- From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <oedipus@hicom.net>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 17:43:32 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
- Message-Id: <20110106174153.M80753@hicom.net>
aloha!
minutes from the 2011-01-06 HTML A11y TF telecon are available as
hypertext at:
http://www.w3.org/2011/01/06-html-a11y-minutes.html
as an IRC log at:
http://www.w3.org/2011/01/06-html-a11y-irc
and as plain text following this announcement -- as usual, please
report any errors, omissions, clarifications and the like by
replying-to this announcement on-list...
IMPORTANT REMINDER: next week's HTML5 A11y TF meeting starts an hour
earlier -- at 1500h -- and will last for 2 hours (until 1700h UTC);
PLEASE NOTE: while there were no new ACTION ITEMS assigned at the
2011-01-06 telecon, TF members are asked to check the HTML A11y TF's
tracker to locate outstanding action items and to complete them as
soon as possible, optimally, well in advance of next week's 2 hour
call...
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/overdue
gregory.
_________________________________________________________
- DRAFT -
HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
06 Jan 2011
Agenda
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2011Jan/0038.html
See also: IRC log - http://www.w3.org/2011/01/06-html-a11y-irc
Attendees
Present
John_Foliot, Eric_Carlson, Gregory_Rosmaita, Mike, Janina,
Léonie_Watson, Michael_Cooper, Cynthia_Shelly, Rich,
Marco_Ranon, Mike_Smith, Janina_Sajka, Leonie_Watson
Regrets
Kenny_Johar, Denis_Boudreau, Silvia_Pfieffer, Laura_Carlson,
Joshue_O'Connor
Chair
Mike
Scribe
Leonie_Watson
Contents
* Topics
1. f2f planning
2. Next week's meeting
3. Subteam reports
4. Longdesc/Verbose Descriptor
5. Overdue Open Actinos
* Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 06 January 2011
<MikeSmith>
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Scribe_List
<MikeSmith>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2011Jan/0027.html
<MikeSmith> f2f survey current results -
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/q1-2011_ftf/results
<Leonie_Watson> scribe: Leonie_Watson
f2f planning
<MikeSmith>
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/q1-2011_ftf/results
<oedipus> GJR will not be at CSUN but will attend virtually
<MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/q1-2011_ftf/
Next week's meeting
<inserted> scribenick: oedipus
next week on 2011-01-13 we will convene at 1500h UTC, one hour
earlier than usual
Subteam reports
JF: please try and get agenda out early so can plan around meeting
<MikeSmith> Media subteam minutes
http://www.w3.org/2011/01/05-html-a11y-minutes.html
JF: reviewed bugs marked media -- good progress -- some can close,
some are more specifically addressed later in cycle (old bugs
reformulated as new bugs with more specifity) -- didn't clear entire
list, but did about 70 to 80 percent processed
JS: identifying gaps in reqs media subgroup generated -- a bit more
tweaking to document as people return from holiday break
MS: number of deadlines coming up -- is media subgroup on track or
need to request more time on any of these issues?
JF: pretty much on track -- going to be tight -- can give better
answer next week
JS: think pretty much on track -- somethings being deferred --
forming a group to define WebSRT, working with new W3C audio group
-- mixed bag as to how addressing issues, but are processing issues
JF: ... 2 or 3 outstanding issues
... 1. multimedia support in content (sign-language, multi-language
tracks)
... 2. @poster "discussion"
... most everything else taken as far as can -- timestamp issue
deferral -- identified gaps, but not our place to fill gaps
MS: for prioritizing, biggest issue that need to work on immediately
is "track" concept
... don't know current state of things with implementors, but think
leaning towards trying to get multimedia support in sooner, rather
than later, so need to push on this -- means significant changes to
spec that need to be added before CR
... has some potential to block progress to LC
JF: high on list of priorities
... not everyone on call yesterday
... will be turning time and attention to issues i identified
MS: good -- other sub team reports -- canvas?
