minutes: HTML Accessibility TF telecon 2010-07-08 [draft]

Hi All,

minutes from today's HTML Accessibility Task Force Meeting are available
as hypertext at: 


as an IRC log at: 


and as plain text following my signature.

(thanks for your help Gregory)


Marco Ranon
Principal Web Access Consultant
RNIB Access Consultancy Services


      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

             HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

08 Jul 2010



   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/07/08-html-a11y-irc


          Denis_Boudreau, Eric_Carlson, Gregory_Rosmaita, Janina,
          John_Foliot, Marco_Ranon, Michael_Cooper, Mike, Paul_Cotton,
          Rich, Cynthia_Shelly

          Laura_Carlson, Steven_Faulkner




     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Identify scribe
         2. [6]Do once-over of previous meeting minutes
         3. [7]Media team; status on requirements; next steps
         4. [8]ARIA team; ARIA-in-HTML conformance spec text
         5. [9]general principle of splitting out authoring guidance
            (John Foliot)
         6. [10]any progress on ensuring that drag-and-drop events are
            keyboard activatable?
         7. [11]bug triage
         8. [12]Review open action items
     * [13]Summary of Action Items

   <trackbot> Date: 08 July 2010

   <eric_carlson> zakim aaaa is eric_carlson

   <dboudreau> <--- on the phone 514.312

   <MikeSmith> agenda:


   <MikeSmith> [15]Scribe List

     [15] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Scribe_List

   <MikeSmith> [16]2010-07-01 minutes

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-html-a11y-minutes.html

   <MikeSmith> [17]Media Accessibility Requirements


   <MikeSmith> [18]proposed replacement spec text


   <MikeSmith> [19]ARIA in HTML5 Change Proposal

     [19] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ARIAinHTML5

   <MikeSmith> [20]API mappings


   <MikeSmith> [21]Open Actions

     [21] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open

   <MikeSmith> [22]need drag-and-drop implementor feedback


   <MikeSmith> [23]Weekly Resolved & Rejected Bugs Report


Identify scribe

   <MikeSmith> [24]Scribe List

     [24] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Scribe_List

   <MikeSmith> scribe: Marco_Ranon

Do once-over of previous meeting minutes

   <MikeSmith> [25]2010-07-01 minutes

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-html-a11y-minutes.html

   <oedipus> GJR notes that aria drag'n'drop is supported in the latest
   point release of JAWS 11 (as is verbosity control over live regions)

   <JF> we should have a meta discussion regarding the general
   principle of splitting out authoring guidance from the larger spec,
   especially when it impacts on accessibility issues.

   muted myself

   <JF> This is currently an active topic regarding Issue 31 [$1\47]
   versus SteveF's First Public Draft regarding @alt text [$1\47] (with
   an indication that Ian will be submitting a null change proposal for
   Issue 31 [$1\47]) and also related to Action Item 44 [$1\47] (as
   well as possibly Item 46 [$1\47]). Establishing a general principle
   (Resolution?) within the TF on this issue will become important
   (IMHO). I also...

   <JF> ...anticipate that this issue will likely re-surface with
   ongoing work within the media sub-team's current activities, so a
   clearly articulated position will be import there as well.

   <JF> [$1\47] [26]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31

     [26] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31

   <JF> [$1\47]

     [27] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-html-alt-techniques-20100624/

   <JF> [$1\47]


   <JF> [$1\47] [29]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/44

     [29] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/44

   <JF> [$1\47] [30]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/46

     [30] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/46

Media team; status on requirements; next steps

   JF: we have a number of comments devided up among different takers.
   Divided in two batches.
   ... first batch done last week, second will be done by the end of
   this week
   ... by next week the requirements doc will be ready and we'll start
   working soon on tech requirements

   MS: we are on schedule. anything blocking?

   JF: most issues resolved.

   MS: what after the requirements doc is ready?

   JF: javascript API needs to be moved forward
   ... make sure tech specs follow the requirements and address all
   ... I believe we are getting close. Maybe a week / 10 days
   ... move on

ARIA team; ARIA-in-HTML conformance spec text

   MS: Cynthia?

   CS: submitted to WG with small tweaks.

general principle of splitting out authoring guidance (John Foliot)

   JF: with Steve's doc we are starting to split guidance from the

   <MikeSmith> [31]Agenda Item for next week's a11yTF Conference Call?


   JF: this will be important with media. the TF shuold push towards
   having a guidance document

   MS: examples?

   JF: authoring transcripts, captions, subtitles

   MS: two options: JF to drive it or somebody else? Indicating what to
   have in a separate document.
   ... JF, can you put some more time on this or anybody else can take
   responsability for it?

   <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to note that, related to timeline
   discussion, we need to focus resources on on-time core deliverables,
   then turn attention to auxiliary work

   JF: is there agreement in the WG / TF that this is the way forward?

   CS: I agree that we shoulld break down things in different documents

   MC: we need to concentrate on timeline first and optimise resources
   ... important work but not right now

   <dboudreau> I believe that breaking things down in different
   docuemnts is a good idea as well

   + 1

   JF: the TF should decide if splitting things is the best way

   CS: authors won't read the specs

   <oedipus> there is a queue

   <dboudreau> having documents on the side that can evolve once html5
   is set in stone can only be a good way forward as far as i'm

   JF: the guidance document could evolve, the specs stay fixed

   <Zakim> oedipus, you wanted to ask to what degree do we want to go
   down this road -- a document for proper TABLE markup seems far less
   useful than putting info into HTML5 spec

   <dboudreau> most authors i know will read techniques documents, but
   very few go down the specs themselves

   Gregory: to what level do we want to break down the docs?

