W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2004

AUWG Teleconference on Monday, 21 June 2004 - Minutes

From: Karen Mardahl <karen@mardahl.dk>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 00:58:02 +0200
To: "'List (WAI-AUWG)'" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005b01c457e3$34d6c6a0$0301a8c0@karen>

Minutes of AUWG Teleconference on Monday, 21 June 2004

Attendees:
JR: Jan Richards
JT: Jutta Treviranus
BF: Barry Feigenbaum
KM: Karen Mardahl
RS: Roberto Scano
 
Regrets:

Matt May
Tim Boland

Agenda:

1. New checkpoint proposal

See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004AprJun/0052.html for
details.

Configurability has been touched upon throughout AT documents. Even if they
override accessibility techniques, those using authoring tools must have
final choice. We will not "force" them to do anything. Topic was spread
throughout Techniques, and it seemed logical to make it into a checkpoint in
Techniques guideline 4.

All agreed. Must be added to ATAG guidelines as well. Also agreed that it
should be priority 2 (discussed in call and in previous correspondance.)

ACTION: JR will add to TECHS.

TB had points about use of terms "author" and "user":
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004AprJun/0055.html
which JR had commented on previously:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004AprJun/0056.html

UUAG has the term User in their documents.
ATAG uses the term author.
RS also had some points:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004AprJun/0057.html
 
Need to distinguish between author and the person using the web content, the
latter being a "Web content consumer". 
We also need to be more clear on how we describe the person creating web
content with an AT (the author) and the person who is using the authoring
tool (still the author but also a user!)

General ACTION: Please keep this in mind as we move on. Probably need to
clarify or improve our definitions of the person using the authoring tool.
Web content consumer was generally approved and will now be used where
appropriate.


2. Implementation Techniques for Guidelines 3 and 4:
NOTE: Work being done on Techs. for guidelines 3 and 4 will affect ATAG 2.0
so please be familiar with these documents in the links below!

Looked at JR's work on techs for Guideline 3 at:
http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca/public/auwg/tech3.html
and approved the addition of a few editorial notes.

JR pointed out Sub-Techniques 3.1.2(10): Audio/video transcripts: 
Ideally, the tool should have some intelligence as to what files are need
for captioning, etc. But remember these are techniques, not requirements.
All these examples are illustrations of what can be done. We still need more
and some of the ones we have need some more info or details. 

ACTION: Everyone! More input/feedback needed!

After talk to BF recently, JR added accessibility features in Figure
3.1.2(9).

Looked at JR's work on Techs. 4:
http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca/public/auwg/tech4.html
and approved the addition of a few editorial notes.

"accessible authoring practices" added to text of Checkpoint 4.1 replacing
previous, longer phrase.
In Techniques for: Success Criteria 1 - removed Documentation as per note
and added "accessibility" to the sentence - it was missing.

4.1.1 was approved with slight change to end of sentence in description of
Tech. 4.1.1.: ("...it cannot be bypassed" changed to "less chance of being
bypassed".)

4.1.2 - moved illustration 4.1.5b here. No problem with recycling
illustrations if they can be used in several places!

BF is preparing input on how to prepare/plan "structure before content".
Will be submitted separately to the list. We have talked about this in a
past telephone conf. - that it wouldn't hurt to provide suggestions or
"advice" in the Techs. on how best to prepare and plan the framework for the
actual content. [Ed. note: This is not worded properly, but I have gone
blank just now. Look for BF's mail for clarification - or someone else can
explain it!)

With all illustrations, we need texts for the longdescs, and we'll need help
or advice! Discussion on how to describe the illustration, and then, in
particular, why certain parts are emphasized by circling them in red.
ACTION: JR will talk with WCAG people about this. KM will ask a contact she
has through our host for the F2F.

3. F2F Planning (Copenhagen, 12-13 July 2004).

ACTION: Everyone needs to review docs and provide comments on list. People
are welcome to print and fax marked-up text to JR (+1-416-971-2896) if that
is more convenient. Meeting will run more smoothly if we are prepared
beforehand.

We'll try to schedule an hour or 2 beginning at 14.00 in Copenhagen, 07.00
Central Standard Time, 08.00 EST for phone conferences.

We should get the phone bridge booked and everyone phones into that bridge.
The number will be posted to the meeting page
(http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2004/07/12-meeting.html)

JR proposed meeting time (locally) of 10-18.30 due to participation of
people that are 6 and 7 hours behind local time.

4. Action item checkup.
None.

End of meeting. Please post any corrections/additions to the list!
Received on Monday, 21 June 2004 19:05:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:49 UTC