minutes: HTML5 Accessibility Task Force 2010-05-27 [draft]


minutes from the 27 May 2010 HTML Accessibility Task Force's weekly
telecon can be found as hypertext at:


as in IRC log at:


and as plain text following my signature -- as usual, please log any
errors, correcitons, clarficiations, misattributions and the like by
replying-to this announcement on-list

please take the time to fill out the newly posted survey on Media 


thanks to cynthia for scribing, gregory.



                               - DRAFT -

             HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

27 May 2010



          Ben, Cynthia_Shelly, Eric_Carlson, Gregory_Rosmaita, Janina,
          Janina_Sajka, Jeanne, John_Foliot, Marco_Ranon,
          Michael_Cooper, MikeSmith, Rich, Steve_Faulkner, Stevef,

          Laura_Carlson, Sylvia_Pfieffer, Kenny_Johar


          cyns, oedipus


     * Topics
         1. action items review
         2. Canvas, Media, & ARIA Subteam Updates
         3. New Topics for the TF's Consideration
         4. Bug Reporting & Processing
     * Summary of Action Items

   <oedipus> happy venerable bede's day (catholic observance)

   <oedipus> happy belated venerable bede's day (anglican observance)

   <oedipus> venerable bede is credited with conceiving the footnote

   <MichaelC> trackbot, start meeting

   <trackbot> Date: 27 May 2010


   <janina> Meeting: HTML-A11Y telecon

   <janina> agenda: this

   <janina> +Business


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

action items review

   <cyns> action items review

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - items

   <inserted> scribenick: cyns

   Action 28 on Gregory on future of datamining

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 28

   GR: don't know publication status of alt techniques

   JS: listed to publish with next round

   GR: wanted that draft to go out an dbe commented on before adding
   appendix,so we don't have discussion on mulitple fronts

   MC: push out 2 weeks

   GR: ok

   <MichaelC> action-28 due 10 June

   <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 10 June

   <MichaelC> action-44 due 10 June

   <trackbot> ACTION-44 - monitor status of @alt in HTML5 spec; when
   SteveF's Alt Guidance is published, ensure that what is in SteveF's
   note supersedes or corrects HTML5 verbiage; propose changes to HTML5
   based on SteveF's alt doc due date now 10 June

   <scribe> ACTION: 44 to Cynthia to ensure that what's in Steve Notes
   superscedes spec verbiage [recorded in

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 44

   MC: waiting on same event?

   CS: yes, push out 2 weeks

   MC: action 20 on Charles on history of col element

   <oedipus> CS: wendy waiting on this for summary and table algorithm

   <oedipus> JS: think that is right

   CS: Wendy waiting on this.

   MC: reasign to wendy to have her follow up with charles

   <inserted> scribenick: oedipus

   MC: deadline?

   CS: a week - will talk to her today

   JS: can you update her on summary so far?

   CS: yes

   JS: revised restore as was in HTML 4.01 at chairs' suggestion to
   take pressure off of time constraints so can engineer better

   CS: not end of world if old stuff is there

   JS: resolved following chair's suggestion, forwarded that

   <inserted> scribenick: cyns

   remaining actions are part of sub-groups

Canvas, Media, & ARIA Subteam Updates

   JS: next topic sub team reports, first canvas

   RS: feedback from Apple late last week. They want to add features to
   ... some group doesnt' agree with for a couple reasons:
   ... 1) feature creep
   ... 2) concerns about magnification
   ... also had some feautres we liked. Sent new draft with new


   RS: didn't expect new requiremetns this late. it slowed things down,
   but we have to reach consensus


   RS: assuming Apple is happy with changes, shouldn't take too long to
   finish. If they want more, it will take longer.
   ... haven't heard from Charles.

   JS: sent note to Charles. Want image map proposals, but if the other
   proposals are ready, we won't wait. Days not weeks to get proposal
   ... we hope he'll get it done

   RS: Apple was waiting until James got back from vacation. I wish I'd
   known that. Challenge we're having now is that james can't attend
   Monday calls. Hope we can resolve via email

   JS: so, we can't come up with a new deadline now? Don't know exactly
   what needs to be done again?
   ... decided to wait and include Apple feedback

   RS: apple created canvas, so we really wanted their feedback

   JS: communications breakdown
   ... but moving forared now
   ... doesn't think canvas will hold up last call
   ... moving to media

   <oedipus> http://www.w3.org/2010/05/26-html-a11y-minutes.html

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


   JF: a couple weeks back we did a major regroup. had been workign
   from assumptions, and need to create list of requirements
   ... requirements list is now fairly complete. tried really hard to
   tighted it and cover everything
   ... broken out by types of disabilities. there are some terms that
   need clean up, and Judy will be doing this
   ... types of technologies and system requirements covered
   ... major thing yesterday, hoping that by EOD or early tomorrow
   there will be straw poll survey to get feedback on requirements.
   don't need to be media expert, just understand accessibility. do we
   have everything, did we miss anything, is it clear?
   ... once doc is finished, we'll do gap analysis against media work
   done so far
   ... those are waiting for this doc.
   ... other groups have expressed interest in this doc. We're getting
   our horse in front of the cart now.
   ... please do the survey

   JS: we really want a wide review. hypertext coordination group
   discussing week from friday
   ... htmlwg also very interested
   ... please do the survey. we're very close to finished, need a
   sanity check.

   RS: all comments in survey? or put them elsewhere?

   JF: you can do it in survey with inline comments, but mail is ok if
   that's easier for you.
   ... total of 17 discussion points. Do we have this right? agree
   yes/no, provide comments
   ... survey is easier, but any format will be accepted.

