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

Minutes: HTML-A11Y 4 March 2009 at 16:00Z

From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 09:19:55 -0800 (PST)
To: "'HTML Accessibility Task Force'" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00e601cabbbe$e6606da0$b32148e0$@edu>
Minutes from the call can be found at:
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/04-html-a11y-minutes.html



Also Copied below:

HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
04 Mar 2010

Agenda

See also: IRC log
Attendees
Present
John_Foliot, kliehm, Marco_Ranon, Gregory_Rosmaita, Michael_Cooper, Janina, 
MikeSmith, Ben_Caldwell?, Eric_Carlson, Stevef, Matt, Cynthia_Shelly, Rich, 
Leif_Halvard_Silli, Paul_Cotton, +20625aaaa, Dick_Bulterman, chaals
Regrets
Denis_Boudreau, Jon_Gunderson, Laura_Carlson, Kelly_Ford, Geoff_Freed
Chair
Janina_Sajka
Scribe
John_Foliot
Contents
Topics
Action Item Review
Sub-Group Updates
Summary of Action Items



<trackbot> Date: 04 March 2010

<janina> Meeting: HTML-A11Y telecon

<janina> agenda: this

<janina> 
+http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/att-0014/canvaselement-issue74-feedback1.html

<oedipus> "solomonic" summary change proposal: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/summary_element

<MichaelC> scribe: John_Foliot

<MichaelC> scribeNick: JF

<oedipus> jf, http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/Teleconference_cheat_sheet

<oedipus> leif, "solomonic" summary change proposal: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/summary_element
Action Item Review

<MichaelC> action-2 due 1 April

<trackbot> ACTION-2 Deliver draft of change proposal for ARIA additions to 
HTML 5 by 2009-12-24 due date now 1 April

<LeifHS> my name: Leif Halvard Silli

Cyns allow diversion for MSAA / ARIA

<MichaelC> action-8: UAI TF has decided to allow for divergent relationships

<trackbot> ACTION-8 Follow up with IE team about whether implementers are 
willing to use parent/child/nesting relationships could be used in mappings 
logic notes added

<janina> If my stuttering continues, I could get my cell phone. It would 
take about 2-3 minutes to make that change.

Cyns beleives Action 8 is / could be closed

<MichaelC> close action-8

<trackbot> ACTION-8 Follow up with IE team about whether implementers are 
willing to use parent/child/nesting relationships could be used in mappings 
logic closed

<MichaelC> action-20 due 11 March

<trackbot> ACTION-20 Dig up history on column element due date now 11 March

<oedipus> chaals' imagemap proposal for CANVAS: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom

<MichaelC> action-21: chaals' imagemap proposal for CANVAS: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom

<trackbot> ACTION-21 - coordinate concrete proposal for use of imagemap in 
CANVAS notes added
Sub-Group Updates

Janina: Concern that facilitators / email exchanges have gone far away from 
polite conversation and become attack like

keep personalities out of discussions

ask others honor that others have perspectives

focuse on technical issues, avoid judgements

Canvas subgroup has offered a proposal to the tF

Chaals has a counter-proposal that he has submitted

Rich: still some issues surrounding ADOM

<oedipus> chaals' imagemap proposal for CANVAS: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom

Maciej suggests that by default the sub-tree navigation be keyboard 
accessible

canvas should be in keyboard navigation

else yu must make explicit statement

<richardschwerdtfe> 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2010JanMar/att-0265/canvaselement-issue74-feedback1.html

<scribe> new modification emerged on Monday call

replace ADOM with Navsubtree

set to false to not include in keyboard navigation

over time you will never have to set it - will become default

(Richard reviews current proposal verbatum)

richard: Chaals proposal binds the image map to Canvas

needs to also deal with <coords> and addition of ARIA markup

<oedipus> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom

richard suggests that either proposal could then be used to make ally 
available

image mape would been seen as a navsubtree

<Stevef> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibility

<oedipus> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibility

yet another CP presented by SteveF

so group must decide do we want to proceed with the first proposal, Chaals 
proposal, or a combined proposal

the navsubtree proposal, in terms of change is rather small to HTML spec

Rich believes there is value in presenting both

Janina: how many changes will this add to the spec?

<oedipus> GJR notes that IMAGEMAP restoration proposal origanted with lachy, 
not chaals

Rich is unsure of feel of HTML WG to re-visit the old HTML4 areamap

SteveF: FF has no support for @role on area elements

however DaveB is pushing for that

<LeifHS> Chaals proposal uses <A> elements. Those support roles, no?

history of re-instatement of area goes back a ways

Rich: what is groups postion?

<cyns> Leif, in current spec A doesn't take roles, but there's a bug on this

Janina: take some time and survey group

would HTML WG look kindly on imagemaps?

<LeifHS> Cynthia, yes, but they discussed FIrefox support.

PaulC suggests that the answer would be No

SteveF: thee has been a fair bit of silence on this topic at the larger 
group

Janina: a survey could ask "Should" HTML WG accept AreaMaps

<cyns> Leif, as part of work item to do mappings, we intend to argue that A 
and most active elements should take roles.

