W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > October 2014

{minutes} Minutes of the HTML A11Y Task Force 2 October 2014

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 10:59:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOk_reFPQ4f7WvZNzc7QEJa-MT9-y1mq-w7BNySyupmSiTffNw@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTML A11Y TF Public <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Minutes of the task force meeting are available at
http://www.w3.org/2014/10/02-html-a11y-minutes.html

A text version is below:

W3C
- DRAFT -

HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

02 Oct 2014

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
janina, ShaneM, [IPcaller], Joanmarie_Diggs, Judy, chaals, Sam, Plh, Liam,
paulc, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, MarkS, JF, Cynthia_Shelly, David_MacDonald
Regrets
Chair
Charles
Scribe
chaals, shanem
Contents

Topics
Longdesc status
Alt Text Note Status
Canvas 2D -- Missing requirement in the CR spec
Call for review of timed text
Longdesc status
HTML5.1 and beyond
Summary of Action Items
<trackbot> Date: 02 October 2014
<janina> chair: Charles
<scribe> ScribeNick: ShaneM
Longdesc status

We don't have a directors decision yet. Any day now.

Alt Text Note Status

We are expecting bugs to be filed on it - including bugs that will be
related to the longdesc decision.

scribe: waiting on cleaning the spec up until after that decision.

So, if you think you have a bug, file it now.

<paulc> Charles does a good job of "channeling" Paul.
Canvas 2D -- Missing requirement in the CR spec

<rubys> My understanding is that Rik and Rich are on the same page:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2014JulSep/0047.html
janina: Rich was writing tests, and uncovered this issue.
... There is no requirement in the published spec to expose 'hit regions'
to the A11Y APIs.
... Not clear how we got into this situation, but it was expected to have
been in the spec all along. It is why A11Y pushed for hit regions in the
spec.
... It is not thought to be controversial at all.
... There are some implementations already. If the requirement had been in
the spec, we could quickly add the tests and it would quickly pass.
... we would really like to see this requirement in this spec. The next
spec is not soon enough.

RS: Hit Region was added to the release for A11Y. Mark was already doing
tests.

MS: The mistake could have happened during edits on hit regions - possibly
during transitions. We should probably do some research to figure out how
the requirement disappeared.
... I have been doing testing, and written apps that use these new
features. Most of it focuses upon fallback content.
... I have not done testing to see if a defined hit region gets its
location updated via the A11Y API.
... I am not sure it would have relevance unless the item received focus.

<Zakim> rubys, you wanted to comment that Janina's sentiment doesn't come
through in Rich's email
chaals: Note that we do not need to get into a technical discussion. We
just need to decide what to do.

<rubys> The next teleconference is next Friday:
https://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#s_6495
rubys: We need to get the public statements clear. The mail from rich is
not consistent with what is being said in this meeting.
... we should get all the data we can back to the canvas editors.

<chaals> scribe: chaals
JB: I knew there were messages, didn't no someone saying it would be OK to
wait for 2.0...

… we need to get those pieces back for this version. Work out how things
got dropped and how to pick them up again.

… and there is a procedural issue - what dowe need to do if we put things
back in. Depending on where and when they were dropped? WOuld the new
process help here?

<scribe> scribe: shanem
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: first we need to verify and then we need to get it fixed.

chaals: Note that if we move to the new process, then we could go straight
into the CR again. That is up to the HTML Working Group.

janina: I agree that we need to clean up the messaging. But it may be
tricky because individuals have opinions.
... PF discussed it yesterday and thought a fix soon is important. If there
is a level 1 that doesn't have it and then a level 2 a month later that
might be okay. Since that is unlikely PF would object to putting it off.

<rubys> Just to be clear: I simply want to connect the right people to have
the right discussions. At the moment PF is having discussions without bring
the results back to the canvas editors.
paulc: Strongly encourage the canvas task force to do all the testing and
the edits. Let's not rush to judgement before we know the full scope of the
changes and whether there is implementation support.

Judy: I understand that for this specific item we need to figure out what
the changes are, but we don't think there are other items.

paulc: If there are other things that could be uncovered through testing,
let's uncover that now.
... Also there is a new canvas TF. If PF has concerns, those should be
conveyed to the new TF.

janina: Should we do a full review and test all sorts of things, or just
cover this item?

paulc: Yes. Do everything you can to figure out what is missing, provide
tests, and then propose how to process a document modified to satisfy the
PF requirements.

richardschwerdtfeger: Screen reader users may want to magnify to focus on
things.

<janina> Noting also that PC suggested an editor's revision of the CR doc
with missing feature included for testing
richardschwerdtfeger: you probably can get away with draw focus if needed,
but you would need to call it on all regions and fallback content. That can
be expensive. The reason it was added to hit region was to give the authors
some benefit.
... note that hit region will change for version 2.
... if this is not already implemented in the browsers today (and it may
not have been) we are in a position where that is going to take a very long
time.
... if that is the case then we might want to wait until a version 2 rather
than delay version 1.
... there is a lot of stuff in canvas 2.

chaals: Let's be sure we have tests written that cover what we think should
be in the spec. That way we can decide better what should be included in
this version.
... basic understanding is that hit region is supposed to be in version 1
and it is not. We need to send a message to the HTML WG saying 'hey
something went wrong and this fell out of the draft'.
... but we need tests before we make a decision so we will know if we can
still pass CR easily, or if we need to include the stuff from version 2
now, or we could wait until version 2.
... are there tests enough now that can guide us in a recommendation?

<rubys> I support Paul's suggestion: get the technical status clear, then
make a concrete proposal.
MarkS: I don't think it would be difficult to write a test to quickly
identify if it is supported or not. But I don't have time right now.

richardschwerdtfeger: I will write the testable statements so we know what
we need to look for.

chaals: If you think it is reasonable to go ahead with the stuff we THOUGHT
should have been in version 1, it seems like it is the lowest cost plan.
... there would need to be a director's meeting, but that's not too
difficult.

<Zakim> chaals, you wanted to propose a resolution…
richardschwerdtfeger: if is reasonable if there is good support and we can
figure out what got dropped.

Judy: I agree. Let's focus on this for now. Whatever we already negotiated
and agreed to, if that got dropped, let's make sure it gets back in.

(general agreement)

<chaals> RESOLUTION: we will work on the assumption that the things that
were dropped are useful and implemented. assuming Rich and Mark's testing
show taht is the case, we will request that it get put back.
Call for review of timed text

chaals: we can look at this spec and suggest things that should happen. we
can do it formally or individually.

<chaals> TTML spec for review
janina: PF regularly looks as last calls and new publications. We have
actioned JF to look it over.

JF: It wasn't a formal action, but I have looked at the spec very briefly.
There is a section that addreses WCAG considerations. At this point I don't
have any burning concerns. If something surfaces I will respond.

chaals: The formal path would be that the TF makes a recommendation and
then ask HTML WG to approve and forward the review, that seems heavy
weight. Let's leave it to PF to do it since they are tasked with it.

janina: Sure, but this task force is tasked for dealing with issues between
HTML and PF. PF will continue to bring things to the TF if coordination is
needed.

Longdesc status

HTML5.1 and beyond

<chaals> HTML 5.1 items
chaals: We have looked at various aspects of 5.1. We have a wishlist. Do we
have concrete proposals?

janina: Trying to lock down a time during TPAC where we can coordinate
between PF, HTML, and SVG.

<paulc> Please see how I updated the agenda wiki:
https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2014-10-Agenda#F2F_Topics
janina: topics include event enumeration on elements (DOM), digital
publishing and PF are meeting, but have things to coordinate with HTML too.

chaals: I would like accesskey to be revamped in 5.1, but I am not going to
be available at TPAC

<David> http://davidmacd.com/blog/html51-footnotes.html
paulc: I updated the agenda - a11y are in three parts.

(see the agenda for details)

janina: we dont think there is need to discuss name computation at TPAC

Judy: recommend also check with the UAAG working group on the accesskey
stuff

David: put up a link to the beginning of a discussion on footnotes. I would
like for us to flesh it out.

janina: we will have call-in capability at TPAC.

<Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to say that I would like to champion accesskey
<chaals> SM: I am happyto champion the accesskey discussion
janina: PF has a note from some years ago that is on point w.r.t. captcha.
There is a big problem from China about this.

Judy: there is not enough exposure about international a11y issues. We need
to pay close attention to it.

chaals: I understand that captcha is important. But how is it relevant to
HTML? Is there something that we want to do in HTML 5.1?

janina: I think that is an open question? There can be supporting
materials, but not clear if there are HTML language requirements.

<janina> http://www.w3.org/TR/turingtest
<janina> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/CAPTCHA_v2
Cyns: I don't think that there have been many improvements since the last
version was published. Are there?

<paulc> All of the suggested "possible" topics are now in
https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2014-10-Agenda#F2F_Topics
janina: we have discussed it here. There are some ways it could be improved.

Cyns: There is a WCAG technique for some of the alternate ways of doing
Captcha

chaals: I return to my question - how is it relevant to the HTML A11Y Task
Force?

janina: You may be right that it is not relevant, but we have not ruled it
out.

chaals: We have identified some things that should be covered in HTML. The
Wiki should be updated to reflect that.

<David> On WCAG we haven't solved Captcha yet.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Captcha_Alternatives_and_thoughts
janina: Is cynthia going to have anything ready on menus for TPAC?

Cyns: No.

paulc: The A11Y experts (from IndieUI) have been talking about editing
stuff with the WebApps group. If there are things about the joint task
force with WebApps / HTML joint task force, those are on the web apps
agenda.

janina: we are interested in helping to coordinate that work.

chaals: there is something relevant to this task force. There might be
changes to what 'contenteditable' actually does.

paulc: I will add something to the agenda on contenteditable.

Cyn: Can you look me in on that discussion - I am not a member of either
group.

janina: A lot if cross posted to IndieUI.

<rubys> http://w3c.github.io/editing-explainer/tf-charter.html
chaals: Cyns, please send me a reminder.

<paulc> WebApps WG F2F wiki:
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/November2014Meeting#Agenda_Monday_October_27
<chaals1> [Thanks to Shane for scribing]
Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2014-10-02 15:55:32 $
Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/No comprendo//
Succeeded: s/Cool//
Succeeded: s/yep, all looks good to me.//
Succeeded: s/Charles, I loaded your agenda, taking the liberty to add a few
items//
Succeeded: s/worked it/ruled it/
Succeeded: s/rssagent, make minutes//
Found ScribeNick: ShaneM
Found Scribe: chaals
Inferring ScribeNick: chaals
Found Scribe: shanem
Inferring ScribeNick: ShaneM
Scribes: chaals, shanem
ScribeNicks: ShaneM, chaals
Default Present: janina, ShaneM, [IPcaller], Joanmarie_Diggs, Judy, chaals,
Sam, Plh, Liam, paulc, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, MarkS, JF, Cynthia_Shelly,
David_MacDonald
Present: janina ShaneM [IPcaller] Joanmarie_Diggs Judy chaals Sam Plh Liam
paulc Rich_Schwerdtfeger MarkS JF Cynthia_Shelly David_MacDonald
Found Date: 02 Oct 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/10/02-html-a11y-minutes.html
People with action items:

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2014 16:00:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:56:44 UTC