Meeting minutes
Announcements
<PhilDay> Link to project board view:
<PhilDay> Link to level AAA status table on wiki:
<PhilDay> Open AAA SC issues
2.2.6 Timeout
<PhilDay> Link to all pen AAA issues
<PhilDay> Applying SC 2.2.6 Timeouts to non-web documents and non-web software
<PhilDay> This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.6.
<PhilDay> NOTE
<PhilDay> See also the Comments on Closed Functionality.
<PhilDay> With the following addition in SC problematic for closed:
<PhilDay> 2.2.6 Timeouts - Some ICT with closed functionality may enforce a timeout (for example, in a system where security rules require a session to be ended after some period of inactivity). In this case, the time limit can be considered as essential, and it may therefore be problematic to apply this success criterion to such systems. However, it is
<PhilDay> still best practice that the user be given the option to extend the timeout as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.1.
Laura: Are we saying an extension should be done as a best practice but not realistic?
GreggVan: We should just skip this completely as there are many reasons that a timeout notification and extension is not realistic.
GreggVan: Suggest we make the note broader
GreggVan: I would make it more general and not name one
GreggVan: What are the reasons for non web that you would not be able to warn them before cutting them off
GreggVan: Retract making it broader due to the fact that we are talking about non web.
GreggVan: we should say that this is one (for non web content) we should consider a requirement.
GreggVan: there are many reasons to cut them off but no reasons not to warn them.
<Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to suggest "apply as written" with no additional notes
Loicmn: Because there is a requirement in the SC to warn users, there is no reason to add anything.
Revised content is therefore as follows.
Applying SC 2.2.6 Timeouts to non-web documents and non-web software
This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.6.
Laura: Do we need to clarify web vs non-web ?
GreggVan: Think we should add a
note - applies as written.
… but may need a note to say the 20 hours example may not
apply
GreggVan: I can't think of anything where you wouldn't give a warning.
GreggVan: Because you issued the warning, you have to allow time to extend before timing them out
GreggVan: Applies as written but some consideration should be given to timeout requirement for non web
Daniel: Agree - remove the note
<Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to reply to Laura as I see no different for non-web
Loicmn: We do not need anything. There is no essential exception.
Loicmn: We could add detail about the 20 hours.
Revised content is therefore as follows (no note needed).
Applying SC 2.2.6 Timeouts to non-web documents and non-web software
This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.6.
<Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say "Applies a written but the warning by itself should be considered for non-web software"
GreggVan: For non web, before you throw the data way, give them a warning.
GreggVan: But this is not an accessibility issue, it's a common sense rule
DRAFT RESOLUTION: For 2.2.6 Timeouts, incorporate proposal into the editor’s draft, with edits shown in the meeting minutes (remove the note) above
<loicmn> +1
<PhilDay> +1
<Laura> +1
<Daniel> +1
<GreggVan> +1
RESOLUTION: For 2.2.6 Timeouts, incorporate proposal into the editor’s draft, with edits shown in the meeting minutes (remove the note) above
Update to introduction to address Mitch’s input
Original issue raised by Mitch, concerning how we
define non-web documents: w3c/
Quote from bottom of Mitch’s latest response
To sum up the contradiction: policies stretch "non-web documents" to include downloaded non-HTML documents; the policies point readers to WCAG2ICT for important information; yet WCAG2ICT does not accommodate the stretch.
I don't see any negative consequences of the stretch, only practical advantages. But I assume that WCAG2ICT needs to stick with its official scope. So I recommend adding a note like the following. It would fit in the Guidance in This Document section, either directly after Note 1 or at the bottom of the section.
Note 2: WCAG2ICT's guidance for documents is technically scoped to non-web documents (those distributed outside of websites). This same guidance may also be useful for documents that are downloaded from websites.
PR: w3c/
Preview diff of the PR: https://
Relevant section of existing editor’s draft: https://
New note: NOTE 1
WCAG2ICT's guidance for documents is technically scoped to non-web documents (those distributed outside of websites). This same guidance may also be useful for documents that are downloaded from websites.
GreggVan: change the note. Once document is downloaded from the web, it is now considered as a non-web document
<GreggVan> s/is as/is/
NOTE 1
WCAG2ICT's guidance for documents is technically scoped to non-web documents (those distributed outside of websites). Any document that is downloaded from the web should be considered as a non-web document; as opposed to a document viewed through the web (and not downloaded).
Laura: if we have a definition for a non-web document - we don't need to define it here again.
