Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference -- 08 May 2018

<Mike_Elledge> Scribe: Mike Elledge

Understanding changes to review and approve: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/understanding_changes/results

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Survey. Bunch of understanding docs, still may be more to be done.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: We will find speelling mistakes, minor changes, additions, looking to get these things in. Not done, still need to think about them.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: But want to get good work out. Put in Editor's draft, so goes to right place.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Increase in number of ppl who have looked at.

Changes to Understanding conformance

<Mike_Elledge> awk: A pull request that came from David. See the changes.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: did this approach work for survey results?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: not useful?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Was it helpful?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: 4 ready, 1 changes (ag): examples seem outdated--Vista, Firefox.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: 543 pull request. Mark Jolic had some suggestions.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Back in October!

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Real video also an example. Seem editorial. MJ suggestions for newer technologies. We can update those without big deal.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Detlev comment more changes. Snippets a bit odd for SC. Why focus on images?

<Mike_Elledge> dm: This is a copy from the publishing team. Often conformance claims are things ppl will understand quickly.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Don't enumerate ones that are difficult to understand.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Don't have a problem with this.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Not sure where to look for Detlev's comment.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: It's in the code snip, very last paragraph. Page has text and images.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Still confused about code snippet.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Looking for space snippet. Under heading. 2nd paragraph, schema.org. After that is code snip. Not a rendering.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Looks like html.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Point that it's supposes to show up.

<david-macdonald> which pull https://github.com/daisy/epub-revision-a11y/wiki/WCAG-Discovery-Metadata-Proposal

<Mike_Elledge> dm: I see it. Looks fine to me.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Not what we're looking at.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Still very lost.

<AWK> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/add-metadata-schema-epub/understanding/20/conformance.html

<Mike_Elledge> awk: The proposed version (above). in epub branch. there is a section, 23 march, supposed to be a code element.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: the html that one would put.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: That's right. should be a code element.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Maybe if we just wrap it. This doesn't have to look at code. Should be rendered like this. Like existing performance claims.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Can get rid of code element.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Detlev question: does conf claim need add'l detail like alt text for images.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Acceptable to put in examples if ppl understand them. Maybe should say "for example"

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Looking at requred elements, it isn't one for conformance claim. List tech you've met. Characteristics in machine readalble metadata. Steps to go beyond. What's in there seems going to cause soem confusion.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Thoughts?

<david-macdonald> For information on using other techniques, see , particularly

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Fine with changing it. Note extra space before comment. Typo.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Sufficient techniques.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Any comments? Just get rid of that section that Detlev mentioned.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Fine with that. Rarely see this format for conformance claims. anyone?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Never provided cc of this sort.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Thought it was a good idea for 2.0. :^)

<Mike_Elledge> awk: In this example, this page includes both text and images, an attempt to be machine readable.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Sounds logical that it came from epub ppl.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Just ping someone there, verify it's what they intended.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: If so, will be a code section. Might suggest when assembled this was first, may be want something simpler first.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Fine with putting at end.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: add to the branch. Anyone disagree?

RESOLUTION: Merge pull request 543

<Mike_Elledge> awk: next

<Mike_Elledge> zakim next item

Changes to Understanding conformance #2

<Mike_Elledge> awk: 545 pull request. All arounc conforming alternate versions. Need to be clear that link goes to alternate version. Small change.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: wouldn't be able to say mobile view is a11ble unless there is a link for info about how to get to the alternate version from desktop.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Statement about screen sizes, kind of makes this obsolete?

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Guess not. Could say this is the conforming alternative so long as works on the alternative screen.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Wouldn't say Step One: Go buy desktop.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Link purpose in context understanding document, also change. Best practice for links to add to link text that goes to alternate version.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Alistair said "or" should be "and".

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Does it have to indicate ways it is more accessible?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Feels like it should. First part required, second optional. Understanding?

<Mike_Elledge> Glenda: Agrees.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Instead say "...providing link text to describe..."

<Mike_Elledge> dm: "pathway to link"

<AWK> "Authors relying on conforming alternate versions must make end users aware that a conforming alternate version is available. This may be accomplished by providing link text to indicate a way to reach the more accessible version and that link may also detail specific ways it is more accessible."

