Re: timeouts

Hi E.A.,

The Working Group's concern (as I recall) is that often the timeout period
is not "exact" but rather an approximation, and they didn't want to get
down to splitting hairs (especially since it would make testing a pain in
the neck).

So, for example, if we say that an authenticated session will be terminated
after 15 minutes, it doesn't force the page owner to police that timing to
the exact millisecond: if it times out after 14 minutes and 47 seconds,
well... close enough - the page will not be considered 'non-conformant'
because the Timeout Warning wasn't specific enough. In reality, I suspect
that the timing will be pretty accurate anyway, because it's a machine
tracking it, and machines are good at that type of thing. But given network
latency issues (etc.), it's really hard to be ultra-specific.

As such, it was felt that a modicum of flexibility would be prudent here,
and we can ensure that this is clearly explained in the Understanding
documents.

JF


On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 2:14 PM, EA Draffan <ead@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> I am sorry I missed the change where it says  'estimated' length of
> inactivity - that would sow a seed of doubt in my mind - what is an
> estimated length of inactivity?
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> E.A.
>
>
>
> Mrs E.A. Draffan
>
> WAIS, ECS , University of Southampton
>
> Mobile +44 (0)7976 289103 <+44%207976%20289103>
>
> http://access.ecs.soton.ac.uk
> <https://www.outlook.soton.ac.uk/owa/redir.aspx?C=69b1RzNTDwem3wbm4pLRmuYfTLt16YjcghtEpZBsF5Sebx78I2DUCA..&URL=http%3a%2f%2faccess.ecs.soton.ac.uk%2f>
>
> UK AAATE rep http://www.aaate.net/
> <https://www.outlook.soton.ac.uk/owa/redir.aspx?C=WUwOCw_4FszLSzcUbkoFdDkad8-Q_GrRfPYUJ_ol5l2ebx78I2DUCA..&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.aaate.net%2f>
>
>
>
> *From:* lisa.seeman [mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com]
> *Sent:* 27 November 2017 17:46
> *To:* public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
> *Cc:* Bradley Montgomery <rbradley@mitre.org>
> *Subject:* timeouts
>
>
>
> Hi Folks
>
> We may only be able to get the following wording on time outs in WCAG:
>
> * Where data can be lost due to user inactivity, users are warned before
> an activity timer is set about the estimated length of inactivity that
> generates the data loss, unless the data is preserved for a minimum of 20
> hours of user inactivity.*
>
>
>
> With the wording above, some people might warn the user on every page that
> a timer starts, and not at the beginning of the process. SO i wont be able
> to know, at the start of a process, that this process times out to fast for
> me to complete the task and just gives me more to read.
>
>
>
> Do we still see value in pushing for this SC if we can only get in the
> wording above?
>
>
>
> (note the original wording is here: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#timeouts
>
> comment summary is here: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Resolving_
> Timeouts/?)
>
>
>
>
> All the best
>
> Lisa Seeman
>
> LinkedIn, Twitter
>
>


-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion