- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:24:36 -0400
- To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Minutes from today's HTML-A11Y Task Force ARIA Mappings Subteam meeting are provided in text below and in html at: http://www.w3.org/2010/06/15-aria-minutes.html W3C - DRAFT - ARIA mapping - HTML A11Y TF 15 Jun 2010 Agenda See also: IRC log Attendees Present Michael_Cooper, Stevef, Rich, Janina, Cynthia_Shelly, [IPcaller] Regrets Chair Steve_Faulkner Scribe cyns, janina Contents * Topics * Summary of Action Items __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ <cyns> http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/HTML5/aria-html5-proposal.html <Stevef> http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/HTML5/aria-html5-proposal.html <cyns> how do I make myself scribe? <cyns> SF: schould we use ARIA or WAI-ARIA in the doc? <MichaelC> scribe: cyns JS: I think it's WAI-ARIA SF: we have 2 tables. the first one used to be called strong native semantics. I changed it to elements with base sematnics that cannot be overridden this first table is pretty much what's in the spec. The second table is elements with semantics than can be overriden this table is the things we've talked about before RS: did we call the button role? <Stevef> i am here <Stevef> i can hear <Stevef> i will call back in ok. thanks. RS: si this waht we agreed to for details? CS: I thought the summary child was the button RS: implied semantics for details is that its labeled by summary ... we also found some bugs with the spec, that we need to address such as bug 92 SF: There are places where we still need to make decisions. ... we also need to address places where we don't agree with the restrictions. CS: should we just start at the top? RS: where we allow people to override, does this mean or, that is you cna have either one ... look at details. it's a reveal button. it reveals an area. ... it's only a combobox if someone decides to override it and make selectable entries inside it. ... we're saying what it can be overridden by. SF: restrictions are what it can be overriden with. RS: ok ... do we want to say that it controls the section that it's expanding. SF: it could, but that's not what this table is about RS: i meant the implied semantics SF: we can put that in as well. CS: do we want to? SF: if they're helpfu we can add them in ... the main thing about the second table is that it has a lot fo things that used to be in the first table because there were more restrictions. ... what i need you to do is to go through and say if you agree of disagree, and bring it up and why. <janina> scribe: janina rich: input type should say what indeterminate is steve: yes, but separate from what we're doing here <cyns> i'm back steve: an aria check on a standard html checkbox should be quite rare <cyns> it's probably going to be pretty rare where a standard html text box is going to have an aria-checked on it? cyns: seems like an easy beginner's mistake, though <cyns> CS: inexperienced authors may make that mistake. cyns: perhaps having both should be a warning steve: yes ... please read guidance for conformance checkers ... sf: first, metadata content ... cs: makes sense rs: yes sf: second table, anything form associated or interactive ... so, error if overwritten cs: agree, but might want to say 'specified in the table above' or similar sf: a warning if something other than what's allowed goes for the first table, which is more restrictive cs: might be helpful to make our purpose more explicit rich: are we saying validators must support a b and c -- is this what html-wg wants? <Stevef> i can hear you <Stevef> i will ring in on another phone sf: spec has referred to error/warning conditions, so i've based on our dicusssions ... tried to provide useful author guidance as well cs: pretty subtle, but i like it ... think you're on the right track rs: due when? js: next week--the 24th sf: obviously i agree with all this, i put it there ... can you all send a list of what you disagree? and we can focus on that? cs: yes rs: not today--will do my best sf: think we're closer than last week? rs: yes ... we need a list of issues related to this to submit--e.g. bug 9817 <richardschwerdtfe> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9817 Summary of Action Items [End of minutes] __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Scribes: cyns, janina -- Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net Chair, Open Accessibility janina@a11y.org Linux Foundation http://a11y.org Chair, Protocols & Formats Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 2010 20:25:07 UTC