<Mike_Elledge> awk: "and that link may indicate pathway that is more accessible."

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Don't want to provide dropdown that is inaccessible.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: you MAY do it this way.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Require button be accessible. Pathway has to be accessible.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: of course. no suggestion it isn't the case. Ag was just commenting on the "or".

<Mike_Elledge> awk: This may be accomplished by providing link text to indicate a way to reach the more accessible version and vs. "or"

<Mike_Elledge> awk: may do that, or do we want to get into specifics?

<Mike_Elledge> dm: never seen a link to a conforming alternative that say how it is more accessible.

<Glenda> AT friendly version

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Just providing a link or note that says here are three. You choose.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Link to alternative versions.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Links to three versions, so here's a WCAG 2.0 AA conforming versions.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Alternatives is my understanding.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: "or" that details specific ways, which is a strange request for link text.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Lop the second part off. First part is what we mean.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Strawman: Go to website taht has accesskeys, and make it more navigable, link that provides instructions would that not be detail specific showing more accessible way.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: You'll provide that in the link text?

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Contextual help, or something like that. Not the text, it's the link, right/

<Mike_Elledge> jf: It's the target we're concerend about. It could be to many objects that would detail how to interact more accessibly.

<AWK> "Authors relying on conforming alternate versions must make end users aware that a conforming alternate version is available. This may be accomplished by providing link text to indicate a way to reach the more accessible version or that details specific ways it is more accessible."

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Hard to reconcile proposal vs. what you're saying.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: "Or that details" refers to link text. AG is saying this seems strange.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: High contrast? Doesn't mean for accessibility, but traditionally it is. Reader-friendly version.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Simplified version may still have complex graphic, but reader-friendly. Saying it's not the accessible version, but here's an alternate version.

<AWK> "Authors relying on conforming alternate versions must make end users aware that a conforming alternate version is available. This may be accomplished by providing link text to indicate a way to reach the more accessible version or that indicates specific ways an alternate version is more accessible (e.g. "high contrast version").

<Mike_Elledge> Brooks: Agree with John. use case if you have aomcplex graph generated on the fly, tabular view unerlying graph, not calling out that it is accessible, but easier than chart.

<Mike_Elledge> Brooks: Yep. Or text view.

<Mike_Elledge> Bruce: Two different sentences. First part has to do with conforming.

<alastairc> E.g. "...by providing link text to indicate a way to reach the more accessible version. It should also indicate specific ways an alternate version is more accessible (e.g. "high contrast version")."

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Could solve problem of complex long sentence.

<Mike_Elledge> Chuck: will work on it.

RESOLUTION: Leave open.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: TOPIC: Pointer cancellation.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Everyone liked it. Alastair suggested some changes AWK made. Mike Gower make the understanding document more understandable.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Any objections to accepting this pull request inot editing branch?

RESOLUTION: Accept pull request.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: TOPIC: Identify Input Purpose

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Only add that it says 1.3.4; that is now 1.3.5.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Yep.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: At least 3 editorial changes.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: just made them. Should be good.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Looking at rawgit...

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Takes a minute to catch up.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Comments: suggestions changes (Mike Gower) introduce translation, add subheading so easier to digest.

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Don't think it's a problem. Some intents are pretty short. some go beyond. This one goes into implementation. Subheading could tackle that. Separate introcuction from intent.

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Might make more sense to beef it up.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: "use autofill techs from 5.2" which gets to implementation.

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Maybe could use more structure.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Propose that open up an issue that we need to scrub the understanding docs intent sections so they are consistent with each other in terms of level of technology they refrence vs. what SC is intending to resolve.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: wuld be a placeholder.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Minor editorial change. Example we're giving. Autocomplete. Use current and new password as example. For instance family and given name. Worried about using the pw example. muddies the water. Doesnt' provide insight.

<Mike_Elledge> jf: Will find a better example if otehrs agree.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Agree? Disagree?

<alastairc> agree, similar to my comment on the last example

<Mike_Elledge> awk: will add taht we need another example.