Rich: don't restrict authors to areamaps

<cyns> So, agree with Gregory, that they SHOULD

<oedipus> GJR thinks the sanest thing is to have 1 approach to CANVAS a11y

hixie suggests that you can have 2D Canvas navigation

Rich: navsubtree clarrifys what to do with that content

eventually navsubtree would become obsolete

<oedipus> strong plus 1 to SteveF's proposal to combine

Rich: if we present Chaals request, do we need to re-write the whole areamap 
part of spec?

Chaals: quite serious about making this proposal

PaulC: question of scope / work effort

if there is strong support for that change, will require detailed Change 
Proposal

Chaals: would like to take preliminary Question to working group

not a huge change

but is scattered a bit more throughout the larger document

so might take a bit more time

Rich: recaps - 2 things regarding navsubtree

read 2d proposal

says essentially that this would be an expected beahviour

elements in navsubtree should be in keyboard order

Chaals: that is what the spec says, argues that it is incorrect

Rich: apple also suggests that the navsubtree would be there

bring the 2 together as "the proposal", then work with Chaals to refine 
details

Chaals: 2 phases to his proposal

1) if you must render all of convas content as active when rendered, it has 
a constraining effect

might end up rendering stuff only relevent to canvas

if you use imagemap elements (no substantive change to spec, just editorial)

then you could use area elements inside of canvas, but don't have a 
rendering behaviour if cnvs is not rendered

already works

<oedipus> not trying to cut off debate, but there are only 20 minutes left 
in call and we have yet to get to summary

one weakness is that the only way to create structure is to use extensive 
area (ARIA) additions

howeve establishes block elements - enables richer ability to add content

change proposl can be minimal in many ways

why write a HTML5 change proposal to change an existn (HTML4) imagemap

but it could be done today

Rich: if we return to HTML4 imagemap, how does it impact on HTML5 spec (drag 
n drop for esample)

Janina: we shoud find broader solutions that go beyond just a11y

Chaals: cannot see a particular impact on Drag n drop

thinks it would be valuable to advance to HTML Wg

impact on DOM?

Janina: important as this is a threshhold issue

seems both proposals can be combined

iron out issues

however, what would be acceptable to larger WG?

ask that question before moving foward?

Rich: pain points

HTML spec is inconsistent re: navsubtree

Q: how do people feel about the default behaviour that navsubtree be default 
behaviour

2) how do we feel about bringing the full HTML 4 imagemap back?

Chaals: HTML5 imagemap model actually can support Chaals

proposal

however if we use html4 model

HTML5 spec doesn't yet work, HTML4 does

thx greg

in functionality, both imagemaps proposals will work

Cyns: does either support more than live regions?

Chaals: essentially yes

in theory everything should work

in both imagemaps spec, the <map> element works like a <div>

(discussion of HTML 4's imgemap properties)

Cyns: curous to see how this would work with menus and toolbars

Chaals: if you make an image map with a bunch of <A> elements inside, but 
wrap with a canvas element, it doesn't render, but is navigatible

Rich: if we bind it, we wouldnt want it to render

Chaals: can be inside our outside of canvas
... make an imagemap and place it inside the canvas

<oedipus> ten minute warning

Chaals: this seems to work everywhere except Safari

today

presumes there is a mechanism

<oedipus> plus 1 to Janina's suggestion

Janina: should we ask Rich and Chaals to further discuss 'merging' ideas 
before moving it to larger WG?

Chaals: proposes that Richa nand he get together at CSUN to bang out details

Janina: worth explaining to WG that we have some good, but incomplete 
proposals - pehaps proposal by end of month

Chaals: tell WG that we have an idea, but not fully baked

SteveF: if we do go down this route, we will be asking for some substantial 
changes to 2D canvas API

<oedipus> FIVE MINUTE WARNING

so introduces sme serious questions

We need the 2 to work together

<paulc> Leaving to go to the HTML Wg meeting which I am chairing today.

there are some things that will definately need to be changed

<oedipus> http://dev.w3.org/html5/2dcontext

Cyns: figure out best aspects of both, then merge them

<oedipus> http://dev.w3.org/html5/canvas-api

SteveF: cannot get examples to work in Opera - need more working examples

for testing

Chaals: win version of Opera has a regression - if not working is considered 
a bug

Rich: interested in seeig examples with input elements as well

<oedipus> TWO MINUTE WARNING

SteveF: if we can get some working examples, can make others

<chaals> for Opera development builds

Steve will bring 2 changes to the subgroup

need to bring to the larger TG group

larger TF group

<oedipus> on the TABLE for summary (pun intended)

<oedipus> LauraC: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/SummaryAttribute20100222

<oedipus> Leif: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/tableInfoProposal

Janina: re summary: pleae look at Leif's change Proposal

<oedipus> GJR's "solomonic" summary change proposal: 
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/summary_element

sorry we lacked time to look at these

thee are numerous proposals out there

<oedipus> Cyns: 
www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Details_element_as_a_replacement_for_summary_attribute%2C_Feb_15%2C_2010

we should talk to see what it would take to bring all of this together?

<kliehm> Also join Cynthia, John, Chris Blizzard, Michael Dale, Bruce Lawson 
and I at SXSW: 
http://my.sxsw.com/search/event_results?q=html5+workshop+-css3+-google ;-)

Summary of Action Items
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 17:20:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:03 GMT