W3C

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

22 Jul 2010

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Michael_Cooper, Marc_Johlic, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Daman_Wandke, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Tim_Boland, Ben_Caldwell, James_Nurthen, Gregg_Vanderheiden
Regrets
Chair
Loretta_Guarino_Reid
Scribe
Katie_Haritos-Shea

Contents


Accept all unanimous consent issues? Not yet

Introduction of new member: Daman Wandke, works part time for USDA and NASA for CIO

Daman Wandke does alot of work on PDFs at USDA

Accept all unanimous consent issues? YES

<greggvanderheiden> Issue 2796: SC 1.4.7 Why "audio-only"?, Issue 2815: Is G1 sufficient technique for SC 2.4.1?, Issue 2819: WCAG2 Techniques draft doc H65- use of title attribute, Issue 2823: WCAG2 -Techniques draft: Flash15 vs Flash37

CLOSED ISSUES: 2796, 2815, 2819 and 2823

Details: Issue 2796: SC 1.4.7 Why "audio-only"?, Issue 2815: Is G1 sufficient technique for SC 2.4.1?, Issue 2819: WCAG2 Techniques draft doc H65- use of title attribute, Issue 2823: WCAG2 -Techniques draft: Flash15 vs Flash37

CLOSED as PROPOSED: 2796, 2815, 2819 and 2823

OPEN ISSUES: 2822: Question about Understanding SC 2.4.4

RESOLUTION: CLOSED as PROPOSED: 2796, 2815, 2819 and 2823

Discussion of OPEN ISSUES: 2822: Question about Understanding SC 2.4.4

Loretta suggests add this something to User Agent notes

2822. Add to User Agent Notes:......the following.......

RESOLUTION: 2822. Add to User Agent Notes: Add and an EXAMPLE to the technique representing this. If the value of the title is essential to understanding the purpose of the link for all users, then the content of this attribute needs to be available to all keyboard users (not only those with text-to-speech software) for this technique to be accessibility supported.
... 2822. Add to User Agent Notes: If the value of the title is essential to understanding the purpose of the link for all users, then the content of this attribute needs to be available to all keyboard users (not only those with text-to-speech software) for this technique to be accessibility supported.
... 2822. Accept as ammended
... 2822. No example will be added to the technique

<scribe> TOPIC: WCAG Review of ATAG 2.0 Last Call by Sept 2

<MichaelC> ATAG 2.0 Last Call WD

Reviewers: Where ATAG 2 has dependencies upon WCAG
... Ben, Daman
... Are see if there any inconsistancies between what ATAG 2 and WCAG 2 is requiring

Suggest Asking: David and Sophia to review

Deadline is Sept 2, will need reviews in 1 week before (by August 23rd) to coalate

How long is ATAG? 40 pages printed

Like WCAG's Understanding - called Implementing ATAG

Everyone ask friends to review. 3 main questions. 1. Do ATAG requirments match WCAG requirments? 2. Do ATAG requirments break any WCAG requirments? 3. Do ATAG conformance levels match/break any WCAG conformance levels?

Guideline: Parts A and Parts B. ATAG Guidelines plus the Glossary

Volunteer to Review ATAG 2: Mark (IBM) will compare ATAG and WCAG glossaries

Volunteer to Review ATAG 2: James (Oracle) may be able to find someone to review it - but - no promises

Volunteer to Review ATAG 2: Loretta will ask Cynthia S if there is anyone at Microsoft who might be able to review it

RESOLUTION to ACCEPT as Proposed, subject to review by Andrew. Issue 2823

CLOSING: Thanks Everybody

<scribe> Meeting: Next Week

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2010/08/03 00:52:33 $