- From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 15:24:01 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Attendance
Chair: Jon Gunderson
Scribe: Jim Allan
Present:
Kitch Barnicle
David Poehlman
Harvey Bingham
Gregory J. Rosmaita
Madeleine Rothberg
Tim Lacy
Denis Anson
Eric Hansen
Dick Brown
Regrets:
Ian Jacobs
Mark Novak
Absent:
Mickey Quenzer Charles
McCathieNevile
Rich Schwerdtfeger
Al Gilman
Hans Riesebos
Action Items
Open Action Items
1.IJ: Draft a preliminary executive summary/mini-FAQ for developers.
(No deadline.)
2.CMN: Propose a technique that explains how serialization plus
navigation would suffice for Checkpoint 8.1.
3.GR: Look into which checkpoints would benefit from audio examples in
the techniques document.
New Action Items
1.Editors: Update document based on MR proposal for control and
configure and the resolutions made during this telecon
2.Editors: Cross reference 4.8 and 4.10 and make clear that checkpoint
4.8 for non-syntheisized speech audio
3.GR: Research history of the priority of checkpoint 4.8 on audio volume
4.EH: Propose new definitions for control and configure
Completed Action Items
1.WG: Read Madeleine Rothberg review of the UAAG related to control and
configure and re-read the guidelines document subsituting control for
configure (except in Guideline 10).
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000AprJun/0354.html
Minutes
PR#284: Consistent use of the words "control" and "configure" in checkpoints
http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#284
JG: mr reviewed control & configure, control is set dynamically, configure
is set up before, control is short term configure is persistent some want
both when
a control is set it can become permanent. set parameters before something
starts (playback rate in video) mr most check points can be control jg says use
control for all, then have configure option in gl10-default user configuration
EH: what is wrong with mr definitions?
DB: mr seems reasonable
JG: people like distinction
DB: yes
DA: important, some things need to be configured. mr analysis was good tl:
DP: if you want both then say both
EH: key thing, if priorities are same, then need to be accurate with
priorities. if difference between control and configure priority then match
checkpoint
priority. would be nice if mr would look at need for control and configure
in checkpoints. unease with locking in developers to tightly
JG: control and configure size of text. make it 2 checkpoints? need minimum
requirement for priority 1 items 10.7 save in profile (p2) control is p1
configuration is p2 but can be seen as part of 10.7 --last control setting
will be saved as configuration
HB: be careful, that last font was not for header but for normal text size.
JG: if setting only header then it should be persistent for headers. don't
have a range for control of font sizes. group has tried for other checkpoints.
DA: don't always want last setting
GR: set UA to reuse last setting, or retain old settings,
JG: may be techniques, different OS may need different techniques - ij
example of editing initialization file.
DA: what you want with configuration-this is the way I want this to behave,
need reset to default, last use may be special case, don't want it to be
default
automatically.
EH: need many ways to set configuration
HB: in techniques have pointers to style sheets
EH: don't over proscribe what configuration means, unless all agree
DA: looking at priorities, control vs. configure, need to look at
individual checkpoints to evaluate. mainly for control and configure are
both important
JG: mr identified 3 cp for control and config. size of text, volume
control/config size of text both p1?
MR: yes, checkpoint delineates
JG: is it impossible for some users to access content.
MR: p1 for one or the other
JG: p1 for control, need it dynamically config is for things that are
difficult
MR: depends on what web authors are doing
GR: cognitive load for control is less than for config
DA: I think its opposite. config is set once and not worry
JG: when set control should be persistent for all pages in session
DA: look at things that require control of, may take 30 minutes to set up
DP: but may never use synthesized speech
JG: 10.7 not impossible
GR: opera persistent control of images don't champion one over the other,
EH: back to 4.1 control and config size of text. both p1
GR: yes, application in real world, config assumes UA source is properly
marked up, client side CSS. if marked up differently then personal CSS doesn't
affect page, then I need local control.
JG: 4.1 in IE need to use two controls,
JA: IE control font dynamically, but must have "ignore font size" configured
Resolved: Checkpoint 4.1 is p1 for both control and configure.
JG: control configure for audio rate- p1
GR: yes
DP: yes
MR: question for screen reader- have configure for rate, but not dynamic
(control) rate
DP: starting to have control for rate.
GR: also starting to have control for punctuation - change dynamically
HB: change in middle of document
GR: yes, if working in IE and note pad, and change
DA: isn't this p2, don't have to have control
DP: talking about rate not punctionation, need quick way to fix rate
problems, and a way to make it persistent, need both, so it is p1, config
is a global
setting, there are times that rate needs to be adjustable quickly depending
on the task
JG: webspeak has control of rate, hpr may have control also, both have
configure.
GR: not just a blind issue, low vision users, second language people
DA: no problem with control and config
JG: p1 for both control and config audio rate
DP: public ally available speech synthesis, have little or no control. such
as Microsoft agent give audio but no control. important that we show developers
that control is necessary .
EH: over time we get an understanding about what is a p1, etc. key point is
apply same standard across all guidelines, don't front load everything just
because we like it. implementation becomes difficult, if can only implement
50% then which are most important
GR: I get lots of requests for setting up user work stations in public
settings. lots of people use public terminals, they are looking into ADA
compliance, must
have control
JG: first level is what is needed by pwd, spent much time working on
priorities. few statements about priorities during last call, don't see
much trouble with
priorities in document. have pretty good consensus.
EH: no problem with p1
HB: reset to default, should that be a technique
GR: yes
JG: user may not have access to that. has been dealt with before. good for
technique for public access terminals. Have checkpoints to restore to default
10.7 p2
Resolved:Checkpoint 4.9 is p1 for control and configure
JG: 4.7 config and control audio volume p1
DP: control is p1, similar to reasons for rate
JG: what about hearing impaired
MR: hadn't thought about it. if no text with only speech then it is relevant.
