13:51:36 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:51:40 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-wcag2ict-irc
13:51:40 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:51:41 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), maryjom
13:51:43 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
13:51:43 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:51:50 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
13:51:56 <maryjom> meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:52:06 <maryjom> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:52:06 <Zakim> ok, maryjom
13:52:15 <maryjom> genda+ Announcements
13:52:26 <maryjom> Agenda+ Announcements
13:52:38 <maryjom> Agenda+ Project standup and planning
13:52:45 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results and discussion on SC 1.4.10 Reflow
13:52:51 <maryjom> regrets: Laura Miller
13:53:01 <maryjom> agenda?
13:53:51 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:07 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:09 <mitch11> mitch11 has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:31 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:32 <FernandaBonnin> FernandaBonnin has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:01:04 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:18 <bruce_bailey> scribe: bruce_bailey
14:01:21 <FernandaBonnin> present+
14:01:25 <ShawnT> present+
14:01:41 <maryjom> present+
14:01:49 <Chuck> present+
14:01:52 <mitch11> present+
14:02:00 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:09 <ChrisLoiselle> present+
14:02:12 <dmontalvo> present+ Daniel
14:02:16 <alastairc> present+
14:02:17 <alastairc> agenda?
14:02:18 <bruce_bailey> zakim, agenda?
14:02:20 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
14:02:20 <Zakim> 1. Announcements [from maryjom]
14:02:20 <Zakim> 2. Project standup and planning [from maryjom]
14:02:21 <Zakim> 3. Survey results and discussion on SC 1.4.10 Reflow [from maryjom]
14:02:30 <olivia-hs> olivia-hs has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:35 <Mike_Pluke> present+
14:02:40 <bruce_bailey> zakim, take up item 1
14:02:40 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:02:40 <Chuck> Thank you so much Bruce for scribing!
14:02:54 <olivia-hs> present+
14:03:00 <bruce_bailey> alastairc chair of AG WG joining today
14:03:17 <maryjom> https://deploy-preview-149--wcag2ict.netlify.app/
14:03:27 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  Michael Cooper working hard on back end so we have a much updated version
14:03:43 <bruce_bailey> ... this is NOT github.io so beware of that
14:04:17 <bruce_bailey> ... this Netlify version reflects preview builds going forward
14:04:24 <maryjom> Remaining formatting issues: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/147
14:04:33 <bruce_bailey> ... still some formatting issues , but better user experience all around
14:04:35 <ThorstenKatzmann> ThorstenKatzmann has joined #wcag2ict
14:04:42 <ThorstenKatzmann> present+
14:04:43 <Devanshu> Devanshu has joined #wcag2ict
14:05:10 <bruce_bailey> ... please add to issue 147 if you catch formatting issues not reflected in that thread
14:05:14 <mitch11> q+
14:05:26 <Devanshu> present+
14:05:29 <bruce_bailey> ... much thanks to editors and MC -- really looking better
14:05:37 <bruce_bailey> zakim, next item
14:05:37 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, bruce_bailey
14:05:44 <maryjom> q?
14:05:50 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:06:19 <bruce_bailey> mitch11: Nelify not available from GitHub?  Can we add links from wiki and elsewhere
14:06:42 <ShawnT> it should work once the change gets merged?
14:06:47 <bruce_bailey> maryjom: Yes, but expectation is that netlify version will be linked up
14:06:48 <BryanTrogdon> BryanTrogdon has joined #wcag2ict
14:06:53 <bruce_bailey> zakim, next item
14:06:54 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Project standup and planning -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:07:02 <maryjom> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/13/views/2
14:07:38 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  We are working this week on reflow, next week pointing gestures
14:07:40 <BryanTrogdon> present+
14:07:54 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
14:08:00 <Sam> present+
14:08:10 <bruce_bailey> ... We might also discuss NEXT week how much we want / need to focus on Understanding
14:08:25 <bruce_bailey> ... please do look at project plan
14:08:51 <bruce_bailey> ... soon after that we will start on the stable SC new with 2.2
14:09:22 <bruce_bailey> ... also there is a command-line oriented discussion happening, please see wiki for information for joining
14:09:34 <bruce_bailey> zakim, next  item
14:09:34 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Survey results and discussion on SC 1.4.10 Reflow -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:10:08 <bruce_bailey> [Mary Jo screen shares from project board]
14:10:38 <bruce_bailey> [correction, sharing from survey results]
14:11:25 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  Phil noted in survey that hard to digest, and suggest some example at representative distances
14:12:21 <maryjom> Proposal in the issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98#issuecomment-1486214488
14:12:23 <bruce_bailey> Fernando also notes in survey that difficult to parse, and provided a proposal.
