakim, MichaelC, jasonjgw,
16:06:37 <Zakim> ... yatil, trackbot
16:06:43 <Glenda> Zakim, next item
16:06:44 <Zakim> I do not see any more non-closed or non-skipped agenda items, Glenda
16:06:52 <laura> present+ Laura
16:07:02 <Glenda> Zakim, take up item 3
16:07:02 <Zakim> I only see 2 items on the agenda
16:07:20 <Glenda> Zakim, take up item 1
16:07:21 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Changes to Understanding document structure?" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:07:23 <Joshue108> TOPIC: Response to comment on 2.4.11 Character Key Shortcuts #501
16:07:47 <MichaelC> present+
16:07:47 <Joshue108> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/501
16:07:56 <JF> JF has joined #ag
16:08:04 <JF> present+ JF
16:08:09 <jimal> present+
16:08:34 <Joshue108> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/512
16:09:09 <KimD> Present+
16:09:29 <Joshue108> q?
16:09:45 <Glenda> Reviewing item 3 on the survey https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Oct_17th_agwg/ Response to comment on 2.4.11 Character Key Shortcuts #501
16:09:52 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
16:10:05 <Glenda> See: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Oct_17th_agwg/results#xnew2
16:10:07 <AWK> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:10:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/10/19-ag-minutes.html AWK
16:11:15 <Glenda> 11 accept as proposed with 3 comments requesting changes
16:12:01 <Joshue108> zakim, ping me in 5 mins
16:12:01 <Zakim> ok, Joshue108
16:12:15 <Glenda> AWK:  my suggestion is a rephrasing.  “I think that this one should be handled more in line with the HTML5 spec for keyboard shortcuts.
16:12:15 <Glenda> If a <a>keyboard shortcut</a> consisting entirely of one or more <a>character keys</a> is implemented by the content @@to activate or focus a control that is not currently focused@@, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key.”
16:12:40 <JF> Q+
16:12:54 <Joshue108> ack JF
16:13:34 <Glenda> JF: prefer that we use the wording “modifier key”
16:14:46 <JF> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/66524/20170920_survey/results#xq4
16:15:10 <Glenda> AWK: the character key question and modifier key is handled in the definiiton.  We could make it clearer.  But I think we should deal with that separately.
16:15:35 <Joshue108> q?
16:15:44 <Glenda> Joshue: Can everyone live with this?
16:16:08 <Glenda> David:  There are 3 proposals.  One from David, one from Steve/Detlev, one from AWK
16:16:45 <JF> Q+
16:17:01 <jimal> +1 to andrew proposal
16:17:02 <Zakim> Joshue108, you asked to be pinged at this time
16:17:39 <AWK> Original: If a keyboard shortcut consisting entirely of one or more character keys is implemented by the content, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key.
16:17:40 <Glenda> Detlev’s suggestion:  would suggest to change the text from
16:17:40 <Glenda> "unless the character key is only active when a control has focus"
16:17:41 <Glenda> to
16:17:42 <Glenda> "unless the keyboard shortcut is only active when a control has focus"
16:18:02 <AWK> Detlev's: If a keyboard shortcut consisting entirely of one or more character keys is implemented by the content, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key, unless the keyboard shortcut is only active when a control has focus
16:18:15 <david-macdonald> unless the character key is only active when a control has focus.
16:18:29 <AWK> Steve's: If a keyboard shortcut consisting entirely of one or more character keys is implemented by the content, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key, unless the keyboard shortcut is only active when a particular user interface component has focus
16:18:40 <AWK> AWK's: If a <a>keyboard shortcut</a> consisting entirely of one or more <a>character keys</a> is implemented by the content @@to activate or focus a control that is not currently focused@@, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key.
16:19:34 <jasonjgw> +1 to Andrew's formulation.
16:19:43 <steverep> q+ to say the current pull has my proposal in it
16:19:53 <steverep> present+steverep
16:20:23 <Joshue108> ack JF
16:21:16 <Glenda> JF: be consistent and use “control” or “user interface component”.  Also have concerned about what a non-character key is.  Will need a definition.
16:21:45 <jasonjgw> q+
16:21:48 <Joshue108> ack steve
16:21:48 <Zakim> steverep, you wanted to say the current pull has my proposal in it
16:21:55 <steverep> Current pull request is http://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/resolve-issue-501/guidelines/#character-key-shortcuts
16:21:56 <Glenda> Joshue:  I agree on consistency.  Prefer “control”.
16:22:45 <Joshue108> If a <a>keyboard shortcut</a> consisting entirely of one or more <a>character keys</a> is implemented by the content @@to activate or focus a control that is not currently focused@@, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key, unless the keyboard shortcut is only active when a particular control component has focus.
16:22:59 <JF> Q+
16:23:22 <Joshue108> ack jason
16:23:51 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
16:23:51 <Joshue108> or If a <a>keyboard shortcut</a> consisting entirely of one or more <a>character keys</a> is implemented by the content @@to activate or focus a control that is not currently focused@@, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key, unless the keyboard shortcut is only active when a particular user interface component has focus.
