[minutes] 20100505 HTML Accessibility Task Force (Media) Teleconference

Available at

Text version:
         HTML Accessibility Task Force (Media) Teleconference

05 May 2010

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/05/05-html-a11y-irc


          Janina, Michael_Cooper, Mark_Hakkinen, Judy, Frank_Olivier,
          Sean_Hayes, Kenny, Eric, plh, John_Foliot, Silvia





     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Actions Review
         2. [5]Process
         3. [6]Requirements Gathering
     * [7]Summary of Action Items

   <Judy> agenda item 1 was action item check : requirements gathering,
   not done

   <Judy> agenda item 2 was process:

Actions Review

   Janina: the only open action item is for John to create the


   Janina: elephant in the room was process problem; we lost a
   participant; please bear in mind that we need to be able to listen
   to each other, not cut off, etc.

Requirements Gathering

   Janina: we're still waiting on John for providing the requirements
   ... he is facing an unexpected work load at the moment

   Judy: just sent email. was concerned we didn't have a unified set of
   requirements for accessibility of media in HTML5.
   ... I briefly characterized each of the links providing by John last
   ... [Judy is covering materials in email]
   ... if anyone is aware of additional resources for requirements,
   please add it to the thread
   ... and then either John or someone will have time to compile them
   ... I also wanted to give an indication of gaps that I'm seeing or
   hearing about
   ... I want to make sure we're documenting requirements for folks
   with mutiple disabilities.
   ... are we capturing requirements for people with cognitive
   ... documenting requirements for video description
   ... requirements for structured navigation
   ... those are concerns that I have

   Janina: how to proceed from disabilities and then to the kind of
   accommodations or the reverse?

   Judy: I'm suggesting to collect the requirements first

   Janina: who is willing to help gather requirements? I'm willing to
   help on structural nav. Maybe Kenny can help as well on that.

   Mark: some papers from the late 90s, specifically WWW2002 conf,
   could help. could send pointers.

   Sean: while we're busy making requirements, they're busy putting
   text into the spec right now. should we slow them down a bit?

   Janina: don't know what to say about someone moving forward adding
   features knowing we're working on this. it shouldn't impact the fact
   that we need to do the job properly
   ... if they guess right, fine, otherwise they'll have to redo the

   Kenny: sharing Sean concerns, the proposal of using the track
   element is already there in the spec.
   ... the video and audio elements now have examples with the track
   ... along with SRT

   Janina: those are solutions that we may end up adopting, but need to
   focus on the requirements
   ... who can take on descriptive video?

   Sean: I'd be happy to volunteer for some of that

   <scribe> ACTION: Sean to look into descriptive video requirements
   [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-29 - Look into descriptive video
   requirements [on Sean Hayes - due 2010-05-12].

   <scribe> ACTION: Janina to look into structural navigation
   requirements [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-30 - Look into structural navigation
   requirements [on Janina Sajka - due 2010-05-12].

   Kenny: I'll be happy to help on structural nav requirements as well

   Janina: captioning, who can do that? Goeff isn't around at the

   Judy: I'm interested in getting the disability requirements around

   <Judy> ACTION: jb follow up w/ Geoff on comprehensiveness of
   captioning requirements [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-31 - Follow up w/ Geoff on
   comprehensiveness of captioning requirements [on Judy Brewer - due

   <Judy> ACTION: jb follow up w/ Gunnar Hellstrom on comprehensiveness
   of secondary signed channel requirements [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-32 - Follow up w/ Gunnar Hellstrom on
   comprehensiveness of secondary signed channel requirements [on Judy
   Brewer - due 2010-05-12].

   Janina: what else in terms of requirements gathering? thank you Jim
   for sending requirements in btw

   4.html UAAG 2.0 guidelines for video

     [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010May/0024.html

   Sean: what about clear audio used in the UK? isolating audio from
   the audio background

   Michael: re concurrent editing of the HTML spec. that's not our
   problem but we need to set a date at which we will provide a
   proposal to the WG and then editing will be expected.

   Frank: My concern is that the spec has WebSRT *and* the concepts of
   cues; there has not been enough discussion of this

   Janina: should we communicate worries to the HTML WG here?

   Frank: yes, we all know that once language into the spec, it has a
   tendency to stay

   Janina: I'd like to advance our discussion on requirements further
   ... the whole point is not to drag the process but move it to a

   Judy: wanted to respond to Sean re clear audio. that's the kind of
   things we want to capture.
   ... there are similar types of provisions
   ... can we fix the spelling mistake in the wiki?

   Allan: we need keyboard controls, that are native to the browser. we
   would want to avoid thousands of interfaces out there

   plh:we should allow th page author to write their own keyboard

   Allan: user override is nice but the default controls should be

   Janina: API for controls?

   Allan: possibly yes.

   Janina: play, pause, caption on, etc.

   plh: video producing companies want to have full control of their
   user epxerience, so you will see lots of video interfaces out there,
   developed using scripting, bound to keys, etc. You should allow the
   web author to write their own control

   Eric: the best we can do is to ensure that everything that the
   browsers can do is also possibly through javascript

   Janina: so that the assistive technology can use those

   Allan: the user still needs to be able to control the video.
   whatever the author do should be mapped to the browser functions.
   ... if I don't use a screenreader, simply using my keyboard, I
   should still be able to use well-known keys

   Janina: we have to be careful in defining not to enter in system

   Allan: some basics are possible, like using tab to go through the

   Sean: we need to add transcripts

   <JF> re: Janina's point - it should be mappable to *a* key -
   unspecified. It is common today to see laptops and 3rd party
   keyboards, etc. that have dedicated volume keys

   Sean: need some kind of labeling to them.
   ... separate from captioning

   Janina: and the transcript may or may not be in sync with the audio

   Sean: they key is to have something labeled as a transcript, and not

   Janina: where should we add this?

   [Silvia and John join the call]

   Silvia: re keyboard controls. firefox has implemented keyboard
   controls. you can change volume, seek, etc.

   Judy: let's focus in requirements first

   Janina: from those present today, we would want to support controls
   in HTML5 user agent
   ... we didn't go beyond that
   ... we're gathering requirements together

   <AllanJ> +1 to controls and as rich a set as conceivable, author can
   always turn off function if it is not needed

   John: I'll manage the wiki but people should try to add stuff there

   Judy: looking for a home for the requirements in the wiki....

   Janina: I'm proposing to start a new page.

   Judy: works for me.
   ... can John make progress on the framework?

   <silvia> +1 to new page

   John: I could work on that this evening
   ... I'll get the page started

   Frank: I'll work on requirements on scripts firing events and the
   concept of cues
   ... making interactive, etc.

   Janina: it's not necessarily captions

   Frank: agreed but we need some way from the caption to see that
   something happened
   ... I'll look into architectural requirements

   Janina: we wanted to start by the user requirements first

   Judy: we might as well capture architectural requirements at the

   <scribe> ACTION: Sean to write transcript requirements [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-34 - Write transcript requirements [on
   Sean Hayes - due 2010-05-12].

   <scribe> ACTION: Frank to write cues requirements [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-35 - Write cues requirements [on Frank
   Olivier - due 2010-05-12].

   Janina: any other volunteer for architectural or user requirements?

   [none heard]

   Janina: next step: concerns from Frank

   Frank: we're talking in this meeting about doing requirements and
   technical investigation. in /// things get added to the spec,
   increasing our challenge
   ... we should have consensus about what we add to the spec and there
   is no consensus at this point

   Judy: suggest to take the action item to come up with date for our
   input and to answer that, with a request to clarify the process
   going on here

   Janina: I was asked where this group was and I asserted that we
   would have requirements by late may

   Silvia: I can well understand the concern with the spec
   ... trying to involve in that process and gives feedback as much as
   ... Ian has put together requirements
   ... those may not be complete
   ... we need to verify Ian's way of thinking'
   ... as long as it's just text in the spec, anything can change
   ... harder after implementations
   ... let's not stop progress. let's recommend that the browser
   vendors don't implement anything yet until we're done with our

   Frank: it's interesting proposal but it seems that inappropriate to
   have text in the spec and says not to pay attention. also it's not a
   placeholder but it's a fairly detailed spec

   Silvia: for a browser vendor to implement this, he filled in plenty
   of details
   ... but obviously we need to look at it
   ... it wouldn't be a problem to recommend to hold back on the

   Judy: when there is text in the spec, it does indeed get
   implemented. ideas are welcome outside of the spec text. the text
   says that video accessible is holding up last call
   ... the TF has an action from the HTML WG to offer a date for input

   <silvia> +1 to Judy

   Judy: we should combine our date with a request not to put text in
   the spec at the moment
   ... to avoid confusing the dialog

   <frankolivier> +1 Judy; the spec should not contain text that does
   not have the concensus of the relevant group

   Sean: also the text has some ressemblance with our requirements,
   we're not done with those and it's premature to add this spec.

   Silvia: re premature to have a proposal in the spec. for a lot of
   the things that needs to be developed, I don't think we have all the
   background and knowledge in this group.
   ... it's not bad thing that it progressed into a larger group
   ... it's necessary to revalidate what we have
   ... we should make the best of it in a constructive way

   John: I disagree. things in the editors draft get entrenched
   ... it seems antagonistic to me

   Frank: I also disagree. we have representatives from Mozilla,
   webkit/safari, and IE here
   ... so not sure what technical expertise you're referring to

   Janina: is there an objection to convey concerns about text going in
   the spec in advance of this group sending the requirements

   Judy: I support to convey concerns from this group about the next
   text addition in the spec.
   ... let's recheck our requirements before starting to compare them
   to a technical proposal

   Janina: is there anyone else opposing except Silvia?

   Silvia: I'd like to see the exact wording
   ... I do have an issue with stopping progress

   <scribe> ACTION: Janina to draft the message re date and text to
   send to HTML WG [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-36 - Draft the message re date and text to
   send to HTML WG [on Janina Sajka - due 2010-05-12].

   Janina: I'll report concerns on the call tomorrow


Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Frank to write cues requirements [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Janina to draft the message re date and text to send
   to HTML WG [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Janina to look into structural navigation requirements
   [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: jb follow up w/ Geoff on comprehensiveness of
   captioning requirements [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: jb follow up w/ Gunnar Hellstrom on comprehensiveness
   of secondary signed channel requirements [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Sean to draft transcript requirements [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Sean to look into descriptive video requirements
   [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

Received on Thursday, 6 May 2010 00:59:50 UTC