Minutes from 20 June TF teleconference

Minutes from the HTML-A11Y Task Force Teleconference of 20 June are provided below as text, and are available as hypertext at:

http://www.w3.org/2013/06/20-html-a11y-minutes.html


   W3C

                                                                                   - DRAFT -

                                                                 HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

20 Jun 2013

   See also: IRC log

Attendees

   Present
          David_MacDonald, Mark_Sadecki, chaals, janina, Judy, SteveF

   Regrets
   Chair
          SV_MEETING_CHAIR

   Scribe
          janina

Contents

     * Topics
         1. identify scribe
         2. longdesc spec status <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-proposals/raw-file/default/longdesc1/longdesc.html>
         3. HTML5 testing and demonstrating interoperability for Candidate Recommendation
         4. Sub-teams
         5. Any Other Business
     * Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 20 June 2013

identify scribe

   <scribe> scribe: janina

longdesc spec status <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-proposals/raw-file/default/longdesc1/longdesc.html>

   cn: Current review closes today
   ... Now tyeing up loose ends; New comments editorial
   ... Looking to produce another editor's draft tonight
   ... Assuming no new technical edit suggestion, CN will start a CFC based on the new editor's draft
   ... Thereafter, not expecting new tech issue, but ...
   ... Else, we need to focus on tests
   ... We need to show implementability of the spec--that it works
   ... Minimum Last Call is 60 days for RAND reasons
   ... Remaining question whether to fold back to HTML spec, or keep as stand alone?
   ... Personally, no strong opinion one way or the other on this

   dm: Asking what the test looks like. Just a test page with longdesc on images?

   jb: Want to speak to the question of stand-alone or back into the HTML spec ...
   ... Interesting question; many want it now; so a TR earlier than HTML 5 might satisfy many desiring to use ld
   ... On the other hand, it may be a problem in that we wouldn't be able to say: "All the core a11y is in the core HTML spec"
   ... Therefore, the more I consider this, the more I prefer to integrate LD back into HTML spec

   cn: Agree with the advantage, main desire now is to get it published

   <SteveF> +1 to getting it to rec then looking at re-integration

   cn: Shouldn't be that hard for us to move it first, then ask HTML to incorporate it

   jb: Agree

   cn: Any objections to that approach?
   ... OK. Perhaps a CFC on this ...

   jb: Perhaps we should do the formality further down the road--at the CR stage.

   cn: OK. We'll return to the CFC at some later point

HTML5 testing and demonstrating interoperability for Candidate Recommendation

   cn: HTML-WG has a doc and a CFC on it. It identifies portions of the spec they believe don't need testing
   ... We're asked to confirm or disagree on any point from our a11y perspective

   <chaals> which bits of HTML5 are so well implemented they don't need testing...

   cn: We have a telecon scheduled 18:00Z today and next Thursday to review
   ... WG has also identified items they believe NEED testing; we should also do that

   sf: Wondering about ARIA mappings testing plan
   ... Probably best if we take up testing

   cn: They believe ARIA is all OK. Do we suggest testing?

   sf: I'll look at that

   <chaals> call for consensus in HTML WG on things that won't need testing

Sub-teams

   js: Unfortunately, media can't meet until mid July

   <Zakim> MarkS, you wanted to ask about full transcript

   <chaals> MarkS: Issue-194 transcript is specifically mentioned in plan-2014, and if we want to do something about that we need to get it on track

   <chaals> JS: THat is one of the three tasks for the subteam. Might be better to run that as an extension spec. We don't seem to be able to get to consensus on that -
   vendors are simply stopping at an impasse

   <chaals> CN: So we might expect two extension proposals?

   <SteveF> email sent http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2013Jun/0049.html

   cn: any other subteam?

   jb: Should we close some subteams?

   cn: It's why I ask as a general question, not specific team names
   ... If there are proposals to close specific subteams, that would be ok

Any Other Business

   jb: Want to get people people to start thinking on HTML 5.1 as we are now closing 5.0
   ... Testing is certainly still ahead for 5.0, but we should also be thinking 5.1

   cn: Asking SF whether there's a 5.0/5.1 diff

   ms: Will be posting an accessible version of the WG doc shortly--one that doesn't just rely on color

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Found Scribe: janina
Present: David_MacDonald Mark_Sadecki chaals janina Judy SteveF


-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
		Email:	janina@rednote.net

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair,	Protocols & Formats	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
	Indie UI			http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/

Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 15:43:47 UTC