16:23:52 <Glenda> Jason:  we use the term “user interface component” more consistenly then we use the word “control”
16:23:58 <AWK> +AWK
16:24:36 <AWK> John, what if we replaced "one non-character key" with "one key that is not a character key"?
16:24:39 <laura> character key definition: http://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/resolve-issue-501/guidelines/#dfn-character-keys
16:25:24 <Joshue108> ack JF
16:25:28 <AWK> q+
16:26:12 <Glenda> JF: 26 references to user interface component and 30+ references to control.  We need to tighten that up.  We are using both terms.  We need to standardize.
16:26:50 <Joshue108> ack awk
16:28:23 <Glenda> AWK:  the word “control” is in the definition of “user interface component”.  So, we can look at this as a different item.  Let’s focus on the proposed SC text that Josh has just written (see next).
16:28:24 <JF> s/30+ references/36 references
16:29:36 <Glenda> AWK:  reconsider the contrstuction of my proposal.  easier to read and easier to parse.
16:30:01 <Glenda> Joshue:  can steve and detlev live with AWK’s proposal
16:30:05 <Joshue108> If a keyboard shortcut consisting entirely of one or more character keys is implemented by the content to activate or focus a control that is not currently focused, then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key.
16:30:18 <KimD> Should Andrew's say "...to activate or ++give++ focus ++to++ a control that --is not-- ++does not++ currently have focus..."?
16:30:28 <Glenda> Steve:  Yes.  I can live with AWK’s proposal.
16:31:02 <JF> Q?
16:31:13 <Ryladog> +1
16:31:14 <JF> Q+
16:31:17 <AWK> uses "focus" as a verb in mine, like in the HTML5 spec
16:31:20 <Glenda> Joshue:  straw poll, who can live with AWK’s proposal?
16:31:21 <jimal> +1
16:31:23 <laura> +1
16:31:25 <KimD> +1 with a little clean up
16:31:27 <Brooks> +1
16:31:31 <Joshue108> ack JF
16:32:33 <Glenda> JF:  real problem is single key shortcuts.  so the mechanism to turn it off, I can support that.  But the remapping to multiple key shortcut that includes a modifier and another key.  I’m not sure this is being conveyed.
16:32:56 <alastairc> Sorry, i have to depart now, I'll check the minutes later tonight.
16:34:23 <Glenda>  then a mechanism is available to turn it off or to remap it to a shortcut that uses at least one non-character key. (should be “at least one non-character key and a modifer key).
16:34:40 <Glenda> JF:  need a modifer key plus
16:35:13 <Joshue108> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_character
16:35:27 <jimal> modifier key for access key is controlled by the browser
16:36:35 <jimal> single key (hot key) in a web application is controlled by the author in javascript ... not anything like accesskey
16:36:40 <Joshue108> q+ to say Single character short cuts are not accesskey
16:36:41 <Joshue108> ack me
16:36:41 <Zakim> Joshue, you wanted to say Single character short cuts are not accesskey
16:37:37 <AWK> @JF, your concern is not with my text, but with the original SC text
16:38:01 <Glenda> JF:  my concern with AWK’s language is that I could map the single character shortcut key of “L” to “CTRL”.  It needs to require at least 2 keys (one being a modifier).
16:38:16 <Glenda> Joshue:  need to leave this open, need to do more research, I think
16:39:01 <Glenda> AWK:  I’m not seeing the issue that JF is raising is part of what we are trying to address here.  There is a cascade problem here.
16:39:53 <Joshue108> q+
16:40:08 <Glenda> AWK:  we need to address James comment first.  Then we can address JF’s issue.  One at a time.
16:41:06 <JF> +1 Josh
16:41:09 <Joshue108> q-
16:42:16 <Glenda> Joshue: we need to have James and JF discuss this on Tuesday
16:42:43 <Glenda> RESOLUTION: leave open until Tuesday so JF and James can discuss and find a solution
16:42:53 <david-macdonald> I had to step out for a bit, back now
16:42:55 <steverep> q+ to point out a possible loophole in AWK's proposal if the control is not immediately focusable?
16:42:59 <Glenda> agenda?
16:44:08 <Glenda> TOPIC: Device Sensors
16:44:54 <laura> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Oct_17th_agwg/results
16:45:08 <steverep> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Oct_17th_agwg/results
16:46:25 <laura> 1.4.12 User Interface Component Contrast (Minimum) #490 should be up next: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Oct_17th_agwg/results#xnew3
16:46:37 <Glenda> s/TOPIC: Device Sensors/
16:47:03 <Glenda> AWK:  TOPIC: UIC Contrast
16:47:12 <Glenda> TOPIC: UIC Contrast
16:47:35 <david-macdonald> david-macdonald has joined #ag
16:47:42 <Glenda> AWK:  5 people agree.  8 say not to accept this change.  This will be a really hard one.
