Minutes: HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 01 Apr 2010

http://www.w3.org/2010/04/01-html-a11y-minutes.html



- DRAFT -
HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
01 Apr 2010
Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees
Present
Cynthia_Shelly, Denis_Boudreau, Dick_Bulterman, Erik_Carlson, Gregory_Rosmaita, Janina, Jim_Allen, John_Foliot, Michael_Cooper, Mike, Rich_S, Steve_Faulkner, kford, paulc
Regrets
Slyvia_Pfieffer, Aurlien_Levy, Dave_Singer, Laura_Carlson
Chair
Mike_Smith
Scribe
kford
Contents
*Topics 
1.Actions Review
2.Issue 85: "ARIA roles added to the <a> element" http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/85
3.Canvas Subteam update: change proposals
4.Resolved & Rejected Bugs Review http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0564.html
5.New Business
6.next meetings, confirm date/time, choose scribe
7.Actions Review
8.Face to Face Planning http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/ftf_2010-04.html
9.PF review of items recently raised by Shelley
*Summary of Action Items

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



<trackbot> Date: 01 April 2010

<dboudreau> mornin' everyone

<JF> morning

<oedipus> aloha!

<MichaelC> zakiim, +1.514 is Denis_Boudreau

<MichaelC> drop item 1

<MichaelC> drop item 2

<MichaelC> drop item 3

<MichaelC> drop item 4

<MichaelC> drop item 5

<MichaelC> drop item 6

<MichaelC> drop item 7

<MichaelC> drop item 8

<dboudreau> brb

<MikeSmith> action-1?

<trackbot> ACTION-1 -- Cynthia Shelly to write overall approach HTML support of ARIA -- due 2009-12-17 -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/1

<MichaelC> scribe: kford

<scribe> Scribe: KFord

Actions Review
<MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open

We have a lot on the agenda so starting with priority items.

<oedipus> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/2

<MikeSmith> action-2?

<trackbot> ACTION-2 -- Cynthia Shelly to deliver draft of change proposal for ARIA additions to HTML 5 by 2009-12-24 -- due 2010-04-01 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/2

Starting with action 2.

Any update from CS on this?

Group believes it will take to the summer to finish.

MS: Can we break this up a bit?

JS: We don't want to dribble in suggestions. What we do with one item may impact others. We've seen this in PF.

MS: Anything is better than saying July.

<oedipus> putting artificial time-constraints on the HTML TF is NOT going to help anyone -- we are WORKING on these issues and have been since HTML5 arrived within w3c

More discussion of implications of keeping actions open for extended time periods.

<JF> +1 there oedipus

CS: We are actively working. It will just take time.

PC: The working group isn't seeing your progress.

GR: That cuts both ways.

PC: It would be helpful to show progress..

<oedipus> GJR: a11y can't be addressed piecemeal

MC: Explains how the group has been making progress. We have some work in a spreadsheet. Maybe we can make this available.

CS: We couold do this but I don't want to debate with the working group line by line.
... Debating details at this point is a concern.
... Maybe we could set a date for providing a higher level framework, such as the groups of mappings.
... Having the higher level discussion would be good, debating if anchor should override button now isn't.

<oedipus> problem is that HTML5 is being implemented piecemeal without addressing a11y concerns -- case in point CANVAS implementations BEFORE an accessible solution for CANVAS is available -- THAT is NOT helpful

<oedipus> look at the participants who are sponsored and those who are not

<oedipus> getting to last call means re-achieving the HTML4

MS: HTML5 chairs are tasked with getting to last call.

<JF> So why are we pushing this? A timeline was proposed - July - and thta's an answer

JS: You are picking one of the more complicated issues. DEoes this represent a larger frustration?

<oedipus> any entity that wants to pay for dedicated HTML5 a11y work is more then welcome to ante up some funds

More discussion between PC and JS around dates.

<kliehm> I understand the need to progress, but I do not appreciate putting such emotional pressure on people.

<JF> Q: do we want "success" or do we want to meet a deadline?

<oedipus> why is there a double-standard for what the TF does and what the WG does?

<oedipus> amen, JF - we want and DEMAND success

PC: I want people to understand what happened at the AC meeting last week.

<oedipus> the chairs also need to LISTEN to the tf members, not just top-down "do this according to my schedule"

PC: There is material in the report that calls the progress slow and steady.
... Issues owned by the accessibility task force have been identified as the long trail.

<oedipus> we are being punished for the dysfunctionality of the HTML WG prior to the present change in chairs, editors

CS: Do we need to shift more effort to this and put other items on the back burner like summary?

