minutes: HTML Accessibility Task Force Call 2011-02-24 [draft]


minutes from the 24 february 2011 meeting of the HTML Accessibility Task 
Force can be obtained as hypertext at:


as an IRC log at:


and as plain text following this announcement -- as usual, please log
any corrections, clarifications, mis-attributions, and the like by 
replying to this announcement on-list...

note that 2 new action items were assigned at the 24 februaary 2011

   * ACTION-105: Gregory - review w3c bugzilla installation versus
   newest version 4, coordinate with those who volunteered, present
   options and needs 
   * http://www.w3.org/2011/02/24-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01
   * http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/105

   * ACTION-106: Gregory - prepare keyboard access high-level issues
   discussion for F2F 
   * http://www.w3.org/2011/02/24-html-a11y-minutes.html#action02
   * http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/106


                               - DRAFT -

             HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

24 Feb 2011


   See also: IRC log - http://www.w3.org/2011/02/24-html-a11y-irc


          Cynthia_Shelly, Eric_Carlson, Gregory_Rosmaita, John_Foliot,
          Léonie_Watson, Marco_Ranon, Martin_Kliehm, Michael_Cooper,
          MikeSmith, Rich, Steve_Faulkner, paulc

          Laura_Carlson, Janina_Sajka




     * Topics
         1. Canvas Subteam Report
         2. Media Subteam Report
         3. Bug Triage Subteam Report
         4. ARIA Mapping Subteam
         5. Change Proposal for Issue 134
         6. Face2Face Meeting
     * Summary of Action Items

Canvas Subteam Report

   RS: canvas subteam proposal -- number of facets to canvas a11y -- 1.
   provide accessible interfaces to AT that can be accessed to
   represent what is seen in canvas

   <trackbot> Date: 24 February 2011

   RS: support in IE9 RC beta and in chrome (in the last week)
   ... hardest part about canvas is getting fallback content loaded --
   hidden from user, hidden content usually not mapped; now can map and
   can focus on other needs


   RS: 2) need to be able to have a FocusRing follow system settings
   (color, background, font size, etc.) -- support for author to draw
   FocusRing while reporting focus position to AT -- simplified
   drawFocusRing -- had an issue where if author wantede to draw
   himself,would drop out of FocusRing and couldn't be reported -- now,
   forcing FocusRing to follow system conventions -- if system has...
   ... FocusRing drawing mechanism, uses that -- outlined algorithm
   into how can compute bounding rectangle for object and object info
   DOM -- if no drawing path, will be handled by UA

   <MichaelC> scribe: oedipus

   RS: old drawFocusRing took x,y coordinates -- not how you draw
   carets for text boxes; always moving focus -- on every platform,
   selection and carets a11y APIs separate from what need for FocusRing
   ... created setCaretSelectionRect -- forget if have RTE or not in
   Canvas, gives author ability to give position whether user selecting
   content or using cursor -- defines what caret position and selectoin
   position is and exposes that to AT
   ... need contestual info (element) and actual caret position so can
   center zoom point on caret based on magnification level -- may want
   caret to left of zoom, etc.
   ... 3rd part: provide ability to get system setting for blink rate
   -- for those who suffer from seizures -- author can detect if blink
   rate set to custom level in system
   ... 4th: put in for metric for baseline for text --FocusRing or
   caret or selection position within content associated with text can
   get baseline to compute actyual bounding rectangle
   ... hixie ok with plan, question is when?
   ... testing the proposal with actual tools
   ... 1 more requirement for magnification -- need position and
   bounding rectangle for any part of the canvas -- challange will be
   to introduce this before last call -- something we can't rush
   through -- some optoins --could do what imagemap does to provide x,y
   and bounding rectangle or can use CSS styling -- querying devs which
   would you prefer

   MS: process in HTML WG -- issue state: waiting for alternate or
   counter proposals -- due date 22 March 2011
   ... if objections, objector should write counter-proposal before 22
   March 2011

   RS: would like to hear thoughts on positioning of content

   MS: take to discussion on public-html list
   ... great to hear canvas a11y progress






   RS: assuming we don't get pushback like to try to get ua devs to
   implement it -- FF and IE trying to get out new versions, so not
   much flexibility there

   MS: squeaky wheel gets the grease -- discrete amount of time to
   accomodate HTML a11y

Media Subteam Report

   JF: single largest issue remaining is multitrak API -- how to
   provide support to supplementary binary assets -- lot of discussion
   -- looked at 8 different ways forward -- polled people on call,
   still some divergence especially amongst UA devs
   ... this is new territory -- not repairing bugs, but building in and
   extending capabilities
   ... 1 change proposal against HTML WG Issue 152


   JF: consensus on call to continue in fashion we have been using --
   dialogue on list -- much common ground but still some divergence
   ... for f2f in march 2001, media subteam would like break-out
   session -- ideally on saturday -- so we can get together in same
   room and hash out details -- most of ateendees from weekly calls
   will be there -- silviaP trying to get funding to attend
   ... should have another change proposal in by March with internal
   consensus behind it

   MS: HTML WG issue 152 is waiting for counter proposals -- change
   proposal submitted from silvia?

