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

A11y TF minutes for 02/16/12

From: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:21:42 -0800
To: <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002b01ccecd7$d6fb9f00$84f2dd00$@ca>
Colleagues,

The minutes from today's a11yTF call can be found at:
http://www.w3.org/2012/02/16-html-a11y-minutes.html

...or as plain text after this notice.

Cheers!

JF
***********************

W3C
- DRAFT -
HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
16 Feb 2012

See also: IRC log
Attendees

Present
    Janina_Sajka, Michael_Cooper, Paul_Cotton, Judy_Brewer, John_Foliot,
Mike_Smith, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, David_MacDonald
Regrets
    Léonie_Watson, Steve_Faulkner
Chair
    Janina_Sajka
Scribe
    jf

Contents

    Topics
        Issue-199 ARIA Attributes Processing
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/199
        Issue-202 Fig-Caption Word Count
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/202
        Issue-203 Media Element Text Description
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/203
        Issue-31 Reconsideration Request
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/movealt
        Issue-30 & (now) Issue-204 Discussion
    Summary of Action Items

<trackbot> Date: 16 February 2012

<janina> trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Meeting: HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 16 February 2012

<janina> Meeting: HTML-A11Y Task Force Teleconference

<scribe> scribe: jf

<MichaelC> scribe: JF
Issue-199 ARIA Attributes Processing
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/199

<MichaelC> ARIA Attribute Processing Change Proposal

Michael C: added a link to the Change proposal pages

reviewed Issue 199 last thursday. due date today, feels it is ready to roll

JS: we usually send an email to the chairs advising of new CP

<paulc> Is this about 191 or 199?

JS: may want to flag as a TF Proposal, but likely want to give people a bit
of time

MC: this should be complete - there may be a small bit of editorial
tweaking, but do not expect substantive changes
Issue-202 Fig-Caption Word Count
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/202

JS: notes that all CP's required have been filed, so we are in good shape

JB: plans to file a CP against Issue 202 before end of day

hope to revisit soon
Issue-203 Media Element Text Description
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/203

JS: discussed process last week on HTML WG telecon

notion to make Issue 203 conditional on Issue 30

plan is to submit at CP by Saturday, but note relationship to issue 30.
Chairs will set aside until issue 30 resolved
Issue-31 Reconsideration Request
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/movealt

JS: several of us have worked on this, however SF got it together and
submitted by last week's deadline

it is undergoing a number of editorial changes, but proposes 2 things

1) asks for guidance in the HTML5 Draft be removed and instead point to the
alt text document

2) notes that the guidance is language agnostic - relevant to both HTML as
well as PDF, SVG, Word docs, etc., thus requests that it be moved to WCAG

<janina> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/movealt

JS: suggestion is that this group bring forward an opinion on this - notes
there are some minor tweaks and editorial changes to come (spelling
mistakes)
... expects that the TF would be interested in perfecting the proposal and
supporting it more formally

(members reviewing the CP now)

JB: has 1 concern, will expand on that momentarily
... we had previously discussed an approach and do not recall ever
discussing this as a joint submission

thought the intent was that this be a deliverable managed by the WCAG WG,
with input from any interested party, as some of the guidance *does* go
beyond HTML

thus having this jointly managed by the htmlwg could be difficult

given that there has been some conflict in the past - this could impact on
other groups

JF: suggests that it be moved to PFWG, administered by WCAG

JB: WAI has a smooth work flow to manage who looks after what

so letting WCAG manage this is likely appropriate, and they have the
bandwidth to do this

WCAG WG can coordinate input from other interested parties

they can also look at this in terms of normative vs advisory, etc.

what is key is appropriate positioning of things

<janina> nq?

so put forward a proposal as to where this should be placed, and then
discuss those merits

JS: sounds like this proposal is finding favor, with 1 change, to remove the
"Joint" management indication

next step to put out a 48 hr survey. Are we ready to do so?

DM: has one concern, that the CP seems to cause some inciting some
combativeness

JB: this is a matter of record of the bugs and rejection pattern, and the
fact that the problem does still exist

JS: one of the basis for the request for consideration was a specific
request of noting the pattern of rejections

<janina> DRAFT: The HTML-A11Y Task Force supports the Issue-31
reconsideration proposal at:

<janina> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/movealt

<janina> provided it is modified to propose the Alt Techniques document
become a deliverable of the WCAG WG.

CS: sounds good

DM suggests "as amended"

JS: we have permission to amend from SF already

(MC making minor edits to the wiki

RESOLUTION: The HTML-A11Y Task Force supports the Issue-31 reconsideration
proposal at: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/movealt

PC: given that this will land in the Chairs inbox soon, suggests some
feedback

<MichaelC> ^ note this resolution was made on revision id 12141

Notes a relationship to WCAG, but this new document will not be part of
WCAG, but rather a new document related to WCAG

cautions about the rational - quote "New version of WCAG" end quote

CS: the design of WCAG is that we do not create a new document, but rather
add and adjust new techniques

MC: the argument also includes a number of documents in a suite that = WCAG,
thus updating any 1 doc creates a "new" version of WCAG

CS: the addition of new documents to WCAG follows the pattern of "Living
Spec"

PC: that is an important point that needs to be underscored, so that the
Chairs and others are clear on WCAG evolution

JB": is there a way to version up the wording so that it includes the
intended change, with language that clarifies the impact on WCAG

PC: the chairs are moving fairly swiftly on re-open requests. Likely by this
friday this will be high on the review list by the chairs

JB: question around word-smithing

DM: is there value in talking about normative/non-normative

<MichaelC> My proposal was that WCAG 2.0, Understanding WCAG 2.0, and
Techniques for WCAG 2.0" constitute the "WCAG 2.0 Suite" and an update to
any of them constitutes and "update to WCAG"

CS: suggest that WCAG was built to accomodate change via the techniques
section (1 of 3 in the "suite") - Living Spec portion

JS: suggest we finish this off line, and then submit the resolution after
that

<MichaelC> Cynthia pointed out that publishing updates to Techniques for
WCAG 2.0 is the mechanism by which WCAG 2.0 is a "living document" while
still being normative

JS: any URIs that can be included will also strengthen the language

<MichaelC> HTML 5 Techniques for WCAG 2.0 Task Force

<MichaelC> Starter set of HTML 5 techniques for WCAG 2.0

<janina> DRAFT: The HTML-A11Y Task Force supports the Issue-31
reconsideration proposal at:

<janina> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/movealt

RESOLUTION: The HTML-A11Y Task Force supports the Issue-31 reconsideration
proposal at: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/movealt

with the edits regarding WCAG discussed and minuted from today's
teleconference

zakim; next item

<Judy> http://www.w3.org/2012/02/14-text-minutes.html
Issue-30 & (now) Issue-204 Discussion

JB: concern about process, and next step will be request of procedural
issues

concerns discussion on splitting longdesc decision over some protests

lack of coordination

also puts ARIA-describedby issue ahead of Issue 30, concern about timing
issue

also proposes a change on ARIA (work of another WG) without consultation or
coordination

need to talk about coordination efforts

JB: invites others to review information in the minutes from the text
sub-team call
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2012 18:22:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:53 GMT