Re: HTML-a11y TF minutes for 10/09/2014

Replying to the following from today's minutes:

<Zakim> liam, you wanted to object to a heartbeat as-is very strongly as it
> could be very damaging, it basically contradicts longdesc, and yes there
> are bugs filed
>
> LIam: object strongly to publish this as is, due to issues around the
> longdesc sensitivity
>
This is bad and damaging to publish this with wrong info
>
This is an incorrect, uninformed and inflammatory statement. There is
absolutely nothing in the current draft that 'contradicts longdesc'
whatever that may mean.

What is 'bad and damaging' is W3C staff members making such statements.





--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>

On 9 October 2014 17:06, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:

>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html
>
>
> HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference09 Oct 2014
>
> See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-irc>
> Attendees
>
> Present
>
> janina, Liam, Joanmarie_Diggs, paulc, JF, Judy, Rich_Schwerdtfeger,
> Cynthia_Shelly
>
> Regrets
>
> Chair
>
> Janina
>
> Scribe
>
> JF
> Contents
>
>    - Topics <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#agenda>
>       1. Identify Scribe
>       http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Scribe_List
>       <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item01>
>       2. TPAC 2014
>       <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item02>
>       3. Longdesc Progress
>       <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item03>
>       4. Alt Note Status
>       <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04>
>       5. Canvas 2D -- Missing requirement in the CR spec
>       <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item05>
>       6. TF Work Items (HTML.Next)
>       <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#item06>
>    - Summary of Action Items
>    <http://www.w3.org/2014/10/09-html-a11y-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <trackbot> Date: 09 October 2014
>
> <janina> trackbot, next item
>
> <trackbot> Sorry, janina, I don't understand ' trackbot, next item'.
> Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
> Identify Scribe
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/index.php?title=Scribe_List
>
> <scribe> scribe: JF
> TPAC 2014
>
> JS: PF have a clear list of who we need to meet with at TPAC, HTML and
> SVG of note
> ... PF will join the HTML WG in your larger room
>
> <paulc> https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2014-10-Agenda#Agenda
>
> will discuss SVG - graphics taxonomy
>
> (there is a TF in the works for that now)
>
> <Judy> [judy looks fwd to seeing that]
>
> alos wish to follow up on the need for event numeration - plan to present
> requirements and use-cases and ask for solutions
>
> previous concerns over security have impacted this discussion in the past
> - so plan is to ask for solutions rather than say what we need
>
> afternoon Thrusday - PF will be meeting with D-Pub after lunch, then after
> break return to larger HTML WG to present our discussions
>
> one key topic is expansion of ARIA roles for document mark-up
>
> subsequent to that, we will be having a discussion around testing
>
> there is also a need for multiple-target needs for an enhanced longdesc or
> described-at
>
> <janina> Resource: TPAC 2014
>
> <janina> HTML-WG: https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/2014-10-Agenda
>
> <janina> PF-WG: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/meetings/tp2014
>
> <janina> Main Page: http://www.w3.org/2014/11/TPAC/
>
> JS: there may be other discussions - media (John and Mark S will be
> meeting with Web on TV folks on Monday.
>
> There may also be other discussions in HTML WG
>
> there is also a session with WebApps - they have been working with IndieUI
>
> PC: SVG meeting times may need to be fine-tuned
>
> RS: there may be a need for more time than originally envisioned
>
> [discussion around meeting times]
>
> JB: Final registration numbers are suggesting a large turn-out, so there
> is some adjusting that needs to happen
>
> PC: looking at PF et al to manage the meeting times
> Longdesc Progress
>
> JS: the news is, no news yet
>
> JB: there is a draft decision in progress.
> ... expect to see it soon
> Alt Note Status
>
> JS: there are some additional bugs that need to be filed, need to get
> that done. Plan to happen before the next meeting.
> ... