W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-wg-announce@w3.org > April to June 2008

{minutes} HTML WG issue-tracking telcon 2008-06-19

From: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:11:15 +0900
To: public-html-wg-announce@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080625051110.GD5260@sideshowbarker>

The HTML Working Group had its weekly issue-tracking telcon on
2008-06-19 for 90 minutes from 16:00Z 17:30Z.

  http://www.w3.org/2008/06/19-html-wg-minutes.html

   Present
          Julian, MikeSmith, ChrisWilson, anne, smedero, Joshue,
          +1.703.843.aabb, DanC, +1.814.308.aacc, aroben,
          Laura_Carlson, Kelly_Gifford

   Regrets
          Steve_Faulkner

   Chair
          MikeSmith

   Scribe
          DanC

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Convene meeting, review agenda
         2. issue-32 table-summary
         3. issue 33
         4. ISSUE-33 ping-referer
         5. update on overdue actions
         6. Triage of raised issues
     * Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

Convene meeting, review agenda

   <Joshue> I promise to help with scribing some day but not today as
   it is rather load where I am at the moment!

   http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/agenda

   <Joshue> yes, @summary discussion is needed.

   <smedero> aroben: document in IRC who said what on the telecon

   MS reviews agenda...

   issue-32?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-32 -- Include a summary attribute for tables? --
   RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/32

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/32

   <Joshue> issue 32 is @summary

   <oedipus_laptop>
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008AprJun/0114.h
   tml

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008AprJun/0114.html

   <oedipus_laptop> scribe's cheat sheet

   <aroben> thanks oedipus_laptop

   <Julian> issue 33 is referer header, which should be on the agenda
   as well

   <Joshue> is pending review

   <oedipus_laptop> http://dev.w3.org/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

      http://dev.w3.org/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

   <Joshue> @summary currently [$1\47]
   http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/32

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/32

   <oedipus_laptop> http://dev.w3.org/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

      http://dev.w3.org/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

   <oedipus_laptop> http://www.w3.org/2002/03/RRSAgent

      http://www.w3.org/2002/03/RRSAgent

   <hober> Should our response to the XHTML2 WG be on the agenda (if it
   isn't already)?

   <oedipus_laptop> http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html

      http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html

   <oedipus_laptop> hober, yes

issue-32 table-summary

   <MikeSmith> I propose we discuss issue 32 and take until :22 minutes
   after on it at most

   <MikeSmith> issue-32?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-32 -- Include a summary attribute for tables? --
   RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/32

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/32

   (wierd... it says pending review on
   http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues )

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues

   <Joshue> would like to see a new action item related to issue 32

   <smedero> (hrm... does, trackbot work from a cache?)

   Josh: I'd like to see an action item where we review the reasons for
   removing table/@summary

   MS: action on who?

   <Joshue> I will take this action item on

   <Joshue> aplogies for any noise from my channel

   <oedipus> GJR will work with joshue if he wants

   <hober> Is there any new information w.r.t. @summary?

   MS: the target is an optional attribute, yes?

   <oedipus> is there any new rationale on why it should be dropped?

   Joshue: right

   <anne> (I think the rationale from the editor was, fwiw, that there
   was not enough rationale for it to be added.)

   <Laura> Some applicable Issue 32 WAI docs

   <oedipus> but it was REMOVED not ADDED

   <Laura> Technique H73 for WCAG 2.0: Using the summary attribute of
   the table element to give an overview of data tables

   <Laura> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H73.html

      http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H73.html

   <Laura> Principle 1: Perceivable - Information and user interface
   components must be presentable to users in ways they can perceive

   <Laura> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#perceivable

      http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#perceivable

   <Laura> Adaptable WCAG2 Guideline 1.3

   msg from hixie where he dropped @summary
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.htm
   l

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.html

   <Laura> Create content that can be presented in different ways (for
   example simpler layout) without losing information or structure

   <MikeSmith> ACTION: Joshue to collate information on what spec
   status is with respect to table@summary, research backgound on
   rationale for retaining table@summary as a valid attribute [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Joshue

   <Laura>
   http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#content-structure-separation

      http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#content-structure-separation

   <Joshue> Maybe keep it as issue 32 and rename

   <MikeSmith> ACTION: MikeSmith to assign action to Josue to collate
   information on what spec status is with respect to table@summary,
   research background on rationale for retaining table@summary as a
   valid attribute [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/06/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-66 - Assign action to Josue to collate
   information on what spec status is with respect to table@summary,
   research background on rationale for retaining table@summary as a
   valid attribute [on Michael(tm) Smith - due 2008-06-26].

