Meeting minutes
<jasonjgw> chiar: jasonjgw
Accessibility of remote Meetings.
JS: We need a new due date for comments
The announcements didn't go out.
I suggest a Friday in Dec
I suggest both go into Dec
JW: Mid to late Dec is that ok?
SH: Janina mentioned a Friday
JS: We will accept late comments
Lets make them both Dec 10th (deadline for comments)
JS: We expect comments on the NAUR and remote meetings
SH: The feedback has been good thanks.
SH: Good experience
<jasonjgw> Josh: will coordinate on messaging/announcements.
with Shawn
JS: There were minutes on remote meetings.
JS: There were back to back COGA issues, and it meant several group meetings were lumped together.
JS: I can try to get them
JW: When we get that done, we can look at this and discuss revisions
SH: Sounds good.
JW: We can do that and close out issues as we go.
JW: Any other preference?
SH: Takes action
<janina> https://
JS: I've got the URI
JS: <Discussion on a11y issues with Github>
<and Google docs>
Natural Language Interface Accessibility User Requirements.
JW: The meeting on this was a Voice Interface meeting
I attended one, and other colleagues were there.
There was a chance to socialise the document
No comments yet but it was raised and into IRC and minutes
JW: There were highlights, interest in a W3C workshop on speech and language interfaces.
This has been on the cards for a while, years.
Speech backed interfaces offer great potential
It was suggested there needs to be a rebalancing
There is an active community group
I noted the doc, and that it is available for comment.
Questions?
JS: Looking at the APA TPAC wiki, it is a good place to gather things.
If you want to add that, go for it.
JW: We should gather these
JS: There are issues with what is supported etc
Synchronization Accessibility User Requirements.
JW: This was a well attended and productive meeting
We have minutes etc and we can extract issues and work on the draft
JW: We have some work to do on this.
JS: The due date for comments is Friday
JW: Steve where would you like to go with the feedback we got?
SN: I need to subscribe to issues list
JS: We can then create URIs that will show issues
JW: From minutes we will extract issues and write issues from them.
SN: If you want to review them and ping me - we will work out what to do.
JW: Then we will take action to review the draft
Next week we are at the WAI CooP project symposium
14 CET
https://
JW: So no RQTF meeting next week. Back on the 17th of Nov
JS: Then the following week - day before Thanksgiving?
JS: I expect that Weds the 24th will not have meetings
JS: We can skip it ok
If we are making good progress then we may not need the meeting time.
JW: 17th is the next
W3C Statements: Implications for Task Force publications.
JW: I've linked to the new process doc
Details of what this entails are in the 2021 W3C Process document:
https://
JW: <Gives overview>
Now that process is in place we have discussed using this new process for our docs
JS: It would elevate the impact of the document
It is only a note at the moment - so the statement is more powerful.
A W3C Statement is a Note that has been endorsed by W3C as a whole
Cloudflare have interesting research on this, that we could introduce into the document
SH: Very happy to help
JW: Sounds like a good idea
Any concerns?
<crickets>
JW: Seems like agreement
JW: Open issues?
JS: No - they should be all responded to.
Resolution: RQTF will resume editing Inaccessibility of CAPTCHA with the goal of advancing to W3C statement status
Upcoming workshop on professional media production on the Web.
https://
<jasonjgw> Josh: there will be an accessibility-related presentation at the workshop, and a discussion of next steps that will include authoring tool accessibility issues.
<jasonjgw> Josh: notes the relevance of the Synchronization Accessibility User Requirements.
<jasonjgw> The focus is on media production, hence synchronization issues are not entirely in scope - though some aspects are.
JS: We are talking about in the can content
So lets start authoring ASL etc, as the HTML spec will support as many as you have translations for
Same for descriptions of video
JS: These descriptions don't always have to be audio
Nigel M - has flagged that he has written a library and descriptions can be added just as text
This text track can be provided, Nigel could talk about that
We have some big opportunity
SN: I was looking at the website
<co-ordinating involvement>
<Gives overview of Sync issues>
<Wrangles over time>
JW: Janina will take this up in APA
JS: Can Raja get involved?
We will follow up with him
Automotive accessibility.
JW: This was an interesting meeting
Dont recall major actions - if you know any lets discuss
Where this hits the UI is the question..
How is the question..
Can we come back to this?
The future of accessibility APIs: possible privacy-related RQTF work.
JS: Yes
JW: There were two sessions on this
The most relevant outcome was interest in developing a privacy related analysis
and the way privacy is impacted (by A11y API development)
JS: The outcome seemed to be why are RQTF/ APA not working on this.
There are people to recruit Lionel W - has a lot of experience in privacy
There are also issues on future directions - there were things that fell into place around the ePub session.
Regarding ePub
Regarding interleaved communication - there were comments around snipping off features
such as multi track recording environments
Could be multiple tracks of meta data etc
XML, or Next Gen specs for music
Could support multiple lines of text
<Janina gives further examples of classical music interleaving etc>
Why not do this by abstracting the output of music into an ebook (by removing the music)
JS: Should I write this up?
Next Music XML markup
https://
MUSIC NOTATION COMMUNITY GROUP
JS: There is a nexus here.
SN: I'm also a part of that.
SN: Teaches music at Louisville, Kentucky
JOC: Sounds facinating