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

Re: Raw minutes for 15 September 1999 Teleconf

From: mark novak <menovak@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:40:33 -0500
Message-Id: <v01540b08b406ad27c598@[128.104.23.196]>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
see comments below @ MN:

>UAGL Teleconference
>15 September 1999
>
>Present:
>
>Jon Gunderson
>Ian Jacobs (scribe)
>Gregory Rosmaita
>Charles McCathieNevile
>Harvey Bingham
>Kitch Barnicle
>Cathy Laws
>Mark Novak
>Marja Koivunen
>
>Agenda [1]
>
>[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".
>         For next draft.
>
>   3.HB: Run pwWebSpeak (with Mark H.) through the guidelines.
>         Cancelled for Harvey.
>         Reassigned to Jon (for a student?)
>
>   4.RS: Look at techniques document.
>         Not done.
>
>   5.DP: Technique 3.6 - Propose techniques
>         Not done.
>
>   6.DP: Run Jaws for Windows through the guidelines.
>         Not done.
>
>   7.GG: Review proposal for techniques for accessing content.
>         Not done.
>
>   8.CMN: Write a proposal for moving forward on this issue to the list.
>         Done since transferred to Ian (about conformance0.
>
>   9.CMN: Propose an example about what UAs can do with schemas.
>         Dropped.
>
>  10.MKN: Compose list of metadata sources for SMIL.
>         Done.
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0357.html
>
>  11.KB: Create dependency list for user agent and authoring tools
>         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
>         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.
>         IJ: I spoke with Dick Brown yesterday. He's supposed to get
>             back to me.
>
>  15.IJ: Find out from Judy about NN attendance at F2F.
>         IJ: I spoke with her. Am waiting for contact info.
>             I also wrote to a guy at Mozilla.
>
>  16.IJ: Find out from Judy about Operasoft attendance at F2F
>         IJ: I spoke with Håkon 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)
>     Done:
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0365.html
>
>  18.IJ: Make the dependency on micropayments more visible.
>      Not done.
>
>  19.IJ: Include GR's link checkpoint as P3 (configurability). Change
>priority of 9.6 to P2. Get techniques out of [1].
>      Not done.
>
>  20.JG: Create a list of AT people to invite to F2F meeting
>      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 JB: 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.
>          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.

MN:  Sorry I had to leave the teleconf. call early, and I may not
understand exactly what was discussed with this issue, but I think if
you want to take a look at another tool which performs a similar action
as described in Issue #73, the enhanced Links PowerToy might be of
value.  This is a script which writes a script to produce a list
of links per the web page in view, and attaches to the context menu in IE.
The source code is included, since the PowerToy is just an HTML
file.

http://trace.wisc.edu/world/web/document_access/

I also note, this PowerToy needs an update to handle some situations
I have since learned about.



>   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 (ā 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.
>
>   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.
Received on Thursday, 16 September 1999 11:38:45 GMT

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