RS: over break, had a lot of RTE issues (spelling and grammar
checking in canvas editor) -- lot of pushback from WHATWG people
saying don't want to expose that info from javascript API because of
security reasons
... ARIA 1.0 has markup to indicate "invalid" -- never thought about
applying them to whole ranges of text in doc; can do also for
selection
... instead of worrying about what allow and don't allow, need to
tweak ARIA 1.1 to expose info in markup -- better fit for clooud
computing -- user shouldn't be limited in RTE experience by
limitations of HTML5
... waiting to hear back from FrankO (MS) review of caret and
focusRing
<MikeSmith> canvas subteam minutes from 2010-12-20
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Dec/thread.html
RS: FrankO hasn't been able to make meetings for over a month, and i
can't get in touch with him -- what can be allowed inside canvas
subtree
<MikeSmith> canvas subteam minutes from 2010-12-20
http://www.w3.org/2010/12/20-html-a11y-minutes.html
RS: sticky point -- spoke with AISquared (screen mag) -- discussion
on public-canvas-api@w3.org
... AISquared makes ZoomText
MS: getting them on board very important
RS: working on that -- made a lot of progress despite lack of people
http://lists.w3.org/archives/public/public-canvas-api
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Canvas
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Canvas_Minutes
RS: did we discuss modifications to aria implementation section with
ARIA going to CR?
MC: not in this context
... ARIA going to CR -- addressing concerns about processing -- need
to be addressed in HTML, not ARIA, but still in flux
<MikeSmith> canvas-api discussions from 2010-12
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2010OctDec/thread.html
RS: Cyns and i need to work on text for spec
MS: any heads up for HTML WG chairs?
RS: not at moment -- wait until have discussion on friday
MC: correct
MS: bug triage update?
MC: summary: holidays affected subteam as other groups; been trying
to stay on-top-of new bugs and bugs that keep coming to attentino as
potentially needing TF attention -- alot bassed on LauraC's work
... trying to keep stuff off TF plate -- agree with issue, but not
entire TF needs to address; recommend bug filer follow up on their
own
... marked bugs as TF priorities if related to work already being
conducted in TF
... add keywords and assign to leader of subteams
<JF> +q
MC: not much on "NEEDSINFO" -- assigning out to filer -- aware of
february deadline on bug filing that affects subteam
MR: next meeting is tuesday, should have full compliment of people
back
JF: observed on media call yesterday that alot of bugs marked
"NEEDSINFO" which is inaccurate -- if "NEEDSINFO" not resolved...
MC: that is artifact of how bugzilla system works -- "NEEDSINFO" in
resolved state with qualifier
... if marked as "VERIFIED" or "CLOSED" still technically open --
moved off editor's plate back to WG
... when hixie bounces back bug, should assign to original filer --
parhaps not getting reassigned
... triage ST has reassigned a lot of "CLOSED" and "VERIFIED"
MS: updated W3C bugzilla per request -- still long way to go
HTML5 Bug 10525 - Please try to improve Bugzilla's
accessibility/usability problems before Last Call
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10525
GJR: please add issues with bugzilla to bug 10525
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10525 master bug
for bugzilla related bugs
Longdesc/Verbose Descriptor
<MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/30
MS: chairs chose not to include in spec as obsolete or deprecated
(obsolete but conforming")
... when chairs made decision on behalf of WG on this, decision went
ahead with formal objection from Leif
... don't have any particular time-pressure to follow up with new
info
... have until doc goes to director for some decision for doc
transition; there is time to have further discussion on this
JS: PFWG examined this yesterday -- spent time on wiki page GJR and
LC put together -- info great start -- compelling use cases and
requirements -- need additional implementation details
<JF> +q
GJR: i filed a bug with just the requirements
JS: Laura tracking usage; JF has done a lot of work on
implementation and correspondence with devs
<MikeSmith> http://www.pearson.com/
JS: is being used by content creators in useful way
... table for support in UA and AU
GJR: has action item from PFWG to add implementation on longdesc
JS: plugin for mozilla for longdesc; need to know about IE and
Webkit; Opera supports but device-dependently
... need to document IE, FF, Webkit and support in ATs in second
column
<JF> Opera supports the exposure of longdesc content in the
right-click context menu today
