W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > July to September 1999

MINUTES(edited): W3C WAI User Agent 15 September 1999

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 13:42:41 -0700
Message-Id: <4.1.19990915134052.00c8cf10@staff.uiuc.edu>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Attendance

Chair: Jon Gunderson

Scribe: Ian Jacobs

Present:
Kathy Laws
Kitch Barnicle
Gregory J. Rosmaita
Charles McCathieNevile (left at 1:00 EST USA)
Mark Novak (left at 1:00 EST USA)
Harvey Bingham
Marja-Riitta Koivunen 

Regrets:
Jim Allan
Allan Cantor

Completed Action Items 

   1.IJ: Find out from Judy about NN attendance at F2F. 
     Status: no identified representative and contacted mozillia group 

   2.IJ: Find out from Judy about Operasoft attendance at F2F 
     Status: They will not be sending a represnentative 

   3.IJ: Propose list of checkpoints that are "sensitive" (affect targetted
UAs) and propose variable priorities/rewording for them. 

   4.KB: Create dependency list for user agent and authoring tools
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0362.html 

   5.JA: Create dependency list for user agent and authoring tools 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0361.html 

   6.JG: Create a list of AT people to invite to F2F meeting 
     Status: Done, I have sent e-mails to several developers 

   7.MKN: Compose list of metadata sources for SMIL. 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0357.html 

   8.RS: Look at techniques document. 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0356.html 

   9.HB: Run pwWebSpeak (with Mark H.) through the guidelines.
     Status: Cancelled 

  10.CMN: Write a proposal for moving forward on this issue to the list.
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0349.html 

  11.JA: Propose definitions to the list of what are the characteristics of
a DGUA and a DUA.
     Status: Cancelled, in light of IJ proposal 

Continued Action Items 

   1.IJ: Find out about MS review of document before F2F and their
participation in the meeting. 

   2.IJ: Run NN (and Mozilla) through guidelines. not done 

   3.IJ: In document, highlight existence of "native" and "applies to". 

   4.IJ: Make the dependency on micropayments more visible. 

   5.IJ: Include GR's link checkpoint as P3 (configurability). Change
priority of 9.6 to P2. Get 
techniques out of [1]. 

   6.DP: Technique 3.6 - Propose techniques 

   7.DP: Run Jaws for Windows through the guidelines. 

   8.GG: Review proposal for techniques for accessing content. 

   9.CMN: Propose something about schemas 

New Action Items 

   1.Working Group: Review IJ proposal for changes in cnformance for
discussion next week 

   2.JG: Run pwWebSpeak (with Mark H.) through the guidelines. 

   3.JG: Ask Denis Anson to review the document 

   4.JG: Propose techniques for rendering of frames 

   5.JG: Ask Al Gilman to come to the next meeting to talk about spawned
windows 

   6.IJ: Propose checkpoint wording for access to form control information 

   7.IJ: Rewording of checkpoint 4.12: Allow the user to turn on and off
rendering of frames 

   8.HB: Submit a technique related to using for ABBR and ACRONYM elements
for rendering 

   9.CL: Submit a technique related to text rendering of client-side image
maps 



Minutes 

Agenda: [1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0359.html 

Review of Open Action Items:

   1.IJ: Run NN (and Mozilla) through guidelines. In progress. 

   2.IJ: In document, highlight existence of "native" and "applies to". 
     Status: For next draft. 

   3.HB: Run pwWebSpeak (with Mark H.) through the guidelines. 
     Status: Cancelled for Harvey. 
     Action JG: Reassigned to Jon (for a student?) 

   4.RS: Look at techniques document. 
     Status: Not done. 

   5.DP: Technique 3.6 - Propose techniques 
     Status: Not done. 

   6.DP: Run Jaws for Windows through the guidelines. 
     Status: Not done. 

   7.GG: Review proposal for techniques for accessing content. 
     Status: Not done. 

   8.CMN: Write a proposal for moving forward on this issue to the list. 
     Status: Done since transferred to Ian (about conformance0. 