14:12:36 <maryjom> Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Reflow
14:13:33 <bruce_bailey> ...from survey, note 2 conflates two different concept.  Gregg and Mary Jo have similar concern.
14:14:10 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  GreggV had some technical responses in survey, for example that cell phone and monitors both held at arms length...
14:14:48 <bruce_bailey> ... also Gregg asserts software should not be required to reflow.  There are some parking lot item, but wont get to that today.
14:15:28 <bruce_bailey> ... GreggV also argued that CSS *is* device independent -- so we should stick with that.  Gregg?
14:16:14 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  From recent conversation, we can't just substitute angle of view, consider content for eBook -- author has no idea what content displayed on...
14:16:38 <bruce_bailey> ... so unit we use must have device independent measure.
14:17:02 <maryjom> From Thorsten's comment about pixel size: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/learnwin32/dpi-and-device-independent-pixels
14:17:32 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  We had some editorial input and a resource that Thorsten provided.
14:18:04 <bruce_bailey> ... another reasonable comment from survey is to use mm as well as pixel examples.
14:18:46 <bruce_bailey> ... Additional suggestions for table of examples / conversions is good one.
14:19:20 <mitch11> q+
14:19:29 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  I do want to tackle all the closed functional issues in single blocks, since it is a cognitively dense topic.
14:19:41 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:20:17 <bruce_bailey> mitch11:  I will suggest we split difference -- that we focus on "up close" products first, since seems simpler use cases
14:20:31 <Sam> q+
14:20:32 <GreggVan> q+
14:20:40 <maryjom> ack sam
14:20:45 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  Agree, want to address more typical non-web documents and mobile first.
14:21:56 <bruce_bailey> SamO:  Device independent pixel as a concept makes sense, but is "apply as best as possible" enough or can we be less prescriptive?
14:22:03 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:22:39 <bruce_bailey> ... The reflow concept we have consensus, but the device independent pixel is more controversial.
14:23:12 <bruce_bailey> GreggVan:  The CSS pixel is a device independent pixel.  Are they not both angle of view?
14:23:12 <alastairc> q+
14:23:16 <maryjom> ack alastairc
14:23:20 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:24:10 <alastairc> Except if the platform doesn't use CSS
14:24:22 <mitch11> q+
14:24:28 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
14:24:29 <bruce_bailey> alastairc:  One of the hardware manufacturers has started using the term , makes more sense in that context.  Need to be careful with endorsing one over the other.
14:24:52 <bruce_bailey> GreggVan:  If they are the same unit of measure, why not stick with CSS pixel?
14:25:18 <Chuck> q?
14:25:33 <bruce_bailey> mikepluke:  It is very confusing to reference CSS in context on non-web technologies.
14:25:49 <Chuck> q+ to advise that we have a queue
14:26:11 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:26:11 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:26:13 <bruce_bailey> GreggVan:  Might we just note that they are equivalent?  Confusing to have defined term approach though.
14:26:14 <Sam> q+
14:27:07 <GreggVan> q+
14:27:10 <Mike_Pluke> Q-
14:27:37 <maryjom> ack Chuck
14:27:37 <Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to advise that we have a queue
14:27:38 <bruce_bailey> mitch11:  If they are both defined as viewing angle, but that is more how they are derived.  The normative definition for CSS pixel is a little problematic because it is so tied  to CSS.
14:28:10 <bruce_bailey> ... From that perspective there is a conflict if not contradiction.
14:28:25 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  Please mind the queue. ..
14:29:07 <maryjom> ack Sam
14:29:15 <alastairc> q+ to ask if a little history would help?
14:29:18 <bruce_bailey> ... If we go beyond what is normative in WCAG that risks going beyond charter.  Do I recall from previous conversation that we wanted to ask AGWG to revisit pixel definition?
14:30:13 <bruce_bailey> SamO:  There are already requirement that use similar angle of view for closed products.  To add an additional one, introduces potential conflict.
14:30:15 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:30:31 <Chuck> Regarding queue, I am not calling out any specific individual.  My intent is to remind all participants that we do have a queue.  So no specific names or individuals.
14:31:00 <bruce_bailey> ... Also a +1 to Phil and Mike that having "CSS Pixel" in non-web reference really causes people to assume the SC is just not relevant.