   <smedero> I can rename it... if anyone has a suggestion?

   <Joshue> just for tidy housekeeping

   <Joshue> @summary is very useful

   <hober> That principle 1 is a good argument for <p> before/after
   <table>, not @summary. That way all users benefit from the summary
   text!

   <Joshue> If you can find rational for dropping please forward to me

   this seems to be a suggested renaming: mechanism to provide a
   summary of high density information easily discernible from a
   cursory visual glance

   --
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0167.htm
   l

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0167.html

   <oedipus> hober, what summary does is what your brain does
   automatically when you visually process a table

   <oedipus> hober, there is no gestalt view for the non-visual user or
   those with very limited viewports

   <Laura> Table summary discussion on public-html:

   <Laura>
   http://w3.markmail.org/search/%22summary%20attribute%22%20list:o
   rg.w3.public-html?page=1

      http://w3.markmail.org/search/%22summary%20attribute%22%20list:org.w3.public-html?page=1

   <Laura>
   http://w3.markmail.org/search/%22table%20summary%22%20list:org.w
   3.public-html?page=1

      http://w3.markmail.org/search/%22table%20summary%22%20list:org.w3.public-html?page=1

   DanC: is a bunch of research overkill? it seemed to me that the
   editor skipped the issue because the title presumed a solution; a
   simple re-phrasing of the issue title seems like a good next step

   <Joshue> I have yet to see solid rational for removing @summary from
   spec

   <Joshue> I will mute

   <Joshue> thanks

   <smedero> My understanding is that Hixie & Hyatt haven't "removed"
   or "dropped" @summary... it just not in the spec at present.
   WHATWG's HTML 5 started with a clean slate and elements and
   attribtues were added as research and test cases came in.

   MS: issues is tracked under my name due to technical limitations

   DanC: estimated due date?

   <oedipus> smedero, but isn't HTML5 supposed to be "evolved from HTML
   4.01" by charter?

   <robburns> lost my skype connection so I'm only on irc at the moment
   (trying to reestablish now)

   Joshue: it may take time to get feedback from the WAI PF WG... how
   about 2 weeks

   <Joshue> Say two weeks for me to return on Issue 32 @summary

   <Joshue> Ok

   <oedipus> smedero, the objection is that what was added to html4x
   for a very definite reason, should either be retained or
   enhanced/improved, not dropped

   <Joshue> Thats it

   <smedero> oedipus, understood... just reiterating past statements
   from Hixie and trying to help folks understand why it is not in the
   spec. It was not intentionally removed as far as I can remember.

   action-66?

   <trackbot> ACTION-66 -- Michael(tm) Smith to assign action to Josue
   to collate information on what spec status is with respect to
   table@summary, research background on rationale for retaining
   table@summary as a valid attribute -- due 2008-07-03 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/66

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/66

   <MikeSmith> Action-66 is due August 4

   <oedipus> smedero, thanks - not implying that it was removed due to
   ill-intent, just that there is a history behind each of those
   elements and attributes which i want the WHAT WG to appreciate

   <smedero> oedipus, ok, clear!

   smedero, "summary="" is not in." is clearly intentional.
   (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.ht
   ml )

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.html

   <hober> oedipus: It's quite possible to appreciate the history and
   still advocate dropping them. :)

   <MikeSmith> any other comments on the @summary issue for now?

   <oedipus> hober, yeah, but not without discussion

   <smedero> DanC: Ahh, good find there.

   issue-33?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-33 -- spec requires non-compliant Referer header --
   RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/33

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/33

issue 33

ISSUE-33 ping-referer

   <Joshue> @summary is very useful well supported. Am interested in
   looking forward at other solutions but it must be based on a solid
   rational

   JR: the offending text is no longer there
   ... so it seems reasonable to close this issue, but I wasn't sure
   about whether to do that myself

   MS: closing issues in calls seems good so that more than one person
   considers it and so we have a record

   <Joshue> The Google data which cites that shows the summary
   attribute on ~2.5% of tables. Note: The following information was
   collected by Google in December 2005. Does not of itself mean that
   the attribute is not useful. It means that it is underutilised and
   that is all. [$1\47]

   <MikeSmith> Any objections to closing this out?

