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

Re: regrets RE: Minutes for the HTML-A11Y TF Teleconference on 15 March

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:23:07 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOavpvfzpeoLKtRVjQRfy4T5Ve_K0=AYyJu929rinHf1tBFMkA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
I sent my regrets to Mike but forgot to CC the list. Sorry.

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:20 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Belated regrets... Last 2 weeks of fiscal year for Government of Canada,
> swamped.
>
> Cheers
> David MacDonald
>
> CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
>  "Enabling the Web"
>     Can-Adapt.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cynthia Shelly [mailto:cyns@microsoft.com]
> Sent: March-15-12 12:51 PM
> To: Janina Sajka; HTML Accessibility Task Force
> Subject: regrets RE: Minutes for the HTML-A11Y TF Teleconference on 15 March
>
> Belated regrets.  I had to deal with a family situation this morning.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janina Sajka [mailto:janina@rednote.net]
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 9:14 AM
> To: HTML Accessibility Task Force
> Subject: Minutes for the HTML-A11Y TF Teleconference on 15 March
>
> Minutes from the HTML-A11Y Task Force teleconference on 15 March are
> reproduced below in text and available as hypertext at:
> http://www.w3.org/2012/03/15-html-a11y-minutes.html
>
>
>   W3C
>
>                                                           - DRAFT -
>
>                                          HTML Accessibility Task Force
> Teleconference
>
> 15 Mar 2012
>
>   Agenda
>
>   See also: IRC log
>
> Attendees
>
>   Present
>          John_Foliot, Judy, Mike, Cooper, Janina_Sajka, Rich, paulc,
> Steve_Faulkner
>
>   Regrets
>   Chair
>          Mike_Smith
>
>   Scribe
>          janina
>
> Contents
>
>     * Topics
>     * Summary of Action Items
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ______________________________________
>
>   <trackbot> Date: 15 March 2012
>
>   <scribe> scribe: janina
>
>   We're small attendance, so meeting will be short, but there's a report
> from Text Subteam that we will take ...
>
>   <Judy> Resumed meeting this Tuesday, March 13th, 1pm EDT
>
>   <Judy> http://www.w3.org/2012/03/13-text-minutes.html
>
>   <Judy> 1. Mainly discussed an update on the PFWG ARIA TF F2F MTG last
> week, including implications regarding longdesc
>   and issue 204, which concerns whether ARIA should be able to point to
> hidden content
>
>   <Judy> - PFWG concluded nothing in 204 that would make describedBY an
> acceptable alternative for longdesc
>
>   <Judy> - We noted that this mechanism may be otherwise useful, but would
> become dangerous at the point that it is
>   combined with tab order focus.
>
>   <Judy> - ARIA documentation clarifications in progress; or now done
>
>   <Judy> 2. Continued concern that the question on longdesc still needs a
> fair hearing, and that the question is
>   recycling extensively but has not actually been called.
>
>   <Judy> 3. Brief discussion of some possibilities for updating the CP on
> meta name-generator
>
>   Judy: Remider to people of the ongoing meeting time for Text, it's
> Tuesdays at 1PM Boston
>
>   Mike, if you're talking, we're hearing science-fictiony noise
>
>   We're good now ...
>
>   john: I have submitted a CP on 204
>   ... Also have ongoing thread with Rich to make certain that my statements
> are factually correct
>
>   mike: OK, unsure of where we are on the agenda ... ...
>   ... Also wanted to get Canvas update today, but no Rich
>   ... Anything else to add re text alternatives on this call today?
>
>   judy: Expect that Text Subteam will need to continue to be extremely
> active given issues still unresolved
>   ... These will also take considerable work
>
>   john: Also want to note Issue-203 which has some dependencies on text
> alternatives
>   ... Noting this was rejected -- noting that it can't be resolved because
> it's dependencies are unresolved
>   ... Just want to note that on record
>
>   mike: I see that, unsure what the TF can do at this point
>   ... The TF isn't an individual entity in the WG process that puts
> proposals, unlike what individuals do in that respect
>   ... In response to John I'm still unclear what the TF's next step would
> be
>
>   john: This is how I see it, the CP outlines requirements and
> dependencies,
>   ... If that's to remain rejected, I guess the appeal is the remaining
> option, though not my preference
>   ... The point of the CP(and the Issue) was to make certain key
> functionality was not lost
>   ... It's inaction from the CHTML Chairs on Issue-30 that blocks proper
> action on these other issues ...
>
>   judy: Want to first speak to John's concern on 203 ...
>   ... I would note I came across a similar conundrum working on a
> Fig-Caption Word Count proposal ...
>   ... Mike, I'm also somewhat confused by what I thought I heard you saying
> ...
>   ... Were you saying the TF doesn't put proposals to the WG?
>
>   Mike: Exactly what I'm saying.
>   ... For instance, no TF "account" for TF opinions, only individual
>
>   judy: In terms of WBS, sure, but proposing positions was a core reason
> for TF
>
>   mike: We've never definitively taken position from the TF on longdesc
>
>   judy: There has indeed been a TF resolution on longdesc, the Laura
> proposal is a TF supported
>
>   mike: I haven't taken a position, have not endorsed one, so if there's
> supposedly such a position, there's something
>   wrong here