JS: cyns trying to find out for IE -- need someone to follow up on
Webkit
MS: EricC or JamesC can help
EC: i can help
... JamesC would know off top of his head
JS: will send email to James Craig asking for details on webkit --
if no reply, ping EricC and he will track down info
<JF> +q
MS: have a bit of time due to process to address this -- shouldn't
rush -- should be well-formed and terse when submmitted
GJR: i filed a bug on the requirements alone
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10853
JF: no response from chairs as to where they perceive shortcomings
-- given many implementation details, but get no traction in HTML WG
-- how define "rapid growth"? being supported by CMS (Drupal 7)
Wordpress, etc
... specifically gave response -- taking it at face value and asking
for clarification which has not been forthcoming
JS: one argument was "no one is using this" or "used in small way,
mostly incorrectly"
GJR: this was something specifically added to HTML4 for
accessibility
JF: google stats used against us, but that misses the point
JS: probably never going to be high -- quantatitive measure never
the intent nor is it appropriate measure of success; there is an
identifiable need, support from content providers, UAs, etc. -- that
is what needs to be considered, not overall market penetration --
GJR filed a bug on the requirements alone
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10853
JS: verbose descriptor is a need that has not been filled by HTML5
<JF> Revisiting this Issue
<JF> This issue can be reopened if new information come up. Examples
of possible relevant new information include:
<JF> * use cases that specifically require longdesc,
<JF> * evidence that correct usage is growing rapidly and that that
growth is expected to continue, or
<JF> * widespread interoperable implementation.
JS: supporting existing components: isn't important to build new
mechanism in HTML5 context because need to support existing
deployements out there no matter what -- removing entirely is wrong
approach
... people need to know what to use TODAY, as well as what is coming
down the pike
qa/
MS: burden of proof -- not productive use of time to point out flaws
in specific decision making
... not helpful to point out to chairs that there are oversights
they have been asked to reconsider; comes down to don't have veto
power over HTML WG chairs decisions on behalf of chairs; task of
charis is to adjudicate decisions; how they do that is up to them,
completely
... shouldn't second guess chairs' decision -- we've been over
details except for coming up with better arguments
... chairs did not feel that info provided by TF and PF met thjeir
quality standards
<JF> +q
MS: point out to chairs that missed something and let them decide
afresh
GJR: what to do when info goes into black hole
<JF> +1 to GJR
GJR: fear that being foced into multiple formal objections which
will not help our cause
MS: don't have ability to compell chairs to give more feedback on
any issuye
... chairs in position to adjudicate -- combative approach not
productive
JS: formal objection is not a remedy that is readily at hand
... if need to file Formal Objection, addressed when director
reviews for CR -- have to use what remedies exist -- if not getting
adeqate response, need to document that because is part of basis of
formal obgjection, but FO today, just going to cause more heat than
light
... will Formally Object should it be necessary
... deadline is 6 monts off; have to use mechanisms avaiable today
and document previous and new requests
MC: 2 classes of issues: 1) dealt with but not to TF satisfaction;
2) issues coming down pike (can request clarification for this to
make better proposals for future
JF: need clarification
MS: no! no! no! not productive
JF: clarification from chairs?
MS: can request, but can't force them to respond
JF: i have asked for clarification and have not received it -- can
TF ask for clarification on these points from chairs -- give3n 3
criteria
JS: agendum for next meeting -- overtime already
... JF please send email about this topic to public-html-a11y
Overdue Open Actinos
<MikeSmith> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/overdue
MS: some overdue for a while, please take look at list of actions
and complete those assigned to them
... at least put comments into tracker if have new info
... start off with actions next week during 2 hour call
LW: @title -- SteveF put together change proposal while i have
action to write one -- talked with Steve about it, pretty
comprehensive
MS: post to public-html-a11y for review
MS: REMINDER--next week meeting starts an hour earlier
(1500h) and lasts for 2 hours
[ADJOURNED]
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2011 17:44:19 UTC