Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group Teleconference

15 May 2019


jasonjgw, janina, MichaelC, Joshue108_, SteveNoble_, scott_h


CAPTCHA Note: open issues.

<scribe> scribe: Joshue108

WebRTC: accessibility-related use cases and their implications.

CAPTCHA Note: open issues.

JW: Just to go back over the story before comments
... There have been changes made to Bio metrics etc

Janina has worked on the conclusions etc..

JW: Just going over state of affairs.

Horz review request has been made, we've had response.

JS: We've had some substantive comments, need to be addressed.
... Some broken refs..

JW: to have a look at this.

JS: There are two big ones, the easier one is that there is a section missing on phone validation.

I think we need this.

JS: He has given lots of the content and should be added as a contributor.

JW: Comments?

JS: Would like to stick to schedule and don't want to push timelines much.

SH: Doesn't have to be a big extension.

JS: We do have things to say etc
... The OP says We can't expect that e'one has phones.

JW: Text messaging etc can be used in a diff channel.
... So to be inclusive combined messaging and voice call is a part of some schemes.

JS: Hearing no disagreement, I'll make sure it happens.

JW: I'll take an action, will also review other changes.

JS: Re Recaptha v 2 Anhel is suggesting they may have closed the case.

Its up to them, may break to some who have not moved to V3.

Maybe we should not make it fully present tense.

JS: In a year or too it may be out of date.
... Scott makes a good point also..
... People don't make changes often unless they need to.

<outlines some limits>

SH: They are in the wild

JS: +1

JW: They are separate issues, and Google may stop the V2 implementation anytime.

There are others that will still operate, but they are different points.

I agree on these points, think they are addressed.

Need to be careful about what we say around Google specific implementation.

<Janina to update>

JS: Comments about what is supported not necessary.

JW: Draft ready this week Janina?

JS: Yes!

JW: Anything else?

JS: Yes, Section 3.3, Turing Tokens..

The privacy pass people are to be thanked..

Think we pushed them to consider this..

We had some influence on people developing new tech in CAPTCHA.

I've called these Turing tokens.

Also Scotts comment, and John agreed - I dialled down some of my comments.

SH: Its great work Janina, and great that it is having an impact.

JS: I've some surprise about usage of term parlance.

JW: Have you a chance to review?

SH: What I saw, looks good to me.

JS: Didn't put new language on list, its in the current draft.

SH: Will have another look, go for it.

JS: Re Biometrics section, thinking how to re-introduce issues around seniors with fingerprint. issues.

Older people can be hard to finger print. It is in there.

JW: Due to tremors?

JS: Skin fading
... Came up with friends..
... Lots had trouble with immigration
... In Japan e'time I've been fingerprinted.

JW: There are lots of devices using this method still.
... Any other comments?

JS: Modulo these changes, we may have others but proposed to implement anything useful that comes in.
... Hope to still meet time line.

JB: Did you check the RQTF credits?

JS: Did ping you but not sure how to do it. It just mentions APA, no URI.

JB: Will reply..

MC: We are talking about the status for the publication doc..
... I edit this when getting the doc ready usually. I've done TF credits before, it is easy but will need reminder.

JB: Just to clarify, we're not trying to say its publication of TF, but don't want to be silent about the fact the TF exists.

Hope to draw people into the group. Use wording that lets people know about it.

JS: We could name the TF in Acknow section.

JB: Put a mention at the front is best.

JW: Ok, Michael will take a run at that.

JS: I'll remind.

JW: Expect a CFC soon, we can look at it afresh before final review draft.
... Any final comments?

Request for review from APA: Mitigating Browser Fingerprinting in Web Specifications.

WebRTC: accessibility-related use cases and their implications.


<jasonjgw> Josh: notes the use cases document.

<jasonjgw> Josh: WebRTC is a technology for direct browser to browser communication. There's an opportunity to give it attention from the accessibility standpoint.


<jasonjgw> Josh collected comments from APA regarding use cases. Josh has created a document which outlines the accessibility-related use cases.

<jasonjgw> This document outlines user needs and application scenarios of WebRTC. Issues are raised that may be addressed in WebRTC development.

<jasonjgw> Josh plans to discuss this further in APA.

<jasonjgw> Comments could most usefully be provided to the WebRTC process for discussion in June.

<jasonjgw> Josh emphasizes the value of examining and developing the use cases well.

Consolidation sounds good

<jasonjgw> Michael notes that several use cases (related to moving channels between devices) may be implementation details outside the scope of the WebRTC specification. Having separable channels, however, would be a matter for the protocol.

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to ask about rtt and irc scrolling support

<jasonjgw> Janina: notes the role of real-time text (where the text is transmitted character by character as it is entered).

<jasonjgw> Janina notes implementation bugs in this area on some mobile devices with respect to focus hanling.

<jasonjgw> Janina inquires where the implementation guidance belongs.

<jasonjgw> Josh suggests we analyze the scenario that Janina has raised in greater detail and determine where the responsibilities lie.

<jasonjgw> Janina notes the importance of real-time text, which has been subject to regulation in some circumstances.

<jasonjgw> Judy notes real-time text issues which have been discussed in Europe.

<jasonjgw> Josh notes real-time text support being required in the U.S. for telecommunications as janina stated earlier; there appears to be clarity in the regulations, making discussions of RTT relatively clear.

<jasonjgw> Josh will consolidate some of the use cases (those associated with moving channels between devices).

<jasonjgw> Judy suggests clarifying the statements in Josh's use cases regarding regulatory requirementsin the U.S.

<jasonjgw> Janina notes that there will be an order mandating real-time text, togehter with explanatory material.

JW: They need to know about regulatory.

<jasonjgw> Josh encourages comments on the use cases.

<jasonjgw> Janina expects most of the substantive discussion to take place here, but APA will also be kept informed.

<jasonjgw> Responding to Janina, Josh clarifies that a meeting on WebRTC is to take place in early June.

<jasonjgw> Josh will clarify an appropriate schedule for delivering the use cases to the WebRTC working gorup.



JS: Lets make WebRTC a top item next week.

JW: If Josh is happy for this.


JW: We can review this, as well as the original next version use case doc.


JW: Can everyone please review the WebRTC use cases that would be great.
... Other comments?

JS: I'm asking people to look at this, and Fingerprinting look at the comments we want to make.
... It should be saying something about a11y, and what that is, is the question.

<jasonjgw> Janina suggests something should be said regarding accessibiity in browser fingerprinting note.

<jasonjgw> We'll take it up next week.

JW: Lets look at this before next week, there may be research and publications.

Need to find out if there are ways someone using AT could be identified.

Lets chat next week.

Thanks to all, productive - will set.

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
$Date: 2019/05/15 14:00:57 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/bit/big/
Succeeded: s/for WebRTC/ Fingerprinting/
Default Present: jasonjgw, janina, MichaelC, Joshue108_, SteveNoble_, scott_h
Present: jasonjgw janina MichaelC Joshue108_ SteveNoble_ scott_h
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: Joshue108_
Found Scribe: Joshue108
Found Date: 15 May 2019
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]