16:48:10 <Glenda> AWK:  my suggestion is we discuss this at TPAC
16:48:13 <jasonjgw> q+
16:48:23 <JF> Q+
16:48:23 <david-macdonald> q+
16:48:30 <AWK> ack ste
16:48:30 <Zakim> steverep, you wanted to point out a possible loophole in AWK's proposal if the control is not immediately focusable?
16:48:50 <AWK> ack jas
16:49:41 <Glenda> Jason: this is complex, will need to discuss this with colleagues more.
16:49:42 <AWK> ack JF
16:50:30 <Glenda> JF:  I support James in 3 to 1 being sufficient.
16:50:45 <laura> The need is real. LVTF reached out to Gordon Legge, Distinguished low vision researcher from the University of Minnesota. His recommendation is in my survey response. He summed it up by saying, "Bottom line: Contrast requirements for form controls should be equivalent to contrast requirements for text..."
16:50:45 <AWK> ack dav
16:51:57 <Glenda> David:  2 sides and both have valid concerns.  Testing burden on this would be high.  Concerned about 3 way contrast for focus indicator.
16:52:24 <jimal> Q+ to say many techniques to adjust focus indicator
16:52:31 <Glenda> David:  probably need to take this up at TPAC
16:52:43 <AWK> ack jim
16:52:43 <Zakim> jimal, you wanted to say many techniques to adjust focus indicator
16:53:23 <AWK> q+ to say that this also covers selection color, such as in a listbox
16:53:29 <AWK> ack AWK
16:53:29 <Zakim> AWK, you wanted to say that this also covers selection color, such as in a listbox
16:53:35 <Glenda> Jim: The 3 way contrast, there is always outline offset, to move it 3 pixels away, then you really are just dealing with a 2 color contrast (not 3).  Or dashed lines, can get you to only need to be concerned about 2 colors.
16:54:16 <steverep> q+ to say there are many many ways to avoid 3-way, and those may need normative changes to convey properly
16:54:40 <laura> If an author touches it, then they need to do it right. If they don't, then it's a browser issue and they are off the hook.
16:54:59 <Glenda> Jim:  if the author didn’t make a change, then there is an exception.  If they do make their own components, they need to make it visible.
16:55:04 <AWK> ack steve
16:55:04 <Zakim> steverep, you wanted to say there are many many ways to avoid 3-way, and those may need normative changes to convey properly
16:56:03 <Glenda> Steve:  There are so many ways in CSS to make things more distinguishable.  You can completely avoid the 3 way contrast problem.  We just need to work on how to avoide the 3 way contrast problem.
16:57:30 <Glenda> RESOLUTION:  Leave UIC Contrast discussion for TPAC
16:57:34 <AWK> TOPIC: Commit for Need an "AND" rather than "OR" in Purpose of controls #405
16:57:53 <Glenda> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Oct_17th_agwg/results#xcorrect
16:58:16 <david-macdonald> present+ david-macdonald
16:58:55 <Glenda> 11 support, 2 suggest changes, 2 want more time or do not accept
16:59:17 <AWK> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/406/files
16:59:21 <jasonjgw> q+
16:59:57 <JF> Q+
17:00:22 <Glenda> AWK:  this is a simple change, and if we focus on the “OR” to “AND”
17:00:50 <Glenda> JF:  I was involved in the writing of this SC.  Intent all along was to say “AND”
17:01:20 <Glenda> Jason:  agreeing with JF.  Other issues are all separate from what this particular question.  Looks like there is good support.
17:01:37 <Glenda> AWK:  the other comments are important, but we will deal with the separately.
17:01:42 <JF> +1
17:01:55 <Glenda> RESOLUTION:  Accept as proposed.  Will ssend out CFC on this!
17:02:01 <marcjohlic> present+ marcjohlic
17:02:22 <Glenda> rrsagent, make minutes
17:02:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/10/19-ag-minutes.html Glenda
17:02:53 <Glenda> rrsagent, make logs public
17:03:05 <Glenda> trackbot end meeting
17:03:05 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:03:05 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been jallan, JakeAbma, interaccess, bruce_bailey, Roy, Laura, jamesn, jasonjgw, Kathy, MikeGower, kirkwood, Makoto, KimD, Greg_Lowney,
17:03:08 <Zakim> ... Mike_Elledge, Brooks, steverep, JF, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Glenda, david-macdonald, marcjohlic, Detlev, Joshue108, alastairc, shadi__, MichaelC, jimal, AWK
17:03:13 <Glenda> trackbot, end meeting
17:03:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:03:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/10/19-ag-minutes.html trackbot
17:03:14 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
17:03:14 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
17:03:14 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:03:14 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been jallan, JakeAbma, interaccess, bruce_bailey, Roy, Laura, jamesn, jasonjgw, Kathy, MikeGower, kirkwood, Makoto, KimD, Greg_Lowney,