W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > August 2010

Weekly Resolved & Rejected Bugs Report

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:05:32 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=YZCtkChMD0dObUavTfR4vQ4TKcWMs-CvwmG5m@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hello Everyone,

Since last week's report we have had eight WONTFIX, three FIXED, three
NEEDSINFO, and two INVALID bug resolutions.
Some A11y resolved bug charts are available at:
http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/html5bugchart/20100821/

One a11y bug was closed.

No new a11y bugs were reported. Half of the new bugs that existed last
week were processed this week. An August 21 a11y Bug Snapshot for the
remaining NEW bugs is at:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/New_A11Y_Bug_Snapshot_20100821

We currently have forty-one HTML5 Spec bugs awaiting task force
decision of whether to apply the a11ytf keyword or not. Marco, Martin,
and Michael are making good progress reviewing them.

Details are as follows.

1. WONTFIX BUGS:

1.1  Bug 9241: "Explicitly state, "For guidance on accessibility
requirements for text alternatives authors should consult WCAG 2.0"
and link to WCAG 2.0" reported by Laura Carlson.
Ian's Rationale: "Having a reference to WCAG here would be
inconsistent since we don't have them in all the other relevant
places. Having them all over the place would make the spec less
coherent and harder to edit. Therefore I think it is best if the two
documents do not try to deep-link into each other."
My View: Wait for the decision of ISSUE 31 and ISSUE 116. If the
decision is to replace the current alt spec text (via a server side
include: SSI) with Steve's text from the document 'HTML5: Techniques
for providing useful text alternatives', this bug may be moot. Steve
already links to WCAG and it should be minor to make this link in his
doc. If the decision is not to replace the current alt spec text via
SSI with Steve's doc and someone volunteers to write a change
proposal, escalate to an issue, as this bug is one of the requests
from the Accessibility Coordination Group's "Consensus Resolutions on
Text alternatives in HTML 5" document.
http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9241

1.2  Bug 9845: "Provide reference and info about HTML5: Techniques for
providing useful text alternatives in html5 " reported by Steve
Faulkner.
Ian's Rationale: "It would be inappropriate for us to link to all the
many information documents that people are going to write about HTML5.
For example, we similarly don't link to Mike's document or Lachlan's
document. Only the most high-profile of such documents are referenced,
in a section on 'Recommended Reading'".
My View: I concur with Steve that it is not be fruitful to reopen the bug.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/0193.html
He has escalated this to Issue 116 and written a change proposal.
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/116
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/altspecification
If the Issue 31 decision is to replace the current alt spec text with
Steve's document, this bug and issue 116 may be moot.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9845

1.3 Bug 9871: "Provide normative advice to conformance checkers about
use of onevent handler attributes" reported by Steve Faulkner.
Ian's Rationale: "onclick attributes have valid use cases, e.g.
analytics. While it is certainly true that they are sometimes misused,
such misuse is already made non-conforming by the spec and it is
impossible for a conformance checker to reliably distinguish such
cases from conforming cases."
My View: Escalate to an issue if Steve or another task force member
volunteers and agrees to actively work on this and sees it through to
closure.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9871

1.4 Bug 9872: "trigger a conformance error when JavaScript is included
in href attribute" reported by Steve Faulkner.
Ian's Rationale: "Concurred with comment 2."
My View: Escalate to an issue if Steve or another task force member
volunteers and agrees to actively work on this and sees it through to
closure.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9872

1.5 Bug 10016: "longdesc and @role (ARIA)" reported reported by Leif
Halvard Silli.
Ian's Rationale: "The longdesc attribute is obsolete, per WG decision."
My View: Because ISSUE-30 has been appealed, and the appeal is
awaiting response from the Team Contact and/or Director and because
there are impending Formal Objection(s), it is possibile that this bug
may be reopened in the future. Will the task force be appealing or
formally objecting to Issue 30? If it does that may aid in reopening
this bug.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/0160.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0027.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0044.html
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10016

1.6 Bug 10017: "longdesc URL checking" reported by Leif Halvard Silli.
Ian's Rationale: "The longdesc="" attribute is obsolete, per WG decision."
My View: Same as for bug 10016.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10017

1.7 Bug 10019: "Native user agent support for exposing longdesc to all
users" reported by Laura Carlson.
Ian's Rationale: "Per the following working group decision,
longdesc="" is obsolete:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/att-0112/issue-30-decision.html
"
My View: Same as for bug 10016 and 10017.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10019


2. NEEDSINFO BUGS:

2.1 Bug 9936: "onclick attributes on any element that is not focusable
should trigger a conformance error" reported by Steve Faulkner.
Ian's Rationale: "I don't understand. Could you elaborate? What is
'conformance advice?"
My View: If possible, the bug reporter or anyone else who is
interested try to give Ian the information that he needs.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9936

2.2 Bug 9657: "Content model of object" reported by Leif Halvard Silli.
Ian's Rationale: "I don't understand. Could you elaborate?"
My View: Same as for bug 9936.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9657

2.3 Bug 10252: "Psuedo-Cascade of Multiple Accesskeys Definable for an
Individual Element" reported by Gregory J. Rosmaita.
Ian's Rationale: "
My View: Same as for bug 9936.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10252