   9.CMN: Propose an example about what UAs can do with schemas. 
     Status: Dropped. 
  10.MKN: Compose list of metadata sources for SMIL. 
     Status: Done. 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0357.html 

  11.KB: Create dependency list for user agent and authoring tools 
     Status: Done. 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0362.html
For next week's call. 

  12.JA: Create dependency list for user agent and authoring tools 
     Status: Done. 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0361.html
For next week's call. 

  13.JA: Propose definitions to the list of what are the characteristics of
a DGUA and a DUA. 

     IJ: I propose we cancel this in light of 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0365.html 

  14.IJ: Find out about MS review of document before F2F and their
participation in the meeting. 
     Status: IJ spoke with Dick Brown yesterday. He's supposed to get back
to me. 

  15.IJ: Find out from Judy about NN attendance at F2F. 
     Status: IJ spoke with Judy Brewer. Am waiting for contact info. I also
wrote to a guy at Mozilla. 

  16.IJ: Find out from Judy about Operasoft attendance at F2F 
     Status: IJ spoke with Hkon Lie. He can't attend. Operasoft won't
attend. Will comment on 27 August Draft. 

  17.IJ: Propose list of checkpoints that are "sensitive" (affect targetted
UAs) and propose variable priorities/rewording for them. (Look at HPR's
evaluation sent
     by Jim Thatcher: 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0234.html) 
     Status: Done: 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0365.html 

  18.IJ: Make the dependency on micropayments more visible. 
     Status: Not done. 

  19.IJ: Include GR's link checkpoint as P3 (configurability). Change
priority of 9.6 to P2. Get techniques out of [1]. 
     Status: Not done. 

  20.JG: Create a list of AT people to invite to F2F meeting 
     Status: Done. JG: I contacted a number of people. We may get a few
extra participants, but there are resource issues. 

Agenda 1) Finish discussion on Configuration Checkpoints for Guideline 9 

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0127.html 

GR: Form control proposal. Ian objected last week to Priority 1. I argued
that problem with forms is that serial navigation is not always sufficient
- you may
encounter a submit button before the form is really over. You want: 

     a) Info about accesskey bindings 
     b) Tabindex order 
     c) View groups and metadata (LEGEND, LABEL, FIELDSET) 

GR: Trying to be somewhere between specific and general. 

KB: Would it remain a priority one? 

GR: Perhaps phrase the checkpoint similarly to that for tables. 

GR, IJ: P2 ok. 

Action IJ: Respond on the list to this proposal. I think we need something
slightly more abstract. 

Agenda 2) Review Ian Jacobs proposal on changes in wording to some
checkpoints and priorities for conformance if available
before the call (15 minutes): 

Based on: 

     Issue #79: How do specialized browsers like pwWebSpeak and IBM
Homepage Reader conform to the guidelines 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#79 
     Issue #77: Validate conformance categories 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#77 

IJ: Refer to [2] 
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0365.html 

(IJ summarizes [2]). 

CL: In the case of table navigation, we don't have a problem. We do have
problems in that we don't have a visual UI that complies. We can send output to
Netscape, or have text-based output. 

IJ: Two issues: a) Communication with other software. b) Multiple output
mechanisms. 

MN: Is it better to follow the "interoperable" route or just staying where
we are; it feels slightly less strict. 

Action Working Group: Please review this proposal for next week. 

MK: I have some concerns about the very device-specific keyboard guideline.
It's up front in the guidelines. 

IJ: Current disclaimer in 27 August draft: 

"Checkpoints in this section do not apply to user agents (e.g., kiosks)
that do not natively support keyboard input." 

/* Charles and Mark leave the call */ 

Agenda 3) Review of impact matrix proposal developed by Kitch Barnicle (10
minutes)

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0300.html 

http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/NOTE-UAGL-impact-matrix-19990903 

KB: What will this document be used for? 

