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

[html-techs-tf] Minutes 2012-03-19 Meeting - HTML5/ARIA techniques TF

From: James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:11:33 -0700
Message-ID: <4F6768C5.7060907@oracle.com>
To: Protocols and Formats Working Group WG <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Please find the minutes at

http://www.w3.org/2012/03/19-html-techs-tf-minutes.html

And in text below.

Thanks to David and Loretta for scribing.

Regards,
James


    [1]W3C

       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

                        HTML Techniques Task Force

19 Mar 2012

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2012JanMar/0100.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2012/03/19-html-techs-tf-irc

Attendees

    Present
           James_Nurthen, Loretta, Adam, David_MacDonald,
           Marc_Johlic, adam_solomon, Cooper, Cooper.a

    Regrets
    Chair
           James_Nurthen

    Scribe
           David, Loretta

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Landmarks techiques
      * [6]Summary of Action Items
      __________________________________________________________

    <David>  scribe: David

    <jamesn>  [7]https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120319techs/

       [7] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120319techs/

    issue: Using the track element to provide captions

    LGR: Considering track element language vs captions, a subtitle
    in the same language as video, vs, caption... as an edge
    case...
    ... Sylvia pffifer read it over no red flags

    DM: concerned about confusion between subtitles and captions.

    LGR: if you only provide other languages subtitles it wouldnot
    conform

    <Loretta>  This techique would go into the list under item 3 in
    the Understanding document, that is, Impleenting G87 using the
    one of the following technology-specific techniques.

    JN: would G87 be a good place to talk about when Subtitles are
    OK...

    DM: should we leave out subtitles... from description

    LGR: will rewrite... not forbidding subtitles, for a talking
    head...

    JN: BBC talks about subtitles for the deaf... (previously
    mentioned)

    <jamesn>  notes www.bbc.co.uk/accessibility/guides/subtitles/

    <Loretta>  Adam, did you have other questions about the test
    procedure?

    LGR: accessibility support... coming, not there yet... one of
    the goals of HTML5, we want to make sure that if everything is
    implemented... Access support affects whether there will be
    sufficient vs. advisory..

    JN: Accessibility support a minor discussion...

    LGR: Concern about accessbility of controls of the video

    JN: is it a UA issue

    LRG: constantly shifting accessibility support, which
    guidelines UA, vs. WCAG.. any controls not accessible would
    affect inclusion as sufficient...

    LGR: HTML5 UA support changing fast... just move forward and go
    over them before publication.

    Adam: is there a way to keep our surveys for that time

    lgr: status section of theechniques good place...

    jn: open issues section of technique... stuff that needs to be
    resolved before publication...

    lgr: we should provide links to surveys...

    mc: will add the section to the template to link to
    techniques... to the status section...

    jn: need to provide a bit of text with link to describe why
    were linking

Landmarks techiques

    <Loretta>  Scribe:Loretta

    <jamesn>
    [8]https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120319techs/results#x
    4000

       [8] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120319techs/results#x4000

    <marcjohlic>
    [9]http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_ARIA_landmarks

       [9] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_ARIA_landmarks

    "Using ARIA Landmarks"

    Walking through the comments. David will add versions to user
    agents, fix somequoting problems in examples.

    Looking at James' suggestion to split this into 2 techniques,
    for 1.3.1 and 2.4.1.

    Adam: we would need to see how keyboard support is implemented,
    to decide whether 2.4.1 is satisfied.

    David: splitting the techniques will have a lot of redundancy.

    LGR: Our conversations will be less confused if we split into 2
    techniques.

    David: have we done this before?

    Loretta: for headings, but we also received pushback from
    people who thought it was confusing.

    H69 is for 2.4.1 and H4? was for 1.3.1

    David: will rework based on these comments.
    ... blog discussions are finding the WCAG work confusing,
    propose setting up other centers of expertise.

    <marcjohlic>
    [10]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#kbd_layout

      [10] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#kbd_layout

    MJ: also include generic regions?

    David: how do we feel about this?

    Adam: in techniques, we usually relate to a particular element
    rather than a set of them.

    Loretta: you can mix landmarks and headings.

    David: does the use of landmarks require that no content be
    orphaned?

    <jamesn>  pinging MichaelC

    MJ: probably shouldn't go into the test procedure that all
    content is contained within a region.

    David: what was the intent?

    JN: there will be cases where some things aren't in a landmark.
    e.g. maybe your page with landmarks is included in a page
    without landmarks
    ... also could have combinations of implicit and explicit
    landmarks.
    ... there may be some sections that don't need keyboard access
    via a landmark.

    David: sounds like best practice rather than requirement.

    JN: nothing in the spec requires that everything be covered by
    a landmark.

    Loretta: suggest making technique title more specific, 'Using
    ARIA landmarks to ...'

    Using ARIA landmarks to identify regions of a page

    <David>  Using ARIA landmarks to identify the regions of a page.

    Adam: will be postpone the discussion of plugins and user agent
    support.

    David: we'll go forward, assuming UA support, and revisit the
    question at publication time.

    JN: we have a long way to go and things may have changed by the
    time we publish

    Loretta: We should identify what UA support we are expecting.

    JN: I looked at David's FF extension. it is cool.

    Daivd: can I install it today?

    JN: yes. It takes some work, but I'll submit some changes to
    it.
    ... check the github page

    Loretta: Adam's question is about how much user agent support
    is needed.

    <David>  how bout now

    David: our historical requirement was if some ua support was
    available and free, that was sufficient.

    Loretta: yes, we had a very low bar for techniques, but then
    need to provide lots of information to authors about how to
    decide whether it works in their target environment.

Summary of Action Items

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [11]scribe.perl version
     1.136 ( [12]CVS log)
     $Date: 2012/03/19 17:08:33 $
      __________________________________________________________

      [11] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
      [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Monday, 19 March 2012 17:12:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 19 March 2012 17:12:16 GMT