14:31:49 <bruce_bailey> GreggVan:  In some places CSS pixel is defined as 1/72 or 1/96 inch so there are example of physical measure...
14:32:24 <bruce_bailey> ... but if with other work we have reference to CSS pixel.  We could just address as note.
14:32:33 <maryjom> ack alastairc
14:32:33 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to ask if a little history would help?
14:33:03 <bruce_bailey> ... For example, Biden is president of U.S.  Biden is also president of United States.
14:34:06 <bruce_bailey> alastairc:  I will try and give some historical perspective.   In 2000 we had longish period of understood default baseline with 1024 and CRTs and DPI.
14:34:49 <bruce_bailey> ... Starting around 2008 web technology started facilitated reflow -- and still things were consistent enough
14:35:37 <bruce_bailey> ... But as technology improved, around 2010, DPI resolution of mobile devices really increased, 2x 4x what we had in 2000's
14:36:50 <bruce_bailey> ... Regardless, convention was still to reference and intended viewing distance and 1024 still was a useable reference expectation...
14:37:23 <alastairc> https://alastairc.uk/2013/02/how-to-hold-your-ipad/
14:38:06 <bruce_bailey> ... Still had a smooth curve among manufactures -- responsibility for legibility and useability was with manufactures -- who were doing that
14:38:56 <mitch11> q+
14:38:57 <bruce_bailey> alastairc:  It won't be the end of the world if reflow is not supported everywhere.  EPUB has a different approach than reflow, and it works well, but it is not reflow...
14:39:08 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:39:56 <bruce_bailey> ... but also hardware, like TVs in doc, are not going to be rotated.  So manufactures are doing their part but accessibility standards can keep up that idea.
14:40:14 <alastairc> q+
14:41:07 <GreggVan> q+
14:41:08 <Sam> q+
14:41:17 <bruce_bailey> mitch11:  A screen resolution setting and platform can support accessibility and scaling.  I do not think how Android addresses is really different than iOS.
14:41:23 <maryjom> q?
14:41:25 <alastairc> ack me
14:41:29 <maryjom> ack alastairc
14:41:41 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:41:59 <GreggVan> Closed products
14:41:59 <GreggVan> For closed products the content should reflow as necessary so that all content and functionality is preserved for all levels of zoom or character sizing that the closed product provides.
14:42:16 <bruce_bailey> alastairc:  I agree they are similar results.  Android facilitated "reflow" in their doc a couple ways, while iOS strictly was around font size -- but the effectiveness was similar.
14:43:03 <maryjom> ack Sam
14:43:08 <alastairc> s/while iOS strictly was around font size -- but the effectiveness was similar/while iOS only provided text size controls -- so it was harder to do something like reflow
14:43:36 <bruce_bailey> GreggVan:  The closed product note currently mentions responsibility for platform.  Seems like it might be simple to acknowledge platform providing zoom is providing accessibly feature even if that is not reflow per se.
14:43:51 <alastairc> q+ to say that if reflow isn't applicable, the others still should be
14:44:00 <GreggVan> q+
14:44:16 <bruce_bailey> SamO;  My concern is that reflow as term just does not work on its face.  Can we come back to this SC?
14:44:25 <Sam> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/new-in-22/#2411-focus-appearance-aa
14:44:49 <maryjom> q?
14:44:56 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  I am not sure, since we have more than one SC which uses CSS pixel, but we might tackle those in a batch.
14:45:00 <maryjom> ack alastairc
14:45:02 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to say that if reflow isn't applicable, the others still should be
14:45:47 <bruce_bailey> alastairc:  Reflow is definitely the trickiest one.   Might be address by device independent pixel, so that could put burden on platform.
14:46:05 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:46:26 <bruce_bailey> ... with regard to other SC including size metric, such as Target Size, those should be less problematic because platforms again well address.
14:47:26 <bruce_bailey> GreggVan:   My thinking is shifting because there are authorities which use DPI and not viewing angle.
14:47:26 <bruce_bailey> ... We need to look at other places, maybe have in front of queue.
14:47:57 <maryjom> Poll: Should we use Device-independent pixel?
14:47:57 <olivia-hs> +1
14:47:57 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:47:57 <FernandaBonnin> +1
14:47:57 <ThorstenKatzmann> +1
14:47:57 <BryanTrogdon> +1
14:47:57 <GreggVan> +1   with a note talking about how it relates to CSS pixel
14:47:57 <alastairc> Reflow, 2.4.11 focus-appearance, taget-size (min and enh).
