Meeting minutes
Accessibility Summary authoring guidelines. It was in review period:
https://
gpellegrino: i've sent private feedback to george with suggestion, i can try to find it or open issues. On the abstract we could start saying the name is missleading (rewrite the abstract) ; second issue on tables. presenting a11Y feature in first columns does not help understanding. The risk is repeating information already present in machine readable metadata.
gpellegrino: we could convert this table in questions. Trd thing, this document as standalone may not help.
AvneeshSingh: we shall wait for George to adress this issues (as he is main editor of this doucment)
CharlesL3: thanks for this feedback. I think they are all good ideas.
<GeorgeK> I cannot get into the zoom link
@AvneeshSingh: Gregorio you can put this on the issues tracker.
so it can be discussed.
Discussion on grouping of the relevant accessibility metadata for user experience guide for accessibility metadata.
gpellegrino: we still have 3 issues open. taggedPDF ; reading mode audio / non visual ; accessibilityfeature None. There are also 2 new issues raised reloocking at the document I found that there are missing points in the Display Guide: accessMode is not present (only accessModeSufficient) ; book feature group is a long list of confusing terms we may create sub groups.
<gpellegrino> https://
<gpellegrino> w3c/
AvneeshSingh: tagged pdf is not a norm or conformance, more a feature.
gpellegrino: maybe similar to structural navigation
tzviya: there are few metadtas related to specifics formats, this is the case of taggedPDF as well a largePrint for exemple.
CharlesL3: largePrint could be used for Fixed Layout or PDF
proposed: tagged PDF should be moved to generic metadata
<gpellegrino> +1
<Jonas> +1
<tzviya> +1
<CharlesL3> +1
<paulgilius> +1
<gpellegrino> so we leave it where it is :)
resolved
<gpellegrino> w3c/
WendyReid: we have to take care of respect content creator here. Is he capable do determine his content can be read non visually?
gpellegrino: the question to solve from user point of view is does this content fits the needs?
wendyreid: content creator can say "we have done nothing to block non visual reading". On retail side I prefer to display what is available. Non visual reading will depend on RS possibilities.
<gpellegrino> w3c/
Hadrien: screen reader friendly is too technical, we decided to (?)
AVneeshSingh: accessibilityFeature: None ; we need a way to indicate a publication is inaccessible. It's clear in ONIX (196-09), no so clear in schema.org
gpellegrino: in Europe we will need more metadata to indicate why it is not accessible (microenterprise ; burden or other exemptions cases).
CharlesL3: it's unlikely an epub has zero accessibility feature. The interest is to be able to indicate that something is missing clearly, not to say that we just don't know.
gpellegrino: I agree, it's strange to say there is no accessibility feature at all.
<gpellegrino> qè
AvneeshSingh: so we can't use accessibility feature none to say it is non accessible.
GeorgeK: something else in conformance statement may be needed. You still get basics epub accessibility for free.
wendyreid: reflowable will always have display transformability. I agree we will never have no accessibility feature in an epub. We don't want to say there is nothing. I don't have the good answer but we need a way to express partial accessibility.
AvneeshSingh: proposal: move this to feature (no conformance) and get back to schema WG.
CharlesL: I like the idea of having a way to express partial accessibility (instead of presuming there is no accessibility at all).
Hadrien: it's possible to have an epub with no accessibility, reflowable with bad css blocks display transformability. There are also fxl with only images. I think one can produce non accessible epub unfortunatly. With those epubs we also won't see any accessibility metadtada inside.
GeorgeK: the need is something to alert a school that a document don't meet minimum requirements.
gpellegrino: it is a rare case where we express thing in a negative way.
proposed: move accessibilityfueature=nonw to book features from conformance
Hadrien: general principles is if anything is not present it is unknown. We need in some context to be able to express negatives (no pagination for school use is an issue). I don't expect publisher's to include this info but a a plateform selling to schools I need to be able to express that. This missing is an issue.
<gpellegrino> +1
<Miiak_> +1
<wendyreid> +1
<Jonas> +1
<CharlesL3> +1
resolved
AvneeshSingh: we'll sicuss the remainings in next call.