   <oedipus> no objection to ping-refer

   DanC: we can't make WG decisions without async participation; seems
   easier to just withdraw the issue

   MikeSmith: yeah; it hasn't really been discussed by the group

   close issue-33

   <MikeSmith> issue-33?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-33 -- spec requires non-compliant Referer header --
   RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/33

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/33

   <MikeSmith> trackbot, close issue-33

   <trackbot> Sorry, MikeSmith, I don't understand 'trackbot, close
   issue-33'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc
   for help

      http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc

   <smedero> I'll do that... I'm on the web interface now.

   issue-33?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-33 -- [WITHDRAWN] spec requires non-compliant
   Referer header -- CLOSED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/33

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/33

   <smedero> ahh there we go.

   MikeSmith goes back to agenda review... raised issues?

   scribe: or XHTML 2 response?

   <oedipus> danC, this one:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0251.htm
   l ?

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0251.html

   scribe: or overdue issues?

update on overdue actions

   action-14?

   <trackbot> ACTION-14 -- Chris Wilson to get more information on MS
   patent review with <canvas> -- due 2008-06-12 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/14

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/14

   <oedipus> hard deadline of end of month, right?

   <hober> I thought the deadline was tomorrow

   <hober> (the 20th)

   CW: we're reviewing this and all of HTML 5, noting the 20 Jun
   deadline...

   <oedipus> hober, you are right

   CW: if the scope of <canvas> grows, that would mean more work

   <oedipus> do people know about the canvas-api list?

   CW: this action dates from before 1st WD, and the 1st WD pretty much
   obviates this action

   <oedipus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/

   close action-14

   <trackbot> ACTION-14 get more information on MS patent review with
   <canvas> closed

   action-29?

   <trackbot> ACTION-29 -- Dan Connolly to follow up on the idea of a
   free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring -- due
   2008-06-12 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/29

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/29

   <MikeSmith> DanC: I don't know whether this actually ever got to the
   management team for an actual yes/no

   <anne> I note that <canvas> recently gained a text API that is part
   of the second WD

   <oedipus> anne, yes

   <MikeSmith> action-29

   <MikeSmith> action-29?

   <trackbot> ACTION-29 -- Dan Connolly to follow up on the idea of a
   free-software-compatible license for a note on HTML authoring -- due
   2008-06-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/29

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/29

   <anne> Besides ImageData for easier manipulation that's probably the
   most major addition.

   action-38?

   <trackbot> ACTION-38 -- Dan Connolly to chairs to review need for
   amending charter with Director -- due 2008-05-22 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/38

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/38

   <oedipus> anne, agree

   <hober> what sort of charter amendment?

   <scribe> continues

   <anne> hober, not clear yet

   hober, the question is whether the scope of the HTML 5 draft is so
   different from the charter that either (a) the charter should change
   or (b) the spec should change

   <anne> or (c) that all is fine ;)

   <smedero> Particularly the charter issue came up at Boston TPAC with
   regards to <canvas>

   right, anne, I wrote "whether"

   action-56?

   <trackbot> ACTION-56 -- Chris Wilson to wilson to follow up with
   Forms WG to make sure they understand this plan of action by
   5/1/2008 -- due 2008-06-12 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/56

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/56

   <anne> DanC, fair enough

   <oedipus> task force runs out soon - need to plan for what comes
   after it turns into a pumpkin

   CW: yes, it's time to consider what to do next since we don't have
   much in the way of results from the forms TF

   <oedipus> forms has been thinking nuts and bolts, while the TF
   charter anne drafted had abstract requirements as deliverable

   <oedipus> collision of expectations

   action-56?

   <trackbot> ACTION-56 -- Chris Wilson to chris Wilson to work with
   MikeSmith and DanC on (re)plan of action for forms coordination with
   Forms WG -- due 2008-06-26 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/56

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/56

   action-61?

   <trackbot> ACTION-61 -- Dan Connolly to ensure HTML WG responds to
   PF WG on Omitting alt Attribute
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.htm
   l -- due 2008-05-31 -- OPEN

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.html

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/61

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/61

   <aroben> MikeSmith: we seem to have skipped action-57

   <MikeSmith> aroben: thanks, checking now

   <Joshue> Steve could not make the call today, so he sends apologies.

   MS: this seems overtaken by other work on issue-31 missing-alt

   <oedipus>
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0205.htm
   l

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0205.html

   close action-61

   <trackbot> ACTION-61 Ensure HTML WG responds to PF WG on Omitting
   alt Attribute
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.htm
   l closed

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.html

   <oedipus> AlG call for participation in ALT discussion:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0205.htm
   l

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0205.html

   DanC: added action-61 to make sure we responded as a WG to the PF
   WG's request

   action-57?