<loicmn> Definition of "non-web document" from EN 301 549: non-web document: document that is not a web page, not embedded in web pages nor used in the rendering or functioning of the page
Daniel: We currently say "document that is downloaded from the web" should we say "document that is downloadable"?
Loicmn: WCAG2ICT does not apparently define non web document but we can look to EN 301 549 as a starting definition.
<Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say Add this note to the definition of Non-web document NOTE: If a document on the web is viewed through a web user agent it is web content. If the same document is downloaded from the web and distributed it is a non-web document.
GreggVan: Add a note to the definition of non-web document as noted above.
GreggVan: If it is downloaded, it becomes a non web document - if distributed once downloaded it is a non web document.
Bruce's original note: NOTE 1
WCAG2ICT's guidance for documents is technically scoped to non-web documents (those distributed outside of websites). This same guidance may also be useful for documents that are downloaded from websites.
GreggVan: we should have a definition of non web documents
Proposal: Add a definition for non-web documents, this should use the EN definition and add Gregg's note in the definition.
We should then modify Bruce's note in "Interpretation of web terminology in a non-web context" to reference this definition.
<GreggVan> new second sentence to bruce note: If a document is downloaded from the web and distributed it is a non-web document.
<Laura> +1
<loicmn> +1
<Daniel> +1
new second sentence to bruce note: If a document is downloaded from the web and distributed it is an example ofa non-web document.
GreggVan: It is an example of a non web document
Phil: separating these into two items, definition and note
DRAFT RESOLUTION: Add definition for non-web documents to key terms: non-web document: document that is not a web page, not embedded in web pages nor used in the rendering or functioning of the page (as per EN 301 549, v3.2.1)
<loicmn> +1
<PhilDay> +1
<GreggVan> +1
<Laura> +1
<Laura> +1
<Daniel> +1
RESOLUTION: Add definition for non-web documents to key terms: non-web document: document that is not a web page, not embedded in web pages nor used in the rendering or functioning of the page (as per EN 301 549, v3.2.1)
GreggVan: Remove the last sentence of the note. Add the "for example" comment
DRAFT RESOLUTION: Remove last sentence of Bruce's
new note in PR w3c/
<Laura> +1
<PhilDay> +1
<GreggVan> +1
<loicmn> +1
<Daniel> +1
RESOLUTION: Remove last
sentence of Bruce's new note in PR w3c/
<Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say "Note: For clarity, if a document is downloaded from the web and distributed off the web it becomes a non-web document."
<GreggVan> "Note: For clarity, if a document that is viewable on the web is downloaded from the web and distributed off the web it becomes a non-web document."
DRAFT RESOLUTION: Add note to the definition of non-web document: "Note: For clarity, if a document that is viewable on the web is downloaded from the web and distributed off the web it becomes a non-web document."
<loicmn> +1
<GreggVan> +1
<PhilDay> +1
<Daniel> +1
<Laura> +1
RESOLUTION: Add note to the definition of non-web document: "Note: For clarity, if a document that is viewable on the web is downloaded from the web and distributed off the web it becomes a non-web document."
ACTION: Laura to follow up with Bruce on changes to note for non-web documents
Begin discussing content for new SCs from SC 2.3.2 onwards
2.3.2 Three Flashes (Level AAA)
Link to issue: w3c/
Applying SC 2.3.2 Three Flashes to non-web documents and non-web software
This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.3.2, replacing “Web pages do not” with “non-web document or non-web software does not”.
With these substitutions, it would read:
[Non-web document or non-web software does not] contain anything that flashes more than three times in any one second period.
Proposed change from Gregg: Update to match latest style on headings & use of non-web software:
Applying SC 2.3.2 Three Flashes to non-web documents and non-web software
This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.3.2, replacing “Web pages do not” with “non-web document, or non-web software, does not”.
With these substitutions, it would read:
[Non-web document, or non-web software, does not] contain anything that flashes more than three times in any one second period.
Daniel: why the comma?
<Daniel> e
GreggVan: will not be commas everywhere but in certain situations may need commas to note that both are applicable.
[Non-web document does not] contain anything that flashes more than three times in any one second period.
[Non-web software does not] contain anything that flashes more than three times in any one second period.
Daniel: let's not get stuck on this. We can bring this to a colleague on this.
<Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to say we should do the same in 2.3.1
<Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to sat "non-web document does not" or "not-web software does not"
Loismn: we have to do the same wording in 2.3.1 as it is same structure.
rssagent, draft minutes