<alastairc> Adding a comment here: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/779

<gowerm> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/904

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Everyone agree with some changes: intent and structure

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Perfect (to mgowers revision)

<Chuck> I have prepared alternatives, I have two different versions to present.

<Mike_Elledge> Bruce: "intent of" would like to be cleaned up.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Editors will do. Won't ask working group to do.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Need to refer to name instead of number, goal to be clear and consistent will be editorial.

<Glenda> no objection :)

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Objetions to accptong pull request

RESOLUTION: to accept pull request

<Mike_Elledge> awk: TOPIC: Understanding Reflow

<Mike_Elledge> awk; 2 changes, 3 ready to go.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Laura? suggests adding reflow is critical to low vision users.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Intent...suggests adding paragraph of text

<Glenda> I support the addition of that sentence :)

<JF> +1

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Add

<jallan> +1

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Need to add somethiing about ppl expanding text before testing for reflow. And orientation on Landscape?

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Quite a few sites would not pass.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Don't have clear resolution on that. Agree that want to have that clarity. not sure what it wuld be though.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: accepting doesn't mean we won't

<alastairc> yes - and impacts more docs than just this one.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: contingent.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: yes doesn't mean ready to publish. We're saying that these are helpful suggestions and get us closer to acceptinog.

<Mike_Elledge> ag: Typo check and unclosed brackets at bottom.

<AWK> https://w3c.github.io/wcag21/understanding/reflow.html

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Don't know why we got rid of figure one. Thought it was helpful.

<alastairc> Re fig 1 - I don't think removing it was intentional, the figure caption was still there

<AWK> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/reflow-changes-Detlev/understanding/21/reflow.html

<Mike_Elledge> awk: has been added. So okay.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: changes okay with different paragraph?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: okay

<alastairc> +1 (no objection)

RESOLUTION: Accept pull request

Understanding Label and Name

<Mike_Elledge> awk; 4 ready, 1 changes. Detlev: persona quote describes speech input correclty.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Anyone with experience using speech tools?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Quote at beginning: Computer: submit the form. computer: Why aren't you doing what I ask?

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Is this right/

<Mike_Elledge> mg: vernacular won't be quite right. Kind of like star trek...

<Mike_Elledge> GS: These are not. I wouldl suggest pulling that, one of my snarky persona quote. Not an Official one.

<Mike_Elledge> gs: Mean to entertain. Not appropriate for persona quote.

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Probably best to add new branch for personas so can look throug at once.

<Mike_Elledge> gs: So voice is consistent.

<alastairc> Some include files?

<Mike_Elledge> mg: could make a macro for all of them.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Get rid of persona quote heading

<Mike_Elledge> gs: for this particular one.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Remove persona quote everything else is fine.

<Mike_Elledge> bruce?: Should

<laura> love the idea of having a macro for all of the understanding docs.

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Only concern is work that's already been done.

<Mike_Elledge> gs: Only done on two, have a request out. DK if it's in your inbox to make sure you were okay with first four that were written.

<Mike_Elledge> MC: If it's there, didn't see it.

<Mike_Elledge> gs: Would love that feedback.

<Mike_Elledge> mc: Please forward.

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Any objecton to removing persona quote and merging?

<gowerm> Because the Personas and Simplified sentences are modular, i think it makes sense to tackle in a separate phase, after all the Understanding brances have been merged into Master

<Mike_Elledge> mj: Leaving simplified text okay?

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Would pull them out. Once we have udnerstanding branches we can add simplified one and one for personas.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Any probs with current short statments. Do they need to be fixed?

<Mike_Elledge> mj: folks said helpful.

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Modular, so can go anywhere. Understanding doc can be read without them.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: support them.

<Mike_Elledge> mg: Cleaner as one pass.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: more work if have to revise then drop them all in?

<Mike_Elledge> gs: Just one or two.

<Glenda> awesome - let’s do it!

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Ojjections to pull the persona and put into branch.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Missing a colon. Advisory with no period at end of it. Others with.

<Mike_Elledge> dm: Name of technique doesn't need a period at end of it.

<Mike_Elledge> mc: Leave it to the editors.

RESOLUTION: Merge pull request 897

<Mike_Elledge> awk: Scribe relief?

<Mike_Elledge> chirp, chirp..