   <trackbot> ACTION-57 -- Chris Wilson to respond to extensibility
   discussion -- due 2008-07-01 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/57

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/57

   <MikeSmith> ChrisW will follow up on action-57

   (trying to connect action-57 to the distributed extensibility
   issue... failing)

   action-62?

   <trackbot> ACTION-62 -- Dan Connolly to ensure HTML WG response to
   XHTML 2 WG re name of XML serialization
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Oct/0385.htm
   l -- due 2008-05-31 -- OPEN

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Oct/0385.html

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/62

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/62

   <oedipus> is action 57 in response to:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0251.htm
   l

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0251.html

   <hober> oedipus: s/57/62/

   <oedipus> hober, thanks

   Danc: again, this is a request from a peer WG and I felt obliged to
   track it until our WG had decided something and responded

   MS: want to continue?

   action-63?

   <trackbot> ACTION-63 -- Dan Connolly to ensure HTML WG response to 6
   Jun 2007 PF WG msg re table headers
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0145.htm
   l -- due 2008-06-12 -- OPEN

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jun/0145.html

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/63

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/63

   DanC: this should be connected to the table-headers issue; can't
   seem to get tracker to do that

   <Lachy> yes, headers="" is on TD elements

   MS: I think some spec changes have been made related to table
   headers

   <smedero> The email DanC linked to earlier notes that header is in
   the spec:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.htm
   l

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.html

   Anne: right; current draft of HTML 5 includes table headers

   MS: so perhaps this is a non-issue?

   <Lachy>
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.htm
   l Hixie's response about headers=""

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.html

   <anne> It's in http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular.html#headers
   for instance

      http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/tabular.html#headers

   <oedipus> quoth hixie: ""Given the problem of conveying the meaning
   of tables to users who are not able to directly see the tables,
   solutions (such as headers="") have to be evaluated on the basis of
   whether or not they address the problem better than not having the
   solution at all""

   <oedipus> quoth hixie: "Conclusion: headers="" probably neither
   helps nor harms this page in existing user agents."

   <Lachy>
   http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tabu
   lar.html#the-td headers attribute defined in spec here

      http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tabular.html#the-td

   <MikeSmith> Joshue: you there?

   DanC: one possibility for turning
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.htm
   l into a WG decision is to mail the WG saying "any objections?"
   though I'd rather we had test cases when we close issues

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Mar/0215.html

   <oedipus>
   http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tabu
   lar.html#headers

      http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/tabular.html#headers

   <smedero> I believe Ben Millard's research on headers was
   instrumental in the March 2008 decision:
   http://sitesurgeon.co.uk/tables/

      http://sitesurgeon.co.uk/tables/

   <scribe> ACTION: DanC to propose a test case regarding table
   headers/id [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/06/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Propose a test case regarding table
   headers/id [on Dan Connolly - due 2008-06-26].

   <Joshue> Sorry Dan!

   <Laura> header examples:
   http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/DroppedAttributeHeaders#head-66e4ad
   a3f06ead1e14e5172f57405120a0b2e02c

      http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/DroppedAttributeHeaders#head-66e4ada3f06ead1e14e5172f57405120a0b2e02c

   well, it was worth a try

   Laura, care to pick one of those?

   <oedipus> also:
   http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ExplicitAssociationPatterns#head-27
   604d3fc1ffdb981a52a4144d36777d598016a2

      http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ExplicitAssociationPatterns#head-27604d3fc1ffdb981a52a4144d36777d598016a2

   <smedero> Bugzilla issues changed this week:
   http://tinyurl.com/6qrymq

      http://tinyurl.com/6qrymq

   <robburns> oedipus we're now discussing issue-tracker issues

   <anne> DanC, another example:
   http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data
   /shrtable_02.html

      http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_02.html

   <oedipus> headers/id in a spec: http://a11y.org/kafs AND
   http://a11y.org/kafs-gta

      http://a11y.org/kafs
      http://a11y.org/kafs-gta

   <smedero> DanC: How about a <table>+header example from the W3C
   itself: http://www.w3.org/QA/TheMatrix

      http://www.w3.org/QA/TheMatrix

   <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/raised

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/raised

   <smedero> (Well, at least that should use header=""... I'm not sure
   it does scanning the source)

   <oedipus> matrix doesn't use headers/id

   <smedero> : (

Triage of raised issues

   issue-1?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-1 -- hyperlink auditing requires use of unsafe HTTP
   method -- RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/1

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/1

   JR: this has been discussed, resulting in divided opinions

   <anne> prolly peanuts compared to alt=""

   <anne> :)

   <oedipus> smedero, not even scope on matrix

   <oedipus> smedero, headers/id are used in tables which are
   fundamental part of http://a11y.org/kafs (RFC track spec)

      http://a11y.org/kafs

   DanC: is there more data to get?

