W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 2010

IRC Log for AUWG teleconference of 25 January

From: Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:45:04 -0500
Message-ID: <4B5F0E00.2050701@w3.org>
To: AUWG <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Apologies for the raw nature of the minutes.  We did not have the "bot" 
that creates minutes from the IRC log running, so we did not get the 
usual minutes.

Minutes (reconstructed): http://www.w3.org/2010/01/25-au-minutes

IRC log (reconstructed): http://www.w3.org/2010/01/25-au-irc

___________________________

Minutes (from the locally saved log with timestamp and scribe nick removed):

update editors draft at 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009OctDec/0064.html

Agenda:

=======

<Greg> 1- Outstanding reviews:

- Comments on this working draft are due on or before 30 November 2009.

Comments on the draft should be sent to public-atag2-comments@w3.org

- Waiting for Microsoft (Reed?), Adobe, CNIB,

- Jeanne wants to develop a "Push" list for heading into Last Call

2- Working through comments

(a) Complete SURVEY:

http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20100122/

(b)http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009OctDec/0058.html

+ Still to go:

B.2.2.8- needs discussion

B.2.3.1

B.2.4.1

B.2.4.2

Guideline B.2.5- needs discussion

Guideline B.3.1

B.3.2

Guideline B.3.4

General: more whitespace...

A.1.2

Implementing Guideline A.3.4

B.1.1

B.1.2.2

Appendix A

(c) JR's 4 Action items related to Cynthia's comments:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JanMar/0011.html

(d) IBM comments continued:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009OctDec/0063.html

1- Outstanding reviews:

- Comments on this working draft are due on or before 30 November 2009.

Greg - Adobe in process

Jutta - SCT, and CNIB almost done

Jean - MSFT perhaps

Jutta reminds all to add to the push list

2- Working through comments

(a) Complete SURVEY:

http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20100122/

(b)http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009OctDec/0058.html

Correction survey here http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20100122/

Question 1 tablesd until simplified wording is developed. While waiving 
the requirements for conformance, there are still opportunities to 
develop compliant software once one knows the context.

Clearer wording is needed for the second half of the asterisk note - 
something around local jurisdictions can define their parameters and 
then measure the conformance by applying ATAG using the local context, 
when you have a user interface that is not a web interface

Action: Jutta to draft alternative language for this


<trackbot> Created ACTION-237 - Draft alternative language for this [on 
Jutta Treviranus - due 2010-02-01].

Item 2 Conformance claims are not required.- all accepted with one exception

Jutta suggests modifying the first sentence without dwelling on the 
notion that claims are not required by eliminating the first sentence.

If a conformance claim is made, etc., then in brackets "Authoring tools 
can conform to ATAG 2 without making a conformance claim..."

Action Jeanne add the new proposed revised language to the survey


<trackbot> Created ACTION-238 - Add the new proposed revised language to 
the survey [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-02-01].

Item 3 A.1.2 Accessibility Standards unanimously accepted

*A.2.1.1* Define "accessible" as used in the context of this provision - 
rewording using the term "recognized alternative content". All agreed 
with one exception.

Jutta "Is there a defintion of recognized alternative content?"

Jean "We do."

Jutta "Then we need to link to the definition"

*A.2.2.2* The use of "and" at the end of each item - consensus is to 
agree with the WCAG convention

*A.3.4.2* This should include role types such as ARIA roles. - 2 exceptions

[2010-01-25 15:51:36] <Greg> Action Greg to research ARIA to see if it 
incorporates the level of granularity one of the respondents has asked for

<trackbot> Created ACTION-239 - Research ARIA to see if it incorporates 
the level of granularity one of the respondents has asked for [on Greg 
Pisocky - due 2010-02-01].

Jutta - In general I think it is a good idea to examine ARIA

Dates for face to face we apparently are settling on the second half of 
the second week

Looking at a Thursday Friday schedule

2 items need further discussion

Guideline B.2.5- needs discussion preauthored content specifically controls

Jutta - We agree with the principle and it should be AA and answer what 
is meant by template, default, and under what conditions

Group has agree to defer until the larger group reconvenes

Action Jean to add the question concerning reverting back to 1 hour 
meetings. If people answer before Friday then the meeting can be 
scheduled accordingly

* trackbot noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.

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

Action Jeanne to add the question concerning reverting back to 1 hour 
meetings. If people answer before Friday then the meeting can be 
scheduled accordingly

<trackbot> Created ACTION-240 - Add the question concerning reverting 
back to 1 hour meetings. If people answer before Friday then the meeting 
can be scheduled accordingly [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-02-01].
Received on Tuesday, 26 January 2010 15:45:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 January 2010 15:45:28 GMT