W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 2008

UAWG minutes 6 Nov 2008

From: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 14:44:40 -0600
To: <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Message-ID: <019201c94050$7eb19b60$7c14d220$@edu>

User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
06 Nov 2008

Minutes: http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008OctDec/0043.html 

See also: IRC log - http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-irc 
Attendees

Present
Regrets
    kelly, mark
Chair
    AllanJ
Scribe
    Simon

Contents

    * Topics
    * Summary of Action Items

<trackbot> Date: 06 November 2008

<sharper> Scribe: Simon

<sharper> ScribeNick: sharper

<AllanJ> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/survey20081106/results

David Poehlman Comment: The proposal says interface but then goes on to say interface and rendered content. are we talking both? should they be split?

<AllanJ> Alan proposal: 2.1.2 For each user interface component, including the user interface itself and rendered content, make available its name, role, state, value, and description via an accessibility platform architecture.

JR: Looks good

<AllanJ> +1

Alan C: Should say 'and every' as opposed to each?

JR: Likes the way it is

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne Write back to David - re new wording [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-69 - Write back to David - re new wording [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

<AllanJ> discussion on wording of PRINCIPLE 2. Facilitate access by assistive technologies

<AllanJ> sharper: assistive technologies seems too limiting

<jeanne> My concern with removing "assistive technologies" would be introducing new jargon that would not be easily understandable.

<AllanJ> JR: perhaps a rationale is needed. Change to "facilitate programmatic access"

<AllanJ> JS: need to make intention clear, want to keep 'assistive technologies'

<AllanJ> SH: concern for future of UAs, mobile, etc. programmers know programmatic access

<AllanJ> ...keep assistive technologies for pragmatic reasons

<AllanJ> SH: UAAG20 around for long time. should be more general more agnostic

<AllanJ> ... all of principle 2 says programmatic access

<JR> JR: Jan's point included making sure assistive tech is highlighted in the coming rationale

<AllanJ> ... rationale is assistive technology

AllanJ: Proposes change to programmatic access, but including AT in rationale

+1

SH: +1

<AllanJ> +1 makes it more general.

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne place 'facilitate programmatic access' into survey. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-70 - Place 'facilitate programmatic access' into survey. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

<jeanne> ACTION: JS to place the rewording of Principle 2 to "Facilitate programatic access" in next week's survey [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-71 - Place the rewording of Principle 2 to \"Facilitate programatic access\" in next week's survey [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

<jeanne> +1

<AllanJ> 2.1.2 For each user interface component, including the user interface itself and rendered content, make available its name, role, state, value, and description via an accessibility platform architecture.

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne place Alan's new wording into survey. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-72 - Place Alan's new wording into survey. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

AllanJ: discussion of 2.1.3

JS: Address David's issue by adding a use case example

Davids Comment: this is unclear, what inaccessible functionality is left?

JS: do we have a use case for this.

<AllanJ> discussion of interrelationship between 2.1.2 and 2.1.3

<AllanJ> SH: why does UA have to compensate for accessibility platform architecture

<AllanJ> JR: UA can do lots of new cool things, but you have to map it some how to the accessibility platform architecture (apa)

<JR> ACTION: JR to Write a proposal to clarify and perhaps integrate 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-73 - Write a proposal to clarify and perhaps integrate 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 [on Jan Richards - due 2008-11-13].

AllanJ: 2.1.4 - everyone agrees with: 2.1.4 If the user agent implements one or more DOMs, make the DOMs programmatically available to assistive technologies.

AllanJ - AC: says "Do we need to specify which assistive technologies? Or to what degree?"

scribe: something like ' "... make the DOM or DOMs programmatically available to assistive technologies to the greatest extent possible??'

JR: we need to make it just programmatically available?

AC: AT can do different things - do we expect developers to understand AT?

AllanJ: Do we need to change AT to accessibility platform architectures

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to suggest that if a functionality works in only one modality (e.g. vision or mouse) then...

JR: programmatic access aims reduce the amount developers will need to know about AT

JS: More about functionality that is available in one modality, and the need for multiple modalities.

AllanJ: Everything needs to be in the DOM - this will handle different modailities

\me LET ME KNOW IF I'M GETTING THE NAMES WRONG PLEASE.

General Discussion regarding the interplay between API pipe, DOM, AT and accessibility platform

<jeanne> do we need 2.1.4 at all then?

