<scribe> scribe: jasonjgw
Janina notes work carried out regarding HTML and TTML, carried out in the midst of other responsibilities by participants.
There is no news to share.
John: finding colors that meet contrast requirements has proven to be a dififcult and time-consuming task.
<JF> https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3ctag/tracking-issues#
<JF> <li data-label="tracker"> <a href="#" title="TAG is following a discussion, but doesn't require resolution." onclick="filterByLabel('tracker')"> <span class="labels" style="background-color:#eeeeee"> </span> tracker</a> </li>
John notes issues with dashboard code, and the use of both class and style attributes. He suggests using a CSS selector to set the color properties.
<JF> pending needs-resolution advice-requested waiting tracker close? Clear filter
John notes different classes which are present, and proposes using a style sheet with appropriate selectors to set color properties.
<JF> https://leaverou.github.io/css3patterns/#diagonal-stripes
John can deliver these styles by end of day if there is agreement.
Janina appreciates John's contribution. This is W3C-developed technology and it isn't clear how much is determined by GitHub constraints.
<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/horizontal-issue-tracker/blob/master/docs/display.js
Michael: the implementation takes colors from GitHub. There's a script that does the work, and Michael sees no reason in principle why it can't do what John is proposing.
Michael can take up any proposal that John puts forward from the standpoint of feasibility.
John agrees to send a compiled suggestion to Michael by end of day today.
This includes style sheet material and changes to markup.
Responding to Gottfried: John clarifies that colors can be overridden under his proposal.
Janina: we have started improving some of the Task Force pages. Janina owes Michael RQTF-related updates.
Janina's general proposition is that APA needs to be more effective in presenting what is going on with APA and its current task forces.
Janina notes an upcoming CFC.
Janina notes some responses from groups. We'll put together the best we can and Janina will respond on list. We may seek to move some technologies to HTML, and therefore will need a vector to WhatWG.
Janina and Michael note a request from Neil Soiffer. Michael notes that mathematics work is happening in ARIA.
Joanie: has suggested to Neil that APA is the appropriate venue for discussing how to address the accessibility issues of domain-specific (mathematics-related) content.
Janina concurs taht APA is the right forum.
Michael will process his application.
Joanie notes that the mathematics work in ARIA is related to use of ARIA to provide author-defined exploration of mathematical content, going beyond the use of ARIA live regions.
Broader issues of MathML are a distinct concern.
Janina notes the need to continue discussion of this topic.
Michael: no new charters since we last discussed them.
Michael notes the point of liaison with APA.
Janina suggests establishing the liaison relationship.
Michael proposes communication with their chairs in the first instance.
Janina takes an action accordingly.
Janina suggests re-establishing the discussion with XR at TPAC.
Michael notes two recent publications.
<MichaelC> Streaming JSON-LD
Michael notes it's too low level for us to be concerned.
No one disagrees.
<MichaelC> Image Resource
Michael: it creates a JavaScript object to represent an image resource.
It defines the source sizes and type - image resources can have multiple sizes (e.g., icons with multiple sizes embedded in the image file)
Michael: it isn't clear wehther there are additional use cases. It isn't clear whether it could be misused to load images for which the text alternative is no longer valid. It isn't clear whether we should regard it as too low-level.
Michael's intuition is that we don't need to review it, but this isn't entirely clear.
John notes a problem with the picture element: you culd only provide one text alternative, but multiple image resources - the image could radically change based on the viewport size.
John: the image could be truncated or otherwise changed that would affect the alt attribute.
Michael: he presumes the intent is not to have images that are significantly different. Perhaps a comment to this effect should be added to the draft. If this is not what is intended, then there are comments to be made. Michael concludes we probably have comments.
John clarifies that we should make generic comments in terms of text alterantives.
Janina will draft comments.
<MichaelC> ACTION: sajka to review https://www.w3.org/TR/image-resource/ Image Resource
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2256 - Review https://www.w3.org/tr/image-resource/ image resource [on Janina Sajka - due 2020-05-20].