DA: with synthesized speech isn't synthesizer with client.
JG: if using telephone, synthetic speech is in host
EH: control and configure for 4.10 is p1
JG: yes
DA: would set home terminal for something I can hear, public terminal may
have default median volume
DP: synthesizers without front end from the author have not control. synth
interperts the markup and outputs, if no markup for control of volume then no
control.
DA: is an imbedded object
GR: acss have aural properties (lists properties), many things built into
w3 spec
JG: control is p1, what about config?
GR: config, most screen readers use sound card cannot set volume through
screen reader, must use OS
JG: can control volume through sapi, actual volume is sapi, master control,
and manual speaker volume
GR: is this a case where OS control covers all audio control
JG: this is a technique, dependent on OS, control must be accessible
GR: ok
JG: gr is config as important and control
GR: I lean that way
JG: note that for regular audio, 4.8 talks about audio volume (not speech)
this is a p2, mr recommended p1 for control and configure. other audio events
must have text equivalents
EH: language used in regard to audio, depends on how terms are used. 4.8
audio is a generic term, includes synth. speech
JG: long discussion on this
EH: need to define better, prerecorded vs. synthesized, discuss in exactly
DP: syn. speech is a special case of audio
DA: syn. speech may need special control, different from general audio
GR: control is situational.
JG: is config a p1?
DP: should be same as rate. same situations, need same type of control and
config--should be p1
JG: objections?
DB: situations where you can configure but not control makes it impossible
to use.
JG: if volume is so low that a person with hearing problem cant hear it
then can
JG: most systems provide config but not control
DB: talking about UA not AT,
GR: if they choose to do this then these are the parameters
DB: I know it is not hard to do, little uneasy about it being impossible to
use thus requiring a p1
JG: it is a present value, was reviewed as a p1, no comments during review
process.
DB: I can live with it. not positive that it meets the impossible rule. can
imagine many scenarios for all GL that can make all be a p1
JG: many public access computers, allow users to configure. set up a
system, so individual profiles follow person around. then can config.
DB: if you log in than your last used profile
DP: if you cant log in then must be able to config/reset values
DB: cant control because you cant hear it
JG: system volume, get back to default value. argue about different
situations where config or control is better or more needed. similar to speech
playback--volume and rate are important for hearing impairment.
DB: can live with it, move on
Resolved :4.10 control and config p1
rest are p3. also add control and configure to 4.8 as a p2
MR: already a p1 need for text equivalent. must have p2 to control and
config audio volume
GR: if have page playing midi file, plays at a volume that cant hear
synthesizer. OS control globally controls all volume. ability to control
volume should be p1
DP: should be p1
JG: address both now
DA: if config/control speech is p1 then this can be p2
GR: cross reference 4.10 and 4.8 add note "if user agent supports sny
speech natively then changes in audio volume should be independent of syn
speech
volume"
JG: minimum requirement that volume controls are independent.
EH: sounds fine to me
JG: how do I know when I comply. group working on this. 4.8, 4.11
independent control, two type of minimum requirements--provide structured
navigation-minimum things are defined, another type is provision of a range
- such as change rate
KB joins don't have range for audio (hardware limitations). syn speech
playback rate was specified - use default of synthesizer else offer a range
EH: on 4.8 divergence on priorities. p1 control, p2 config.
JG: need action, why 4.8 is p2, check archives
Action GR: why 4.8 is p2, will post to list
GR: recollection, speech is p1 and audio is p2 is for reasons stated, audio
overwhelms synth. speech.
EH: need to define that 4.8 is non synth. speech. or audio other than
synthesized speech with pointer to 4.10
Action Editors: cross reference 4.8 and 4.10.
Resolved: independent control of synthetic speech and audio volume.
Action Editors: 4.8 indicate non-synthesized speech audio.
JG: combine volume control for audio and synth speech. must have
independent control as a minimum
GR: originally 4.8 was turn on and off background audio.
JG: have separate check point for that adopt mr proposal
Resolved: Use the rest of MR proposal for changing the wording of control
and configuration checkpoints
Action EH: Propose new definitions of control and configure.
2.PR#283: Delete checkpoint 10.4 Allow the user to change the input
configuration.
http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#283
JG: Checkpoint 10.4 currently does not have any clearly identified minimum
requirements. Its minimum requires seem to satisified by other checkpoints:
1.We already have a requirement that all functions be accessible
through the keyboard (1.3)
2.We say to use system conventions (5.8)
3.Allow single key or command configuration (10.5)
4.Configuration of graphical controls (10.9)
5.Saving custom and restoring default configuration information
(including keyboard bindings) are in checkpoint 10.7
What additional functionality does checkpoint 10.4 add that can be put in a
minimal requirement for satisfying the checkpoint? We need just one requirement
of a minimal specification to satisfy the checkpoint that is not covered
somewhere else.
NOTE: I would modify the minimum requirement of 10.5 to include either
single key or modifier + single key for configuration of systems with
keyboards.
This would generalize 10.5, but still provide the single key functionality
for those that want just a single key.
EH: for 10.5 need to describe minimum requirements. so many steps. define
functionalities.
JG: all things that need control need keystrokes. part of minimum spec for
10.5
EH: is there language for 10.5 minimum requirements. they are posted for
Netscape.
JG: I will look and post something. 10.5 is next issue.
KB: jg turning in 508 comments
JG: yes
EH: are you KB
KB: yes have lots of work
Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
MC-574
College of Applied Life Studies
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
WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
Received on Thursday, 25 May 2000 16:24:21 UTC