AllanJ: In Conclusion DOM must be available to AT
... Proposes 2.1.4 is complete

All Agree

<jeanne> ACTION: JS to add 2.1.4 to the new draft. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-74 - Add 2.1.4 to the new draft. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

Judy: can we ask David Poehlman to clarify his comment 'cannot accept, advise or reject.'

<AllanJ> ACTION: jim to write david concerning clarify comment on 2.1.4 - need more expansion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-75 - Write david concerning clarify comment on 2.1.4 - need more expansion [on Jim Allan - due 2008-11-13].

item 3 3. Work on language of Principal 3 success criteria.

- establish style rules for document

- Issue 16 - Relook at the phrasing of Principle 3 to ensure

clarity.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/issues/16

- establish replacement wording for 'chrome' (SC 3.10.11, and

elsewhere, Issue 2 - http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/issues/2)

from stored data

>From my mail 10. Principle 3, in particular 3.1 needs to be more clear. I�ve mentioned on a few calls how the user interface does a lot visually to convey meaning. I don�t think these guidelines give enough detail on what needs to happen or the expectation around accessibility. User agents today do a lot to convey state from security to page functionality with unique UI elements. AT jumps around loads of hoops today to convey this info.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008OctDec/att-0026/00-part

<AllanJ> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2008/WD-UAAG20-20081022/WD-UAAG20-20081022.html#principle-perceivable

Previous Discussion:

RINCIPLE 3: Ensure that the user interface is perceivable

JAllan: Anyone have any general problems with the wording?

none heard.

Now looking at Guideline 3.1 Provide text alternatives for non-text components

group is ok with general wording.

JR: I wanted to comment on something we found in ATAG. The item one that says you need to cover the accessibility of your platform is likely to cover this.

Jeanne: I wanted to ensure we covered the accessibility of documentation.

>From my mail 10. Principle 3, in particular 3.1 needs to be more clear. I�ve mentioned on a few calls how the user interface does a lot visually to convey meaning. I don�t think these guidelines give enough detail on what needs to happen or the expectation around accessibility. User agents today do a lot to convey state from security to page functionality with unique UI elements. AT jumps around loads of hoops today to convey this info.

<jallan> KF: should keep, need to be a bit explicit, to make sure the point gets across

More discussion about whether 3.1 is covered in guideline 1.

<jallan> KF: user interface everything is labeled and available programatically

<jallan> ... the UA could do more to make the information available.

<jallan> JA: 3.1.1 does not say make information available programatically

<jallan> JR: should be in Principal 2

<jallan> JA: information is available passively, the user must request the security state, rss feed, etc.

kford more discussion about this.

<jallan> ... do we need some SC to allow option to provide overview of current states in the UA

JR: I think principle two would cover most of this.

<jallan> JS: this is needed for low vision people.

kford: kford and Jeanne think principle three needs to be strengthened.

<jallan> ... ARIA has section on passive alerts, perhaps we need something like that

JAllan: we've talked a lot about screen readers. Visually you glance around.
... if this is all available programatically, isn't it then the AT's job to grab this info.

<jallan> KF: what is the state, what is important, the UA has gone through the effort to provide an icon. How is the user to decide what is important

<jallan> ... I am missing the gestalt of the information

<scribe> ACTION: kford jeanne to add guideline in 3.1 around improving perceivability [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - kford

<jeanne> ACTION: KF to KF and JS to write proposal for Guideline 3.1 improving perceivability of user interface and passive status. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - KF and JS to write proposal for Guideline 3.1 improving perceivability of user interface and passive status. [on Kelly Ford - due 2008-10-28].

<jallan> JR: add to examples, kinds of important state information

JR: I think we need to add to examples, some of what kford was saying about important state in modern browsers.

JAllan: 3.1.1 needs to reveal info programatically and there needs to be some mechanism to provide a overview of important state items.

Guideline 3.2 Provide access to alternative content

JR: I have a long standing general concern about mixing content and user interface.

JAllan restates JR's concern.

JS: This goes back to what I was saying in the beginning about the overall principle. This talks about content and user interface.

JR: You either split into two principles or expand scope of the current principle.

JAllan: I prefer to keep one principle if possible.

Jeanne: We need to ensure any author controls like ARIA are perceivable.