John: notes section 4.3.2 of the draft, in which different sizes and types can be given. John suggests an aria-label might be useful.
Janina will use the term "text alterantive" to keep the comments generic.
<MichaelC> action-2256: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Image_Resource
<trackbot> Notes added to action-2256 Review https://www.w3.org/tr/image-resource/ image resource.
Janina notes we're asking them for clarification of intent - that the sizes may be different but the meaning/purpose maintained.
John is concerned there may be use cases other than icons (used as examples in the draft).
John suggests that if there are such use cases, there may need to be a mechanism for specifying multiple text alternatives.
Gottfried notes that there are personalization opportunities.
Michael notes that some of the problems will be considered to be inherited from the design of HTML image elements.
Janina will review the draft and propose comments.
Michael notes their rapid publication cycle.
Matthew: over-all, there are no major concerns with the HTML draft.
He has one question and observation.
OBOBOBOBOAOAOAOBOBOMatthew notes an issue taht should have been tagged as accessibility, but wasn't.
<Gottfried> Matthew: Should i send an email asking for replies and give a deadline?
<Gottfried> Janina: Yes
<Gottfried> Matthew: There was one issue on autofocus and timing. Does not seem to affect screen readers.
<Gottfried> ... Not an issue if we don't get an answer. More an implementation issue.
<Gottfried> ... I mentioned the issue in my message on May 10.
The question from Matthew related to when autofocus events are dispatched and wehther it affects screen readers.
Matthew's observation: notes the delegate focus behavior of custom elements. It can result in several different focus outlines being drawn by the browser and may be confusing.
This issue was discussed in W3C Web Components work, and it was decided not to change the spec, but that authors can use styling to address the usability problem. This is an issue we might wish to be aware of.
Matthew sees no reason why this should affect the HTML review, as the concern has been discussed and resolved elsewhere.
Janina is inclined to go ahead and close this unless someone needs more time.
There being none, it is decided to close this.
Janina notes the thoroughness of the review.
Matthew notes that the detailed issues are in HTML files included with his review comments.
Responding to Michael, Matthew suggests indicating to them that we don't have any issues.
Janina concurs.
Gottfried - TTML comments: there were six comments requiring resolution.
There are two issues requiring discussion after completion of version 1.2.
Gottfried notes it isn't clear how far the author's responsibility extends for specifying presentation (of the timed text).
He notes that the author should be able to propose presentation, but it then needs to be adaptable by the user.
Michael - responding to Janina: suggests removing the accessibility needs resolution label in the GitHub issues.
Gottfried suggests deferring 524 and 523 until after the release of 1.2.
Issue 521: changes were made and we should accept their proposed note in the spec.
522: still needs negotiation.
519 and 520 - both apply to appendices.
Gottfried: Michael suggested they add references to additional WCAG success criteria.
<JF> Have a client call at top of hour - bye all, stay safe!
There's a discussion of whether 1.4.3 or 1.4.11 or both are relevant to tiemd text.
Gottfried raises the issue of emoticons with respect to these success criteria.
Gottfried suggests a contrast of 3:1 should be sufficient for emoticons, but 4.5:1 would ensure conformance.
Timed text is superimposed on the video and should have a 3:1 contrast ratio, Gottfried suggests.
Michael clarifies that Gottfried had proposed the success criteria references.
Gottfried raises concerns with the language used in referring to WCAG - "WCAG recommends" rather than "WCAG requires".
Michael - summarizing: 520 and 522 need discussion; 519 is almost there, and the other three are fine for this release.
Gottfried will subscribe to the issues and Janina will assist with the work.
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: i/Gottfried/topic: TTML-IMSC comments Default Present: Joanmarie_Diggs, janina, becky, Joshue, Matthew_Atkinson, jasonjgw, JF, MichaelC Present: Joanmarie_Diggs janina becky Joshue Matthew_Atkinson jasonjgw JF MichaelC Joshue108 Regrets: Becky Found Scribe: jasonjgw Inferring ScribeNick: jasonjgw Found Date: 13 May 2020 People with action items: sajka 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]