14:03:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:32 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/09/26-wcag2ict-irc
14:03:32 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:03:33 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
14:03:33 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
14:03:33 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:03:37 <maryjom> chair:  Mary Jo Mueller
14:03:55 <maryjom> meeting:  WCAG2ICT Task Force Extra Friday Teleconference
14:04:01 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
14:04:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/26-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
14:04:24 <maryjom> agenda+ 1.3.4 Orientation - Note 1 (Issue 779)
14:04:39 <maryjom> agenda+ Font size items in the EN 301 549 including (4.2.2, 5.1.4, 9, 10, 11.1.4.4)
14:04:53 <maryjom> agenda+ New notes from EN on 1.2.3 and 1.2.5
14:05:14 <Daniel> scribe+
14:05:20 <Daniel> zakim, take up item 1
14:05:20 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- 1.3.4 Orientation - Note 1 (Issue 779) -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:05:39 <bbailey> present+
14:06:49 <bbailey> Apologies, I will have to drop just before top of hour for co-hosting WCAG2-Issues call.
14:07:59 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VrVZkHNcoJ-DOswwCf98HBZrOqLWHhzk51kJqdqM93Y/edit?tab=t.0
14:08:25 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
14:08:42 <GreggVan> present+
14:08:48 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VrVZkHNcoJ-DOswwCf98HBZrOqLWHhzk51kJqdqM93Y/edit?tab=t.0
14:09:11 <Daniel> [[maryjom displays wip on the google doc]]
14:11:18 <Daniel> maryjom: We agreed about copying your examples, if you change them we'll copy them back
14:11:37 <GreggVan> q+
14:11:43 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:12:01 <Daniel> GreggVan: Building directories -- that would be  true for software and documents.
14:12:24 <Daniel> ... For documents, you can have a building directory document, but for consistency I think it should be the same for all
14:12:47 <Daniel> ... Fewer places where a document would be used
14:13:41 <Daniel> GreggVan: I am concern with this being an essential exception when it's really not
14:14:20 <Daniel> ... There's no way for the user to make it appear in the other orientation
14:14:38 <Daniel> ... So we are getting to a good place but using a faulty logic
14:14:52 <Daniel> ... I whink we should put an exception on it
14:15:20 <Daniel> ... WCAG2ICT -- this only applies when viewing in another angle is possible
14:15:36 <Daniel> ... EN -- add a precondition that viewing in another angle is possible
14:16:16 <Daniel> maryjom: This is the pr that we have
14:16:27 <Daniel> s/have/have for the precondition/
14:17:17 <Daniel> maryjom: Maybe "if viewed"
14:17:26 <Daniel> GreggVan: "It's possible for it to be reoriented"
14:18:31 <Daniel> maryjom: Calculators can be reoriented
14:18:48 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: It's whether the display direction can be changed
14:19:39 <Daniel> GreggVan: The ICT under discussion is software, not calculators
14:19:57 <Daniel> ... But it could be includes, you are right
14:21:18 <Daniel> GreggVan: "Where ICT includes non-web softwware that provides a user interface and it's possible for the non-web software to be reoriented" [...]
14:21:29 <Daniel> maryjom: It's possible to change the ui on the display
14:21:31 <bbailey> q+
14:22:05 <Daniel> GreggVan: We do have the calculator problem that you are talking about
14:22:34 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: One line of code needs to be changed (display orientation) and whether that happens automatically
14:24:02 <Daniel> [[Gregg proposes amendments in the google doc]]
14:27:20 <bbailey> documents do not have user interface
14:27:28 <Daniel> GreggVan: I worry about us taking the word "essential"
14:27:54 <Daniel> GreggVan: The provission says that if it's viewable in two dimensions it needs to be available in two dimensions
14:28:30 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: Typical is not good on the precondition
14:28:55 <Daniel> ... The indle example is better, as there might be the capability within the device
14:29:41 <Daniel> GreggVan: "hardware that is designed to be reoriented"
14:30:01 <bbailey> "software for hardware designed to be used in two orientations" is good
14:30:16 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: I am interested in allowing screen reorientation
14:30:35 <Daniel> GreggVan: It doesn't say you have to do something automatically. Allows is a permision thing
14:32:08 <Daniel> Daniel: Sometimes you put your watch on the right/left rist and it reorients
14:34:23 <Daniel> maryjom: Are we happy with this now?
14:34:26 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: Yes
14:34:39 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: Digital building directory was the other change we agreed
14:34:48 <Daniel> maryjom: Yes.
14:35:57 <Daniel> bbailey: Not quite working for documents
14:36:18 <Daniel> ... but I think overall it's OK
14:36:39 <Daniel> ... It may still going to need additional edits
14:37:13 <Daniel> GreggVan: For preconditions we have a formula
14:37:50 <Daniel> [[Participants wordsmith in the google doc]]
14:39:01 <bbailey> q-
14:39:08 <Daniel> q?
