– DRAFT –
WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference

<Chuck> Thanks!

zakim take up next

Announcements

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-weeks-available/

maryjom no meeting next week, update availability for better planning of meeting schedule

Status of Markdown version of document

<bruce_bailey_> Very nice!

<MichaelC> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/wcag2ict/restructure-to-md/index.html

michaelc shows updates he made

<GreggVan> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/

<Zakim> pday, you wanted to Ask about process of generating content - issue, then discussion in comments on issue, then copy to relevant markdown file?

maryjom look at markdown version today

Survey: Draft of SC 1.4.12 Text Spacing

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Draft-discussion/results#xQ2

maryjom next surveys with more time to discuss in more detail

<Chuck> refresh, it's updated

maryjom question 2: 5 people agree

<Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say User or user agen?

<bruce_bailey_> sorry , i thought i was replying to questions to me

bruce_bailey_ suggests to look with 2 paths on the SC

<Zakim> bruce_bailey_, you wanted to plus one to Devanshu

devanshu asks if the SC does aply to use or user-agent

bruce_bailey_ SC should apply to software and not in markup

<Zakim> pday, you wanted to Apply to software that supports the following text style properties

chuck OS should support

maryjom definition of non-web content exists, better to explain exeption in note

chuck proposals to normative text should be last option

bruce wants it in text (not just a note) because point is too important

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Draft-discussion/results#xQ3

maryom question 3

<GreggVan> +1 to chuck

<bruce_bailey_> +1 to chuck also

<Chuck> +1 to Gregg's recollection of prior WCAG2ICT scope.

greggvan  WCAG does not tell how to achive because technology goes on

maryjom WCAG2ICT does not write new SC

Survey: Draft of SC 1.3.4 Orientation

<Mike_Pluke> +1

<Chuck> POLL: Approach 2 tracks for this SC, one track for non web documents and one track for non web software?

<GreggVan> +1 to using it for this one -- and select other ones

<Chuck> +1

+1

<ShawnT> +1

<Mike_Pluke> +1

<bruce_bailey_> +1 for two tracks on some SC

<maryjom> +1

<olivia-hogan-stark> +1

<AnastasiaLanz> +1

<pday> +1 - as long as the process is clear - I worry that we might miss half of a review for an issue

<Devanshu> +1

<Sam> +1

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Draft-discussion/results#xQ4

<bruce_bailey_> +1 to GV that two-tracks comports with my recollection of previous wcag2ict effort

<Chuck> Software that is intended to run on devices that are fixed in place and have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation would be covered under the essential exception and not require software support for orientation changes.

<maryjom> +1 Gregg's suggestion

<Zakim> bruce_bailey_, you wanted to say my edit

<Chuck> Content that is intended to run on devices that are fixed in place and have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation would be covered under the essential exception and not require software support for orientation changes.

<bruce_bailey_> i think my proposed edit addresses Sam's question about screen on hardware

<Chuck> Software that is intended to run on devices that are fixed in place and have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation would be covered under the essential exception and not require software support for orientation changes.

<Chuck> Content that is intended to run on devices that are fixed in place and have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation would be covered under the essential exception and not require software support for orientation changes.

<maryjom> Note: Non-web software & content that is only intended to run on devices that are fixed in place OR have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation would be covered under the essential exception and not require software support for orientation changes.

<bruce_bailey_> careful with *intended*

<bruce_bailey_> Proposed: Note: Content that is only used on hardware is or fixed in place OR have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation is covered under the essential exception and not required to provide support for orientation changes.

<Chuck> Proposed: Note: Content that is only used on hardware THAT is or fixed in place OR have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation is covered under the essential exception and not required to provide support for orientation changes.

<Zakim> bruce_bailey_, you wanted to discuss above proposed

<Chuck> Note: Content that is only used on hardware THAT is fixed in place OR have no sensor to detect or ability to change the orientation is covered under the essential exception and not required to provide support for orientation changes.

<Chuck> +1 to bruces proposal with my minor edit

<Chuck> ack

<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to rif on Bruce's proposal

<pday> +1 to Chuck's edit

<bruce_bailey_> yes, my grammar is not great

<Chuck> Examples where a particular display orientation may be essential are a bank check, a piano application, slides for a projector or television, or virtual reality content where content is not necessarily restricted to landscape or portrait display orientation.

<Mike_Pluke> Content that is only used on hardware THAT is fixed in place OR that has no sensor to detect or change the orientation is covered under the essential exception and not required to provide support for orientation changes.

<Chuck> I have a harsh stop

greggvan ask what is essential (rational)

<GreggVan> +1

<Devanshu> +1

<Chuck> +1 to encorporate, bye

<ShawnT> +1

+1

<bruce_bailey_> +1 for close enough

<olivia-hogan-stark> +1

<maryjom> Poll: Is Orientation ready to incorporate into the document with the above note edits.

<Sam> +1

<pday> +1

<GreggVan> +1

<Devanshu> +1

<GreggVan> bruce +1 'd it before it was posted

<Mike_Pluke> My proposed change to Bruce's suggestion was at 15:58