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

AGENDA: W3C WAI User Agent Face-to-Face meeting at Redmond, Washington, Oct 11-12

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 11:07:38 -0700
Message-Id: <4.1.19991008105146.00b4ac60@staff.uiuc.edu>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Participants

Gregory Rosmaita, VICUG NYC 
Kitch Barnicle, Trace Center 
Harvey Bingham, Bingham Associates 
Jim Thatcher, IBM Special Needs 
David Poehlman, Blind Access Review Board 
Ian Jacobs, W3C, UA Guidelines Editor 
Charles McCathieNevile, W3C 
Richard Schwerdtfeger, IBM 
Glen Gordon, Henter-Joyce Inc. 
Wilson Craig, Henter-Joyce Inc. 
David Clark, CAST, Inc 
Hans Riesebos, ALVA 
Jon Gunderson, University of Illinois, UA Chair
Mark Novak, Trace Center 
Judy Brewer, W3C
Mickey Quenzer, Productivity Works
TBA, Microsoft

Agenda 

Monday, 11 October

8:00 Transportation leaves from DoubleTree to Microsoft Corporation/Building 30

8:00 - 8:30 Continental Breakfast 

8:30 Preliminaries 

     Introductions 
     Review of agenda 

Review Open Action Items (10 minutes max)

   1.JG: Run pwWebSpeak through the guidelines
     Status: Contact pwWebSpeak person to finish the review 
   2.JG: Contact Lakespur Roca related to posting for review of keyboard
support
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/1999OctDec/0015.html 
   3.JG: Contact MR about SMIL techniques 
   4.JG: Review RS comments on current working draft and update the issue list
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999OctDec/0063.html 
   5.IJ: Contact Microsoft about participation at F2F meeting in Redmond 
   6.IJ: Contact Marja about writing a proposal for what should be changed
related to checkpoint 2.1 issues 
   7.IJ: Split Checkpoint 1.1 into support device indepdence and use
standard APIs. Clarify that not all APIs required. Results
     dependent on Rich proposal. 
   8.IJ: Propose a checkpoint like the ones for form about table summary
information (checkpoint 9.9 and 9.10) 
   9.IJ Change title of Guideline 7 to reflect more than just w3c
technologies accessibility 
  10.IJ: Add checkpoint 6.6 to guidelines 7 
  11.GG: Review proposal for techniques for accessing content. 
  12.GR: Write a proposal to address issues about spawned windows. 
  13.DP: Run Jaws for Windows through the guidelines 
  14.MR: Working on SMIL techniques in addition to SMIL access note. 
  15.RS: Propose rewording of Checkpoint 1.1 

Process Overview and Update (30 minutes max)

   1.Last Call (3-4 weeks) 
   2.Proposed Recommendation (3-4 weeks) 
   3.Recommendation 
   4.Reviewers for last call 
   5.Guidelines and Checklist (reccommendation) 
   6.Techniques (note) 
   7.Impact Matrix (appendix to guidelines?) 
   8.Press release 
   9.Issue list 
  10.Product reviews 
  11.Minority opinons (conformance, any others) 
  12.Testimonials 

Discussion of Open Issues

   1.Issue #78: Review requirements for window spawning 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#78 

   2.Issue #85: Priority of checkpoint on language support 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#85 

   3.Issue #86: Should Guideline about support for W3C technologies be
broadened or narrowed? 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#86 

   4.Issue #87: Proposed wording change about user-control of highlight
rendering 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#87 

   5.Issue #88: Proposed wording change for checkpoint on access to
selected content. 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#88 

   6.Issue #91: Proposed reformulation of frames checkpoint 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#91 

   7.Issue #92: Proposed checkpoint about form orientation 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#92 

   8.Issue #93: Proposed modification to definition of "applicable checkpoint" 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#93 

   9.Issue #94: Reenforcing the the use of standard keyboard APIs in
guideline 2 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#94 

  10.Issue #95: Proposed checkpoint: Choose from among style sheets 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#95 

  11.Issue #97: Questions about wording of document outline checkpoint 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#97 

  12.Issue #98: What does "appropriate" mean in "appropriate w3c
recommendations"? 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#98 

  13.Issue #99: Priority of control of GUI layout should not be priority 1 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#99 

  14.Issue #100: Proposed Note on verifiability of some checkpoints 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#100 

  15.Issue #101: Wording of checkpoint on document change notification 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#101 

  16.Issue #102: List of problematic checkpoints. 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#102 

  17.Issue #103: Proposed change to priority wording 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#103 

  18.Issue #104: Proposed additions to conformance claim requirements 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#104 

  19.Issue #105: ACCESSKEY implementation issues 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#105 

  20.Issue #106: Proposed Abstract revision 
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#106 

  21.Issue #107: Proposed new checkpoint: 6.7 Support assistive technology
accessibility standards defined for plug-in and virtual machine systems
used by your browser.
     http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#107 

10:00-10:15 Break

12:00-13:00 Lunch

15:00-15:15 Break

17:30 Transportation from Microsoft Corporation/Building 30 to Resturant 

20:00 Transportation from Resturant to DoubleTree Hotel

Tuesday October 12, 1999

8:00 Transportation leaves from DoubleTree to Microsoft Corporation/Building 30

8:00 - 8:30 Continental Breakfast

Review Guidelines Glossary Definitions (15 minutes max)

Discussion of Techniques Document

The purpose of the discussion is to identify missing, incorrect or
misleading information in the techniques document. We will review
each section of the techniques documentto identify 

     Table of Contents Organization of the Techniques Document 
     3.1 Access to content 
     3.2 Device independence 
     3.3 User control of style 
     3.4 Viewports, selection and focus 
     3.5 Navigation of active elements 
     3.6 Status information 
     3.7 Keyboard access 
     3.8 Configuration 
     3.9 Documentation 
     4.1 System conventions 
     4.2 Testing UA operation with platform standards 
     4.3 Accessibility Features 
     4.4 Document object model 
     4.5 Information for assistive technology 
     5.0 Support for HTML accessibility 
     5.1 Equivalent information 
     5.2 Links 
     5.3 Tables 
     5.4 Frames 
     5.5 Scripts 
     6.0 Support for CSS accessibility 
     7.0 Support SMIL accessibility 

10:00-10:15 Break

12:00-13:00 Lunch

15:00-15:15 Break

15:15 Review of Meeting Action Items

15:30 Adjourn meeting

17:30 Transportation from Microsoft Corporation/Building 30 to Doubletree Hotel




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 Friday, 8 October 1999 12:03:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:24 UTC