   JF: no, i think FrankO of Microsoft
   ... silvia thinking of writing a CP; apple reps might write one,
   maybe a third; if stopped today would have to work through 3 or 4 --
   thought best if could coalesce around CP that meets everyone's

   MS: chairs have to evaluate each CP -- if can merge into common CP,
   that is preferable

   JF: right, that is our goal
   ... a lot of issues coming to the attention of people -- more than
   a11y -- i18n, "widestreaming" -- complex topic
   ... very aware of 22 March 2011 deadline, but don't want to ruch --
   we need to get this right

   MS: should devote F2F time to this issue -- if need breakout
   session, then could do that

   JF: not sure of agenda and logistics for F2F -- will discuss with
   ... engineers need to discuss low-level engineering as well

   MC: should have time in agenda for breakouts -- media subgroup meet
   an addtitional day?

   JF: not feasible

   MC: ok, just checking

   MS: should accomodate breakouts as needed

   JF: issue of time stamp formats still quite open -- hearings in U.S.
   at FCC about mandating captioning -- keeping eye on that -- U.S. may
   mandate specific technology which will impact development

Bug Triage Subteam Report

   MK: down to almost no bugs to which to apply a11ytf keyword --
   looked at all marked a11y to see if needed a11ytf attention and
   ... looking at what appears each week

   <kliehm> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10525

   <MikeSmith> "Please try to improve Bugzilla's
   accessibility/usability problems before Last Call"

   MK: would be good if someone in TF could handle HTML WG bug 10525 --
   needs owner, needs to be done

   GJR: i will do a bugzilla review of w3c version versus current
   version (version 4, recently released)

   <scribe> ACTION: Gregory - review w3c bugzilla installation versus
   newest version 4, coordinate with those who volunteered, present
   options and needs [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - - review w3c bugzilla installation
   versus newest version 4, coordinate with those who volunteered,
   present options and needs [on Gregory Rosmaita - due 2011-03-03].

ARIA Mapping Subteam

   SF: haven't had meeting lately -- waiting on the chairs to address
   issues outlined in CPs -- timeline?

   MS: chairs haven't yet scheduled date -- perhaps paulc can comment

   PC: issue number?

   SF: 129


   PC: not in current queue
   ... did receive request about this via public-html
   ... reason why wanted decision on this issue?

   RS: because we have a lot of work to do with UA devs

   PC: has impact outside of WG, right?

   RS: yes

   PC: not clear in original message

   MS: does resolution of this issue have implementation impact on UAs

   SF: yes, definitely

   RS: replaced ARIA section to define where ARIA can and cannot be

   <paulc> Other than the intro and signature the request only said:
   "When will the chairs have a decision on the straw poll vote on
   issue 129?"

   SF: part about doc conformance; default roles defined in ARIA user
   agents must implement -- default role on element, has to apply that
   role -- one of the major issues

   MS: should be prioritizing talk with chairs

   PC: RS provided no rationale as to why chairs should consider

   RS: don't know what your queue looks like -- understand need for
   deadlines -- we rushed to meet it, and then it sits there, which is
   frustrating --

   <JF> +1 to Rich

   PC: only making the point that if the chairs get 5 emailis
   requesting review need to know why so important to requesting
   ... suggest RS respond to own message as to why an earlier decision
   on ARIA in HTML5 is needed
   ... are moving forward with change proposal review
   ... some issues may moot others -- chairs prioritize on ratinoale
   given to us by WG memberts, suggest RS do the same

   MS: will follow up on this too to ensure gets into charis' queue
   ... default roles is higher priority than document conformance

   SF: people are implementing HTML5 now, basing decisions on what is
   in spec, hence urgency

   RS: have product teams implementing HTML5 now so need to get


   SF: there was a call for change in regards issue 161 (A11y API
   Mapping) -- expired yesterday -- sam sent out notice that "closed
   without prejudice" -- responded to him saying would provide CP today
   -- working on document now including advice as to how to procede


   MS: not going to do anything about it but leave to discretion of
   chairs -- not going to second guess chairs' decisons on

   SF: would lilke a reasonably timely reply -- don't want to wait 2
   weeks to find out won't be opened

   PC: if submit change proposal today, chairs will at least consider
   it -- 4 due yesterday -- chairs immediately requested counter
   proposals to be completed by 22 March 2011 --schedule to LC needs to
   give people writing coutner proposals as much time to compose as
   given to thiose writing CPs
   ... i speak for Paul and not for all 3 co-chairs

