W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2000

Minutes and other matters

From: Jutta Treviranus <jutta.treviranus@utoronto.ca>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 13:42:30 -0400
Message-Id: <p04310119b53763c27ba3@[142.150.64.191]>
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Below are my rough notes for Tuesday's meeting. Please flesh them out.

Regarding the next joint face-to-face meeting at WWW9, I have had to 
decide between sending Chris Ridpath or going myself. There are two 
conflicting events that at least one of us has to attend. I decided 
that it was more important that Chris should attend the ERT meetings. 
Consequently, Chris Ridpath, Jan Richards and Ian Graham will be 
attending the meetings on behalf of the ATRC and I will be in Ottawa 
at a meeting on Parliament Hill.

I will be raising the tentative proposal that we investigate merging 
the two working groups to the Coordination Group on Tuesday, since 
the techniques we are working on are very similar. This will likely 
come up as an agenda item during the face-to-face meeting. What are 
people's thoughts on this?

Thanks Jutta


Here are the raw notes for Tuesday's meeting, forgive the stylized 
text, I did it in Word.

Present:
Heather,
Jan
William
Frank
Marjolein
Gregory (late)
Charles (late)

Review Action Items:
Nothing further completed

Techniques Draft:
Heather will review techniques from general perspective by the next meeting.

Resolved we need to change definition.
Jan will post a diagram of his proposal
Heather proposed that a better way to encourage the author to input 
meaningful equivalent text is to provide a prominent text field in 
the image insertion dialog and back this up with a blue underline for 
cases when the dialog is not used to paste in the image. There was 
general consensus that this was a good approach.
Charles joined
Gregory joined
Charles: Dropping the word prompt means 3.1 is not needed as it is 
covered by 4.0.
Charles proposed dropping 3.1
Heather agreed with Charles.
Jan, Marjolein, Jutta, Frank and Gregory disagreed.
Gregory: The onus is on the developers who objected to the guideline 
to propose an alternative.
Jutta; The Guideline document at the moment is contradictory and 
confusing as it relates to the term prompt and the onus is on us to 
clarify.
Charles will propose an alternative definition for prompt and send it 
to the list.
Received on Thursday, 4 May 2000 13:32:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:44 UTC