   RS: Is this wiki public?

   JF: survey is task-force restricted

   RS: Geoff is aware of the document

   <oedipus> Media Accessibility Requirements (please review!)

   JS: document is publicly viewable, but someone outside task force
   won't be able to fill in survey. have them send email.

   <oedipus> JS: survey results and wiki are world-viewable; surveys
   and wiki content modification limited to TF members

   JF: We are particularly looking for a deaf-blind user to give

   JS: thanks everyone who worked on this doc. Great contributions, and
   I think we'll be pleased with the results.
   ... there may be some terms that are used in accessibility that
   engineers won't understand. we're trying to find ways to define
   these better
   ... we hope this doc will live on beyond this task force

   <JF> +1 to longer life of Media Accessibility Requirements document

   SF: still working on mappings
   ... rich has started on his, Steve started on his, cynthia started
   on hers

   <oedipus> plus 1 to longer life of Media Accessibility Requirements

   <inserted> scribenick: oedipus

   CS: aggressive target date, but think still ok
   ... draft but without signoff for target date
   ... already implemented (most of it) -- have to copy from existing

   RS: was to address hixie's table -- that doc isn't going into the
   HTML5 spec?

   CS: don't think so, don't care

   RS: would not do that

   CS: second gargantuan -- not opposed to it being in spec, as long as
   in HTML5 document set

   RS: not alot of UA devs have done A11y API mappings

   CS: safari has mappings, IE has mappings, FF has mapping

   RS: concern about "command"

   CS: that has always been point of emphasis to document older stuff
   -- not controversial

   SF: what are we intending to produce to modify or replace what is
   currently in spec in regards to conformance

   CS: not sure if we decided on that -- been data collecting so far

   RS: hixie's current beef is that there isn't a 1-to-1 mapping for
   ARIA and says that is problem, but is not, since we want native
   solutions over ARIA

   JS: reminder -- just 4 weeks away

   SF: who owns requirements document?

   CS: rich

   JS: 24 June still target date

   RS: have plethora of controls being added -- are they adding more to
   HTML5 spec

   CS: ones that are in there have been there a long time

   RS: biggest concern is HTML5 still a moving target -- can't say we
   are done until spec text correct/analyzed
   ... may be implemented but are not yet supported
   ... pragmatic view: say something by 24 june, but we will probably
   log bug against it -- too big

   CS: big mapping table with wraparound text and re-write of override
   verbiage in HTML5 spec will be delivered 24 june 2010
   ... if spec changes, they will change

   <inserted> scribenick: cyns

   JS: a few points before next topic
   ... Steve sent email asking if ARIA title change was ok. we'll do an
   editorial pass later
   ... ARIA title chagne do this wekk

   SF: will do

New Topics for the TF's Consideration

   JS: new topics coming soon


   JS: in April F2F asked Gez Lemon to look at drag and drop. He has
   ... asked him to join call to discuss. He proposed June 3

   <oedipus> plus 1 to sooner rather than later

   <MikeSmith> yeah

   JS: 10th and 24th ok too. Would prefer to schedule sooner rather
   that later, next week

   <JF> +1 for next week

   +1 next week

   JS: drag and drop scheduled for next thursday's meeting. Please read
   ahead of time and discuss on list
   ... 2nd topic, accesskeys. Gregory plans to bring it here in 2-3



   JS: not done with major issues, have at least these 2 left to look

Bug Reporting & Processing

   RS: I found some issues with HTML 5 spec, as did Cytnhia and Steve.
   What's the venue for getting those addressed? Is there someone
   assigned to raise issues
   ... for example, both details and the summary button can recieve
   focus. that's not going to work for mappings. how do we vet those

   MS: file a bug

   RS: who enters those. who tracks them. I'm concerned about the time
   to do this

   MS: doens't work for me to file bug for someone, because i don't
   understand the bug report
   ... hixie will come back with questions

   <oedipus> CS: tag with a11y tag, this group will track

   MS: use the a11y tag
   ... this is the group policy

   <MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/

   CS: if you tag it a11y, it will get picked up in Laura's report, and
   tracked by the group


   MS: raise a new bug against HTML5 spec

   You have to set up a bugzilla account with your email address

   JF: wants to follow up with Gregory on accesskey, also has some
   notes from Charles. will take offline

   JS: Laura's report about bugzilla
   ... what's a better way to handle these. but we dont' get to it in
   the call, and people are not up to speed on the actions needed
   ... we don't get through a lot in a call
   ... is there a better way to track these?
   ... identify easy ones?

   CS: identify easy ones, and also important ones. maybe have a couple
   people do it, or schedule a special call

   <oedipus> perhaps someone from a time zone that is incovenient can
   participate by fielding bugs

   <oedipus> easy ones, important ones, things actually being

   CS: do bugs for 15 minutes at the beinging of the call, maybe not
   every week

   JF: alternate weeks doing bugs and actions

   JS: call for participation on email

   CS: say in call for participation that it can happen all in email,
   no call required

   JS: make recommendations on things that are easy, can be closed,
   which are important and need to get addressed by the group

   CS: when we do bugs on teh call, we can do in priority order based
   on feedback of sub-grou[

   <oedipus> fyi:

   JS: no Monday Canvas subgroup call, all other meetings on normal
   schedule next week

Summary of Action Items

   * Note: a "false" action item was generated at the 2010-05-27 

   [NEW] ACTION: 44 to Cynthia to ensure that what's in Steve Notes
   superscedes spec verbiage [recorded in

   [End of minutes]


Received on Thursday, 27 May 2010 16:28:47 UTC