W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > July 2013

Minutes from today's TF teleconference

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 18:05:18 -0700
To: "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.w0fdm4rqy3oazb@chaals.local>
http://www.w3.org/2013/07/18-html-a11y-minutes.html - Thanks to John Foliot

and in text below

HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

18 Jul 2013

See also IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2013/07/18-html-a11y-irc

  Chaals, Janina, David_McDonald, JohnF, PaulC, RichS, TedO'C, SuzanneT,  
MarkS, CynthiaS
  Leonie, SteveF
Chair: Chaals
Scribe: JF


  +CfC on our procedures
  +longdesc in Last Call
  +HTML5 testing and interoperability
  +Canvas testing and interoperability
  +using alternative text in HTML
  +Other business (next meetings)

CfC on our procedures

Chaals: sent out a CfC on new statement of work and new decision procedures
basic changes is to make things simpler
deadline for comments is Monday of next week
JS: small nit, usual term is calnedar day, and you say natural day
Chaals: same thing
... can change that. Please send an email

longdesc in Last Call

Chaals: spec is now in last call, there are only 60-something days left
... I anticipate a comment from Yandex, but will likely take another week  
or so - based on use-cases
DM: Seems the response has been mixed to date
JS: How do we want to proceed on the comments that have come in to date?
Chaals: wait another week or so, and then do review of comments on the list

HTML5 testing and interoperability

MS: thanks to Paul for the reply. disappointed to have the response  
rejected in whole
... Not sure that more time is all that will be needed to meet the criteria
JS: Lets not give up that easy
may be true, or not, but having a problem in my mind on how to prove lack  
of interoperability
JS: would it be more acceptable if we can state we cannot find a  
user-agent that supports
PC: Some kind of evidence, in particular to show, that X-scenario in a  
browser did not work
... Not suggesting that the TF, as author, produce test-cases that fail
... so simply testing 1 or more browsers, under x testing scenario, is  
<richardschwerdtfeger> http://html5accessibility.com/
simply stating that "you beleive it" does not meet the bar
PC: take a simple document, use a user-agent, one or more, perhaps with an  
AT, then explain what you did and the results
Chaals: doesn't seem to be a high bar. Sounds like you are asking for a  
list of things that doesn't work, but has been tested
<richardschwerdtfeger> http://html5accessibility.com/
RS: the editor (Steve) has already done some testing and showing his  
results at the URL provided
suspect this is based on a non-nomative passage
testing has already been done for interop
RS: If steve were to present his test cases, would that be adequate?
PC: Yes, in fact what we are hoping is that if somebody came forward with  
a test case that shows a fail across all browsers, then we could look to  
add that to the larger test suite
Chaals: How much time would it take to get steve's work ready for this?
PC: Please remember we have started the CfC for Canvas testing
if the TF comes back with a request for more time, that would likely be  
Chaals: would that be reasonable to do quickly
MS: Steve has noted that html5accessibility requires some additional work  
to be updated
<David> www.html5accessibility.com/tests/ARIA-tests/
MS: In an ideal world, likely 30 days, but with holidays, etc. would  
likely need a bit more time
PC: Suggest that request for an extension to Sept. 1st, and prior to that,  
present a status report. Expect the chairs to support. Set an agressive  
date, and then give rope as needed
Chaals: sounds like a reasonable time-line
PC: One additional request: if you make progress, do not batch it all at  
the end, rather provide rolling updates
JS: Need to add a footnote. Agree with the process, but it really is  
different from the original marking of the process outlined in San Jose

Canvas testing and interoperability

Chaals: Short answer is, the same thing applies. We need to provide  
evidence of what works and what doesn't
PC: Believe it was at WG meeting last week - probably going to be more  
testing of canvas than other aspects of the spec
Chaals: there was a call 2 weeks ago, where Rich discussed what worked and  
what didn't. Some does, some doesn't, but we want to get to a point where  
we can have it in HTML5, but its not ready yet
... hope to have them ready and passed later, and still catch up to html5
PC: encourage the TF to follow the same process as above - provide  
evidence as early as possible
Rich: as I understand it, the path piece has been implemented in a browser
Chaals: issues is that we do not have enough to pass
Rich: what I really want to see is the caret selection / focus rings get  
done in this Recommendation
Chaals: short answer is we are in the same position. Early comments better  
than complete comments
JS: So we need implementers of this correct?
Rich: sent out a note to MS asking about implementation, but have not  
received an answer
CS: don;t believe it is in yet
... Is there a date for a dot release for canvas?
JS: this could exit for CR now minus the things that might get pulled
PC: There is already a next-gen document now
<paulc> For 5.1 schedule, refer to  
Chaals: short answer is that we need to look at interop and see what we  
knowing that there are a number of things following
<paulc> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-2dcontext-20121217/
PC: wish to point out that focus rings are not on "at risk" list
when you are in CR, 2 things that can block, testing and implementation
<MarkS> Focus rings are marked as At Risk in the implementation report:  
reason for 5.0 schedule stretches out so far is that anticipate length of  
time for implementation
PC: if you remove something from the Candidate Spec, you need to return to  
square 1
<chaals> [MarkS - but that just means "no interop yet", it isn't the same  
as "at risk" in the process sense]
so focus rings is not on the At Risk list
Chaals: we are where we were 2 weeks ago, so lets move on

using alternative text in HTML

Chaals: this is the changes to the HTML spec, and the guidance that it  
Steve F has been working on that, but we do not have a published version  
of that yet
hope to have that available for review in a few days
note that if longdesc gets completed, we will now be able to use that as  
well, which will likely impact the section
PC: there is a thread (linked here) - is this the same issue?
I asked some questions on that thread, and did not receive a response
PC: Question is about status of Last Call on Alt Text techniques
JS: delay appears that we were going to finish some edits in the html5  
spec first, and having those edites come into the spec document
Chaals: short answer is that we expect Steve's document to be moot.
PC: Notice Steve\s note of June 6 - states: I have added/updated the  
following sections in the 5.1 spec...
JS: working in the nightlies, with goal of backporting when completed
PC: Is there a tag to use that is tracking these issues?
Chaals: Will need to query steve, but he is aware of the need
PC: Want to make sure what all the steps are. Co-chairs looking for  
heart-beat docs to be done, and alt techniques is on the list
but no point doing that, as it is being merged into the html 5 and 5.1 docs
Chaals: I believe that if you asked the group, they would agree to that


Chaals: I know there is nothing from text sub-team, nor bugs
are there any sub-teams that have anything to report?
Chaals: I have started to look at some media stuff.

Other business (next meetings)

JS: need to look for a time to have a meeting
Chaals: have a question about meeting schedules over the next 2 weeks.
how many anticipate attendance next week?
Chaals: following week?
(JF notes that getting quorum over the next 2 weeks is do-able)
Chaals: end the meeting early?
PC: TF should expect to see a note from the admin re: extension requests

[End of minutes]

Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Thursday, 18 July 2013 16:05:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:34 UTC