IJ: 
a) Help people understand which groups of users benefit. 
b) Ensure that different groups' needs are addressed. 
c) Filter out useless checkpoints. 

KB: When I was ready to post this, I realized that I hadn't listed mouse as
being affected by any checkpoints. 

Questions: 

   1.Include mice as input technologies? 
     IJ: Yes. 
   2.Checkpoint: 9.1: Does highlighting imply visual only interfaces? 
     IJ: No. 
   3.Review of specific checkpoints. 

Action JG: Ask Denis Anson to review this list. 

4.Issue #71: Titles for ABBR and ACRONYM elements (need a technique) 

HB: The technique should address first instances and reuse of the title. 

Action HB: Will propose technique to list. 

5.Issue #72: What should UAs do to support author-supplied metadata? 

   1.Marja: Compose list of metadata sources for SMIL. BR>
http://www.w3.org/1999/09/smilmetadatasources.html 
   2.IJ: Compose list of metadata sources for HTML. 
     http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS-19990505/#html-index 
   3.JA: Compose list of metadata sources for CSS. (e.g., generated text) 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0348.html 
   4.CMN: Propose something about schemas. 
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0349.html 

JG: In WCAG teleconf last week we discussed this. It should suffice to
consider metadata known to promote accessibility. Need techniques,
therefore, for known
metadata sources. 

Resolved: Include as techniques.

No Action assigned. 

6.Issue #73: Text rendering of client-side image maps 

http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#73 

IJ: Has this been done by any existing tools? 

CL: HPR does this. We found that you can have alt on MAP. 

IJ: Not legal on MAP in HTML 4.0. Another idea: If you find a title
attribute, reuse as "title" in the A element. 

CL: We look for alt, title, URL piece in that order. 

Action CL: Send how HPR does this to the list. 

7.Issue #76: How to get to frames when the user turns off the rendering of
frames (need a technique)

http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#76 

IJ: The issue was "What does it mean when you turn off frames? How do you
get at the frames?" Why would you want to turn of frames? 

GR: For speech, e.g., easier to have linear access or NOFRAMES content.
Often, browsers don't give access to NOFRAMES unless frames turned off. 

IJ: What does "turn frames off" mean? I suggest that this means that you
don't get frame contents, only frame alternative content. This is different
from non-linear
access to to frames ( la Lynx). 

IJ: How do frames reduce accessibility? 

GR: Screen readers may not let you know that you're in a framed view. Also,
frames that are related - one may change (and be spoken) but you're still
in the
navigation frame (which hasn't changed). 

JG: Also, some cognitive issues. May want a simpler looking page. 

CL: In HPR, we list links to each frame. We also list NOFRAMES content. 

IJ: Are we talking about two-dimension rendering only as an accessibility
problem? 

GR: A lot of sites use content negotiation to send you to another site that
tells you to get a frame-enabled browser. This may happen with Lynx, unless
you fake your
UA declaration. 

CL: Not many sites use NOFRAMES to promote accessibility. 

Resolved: 

For 4.12 add:

     a) Ensure that alt content available when turned off. 
     b) Important for screen reader users and some users with some
cognitive impairments. 

IJ: Ideas for next draft. 

     a) For Guideline 4, add reminder to render alt content. 
     b) Add rationale for frames. 
     c) Add definition of "turn off a frame" to the document to distinguish
from alternative renderings or navigation. 

Action IJ: Propose a change to 4.12 to the list. 

Action JG: Proposed techniques for access to frames

8.Issue #78: Ian Jacobs Review requirements for window spawning 


http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0212.html 

Action JG: Invite Al to meeting next week.



Copyright    1999 W3C (MIT, INRIA, Keio ), All Rights Reserved. W3C
liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply. Your
interactions with this site are in
accordance with our public and Member privacy statements. 

Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
1207 S. Oak Street
Champaign, IL 61820

Voice: 217-244-5870
Fax: 217-333-0248
E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
		http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
		http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 1999 14:37:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:49:15 GMT