>   ... I'm aware there are individuals that do not endorrse
>
>   janina: There definitely was -- a resolution on the call and the follow
> up email consensus call
>
>   mike: Want to hear current state on Canvas -- to move on ...
>
>   rich: So, I've been working with Ian providing requirements and use cases
>   ... I don't know everything a11y needs is there, need to look forward
>   ... My initial reaction is that it may be a bit more heavyweight than
> needed
>   ... What I'm hearing inside of IBM from people using canvas is that it's
> much lighterweight than SVG
>   ... With Canvas we don't need an element for everything drawn
>   ... Don't know who wins on that, but I know I need to look further on
> Ian's latest
>   ... Mike, do you know whether Ian has vetted this with app developers?
>
>   mike: That is a key question ...
>   ... would not want this to end up as different browser implementations
>
>   rich: agree
>
>   mike: We have the situation of a large enterprise being able to
> implement, butneed also to enable the small shop and
>   individual author to implement
>   ... Frank's proposal looks much simpler to me from that perspective
>
>   irhc; I also don't know the answer to that at this point
>
>   rich: At one point the proposals were missing the ability to clear the
> path, for instance
>   ... This was missing in Frank's, don't yet know about Ian's
>   ... But I think the most important feedback needs to be from app devs
>
>   mike: Don't know for sure, but suspect there might not have been much
> feedback from devs on Ian's current proposal
>   ... that kind of feedback does take time
>
>   rich: IBM is definitely looking at canvas vs SVG because of our apps in
> data analytics
>   ... I know people think we're doing a rich text editor because I talk
> about that, but it's actually data analytics for
>   us
>   ... Also, WebGL is built on HTML canvas
>
>   mike: There's a close mapping between canvas and the way native desktop
> apps work in many, many cases today
>   ... we may disagree on whether creating text editing is appropriate or
> not
>   ... but it is possible to do that
>   ... in the end, everything is a bit map
>
>   rich: So, from this perspective, the a11y support is deep experience for
> us because we've done this all before with
>   Windows (and other GUI)
>
>   <Stevef> FYI more canvas YUI http://fohr.github.com/blossom/
>
>   paul: Problem here is that we have a close date for proposals and Ian
> hasn't submitted one yet
>   ... Regardless of what Ian may have put into the spec, there's no counter
> proposal
>   ... We're missing a cp for what Ian has added into the spec -- and that's
> a problem
>   ... it's unobvious how much overlap between Frank's cp and what Ian has
> put into the spec
>   ... I believe that's what Rich is saying he needs to look into
>
>   rich: I'm unsure of what has changed, there's no diff
>
>   paul: So, whether heyavy or light weight, I'm concerned that it's
> unobvious how much overlap
>   ... And secondly that there's also no CP
>
>   <Stevef> richardschwerdtfe: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker
>
>   rich: Could Ian be asked for a CP?
>
>   paul: Any wg member can do that ...
>
>   mike: So this is tantamount to asking him to respond to Bugs yet defend
> the changes in the spec
>
>   paul: More importantly, in this particular case there's no association
> with a bug this time
>
>   rich: Yes, he didn't follow any kind of process here
>
>   mike: There are many changes he makes that aren't responsive to
> particular bugs
>
>   paul: My point is simply that there's no corelation here to any
> particular bug
>
>   mike: Speaking from an editor's perspective, sometimes one needs to make
> a judgement call ...
>   ... I think what we need at this point re Ian's path changes is an
> assessment whether these are in line with our
>   requirements
>
>   rich: Can try to look at that, but it's hard without a diff or a CP
>   ... It's particular time consuming to reverse engineer this
>   ... Mike, do you know whether the HTML Chairs have reviewed Frank's
> proposal? The others that went in
>
>   mike: They have a process, first step being a comment on whether the CPs
> are "well formed"
>   ... Sometimes this takes time -- along time
>   ... I would ask that we try to have a qualitative assessment on Frank vs
> Ian's proposals by next week ...
>
>   <Stevef> richardscherdtfe: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Canvas lists what
> hixies been adding
>
>   rich: I'll do my best, noting that there's a lot to look at here and many
> of us have a back log of work given recent
>   travel and conference meetings
>
>   mike: If not by next week, can we say two weeks from now?
>
>   Steve: There's some helpful info on the WHAT Wiki page ...
>
>   mike: Do want to ask for scribe for next week, anyone?
>   ... Silence, unfortunately!
>   ... I'll do it if no other volunteer
>
>   john: If I'm working from home, I'll do so, or back up the scribing
>
>   mike: Any objections to adjournment at this time?
>
>   [no objections]
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
>   [End of minutes]
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ______________________________________
>
> --
>
> Janina Sajka,   Phone:  +1.443.300.2200
>                sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
>
> Chair, Open Accessibility       janina@a11y.org
> Linux Foundation                http://a11y.org
>
> Chair, Protocols & Formats
> Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 18:23:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:27 UTC