   <dboudreau> isn't there a way for us to set the foundations in the
   spec, but refering to document techniques for details? Most people
   aren't lazy, theyr'e just afraid of the larger documents... and
   html5 is already huge

   GR: a bit concerned about to much splitting out
   ... we need to protect the specs

   JF: the specs should only to deal with the markup and not the

   <oedipus> dboudreau, understood - it needs to be in both places, and
   mutually reinforced

   PC: why should we split the material?

   JF: by splitting these document we would provide examples that are
   not strictly tech specs

   <oedipus> dboudreau, i like the "markup spec" version because it
   doesn't crash my UAs like the "main" HTML5 spec often does

   <dboudreau> because the main spec is much too big?

   <oedipus> dboudreau, precisely

   PC: not talking about taking accessibility issues off the html

   JF: no

   <oedipus> GJR perceives need to distinguish between the science and
   the art of accessibility -- where "art" means how to provide terse
   and long descriptors, but the nuts and bolts for accessibility
   should not only be in HTML5 spec, but in EVERY example therein

   <dboudreau> oedipus, the same thing would have happened in wcag 2,
   had the techniques and failures been integrated directly in the spec

   JF: we still have to decide if we want to follow this principle

   PC: i think the current html5 specs are adequate to authors, and i
   wonder if splitting docs would be really helpful

   <dboudreau> aren't we on the path of splitting documents to have one
   for UA and one for authors?

   GJR: we need to distingue between the science and the art of

   GRJ: access principle should always be part if the specs,
   implementations should e in a separate document

   PC: discussion to be contuined on the mailing list

   <oedipus> dboudreau, i'm not sure what cowpath we are on ;)

   <oedipus> GJR notes that aria drag'n'drop is supported in the latest
   point release of JAWS 11 (as is verbosity control over live regions)

any progress on ensuring that drag-and-drop events are keyboard

   <dboudreau> oedipus :) for the record I agree with what you'Re
   saying... the principles should be in the spec, but not the

   MS: any new information on DnD?

   GJR: Jaws 11 has support for DnD and live regions



   <oedipus> previous link contains info about JAWS support for ARIA
   drag'n'drop and live region control

bug triage

   <MikeSmith> [33]Weekly Resolved & Rejected Bugs Report


   <MikeSmith> [34]http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10026

     [34] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10026

   MS: Bug 10066: waiting for editor response.
   ... Volunteers? maybe Joshue O'Connor?
   ... Bug 9657: please respond to Lief

   <oedipus> [35]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/CAPTCHA_Survey

     [35] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/CAPTCHA_Survey

   <MikeSmith> CAPTCHA bug

   ... do we need a survey about CAPTCHA?

   MC: we can do a survey.

   <dboudreau> Captcha survey: I'd say give ppl time to go over it
   again then decide if it's rdy for publication

   MS to talk to MC offline

   <oedipus> captcha example in HTML5 thread:




   MS: please add comments and send messages to TF mailing list if yuo
   feel strong about any of the bugs

Review open action items

   <MikeSmith> [38]Open Actions

     [38] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open

   MS: not time left for all actions

   <MikeSmith> action-28?

   <trackbot> ACTION-28 -- Gregory Rosmaita to - prepare text for
   SteveF's guidance document about future of data-mining using RDFPic
   methodology outlined in post to list -- due 2010-07-01 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [39]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/28

     [39] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/28

   GJR: next week for action 28

   <MikeSmith> action-28 due 2010-07-15

   <trackbot> ACTION-28 - prepare text for SteveF's guidance document
   about future of data-mining using RDFPic methodology outlined in
   post to list due date now 2010-07-15

   <MikeSmith> [ajourned]

   regrets for nex week from me

   <dboudreau> ok take care all

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [40]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([41]CVS log)
    $Date: 2010/07/08 16:05:07 $

     [40] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [41] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
Check for newer version at [42]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002

     [42] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: Marco_Ranon
Inferring ScribeNick: Marco_Ranon
Default Present: Rich, +1.408.307.aaaa, Mike, Michael_Cooper, Janina, E
ric_Carlson, Gregory_Rosmaita, +1.514.312.aabb, Denis_Boudreau, +1.650.
Present: Denis_Boudreau Eric_Carlson Gregory_Rosmaita Janina John_Folio
t Marco_Ranon Michael_Cooper Mike Paul_Cotton Rich Cynthia_Shelly
Regrets: Laura_Carlson Steven_Faulkner
Agenda: [43]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Ju
Found Date: 08 Jul 2010
Guessing minutes URL: [44]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/08-html-a11y-minute
People with action items:

     [44] http://www.w3.org/2010/07/08-html-a11y-minutes.html

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

   End of [45]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [45] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm


NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be privileged.  If you are not the intended 
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the 
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the 
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it 
and any attachments from your system.

RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants.  However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any  such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and 
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk

This message has been scanned for viruses by Websense Hosted Security - 

Received on Thursday, 8 July 2010 16:21:10 UTC