W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 2011

Agenda for AUWG Teleconference of 31 October

From: Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 12:02:37 -0400
Message-ID: <4EAEC69D.2080807@w3.org>
To: AUWG <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Jan sent this earlier, but his emails are not posting to the list.   I 
am resending it.

=====================================

Updated Agenda:
===============
Goal: Attempting to come to consensus on all remaining blocker issues 
(identified here: 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0040.html) 
except WCAG-WG's issue.

1. MS2: The biggest concern for ATAG 2.0 is that it is never clear if 
ATAG is for a single tool or a collection of tools. It is trying to be 
both. This leads to a great deal of structural problems....
Proposal: Yes 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0045.html)

2. MS3: Most touch screen devices do not use the keyboard for 
navigation. Keyboard is only used for text input. The current definition 
of keyboard interface does not work ...
Proposal: Yes 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/att-0031/ATAG2-21July2011PublicWD-CommentResponses-rev20111017.html)

3. MS1 (related to MS1 on previous public draft): The concept of 
"automatically generate" content does not appear well defined. In the 
example where the developer changes the template of a content management 
system illustrates the issue. How is a template changed or configured by 
a developer considered "automatic"?
Proposal: Not yet 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0049.html)

4. MS7:
What are "restructuring transformations" and "recoding transformations"? 
We think the concept of "accessibility information" needs reexamination....
Proposal: Not yet 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0048.html)

5. TL17:
I'm uncertain how (b) [in B.2.2.3 Technology Decision Support] will be 
remotely useful to the user....
Proposal: Yes 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/att-0031/ATAG2-21July2011PublicWD-CommentResponses-rev20111017.html)

6. IBM1:
I do have a concern with one of the blocking issues raised on the 
conformance claim.  Why is ATAG not using the same or very similar 
conformance claim from WCAG 2.0?...
Proposal: Yes 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0046.html)

BREAK (MAY OCCUR EARLIER)

7. Walking the proposed responses table for unapproved comments:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/att-0031/ATAG2-21July2011PublicWD-CommentResponses-rev20111017.html 


#tl1
#tl5
#ms3
#tl7
#tl8
#tl9
#tl11
#tl12
SKIP #tl13
#ms4
#ms6
#ms9a
#tl16
SKIP #ms8
#tl18
#tl19
#ms10
#tl20
#tl21
#tl22
#tl26
SKIP #wso1
[12:01:10 PM] *** Jan Richards sent 
ATAG2-21July2011PublicWD-CommentResponses-rev20111031.html ***
Received on Monday, 31 October 2011 16:02:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 31 October 2011 16:02:56 GMT