Meeting minutes
Announcements
Maryjom: Announcements. Call for consensus of AGWG: No negative responses.
Daniel: The WCAG2ICT updated Note has been published to https://
… https://
… We are working on also redirecting https://
Editors draft.
<bbailey> Woot!
Bbailey: we ended up publishing something with a precondition?
Daniel: yes, used in EN.
<maryjom> Issue 822: w3c/
maryjom: there was a new issue opened #822
maryjom: should be disposed of pretty quickly. Question is why would a font have a lower contrast when you increase screen scaling?
<bbailey> I wanted to mention ACT 1.1 out for CFC (not our work)
maryjom: if anyone wants to weigh in on that to cover new types of test cases.
<bbailey> https://
<bbailey> CFC - Publication of ACT Rules Format 1.1
maryjom: changes at IBM. Retiring or new positions. Mike Gower, co facilitator with Bruce. Two new facilitators needed for WCAG2-Issues
Patrick Lauck will be one.
<bbailey> WCAG2-Issues (aka Backlog) looking for new TF facilitators starting with the new year.
New Issue #822
<maryjom> Issue link: w3c/
Maryjom: had Daniel clean out the template that was in WCAG2ICT . So now it is gone and when someone opens a new issue it will be blank
Somebody opened an issue against Accessibility Insights. When screen scaling when high the contrast was no longer sufficient.
<bbailey> I propose converting to a discussion. I understand why they are asking on our repo.
<Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to propose moving to a discussion
<bbailey> +1 to MJ proposed response
bbailey: proposed to move to discussion but agree with the proposed response.
bbailey: suggest they publicly ask the question to get public feedback.
lauram: should this be added to future issues for WCAG2ICT to discuss
Maryjom: Do we need to add a note?
lauram: this seems like a test condition
<maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Answer issue #822, as proposed
<maryjom> Draft answer: The template was only for our Task Force use a as we were developing the document. We have removed the template to avoid confusion since that part of the WCAG2ICT work is done.
<maryjom> The issue you describe seems to be a testing issue. WCAG2ICT does not provide any development or testing guidance for non-web technologies. It only provides the non-web language substitutions for language in WCAG success criteria, and explanations where there may be difficulties in non-web technology support for individual criteria since non-web
<maryjom> software covers a wide variety of technologies. The issue you describe seems to be a test condition that you'd need to adjust for testing on the Windows platform.
<Daniel> +1
<bbailey> +1
<LauraM> +1
RESOLUTION: Answer issue #822, as proposed
<bbailey> ack
1.2.8 Media Alternative (AAA)
<maryjom> w3c/
maryjom: media alternative (prerecorded).
maryjom: Phil had some suggested text for notes.
maryjom: adding something to cover new technologies was supported by Loic and Bruce
<bbailey> The generative AI example is an example not live, it is pre-programmed software.
<maryjom> NOTE 1
<maryjom> As described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 1.2.8, this success criterion is concerned with providing an accessible alternative to time-based media such as audio visual material. This accessible alternative could be in text form, may provide a running description, and could read something like a book.
<maryjom> A system that only uses audio visual media as a redundant addition to other forms of information (such as in text form and as audio guidance) such that the information conveyed in the audio visual media is already fully described by the other forms of media would meet the intent of this Success Criterion.
<Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to suggest working offline
maryjom: we will need to make adjustments to the second paragraph to address this but we are not sure how to change it yet.
<bbailey> Could change second sentence to: Prerecorded could include media that is generated on-demand such as by generative AI.
Maryjom: Maybe we should adjust note three.
<maryjom> NOTE 3
<maryjom> Prerecorded media is defined as information that is not live and is not computer generated. Examples of media content that is not considered live is content generated on-demand such as by generative AI.
<Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to change "this" to "prerecorded"
bbailey: I do not like the word defined
<maryjom> > Prerecorded media is information that is not live and is not computer generated. Examples of media content that is not considered live is content generated on-demand such as by generative AI.
maryjom: Should we create a google doc and work from there?
<LauraM> +1 to google doc
<Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to ask if anyone else concerned with Note 1 2nd paragraph
bbailey: did anyone else have issue with the second sentence of Phil's note 1.
bbailey: that was the one that Gregg commented on.
<bbailey> yes, 2nd paragraph of note 1 (not 2nd sentence)
<bbailey> i agree it was fair paraphrase from Understanding
1.2.9 Audio Only (Live) (AAA)
<maryjom> Issue 535: w3c/
<bbailey> +1 to gregg's comment in thread that we should clarify something about conference calls
bbailey: sirius/xm is audio only but Maryjom asked if it's a document.
Maryjom: it's content presented through software
bbailey: it's content, not web content. Live content.
<Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to agree with Gregg streaming implies software
<maryjom> Gregg's proposed note: This SC does not apply to "non-web documents" because any non-web entity that was streaming presenting live audio content would be considered software".
Loicmn: I agree with something related to proposing a note that explains that any non web content being streamed is not a document
bbailey: anything live is not a document (in general)
maryjom: might create a PR on this for the next time.
<LauraM> +1
<loicmn> +1
<bbailey> +1
<maryjom> Use issue 791: w3c/
maryjom: look at issue 791 to take a look at other AAA criteria and their proposals
<Daniel> w3c/
Maryjom: Next meeting is January 8.