3. WORKSFORME BUGS:

3.1 Bug 9673: "Remove any reference to a specific Time Stamp format
for video captioning from the specification at this time" reported by
John Foliot.
Ian's Rationale: "marking WORKSFORME since the W3C spec doesn't have
any mention of timed tracks."
My View: If the bug reporter agrees, close the bug; if the bug
reporter disagrees, reopen the bug and try to explain further or
escalate the bug if that isn't fruitful.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9673

3.2 Bug 10251: "Psuedo-Cascade of Multiple Accesskeys Definable for an
Individual Element" reported by Gregory J. Rosmaita.
Ian's Rationale: "The spec seems to already handle these cases."
My View: Same as for bug 9673.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10251


4. INVALID BUGS:

4.1 Bug 8171: "Implement the text alternatives proposal from WAI"
reported by Michael Cooper.
Ian's Rationale: "It's not clear what exactly is being requested here.
Please file individual bugs to be filed for each problem, and describe
the problems in those bugs."
My View: Individual bugs were filed for each problem. This bug may be
resolved with the resolution of Issue 31 if the change proposal
"Correct and Improve <img> Conformance Checker Guidance" is accepted
by the HTML working group. That proposal implements the text
alternatives proposal from WAI CG.
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20090126
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8171

4.2 Bug 10015: "longdesc URL checking" reported by Leif Halvard Silli.
Ian's Rationale: "The longdesc="" attribute is obsolete, per WG decision."
My View: Because ISSUE-30 has been appealed, and the appeal is
awaiting response from the Team Contact and/or Director and because
there are impending Formal Objection(s), it is possible that this bug
may be reopened in the future.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/0160.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0027.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0044.html
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10015


5. FIXED BUGS:

5.1 Bug 9678: "add rationale for providing an alt when inline
description is available" reported by Steve Faulkner on Steve's alt
document.
Steve's Rationale: "An image contains relevant information, an
alternative interpretation of which is available in the same document
as structured text. Using an empty alt attribute hides an image from
some users, which is incorrect, the image is not meaningless, it
contains information which a range of users could interpret with the
aid of the short text alternative and longer description. It also
provides a text alternative for users who have images turned off in
their browsers, so they can if they wish load and view the image. If
an empty alt attribute is present there may be no indication that an
image is present. Also if a description of an image is provided in a
document, a programmatic association between the image and the
descriptive text is required, using an empty alt attribute on the
image effectively precludes the assigning of a programmatic
association."
My View: The spec revision for this bug looks good to me. If anyone
thinks this bug is not fixed properly please speak up.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9678

5.2 Bug 9679: "Consider expanding the explanation of a null alt
attribute (alt="") " reported by Laura Carlson on Steve's alt
document.
Steve's Rationale: "I added some information about the use of the null
attribute a while back:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/#empty "
My View: The spec revision for this bug looks good to me. If anyone
thinks this bug is not fixed properly please speak up.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9679

5.3 Bug 9893: "tabindex not listed in Table of Contents" reported by
Laura Carlson on behalf of Gregory J. Rosmaita.
Ian's Rationale: "Concurred with reporter's comments."
Checked in as WHATWG revision r5303.
Check-in comment: Make tabindex="" appear in the toc.
http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=5302&to=5303
My View: The spec revision for this bug looks good to me. Gregory, if
you or anyone else thinks bug 9893 is not fixed properly please speak
up.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9893


6. CLOSED BUGS:

6.1 Bug 9217: "Remove the Paragraph-Section-Heading loophole for not
providing a text alternative" reported by Laura Carlson.
This one is fixed as the exception was removed from the spec.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9217


7. NEW BUGS:

No new a11y bugs were reported this week. Half of the NEW bugs that
existed last week were processed this week. Currently 15 NEW a11y bugs
exist. The oldest NEW a11y bug was opened on April 9, 2010. The newest
NEW a11y bug was on July 28, 2010.
For further details see the August 21 a11y bug snapshot:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/New_A11Y_Bug_Snapshot_20100821


8. "A11yTF" KEYWORD BACKLOG:

We currently have forty-one HTML5 Spec bugs awaiting task force
decision of whether to apply the a11ytf keyword or not. Marco, Martin,
and Michael have been making good progress in reviewing them.
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/Bugs_Awaiting_A11yTF_Keyword_Decision
Many thanks to Marco, Martin, and Michael for reviewing this list.
Please review their proposals for decisions.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0013.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0124.html

We currently have seven Bugs on Document "HTML5: Techniques for
providing useful text alternatives Bugs" awaiting task force decision.
Steve Faulkner is editor of that document.
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/Bugs_Awaiting_A11yTF_Keyword_Decision#Text_Alternatives_Techniques_Bugs_Awaiting_Decision

The initial sets of "A11y" bugs, which were determined to have the
"A11yTF" keyword applied to them in January 2010, are at:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/accepted

The initial set of "A11y" bugs, which were determined not to have the
"A11yTF" keyword, applied to them in January 2010 are at:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/rejected


9. RELATED REFERENCES:

Weekly Resolved and Rejected Bugs Reports Archive
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/Weekly_Resolved_and_Rejected_Bugs_Reports

"A11yTF" Keyword Criteria (Draft)
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/KeywordCriteria

Bug Status Table:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs#Bug_Status_Table

NEW Bug Snapshots
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/New_A11Y_Bug_Snapshot

Escalating a Bug to an Issue:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/Escalating_a_Bug_to_an_Issue

Accessibility Change Proposal Status Table:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Accessibility_Change_Proposal_Status

Best Regards,
Laura

--
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Saturday, 21 August 2010 17:06:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:16 GMT