14:48:01 <alastairc> +1
14:48:02 <ShawnT> +1
14:48:02 <Sam> For refference the fix CSS Pixel is 1/96 of an inch  https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/new-in-22/#2411-focus-appearance-aa in WCAG
14:48:04 <maryjom> +1
14:48:07 <Sam> +1
14:48:08 <mitch11> +1
14:48:09 <bruce_bailey> maryjom: We could use term for now, and have note showing relation with CSS pixel
14:48:09 <ChrisLoiselle> +1 with note on CSS relationship
14:48:55 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  We have agreement on this approach, so I will take a first draft on what that might look like.
14:49:29 <bruce_bailey> ... Homework will be for members to look for situations which might be problematic.
14:49:59 <bruce_bailey> MaryJo asks Mitch Evans to followup?
14:50:09 <mitch11> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98#issuecomment-1486214488
14:50:16 <maryjom> Mitchell's device-independent pixel: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98#issuecomment-1512930849
14:50:52 <bruce_bailey> mitch11:  We have covered my comment on device in defendant pixel , and that is the hardest one
14:51:01 <bruce_bailey> zakim, draft minutes
14:51:01 <Zakim> I don't understand 'draft minutes', bruce_bailey
14:51:15 <bruce_bailey> rssagent, draft minutes
14:51:31 <maryjom> Non-web documents, Mitch's comment: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98#issuecomment-1512900536
14:51:45 <Chuck> rrsagent, make minutes
14:51:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-wcag2ict-minutes.html Chuck
14:51:53 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
14:51:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
14:51:59 <bruce_bailey> mitch11:  Okay the next one to consider would be around non-web documents
14:52:15 <GreggVan> q+
14:52:56 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:53:19 <bruce_bailey> ... If the document needs certain layout, responsibility lies with both agent and author, so I made a suggestion noting exception for content requiring two dimensional layout
14:53:44 <maryjom> q+
14:54:03 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  The proposed note is similar to allowing exception for when cant be accessible, then don't need to be accessible...
14:54:06 <mitch11> q+
14:54:47 <alastairc> q+
14:55:11 <bruce_bailey> ... it is circular definition.  If content format does not support reflow, then it is not accessibly supported , but there is a conflict because reflow software is different than reflow content.
14:55:13 <maryjom> ack maryjom
14:55:28 <bruce_bailey> ... for example, reflow data table is not funtional.
14:55:49 <GreggVan> q+
14:55:53 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:55:57 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  Mitch is just splitting up non-web documents from non-web software.
14:56:38 <bruce_bailey> mitch11:  Agree that it varies by format type.  PDF used to be example, but reflow can be supported now...
14:57:16 <bruce_bailey> ... we need to fact check what we mean by "document type" but I think that means , maybe for example , two version of EPUB...
14:57:39 <maryjom> ack alastairc
14:57:46 <bruce_bailey> ... it hits up against fundamental alteration and similar concepts.
14:58:49 <bruce_bailey> alastairc:  PDF is an example , since image breaks reflow in PDF which otherwise supports.  Canvas is a modern concept where the two-dimensional nature is essential.
14:59:18 <bruce_bailey> ... But is WCAG2ICT aimed at platforms or content authors?
14:59:18 <mitch11> I must drop, thanks
14:59:28 <bruce_bailey> present+
14:59:35 <ShawnT> present+
14:59:48 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:59:52 <bruce_bailey> maryjom:  Survey on survey did not have enough responses, so i will reopen.
15:00:36 <bruce_bailey> GreggVan:  Essential an only be applied if fundamental alteration.  If other product, fundamental alteration cannot be provided...
15:01:23 <bruce_bailey> ... with a table, can still reflow within cell.  If cannot meet with technology, then it is not accessibility support, so use something else.
15:01:26 <dmontalvo> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:01:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-wcag2ict-minutes.html dmontalvo
15:01:42 <bruce_bailey> maryjom: I will try to incorporate more comments into current draft.
15:01:57 <bruce_bailey> zakim, end meeting
15:01:57 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been FernandaBonnin, ShawnT, maryjom, Chuck, mitch, ChrisLoiselle, Daniel, alastairc, Mike_Pluke, olivia-hs, ThorstenKatzmann, Devanshu,
15:01:59 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
15:02:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
15:02:07 <Zakim> ... BryanTrogdon, Sam, bruce_bailey
15:02:07 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:02:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
15:02:13 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, bruce_bailey; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:02:13 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
15:02:13 <GreggVan> present+
15:30:54 <Sam> Sam has left #wcag2ict