<jallan> JA: the user agent provides a user interface to allow access to the author provided alternative content

kford: I think we need to expand the scope of principle 3.
... Today the web author can easily extend what's traditionally thought of of the user agent

<jeanne> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-WCAG20-20080430/#perceivable

<jeanne> I think we should use the WCAG wording:

<Jan> PRINCIPLE 3: Perceivable - The user agent's user interface and rendered content must be presented to users in ways they can perceive

<jeanne> issue: relook at the phrasing of Principle 3 to ensure clarity.

<trackbot> Created ISSUE-16 - Relook at the phrasing of Principle 3 to ensure clarity. ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/issues/16/edit .

AllanJ: Leave Issue 16 and move to success criteria starting at 3.1.1

JR: scrap 3.1.1 and concentrate on criteria primarily related to user agents not other kinds of software

AllanJ: as it is covered in principle 1

<jeanne> +1 to deleting 3.1

SH: +1

<AllanJ> +1

AC: +1

JB: +1

<jeanne> ACTION: JS to delete Guideline and SC for 3.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action08]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-76 - Delete Guideline and SC for 3.1 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

AllanJ: 3.2.1 The user has the global option to be notified of alternatives to rendered content (e.g., short text alternatives, long descriptions, captions)

<AllanJ> STYLE Note - action verbs

jeanne: refresh... rephrasing so everything starts with an action verb

<jeanne> Provide a global option to be notified of alternatives...

Discussion: ensure or provide?

AllanJ: Ensure

<jeanne> +1 to provide

<AllanJ> +1 provide

AC: Provide

<JR> JR: Provide

SH: Ensure

AllanJ: 3.2.1 done, choice is 'provide'.

<jeanne> ACTION: JS to update 3.2.1 with " Provide a global option to be notified of alternatives..." [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action09]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-77 - Update 3.2.1 with \" Provide a global option to be notified of alternatives...\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

<AllanJ> Provide a global option for the user to be notified of alternatives to rendered content (e.g., short text alternatives, long descriptions, captions)

AllanJ: Moving on to '3.2.2 Configurable Default Rendering: The user has the global option to set preferences for which alternative(s) are rendered by default. (Level A)'

<JR> +1

<Alan> OK

<AllanJ> Provide a global option for the user to set preferences for which alternative(s) are rendered by default.

<AllanJ> SH: if user can choose all alternatives to be rendered, how do we communicate that to the developer, that the user is to have a choice

<AllanJ> ACTION: jim to rewrite 3.2.2 to allow user to choose any combination of alternatives to be rendered [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action10]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-78 - Rewrite 3.2.2 to allow user to choose any combination of alternatives to be rendered [on Jim Allan - due 2008-11-13].

<jeanne> ACTION: JS to draft a new wording for 3.2.3 for the 11/10 survey [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action11]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-79 - Draft a new wording for 3.2.3 for the 11/10 survey [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

<scribe> ACTION: sharper Suggest new wordings for 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action12]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-80 - Suggest new wordings for 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 [on Simon Harper - due 2008-11-13].

allanJ: move open issues for next time.

<AllanJ> ACTION: Alan to reword 3.2.4 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action13]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-81 - Reword 3.2.4 [on Alan Cantor - due 2008-11-13].

<scribe> scribenick: AllanJ

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to reword 3.2.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action14]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-82 - Reword 3.2.3 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-11-13].

<scribe> ACTION: Jim to reword 3.3.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action15]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-83 - Reword 3.3.3 [on Jim Allan - due 2008-11-13].
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Alan to reword 3.2.4 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action13]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne place 'facilitate programmatic access' into survey. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne place Alan's new wording into survey. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to reword 3.2.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action14]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne Write back to David - re new wording [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Jim to reword 3.3.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action15]
[NEW] ACTION: jim to rewrite 3.2.2 to allow user to choose any combination of alternatives to be rendered [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action10]
[NEW] ACTION: jim to write david concerning clarify comment on 2.1.4 - need more expansion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: JR to Write a proposal to clarify and perhaps integrate 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: JS to add 2.1.4 to the new draft. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: JS to delete Guideline and SC for 3.1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: JS to draft a new wording for 3.2.3 for the 11/10 survey [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action11]
[NEW] ACTION: JS to place the rewording of Principle 2 to "Facilitate programatic access" in next week's survey [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: JS to update 3.2.1 with " Provide a global option to be notified of alternatives..." [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: sharper Suggest new wordings for 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/06-ua-minutes.html#action12]
 
[End of minutes]

Jim Allan, Accessibility Coordinator & Webmaster
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9264  http://www.tsbvi.edu/
"We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2008 20:57:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:52:05 GMT