W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [html-techs-tf] Agenda & Survey for 30-April-2012

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:09:46 +0100
Message-ID: <4F9EC75A.50205@cfit.ie>
To: w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
CC: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, Léonie Watson <lwatson@nomensa.com>, Matt Morgan-May <mattmay@adobe.com>
Hi y'all,

Here are the minutes for todays call (after this mail and a URI). Many 
thanks to Loretta for scribing. [1]



[1] http://www.w3.org/2012/04/30-html-techs-tf-minutes.html


HTML Techniques Task Force

30 Apr 2012


See also: IRC log


Joshue, Cooper, adam_solomon, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Marc_Johlic, 
Jon_Gunderson, Tim, David_MacDonald
Loretta, David

Please comment on the new survey for this week - 
Summary of Action Items
<Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/htmltechs-20120409/
<scribe> scribe: Loretta
Please comment on the new survey for this week - 

<Joshue108> scribenick: Loretta
JOC: I cleaned up the wiki page for the combined sections, then split 
out section and article.
... I will update the techniques to address the current round of comments.
Loretta: have we decided whether to do joint or separate techniques/
JOC: Currently, updting both paths. Currently, I think having separate 
techniques would be better.
Marc: It is a lot easier to read the individual techniques. Massively 
long techniques can be overwhelming.
JOC: How to demonstrate the relationships between the elements? Maybe 
use multiple types of mark-up in the examples for one element type.
... Or provide some kind of overview somewhere.
Marc: This is one reason I am torn. Maybe an overview with links to the 
individual techniques?
JOC: Maybe make the overview with no test procedure, etc.
Marc: Maybe an overview describing what they are about, then one sample 
that contains everything.
<scribe> ACTION: Josh to create a new page using this model. [recorded 
in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/30-html-techs-tf-minutes.html#action01]
Loretta: Michael how could we fit this into the WCAG document structure?
... Somehow use model of 1 general technique plus one of the following...
Michael: we shouldn't keep ourselves from writing support documents and 
linking to them. We'll find a place to put the supporting information.
Josh will proceed with this idea.
JG: In the section example, I was curious why you use article as the 
container for the different sections. I thought article would be more 
JOC: THe article element has 2 hats: an article (a large unit) or 
something that is much smaller and more granular.
JG: ARIA's definition is muchmore of a discrete unit. Do we want to 
promote article to have 2 different meanings in html5, even if it can?
JOC: There is a lot of confusion in general about how to use these 
different elements.
JG: We want WCAG to encourage the best use of the elements, rather than 
the possible use of the elements.
JOC: Which definition should we favor?
JG: (reading definition from HTML5 spec)
JOC: so blog post itself could be an article, but comments can also be 
(child) articles.
JG: reading the section element: article encouraged when you want other 
people to repurpose that piece of the content.
JOC: my understanding is that article should be the parent.
... but I could be wrong as well.
JG: I agree that we should present these in the best way. How fast and 
loose should we play with the spec?
Loretta: I worry about spending too much time trying to specify best 
JOC: How do we encourage good usage? Do we just take the examples from HTML?
Loretta: this will be most painful when writing the test procedures. Do 
they require best practice?
<jongund> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_HTML5_article_element
JG: footer example seems odd, with only child that is a section. footer 
and section are both landmarks. If a landmark only contains one landmark 
child, it is an extra layer for navigation.
JOC: footer is a flow element in HTML5. It isn't a landmark, is it?
JG: It final outcome in HTML5 is not clear. There may be a schism 
between the way things are defined in ARIA and HTML5. footer will be a 
landmark in HTML5, but not in ARIA.
... I already see article being misused even as an ARIA role.
... Now we have footer. We don't have footer in ARIA, we have 
complementary info.
JOC: IN terms of user agent support, footer may be another generic div.
Loretta: concerned about trying to address everything in 1.3.1 technique
JOC: But what should we show in our examples? Maybe I should take the 
footer stuff out completely.
... If it is a concern that we are generating too many landmarks, maybe 
we should restructure this?
JG: I worry about semantic pollution. If everything becomes navigable, 
it reduces the efficiency of using them. Too much semantics can be a 
... We have the tension between how to use headers and landmarks 
together. Users may be familiar with headers but not landmarks.
... With HTML5's ability to affect the level of headers baeed on the 
mark-up structure, this may introduce more confusion.
JOC: ANother interesting discussion, maybe not for now.
JG: Looking at the example, the idea is that the footer will include the 
comments. THis is a typical blog structure. In the second example, we 
include actual comments.
JOC: The question is whether the usage of the footer is correct? Or 
should I use div or section?
... The containing element could be a section?
Loretta: Will your proposed restructuring help with this, where we will 
have an overview and overview example?
JOC: I'd like to get feedback on the appropriate use of footer.
Loretta: Jon, does the versio populated with comments seem better?
JG: ANother question about the use of labels. SHould these sections use 
aria-labelled by to associate the header with the section?
... I'd be happier to use something like that.
JOC: Great idea.
... There is only one section in the current example. THere are a few 
articles nested .I could add aria-labelledby.
<David> scribe: David
LGR concerned about complexity... tension between simple demonstartion 
of technique vs... demonstrating a bunch of SC at the same time, and 
much more complex
Josh: let's do both, a simple example and a more complex one with WAI ARIA
LGR: 1.3.1 say that relationships that are there are explicit
Josh: without labels then it's a failure...
LGR: Really? I wouldn't agree... WAI Labels on Sections is helpful, but 
not a failure without it...
<Loretta> David: I'm confused why we would add a sectino when there is 
no UA support? THere is no accessibility currently.
<Loretta> David: we might want a technique on labels. Why include a 
section technique at all? We only want to include techniques that 
support accessibility.
<Loretta> JOC: future peoofing.
<Loretta> JOC: Want a working example but also want to demonstrate how 
things should be used.
<Loretta> LOretta: standards of AT support are relaxes for HTML5 
techniques so we can proof the spec for missing features or support
<Loretta> David: we should focus on ARIA techniques which are more mature.
<jongund> I have to go to another call, good discusion
<Joshue108> thanks Jon
<Joshue108> s/peoffing/proofing
<Loretta> I think I just got kicked off...
<Loretta> Anyway, write up a complete, best practice example for the 
overview document. THen maybe individual techniques can contain some 
simpler examples, and also refer
<Loretta> to the complete example as another example, possibly with 
discussion of how the specific element is being used there
<Loretta> Josh, does that make sense?
<Loretta> (Of course, these things always sound good until we try to 
apply them. <grin>)
<Joshue108> Yup, thanks Loretta.
<Loretta> Sorry about losing the phone. I don't know what happened. See 
you in 4 weeks?
<Joshue108> :-)
<Loretta> I'll miss the next 3 Mondays...
<Loretta> Good work!
Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Josh to create a new page using this model. [recorded in 
Received on Monday, 30 April 2012 17:10:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:09 UTC