   SF: the issue says create a reference -- creating document -- wo'n't
   be ready for LC, asking to have reference to docuement in HTML5
   ... issue is to have a reference to it

   PC: don't see why HTML5 in LC can't reference an editor's draft --
   no logistical or administrative barrier to that

   <richardschwerdtfe> gotta drop off folks

   SF: only thing been told is hixie stating "special status" for
   referenced documents in HTML5, but hasn't articulated what
   constitutes a "special status"

   PC: i don't know what he means by that either
   ... why did you miss this deadlijne?
   ... been there for a moth -- on last weeks' WG agenda as closing
   next week -- TF needs to pay more attention to these dates

   SF: human error -- previously with human error hixie has been given

   PC: concewrned we are speaking in circles here

   SF: will get CP in today, wanted clarification on what CP should say
   so would be accepted

   MS: SF please try to join HTML WG call at noon to discuss

   SF: can't make those calls because have to pick up kids from school

   RS: chairs pretty swamped -- what is big deal if don't get into

   PC: sam took action item to call for counterporopsals if submitted
   by today -- immediately ready to take action -- longer it takes to
   file CP, less time people have to do counter proposal, which may
   sway chairs to leave issue closed because unfair to counter
   proposals because original propoasal deadline extended
   ... want to ensure that TF undertstands pressure on the chairs

Change Proposal for Issue 134

   HTML A11y TF Action-87 "Create change proposal for ISSUE-134

   <MikeSmith> oedipus: allow menu and command to represent a tablist

   HTML WG ISSUE-134: "Provide tablist and tab states for menu and
   command elements respectively"

   bound to HTML Bug 10831:

   change proposal for HTML WG ISSUE 134:
   (thansk to everett zufelt and jason kiss)

   <inserted> scribenick: MikeSmith

   oedipus: the state of tab controls is normally only visually

   … and this makes cases for tabs are unfocusable

   … current state is that this creates much more work for Web

   … but there is a solution for this, which is to provide support

   <inserted> scribenick: oedipus

   "The HTML5 menu element, along with the command element, can
   currently represent a menu, context menu, or toolbar. Since a group
   of tab controls effectively acts as a menu of command elements for
   showing and hiding associated content tab panels, it is, therefore,
   proposed that the menu and command elements are well-suited to serve
   the purposes of a tabbed interface, and that their functionality be

   extended to represent a tablist of tab controls and to identify
   which of those tabs is selected. "

   " * Add a tablist state to the menu element.

   * Add a tab state to the command element.

   * Add a tabpanel state to command element.

   * Add a tabgroup attribute to the command element."

   <richardschwerdtfe> those are role values

   "If no action is taken on this issue, then, without developers doing
   rather significant work to make a tabbed interface accessible using
   WAI-ARIA and additional scripting, only the selected tab in each
   tablist will be focusable, meaning that the remaining tabs from each
   tablist will not be available or accessible to assistive


   <richardschwerdtfe> dropping now folks. sorry

   <JF> http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-134

   richard correct tablist, tab, and tabpanel would be @role values

   tabgroup would be a new attribute on command element

Face2Face Meeting


   MS: list of proposed topics
   ... have some cases of miscommunication about process -- would like
   to prevent going forward -- useful to have process discussion and
   decision policy document and some of the contentious issues around
   ... 2nd) session on how to write a good change proposal -- how to
   avoid accusations of incomplete
   ... tuturial on change proposal writing would be helpful --
   ... 3rd) discussion over technologies: media, canvas, how to procede
   with longdesc, ARIA integration
   ... ambiguity about keyboard access

   MS: bugs and issues that need to be brought to the WG's attention

   qck oed

   <inserted> scribenick: MikeSmith

   oedipus: I can prepare a keyboard-access overview and current-status
   focusing on high-level and discrete issues

   … I will attend remotely

   … I would like to go through it all

   … so I can present what are issues, what has changed

   <Stevef> chane proposal for issue 161

   Stevef, thanks

   <Stevef> np

   <oedipus> ACTION: Gregory - prepare keyboard access high-level
   issues discussion for F2F [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - - prepare keyboard access high-level
   issues discussion for F2F [on Gregory Rosmaita - due 2011-03-03].

   <inserted> scribenick: oedipus

   JF: need to plan timeframe for 2 days -- even a skeleton at this
   point would be helpful

   MS: narrow down to day and part of day you will have critical mass

   JF: want to do breakout in afternoon to accommodate austrialian time

   MS: can discuss on mailing list -- will kick off discussion with
   list of topics -- try to send out tomorrow


Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Gregory - prepare keyboard access high-level issues
   discussion for F2F [recorded in

   [NEW] ACTION: Gregory - review w3c bugzilla installation versus
   newest version 4, coordinate with those who volunteered, present
   options and needs [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

Received on Thursday, 24 February 2011 17:34:24 UTC