14:42:17 <Daniel> zakim, take up next
14:42:17 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Font size items in the EN 301 549 including (4.2.2, 5.1.4, 9, 10, 11.1.4.4) -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:43:23 <GreggVan> https://labs.etsi.org/rep/HF/en301549/-/issues/255#note_27031
14:44:20 <Daniel> GreggVan: Second to last at the bottom
14:46:22 <Daniel> ... in the issue, look at SUGGESTED RESOLUTION based on the above
14:46:39 <Daniel> GreggVan: Go with CSS pixels for normative stuff
14:47:16 <Daniel> ... provide fonts and distances only to provide grounding for those who have trouble with angles of view
14:49:11 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: There's another harmonized standard for non-digital presentation
14:49:22 <Daniel> ... x-height 2.7 at 400
14:50:29 <Daniel> GreggVan: That'd be a CSS of 15. What we have on the screen exactly matches that
14:51:06 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: They say x-height of 2.7 mm ARIA 14 point at normal weight
14:51:45 <Daniel> GreggVan: This would be a 9% difference
14:52:46 <Daniel> GreggVan: We could say the minimum font size should be 14 18 points
14:53:02 <Daniel> ... I am afraid it's getting pretty big
14:53:57 <Daniel> ... If we were doing CSS pixels, 15 CSS  pixels would be 28 points, it may be excesively large for a kiosk
14:54:28 <Mike_Pluke> The counter proposal to Gregg's is: Best practice is for default body text to have an x-height no smaller than that of Arial with a font-size of 16 CSS px. On a 14-inch 1920×1080 display with no zooming or scaling, this corresponds to an x-height of about 1.2 mm, which would be appropriate for a viewing distance of 40 cm.
14:55:32 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: 16 CSS pixels was the figure wwe were discussing in this thread previously
14:55:48 <Daniel> s/wee/we/
14:57:09 <Daniel> GreggVan: At least we can agree on the language
14:57:55 <Daniel> ... and then we can sort out the figures later
15:00:39 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: Not comfortable with the figures
15:00:58 <Daniel> ... Other expert in the field came back with another formula
15:02:03 <Daniel> GreggVan: But he contradictss ourselves. His last comment contradicts itself when he takls about x-hegiht
15:02:12 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: But that's not specified directly
15:02:38 <Daniel> ... Compared to the x-height of something else, it need to be the same
15:02:48 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: That formulation he's been using for quite some time
15:02:54 <Daniel> GreggVan: And I don't think it's useful
15:03:12 <Daniel> ... Is his more understandable than the one I am proposing?
15:07:44 <Daniel> maryjom: I'd suggest "At a viewing distance of 300mm/400"
15:09:23 <Daniel> [[Edits in the google doc]]
15:12:13 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: At the typical vewing distance of an ATM the typical cap height should be 4.8
15:12:38 <Daniel> maryjom: Cap letter i
15:13:01 <Daniel> GreggVan: ARIAl 19 point font
15:16:25 <Daniel> q+
15:17:34 <Daniel> maryjom: If we are not using CSS pixels, for software we should use density independent pixels
15:18:39 <Daniel> GreggVan: Nobody is using the display density that was used ten years ago
15:18:48 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: That would date
15:19:41 <Daniel> Mike_Pluke: If we presented the two versions we have here to Phill he may be able to tell us something about them
15:20:10 <Daniel> maryjom: He's worried about the compatibility between the two specs
15:20:17 <Daniel> q-
15:21:17 <Daniel> s/Phill/Phil/
15:25:06 <Daniel> zakim, take up next
15:25:06 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- New notes from EN on 1.2.3 and 1.2.5 -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:26:03 <Daniel> Daniel: What's the purpose of the discussion in WCAG2ICT?
15:26:09 <Daniel> Daniel: W3C/WAI doesn't support adding this note to WCAG2ICT, I will comment separately for the EN in the appropriate forum.
15:26:09 <Daniel> ... Inserting audio description in the existing gaps of a video is *not* the only way to provide audio description. You can provide an alternative video or provide a separate timed text file or synched audio file. Consequently, if the video doesn't have gaps you should use the other alternatives to be able to pass 1.2.5, which is where the real
15:26:09 <Daniel> issue occurs in this context.
15:26:09 <Daniel> -> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/4460 Audio description no pause
15:26:11 <Daniel> -> https://www.w3.org/WAI/media/av/description/ Description of visual information (WAI Audio/Video media guide)
15:59:12 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:59:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/26-wcag2ict-minutes.html Daniel
16:06:22 <maryjom> zakim, end meeting
16:06:22 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been bbailey, GreggVan
16:06:23 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
16:06:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/26-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
16:06:30 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, maryjom; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
16:06:32 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
16:10:11 <maryjom> rrsagent, bye
16:10:11 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
17:02:53 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
17:02:53 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/09/26-wcag2ict-irc
17:04:06 <Daniel> Daniel had concerns about this language providing an exception where Audio Descriptions would simply not be provided at all for A/V content simply because there aren’t any or are not big enough gaps to add description.   Mary Jo mentioned that there is a technique to provide a separate audio track using extended audio description where gaps in
17:04:06 <Daniel> audio are added to insert the descriptions. Conclusion is to remove references to little gaps or zero gaps from the note.
17:04:26 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:04:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/26-wcag2ict-minutes.html Daniel