See also: IRC log
<Andi> resolution: Team C techniques accepted by consent decree
<Andi> resolution: Team C techniques accepted by consent decree - Allowing the user to extend the default timeout, Failure due to using meta redirect, Providing a text message that identifies the field as mandatory, Providing a text message when user input falls outside the required format or values, Ensuring the only way to get to an inaccessible version is from a link from the accessible version, Failure due to using the blink element, Failure due to using text
<Andi> scribe: Andi
resolution: accepted by consent decree
resolution: accept with edits
resolution: accept with edits
rationale for delete proposal - script and meta refresh can both be disabled in user agents - don't think it is a "common failure"
everything not resolved today must have new proposals submitted for survey by Monday so can be reworked before Thursday
resolution: accepted Team B techniques by consent decree: How to Meet SC 1.3.5, Ordering the content in a meaningful sequence, Failure due to positioning information with CSS so that the visual reading order or the programmatically determined reading order does not convey the meaning of the content, Absolute positioning based on structural markup, Failure due to using CSS styling to control directionality in XHTML/HTML, How to Meet SC 3.1.6, Using the ruby e
Information and relationships conveyed through presentation can be programmatically determined.
resolution: accept
Recognized by assistive technology that supports the technologies in the chosen baseline
since this definition is also on the survey for agenda item 5, defer discussion until then
resolution: accept with edits - add note in technique "if it is an initialism, inserting a space character is not a failure"
<Makoto> zakimi, mute me
resolution: accept - regarding MC comments, lots of things other than web pages can have titles and meaningful titles are addressed in a level 3 SC
resolution: accept as proposed at Level 3 - both of MC concerns are met by the proposed wording - if text provides meaning, you would not need to know the pronunciation
resolution: accept
resolution: accept
<gregg> ack
resolution: accept modified proposal - when the sequence of the content affects its meaning, that sequence can be programmatically determined.
resolution: accept
2 separate and distinct questions - 1. what terms we use 2. examining the SC to get the right term for each one
3 entities are delivery page, Web page extraordinaire, and authored unit
rationale for not including "perceived unit" - authors can't control it
3.2.2 will use authored unit
<gregg> ack
2.2.2 - discussion that this should apply to delivery units - example is ad in an iframe
but conformance is not at a delivery unit level - if ad doesn't conform, your page would not conform even if you provide a way to make it conform on your page.
jpegs are delivery units but cannot comply on their own - only when wrapped with something like an img element in an HTML document
maybe we need another entity - something between a delivery unit and a web page
<gregg> ackack g
or maybe we need something in conformance - a web page conforms if all delivery units conform or if it can wrap non-conforming delivery units in something that makes them conform
eb 2.0 model is not web pages at all but streaming resources - users create their own eb pages from the streaming content
with regard to 2.2.2, the in-between entity might be something that has a user interface
<Zakim> ben, you wanted to say, "I don't understand how this changes anything about the way a claim is made or in the motivation to apply WCAG 2.0 for different types of developers"
proposal to add "authored component" to the set of entities - delivery page, Web page extraordinaire, and authored unit
authored component is smaller than a Web page
2.2.2 - authored component or Web page
2.4.2 - Web page
2.4.3 Web page
2.4.4 - Web page
2.4.5 - skip
2.4.7 - has to be true for the whole and all of the parts
2.4.8 - Web page
3.1.1 - Web page
3.2.3 - Web pages
3.2.4 - Web pages
4.1.1 - authored component or Web page
3.2.2 - authored unit
<marco> 1,01I must go now, sorry. Bye!
resolution: add "authored component" and define as "authored unit that is intended to be used as a part of another authored unit"
<Zakim> ben, you wanted to say, "by adding authored component, can we now say primary resource?"
resolution: change Web page to Web unit
<ben> scribe: ben
resolution: define authored component as, "an authored unit intended to be used as a part of another authored unit"
resolution, replace Web Page or other primary resource with "Web Unit or authored component"
resolution, replace "Web page or other primary resource" with "Web unit" in 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 2.4.4, 2.4.8, 3.1.1, 3.2.3, 3.2.4
<Michael> "parent" in an XML sense has a specific meaning as John points out
<Zakim> Michael, you wanted to say the procedure to navigate to parent structures would need to be straightforward and universal for this to work
<Zakim> Michael, you wanted to say if we can't define what the UA should do we can't accuse it of being broken
<Kesh> "the unique function of each link can be determined" is proposed
resolution: revise SC 2.4.5 to read, "The unique function of each link can be determined. "
... add 2.4.9 to read, "The unique function of each link can be programmatically determined from the link."
resolution: accept proposal and replace "element" with "component"
<jslatin> our definition of user agent explicitly includes AT
<Michael> which is why it's a wider net
resolution: accept unanimous items from other surveys
from conformance survey 476, 1324, 1328, 1361, 1362, 1437, 1444, 1556, 1560, 1573, 1575, 1590, 1598, 1702, 1723, 1724, 1725, 1726, 1727, 1759, 1760, 1762, 1778, 1787, 1823, 1855, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1871, 1872
from introduction - all but 1866 and 1867