<oedipus> while this is going on, we are NOT addressing any of the agenda items -- this meta-discussion EVERY week isn't helpful at all

<oedipus> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/ftf_2010-04.html

Discussion around whether accessibility mappings should get talked about at F2F.

JS Outlines goals of F2F.

<oedipus> process has now monopolized HALF the meeting time

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say we could have sub-groups for part of the agenda next week and to say I'm concerned that some of the frustrations expressed in IRC will escalate tension

MC: Proposes that that subgroups are used to help make progress.

<oedipus> i stand by my comments in IRC and by voice

<JF> then let's plan for progress, not for hitting some artificial deadline

MS: We've spent a lot of time here. We should get back to the agenda.

/me who is speaking?

<oedipus> dick bulterman

/me GR can you summarize his comment?

<oedipus> DB: how can i help advance discussion on media issues -- will there be time at the f2f if i push issues to the public-html list

<oedipus> MS: that would be useful

<MikeSmith> take up item 2

DB: Asks how to make progress on some of his issues. Suggestion is to bring it to the list.

<MikeSmith> take up item 18

MS: Please look at the agenda, if you have proposed changes we should know about them.

<MikeSmith> take up item 17

MS: Note F2F venue has changed.

<oedipus> the bentley suite = http://www.holidayinn.com/hotels/gb/en/birmingham/bhxwm/hoteldetail

MC: Meeting page has details.. Meeting is at Holiday Inn, couple blocks from original location.

<MikeSmith> http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/service_disruptions/2010/dispute.html

MC: May also be a possible rail strike. Be aware if this could impact you.

<MikeSmith> item 3

Issue 85: "ARIA roles added to the <a> element" http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/85
<oedipus> ISSUE-85 escalated from bug: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8000

<oedipus> ISSUE-85 escalated from bug: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8000

Canvas Subteam update: change proposals
CS: We are cranking through this. We made progress at a recent PF F2F.

<oedipus> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Canvas

MS: Rich, for canvas we are waiting for work around focus to be done.

RS: What we need to do expose blink rate to the API so we don't cause issues.
... Hope to be working on this during travel.

<oedipus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0014.html

<oedipus> change proposal (SteveF) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0088.html

RS: The item at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0014.html has been sent to the list. Haven't heard much, what's the status. Can we propose this?
... A change may be coming but that shouldn't block this item.

s/blick/block

<paulc> which wg isse is being discussed?

<oedipus> for focus rectangle and caret http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0088.html

<richardschwerdtfe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0435.html

<oedipus> action-12 paulc

<MikeSmith> this is for HTML WG issue 74

<paulc> http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-074

<MikeSmith> take up item 5

MS We have a couple proposals that are out there.

<oedipus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0562.html

/me not hearing EC, can someone capture what he said?

<MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_TextAssociations

<oedipus> EC: hope to have something written up for face2face on Media Text Associations

<oedipus> MS: Media Text Associations?

<oedipus> EC: correct

<oedipus> EC: this is issue we've been talking about

<oedipus> MS: not clear where blockage is on this proposal

MS: Not clear what this proposal is blocked on.

<oedipus> MS: would like to send out CFC on it

MS: Thinking we should send this out for call for consensus.

DB: Our concerns are that video container has evolved into mixing timings that is beyond presentation of a given piece of media.

MS: I don't think it is too early to send out call for consensus. Dick you should then respond with your points.

Dick: Fine with me.

Resolved & Rejected Bugs Review http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0564.html
MS: Please look through bug report and bring any that we should look at in the meeting.

MC: We want this to be an agenda item at F2F.

New Business
MS: No new business aside from F2F venue change.

next meetings, confirm date/time, choose scribe
Actions Review
Face to Face Planning http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/ftf_2010-04.html
PF review of items recently raised by Shelley
CS: We talked about this at a high level. On PF call we agreed that removing elements was a bad idea.
... We were interested in putting voice of task force behind keeping these items.

SF: Eliminating these items is a good idea - allows author to use native semantics without having to add ARIA markup.

<oedipus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0858.html

JS: I saw one that was out of scope for us perhaps.
... We should make a list that are accessibility related, review at F2F and make a proposal from task force to take to WG.

<JF> I agree with Janina, there is a fair bit to digest here

PC: It would be helpful to know which of these task force thinks need to keep around.

<oedipus> 2 MINUTE WARNING

MS: Anyone who does comment on these has an obligation to read the full proposal and not just react to titles.

/me MS is breaking up, can anyone else scribe his comment?

MS: I think we need to consider Cynthia's idea of moving mappings higher and also breaking into groups.

<MikeSmith> [adjourned]

presnet+Jim_Allan

Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]

Received on Thursday, 1 April 2010 16:17:24 UTC