W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > August 2012

Minutes from the TF Telecon on 2 August

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 12:07:56 -0400
To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120802160755.GL5663@concerto.rednote.net>
Minutes from the HTML-A11Y Task Force Teleconference on Thursday 2
August are provided below as text and are available as hypertext at:

http://www.w3.org/2012/08/02-html-a11y-minutes.html


   W3C

                                                                                   - DRAFT -

                                                                 HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

02 Aug 2012

   Agenda

   See also: IRC log

Attendees

   Present
          John_Foliot, Mike, Janina, Judy, Rich, Michael_Cooper, paulc, +44.117.929.aaaa, Leonie, Steve

   Regrets
   Chair
          MikeSmith

   Scribe
          janina

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Issue-201 (canvas hit testing), Status
         2. Issue-204 (ARIA and hidden elements), Test Page and WBS Responses
         3. Issue-30 (longdesc), WBS Preparation & Timelines
         4. Issue-206 (alt exemption for generators), developments
     * Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 02 August 2012

   <scribe> scribe: janina

   <MikeSmith> paulc, you dialing in?

Issue-201 (canvas hit testing), Status

   rich: Haven't seen a response from Ted or Frank

   mike: Nothing on WG list as of overnight either

   rich: Unsure why some of the prohibitions are there, but they're serious and suspect they're unintentional

   mike: Anything else we could do in parallel?

   rich: We're waiting for agreement on line one of text
   ... Also haven't heard from Frank

Issue-204 (ARIA and hidden elements), Test Page and WBS Responses

   mike: John, you posted a test page? More to say?

   john: Supposedly we can expose structure in hidden div
   ... Understand this should work in FF14, but I wasn't able to confirm that

   <Mike5> Test page: structured content in hidden divs

   rich: What do you mean "can be done in FF?"

   john: That FF will expose the content

   <Mike5> Testing Structured content in @hidden container, etc.

   rich: By design FF doesn't map hidden content to a11y api
   ... We tried this strategy years ago in Home Page Reader (HPR)
   ... Problem is that you're now asking AT to function as the browser
   ... Rather, you want the browser to expose the content in such a way that the AT can walk the struct

   john: Point of test page is to illustrate approach of one of the CPs doesn't work
   ... V4 disallows for that reason, and that the sighted kybd user is lost with unfocussed tab stops

   steve: I do see the text portion from your test page, not sure whether or not it announces it

   rich: Yes, it's stringified
   ... But the struct is not exposed to AT

   steve: only text content at this time is exposed

   john: My example, n response partly to Simon, is the nested lists, headings, URIs, etc.

   <JF> +1 to losing tab focus comment by Judy

   judy: Want to focus back on the next steps re the Issue WBS, it's important to clearly identify the problems exposed via the test page in the WBS
   ... The disappearing cursor is one important point. We need to circulate this with a description for people who don't get it yet

   john: Biggest problem is that survey closes Friday, so that all we can do is to file ...

   judy: Yes, putting this in survey is important, but also explaining this on list so that the wider community can understand the design flaw.
   ... We've been speculating this for months and people haven't understood it. Now, that we can show it, we need to make it clear.

   rich: I'm concerned that people are making assertions who don't have the requisite understanding to be speaking authoratatively
   ... To those of us who have worked in this area for years, this is obvious.

   mike: I think this is important pointing out in an email

   rich: We saw similar in Issue-205, where there were assertions on things working, but no understanding why they aren't working for the a11y user
   ... It's particularly bad because the H5 chairs have been making these kinds of assertions without having the technical background to understand the a11y implications
   of their assertions. It's happening very consistently and that's a problem.

   judy: Rich, many people share that concern, but we need to get through today's agenda critically.

Issue-30 (longdesc), WBS Preparation & Timelines

   judy: We had suggested to the CCs some ways to move forward expiditously,
   ... The q that came on list, however, was specifically whether the CPs on 30 were ready to go
   ... Because we're waiting on decisions on 204, and also 194, not knowing what those will be, can impact what we need to say in 30
   ... Laura does indicate willingness to accept a preamble in her CP
   ... So, needing to see the decisions, possibly taking this through PF, and certainly taking it through the TF again, makes the 17th unworkable, especially as August
   is a heavy vacation month
   ... Clearly everyone inows I30 is one of the key issues we want to get back to, but need to do it properly
   ... Particurly critical is our need to see the decisions, and address any assertions in them appropriately with PF and TF participation.
   ... So, this is partially a Text Subteam report as we discussed this

   mike: So, the only action here is that the chairs give more time

   judy: In terms of coordination, yes
   ... There are several actions in process now on this from the Text Subteam

   john: CCs did indicate on list, first asking whether more time was needed, and Paul indicating up to a month as I read it

   <paulc> Please respond to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Aug/0003.html

   judy: An appropriate venue for discussing this kind of topic, agreed in Bilbao, would be a coordination call

   paul: We want this done in public
   ... I offered coordination mtg Tuesday and haven't heard

   judy: You'll probably hear us agreeing Tuesday

   mike: Judy, do you want this up on the WG call?

   judy: Can continue to assert what we've said here if desired
   ... e.g. if CCs can announce a date for decision on 204, would be helpful for us to designate a date when we would be ready

   janina: Asking whether people on this call agree with this progression?

   mike: Can't say myself as I'm not up to speed on these dependencies

   john: Yes, the entire question of approach in 30 needs to be informed by the decision on 204.

   jf: Don't think this should be shocking or surprising

   judy: Perhaps another way to say it is to appropriately respond to continuing misunderstandings of the dependencies, which may still be present in a 204 decision.

   mike: Seems people actively working on this feel quite strongly on this.

   janina: Yes, possible exception of Laura

Issue-206 (alt exemption for generators), developments

   mike: a ton of on list discussion the last 24 hours or so
   ... reviewing history of meta generator ...
   ... CP asked for 31c decision to be reissued and it was as Issue-206
   ... CP said remove the meta generator exemption
   ... Seems no one is advocating for the meta generator any longer
   ... I can also say Hickson is also prepared to remove it from the WHAT spec
   ... my goal is to make our validator as useful as we can, and to keep it and v.new in sync as well
   ... So, we have an additional CP now to identify via attrib images put in by auto tool

   steve: q about keeping validators in sync? Following what?

   mike: No, we follow our spec

   judy: Been reading, much interesting discussion on thread, initially disappointed that user requirements not addressed in the early discussion, but that seems to have
   changed now
   ... One discussion point should be how tightly constrained the set that this tag would apply to
   ... Think Laura's proposal offers an interesting distinction here

   janina: Yes, wanted to suggest discussing why spec rather than validator filter is a good question
   ... Also like Mike's suggest default warning msg

   john: Concerned that validating a page with these errors is improper
   ... Haven't caught up with the overnight thread, though
   ... We also need to do something for the user that needs to deal with the results of missing alt

   steve: I think this is potentially a good thing for the end user

   <LeonieWatson> +1 to JF's worry that the UX is getting lost

   steve: I spend time look at real world apps; see a lot of no alt and no indication of what the image is about, so users don't know there's something tthere with value
   they're missing
   ... being told there's an image without alt is better than not knowing there's an image there at all

   mike: I expect we'll have this agendum again next week.
   ... Don't think we have a deadline at this point

   john: There's an Aug 8 deadline for counter CPs, and expect that bar has been met

   mike: Noting we're over the hour, anything else for today?
   ... OK. We're adjourned until next week!

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Found Scribe: janina
Present: John_Foliot Mike Janina Judy Rich Michael_Cooper paulc +44.117.929.aaaa Leonie Steve


   [End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
		Email:	janina@rednote.net

The Linux Foundation
Chair, Open Accessibility:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair,	Protocols & Formats	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
	Indie UI			http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2012 16:08:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 2 August 2012 16:08:22 GMT