   JR: I don't think so

   <Joshue> gotta go. I will start work on action item 32 re @summary
   and fine tune the wording of the action item in order to ensure that
   it correctly represents the issue. Bye

   MS: this is clearly a WG issue, since it's been discussed
   considerably and it involves another WG

   DanC: so how about putting the question?

   <Lachy> shouldn't we wait till Hixie actually looks at that section
   of the spec before we close the issue?

   MS: let's give it some time in OPEN state first

   <anne> Lachy, he has...

   <Lachy> ok, then close it.

   <Laura> Dan: Joe Clark's
   http://joeclark.org/access/cinema/reviews/

      http://joeclark.org/access/cinema/reviews/

   <anne> Lachy, that's not how it works

   ah... good... that's one concrete page, Laura. the next step is to
   reduce it to a small example. any help doing that is appreciated

   <MikeSmith> Scribnick: MikeSmith

   <MikeSmith> Scribenick: MikeSmith

   MikeSmith will take issue-1 to the group for review

   <oedipus> danC: there are smaller tables with id/headers and such at
   http://a11y.org/a11y-dom-api

      http://a11y.org/a11y-dom-api

   <anne> also see end of
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0085.htm
   l fwiw

      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0085.html

   <anne> (revisit the feature if it fails to get implemented)

   issue-5?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-5 -- Is there a need to expand the available
   <button> types to include 'radio' or 'toggle'? -- RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/5

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/5

   <smedero> There hasn't been discussion of that feature outside of
   the f2f... meeting.

   not taking this up at this point because there has not been
   significant discussion on this list, no other WG asking for this

   <Julian> issue-6?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-6 -- Pros and cons of keeping video and audio in
   the scope of the HTML working group -- RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/6

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/6

   the fact that we have already published a two WDs with video and
   audio in them has to some degree made this a moot point

   this is a candidate for just being closed

   <Julian> issue-7?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-7 -- codec support and the <video> element --
   RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/7

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/7

   issue 7 remains important but getting resolution remains outside the
   control of the HTML WG

   <Julian> issue-9?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- how synchronization works for <video> is
   unclear -- RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/9

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/9

   I think issue 9 does not need to be taken up by the group

   <smedero> I've got to drop off now, regrets.

   another issue that could go to bugzilla, maybe

   <oedipus> i have to drop off too, but wanted to note 2 things:

   <Julian> issue-10?

   <trackbot> ISSUE-10 -- how similar should SMIL and <video> attribute
   names be? -- RAISED

   <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/10

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/10

   <oedipus> as far as issue 35
   (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/35) i noted in the
   notes that the issue should be closed due to the erroneous nature of
   its underlying assumption and provided details and pointers

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/35)

   <oedipus> as far as issue 51
   (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/51) i think that it
   can be closed by noting:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0182.htm
   l and
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0183.htm
   l)

      http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/51)
      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0182.html
      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0183.html)

   <smedero> I can move certain Tracker issues to Bugzilla if that's
   what you'd like to see happen MikeSmith. Assign an action, email me
   directly, or ping me on IRC...

   smedero: OK, I look into it

   anne: I'm not sure I agree with oedipus statement that this should
   be closed
   ... Henri Sivonen has discussed this too, and I think it's on
   Hixie's TODO list ...
   ... and perhaps we should wait until we have more implementation
   experience ...

   <Lachy> Issue 35 should definitely remain open. Gregory's arguments
   against it don't make sense

   <hober> agreed

   so I note that oedipus has written, "values of the attribute are not
   CURIEs [CURIE], but simply strings."

   <anne> AvK: I don't think the role attribute module actually
   reflects what implementations do

   <anne> ... the implementations just treat them as string values not
   qnames or whatever

   <anne> ... seems much simpler for everyone involved...

   <anne> AvK: HTML and XML would be the same as far as I can tell, but
   no qnames

   <anne> ... euh, curies?

   we got up through issue-10 in our review of raised issues

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: DanC to propose a test case regarding table headers/id
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/06/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: Joshue to collate information on what spec status is
   with respect to table@summary, research backgound on rationale for
   retaining table@summary as a valid attribute [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/06/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: MikeSmith to assign action to Josue to collate
   information on what spec status is with respect to table@summary,
   research background on rationale for retaining table@summary as a
   valid attribute [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/06/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action02]
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 05:11:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 19 February 2014 13:57:50 UTC