<laura> Scribe: Laura

<Mike_Elledge> Thanks!

awk: scribe for thurs?

brooks: I will.

chuck: 2 options:

Understanding conformance #2

<Chuck> Sentence 1: Authors relying on conforming alternate versions must make end users aware that a conforming alternate version is available.

<Chuck> Sentence 2: This may be accomplished by providing link text to indicate a way to reach the more accessible version.

<Chuck> Sentence 3: Alternatively a link may be provided to instructions which indicate specific ways an alternate version is more accessible (e.g. "high contrast version").

<Chuck> Sentence 1: Authors relying on conforming alternate versions must make end users aware that a conforming alternate version is available.

<Chuck> Sentence 2: This may be accomplished by providing a link to a more accessible version, identified clearly by link text.

<Chuck> Sentence 3: Alternatively a link to instructions may be provided which documents how to access a more accessible version as well as the specific ways the alternate version is more accessible (e.g. a "high contrast version").

<bruce_bailey> +1 to 2nd version

awk: what do people think?

<Glenda> +1 to 2nd version

david: either

<alastairc> +1 to second, the 1st one suffers from the problem of "here is how it is more accessible, but I won't link to it"

<marcjohlic> +1 to 2nd

<JF> +1 to second version

<kirkwood> +1 to 2nd

awk: there are other options too.

chuck: yes. not the only way. It is conditional.

awk: maybe give it a try. we can change if needed.
... any objections to #2?

RESOLUTION: merge PR 545

Review of Understanding progress

<alastairc> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Wcag21-understanding-documents#List_of_understanding_docs

awk: we have a month more less to REC.
... need to complete
... 17 yes & no nos on AC survey
... looks good.Good mix of large companies and a11y companies.
... comments open until 22nd.
... we can change understanding docs edits very quickly. Not tied to TR anymore.
... we can change things easier now.

<Zakim> gowerm, you wanted to say should we be using the Ready for WG Review label? https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/labels/Ready%20for%20WG%20Review

mg: labled some understand docs ready for review.

awk: need to get them into a survey. ping the chairs.

<Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to talk about general understanding review

ac: can anyone take on identify purpose?

JF: on my todo list.
... will have it done by end of this week.

ac: non text contrast on my list for this week.
... more ready for survey. (reading from wiki page)

awk: lets do a survey on them.

<JF> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Wcag21-understanding-documents

JF: is wiki page up to date?

ac: mostly. accurate as of last thursday.
... some others have been active. but don’t want ot duplicate.

https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/777 - proposed technique for role=status

awk: mg suggested this one and the next one.
... for 413 status messages.

mg: we did go through these at one time.
... capturing missing ARIA techniques. They are amost siblings.

<marcjohlic> rawgit to the technique: https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/becab06b706f39bd80004cd9f2836c0d5311ee20/techniques/aria/aria-status-role.html

david: make sure don’t have to use role status message.
... note the only way to meet this SC.
... considering the language could be a common misconception.

awk: helpful to put in related techniques. need some hook.

MG: what do we do to cross reference?

mc: haven’t figure that out yet. use words.

https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/797 - proposed technique for role=log

awk: detail and structure looks good..
... next one 797

david: role=log falls into this SC

<alastairc> gowerm isn't log 'assertive' rather that polite

jf: aren’t they static or not?

mg: it is aria live.
... for example won’t get the whole chat.

<alastairc> oh, no, it is polite, I mis-read the docs.

jf: does all logging needs to be announced?

awk: this one is on the right track as well.

<AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Wcag21-techniques

awk: this is what we have right now.
... update on process.

mc: sent email regarding titles.

awk: will have a bunch of new branches.
... populate with minimum files

mc: making the titles consistient with 2.0

<kirkwood> catchy

awk: shortening verbose ones.
... we will send around list of techniques.

MC: live examples are in a sub directory in 2.0.
... we could use that model.
... or we could do them in a different branch.
... will think it through.
... will put up instructions.

awk: more to come soon.
... will be sending out a survey
... talk with everyone thursday. Thanks so much.

trackbot, end meeting

- DRAFT -

Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

08 May 2018

Attendees

Contents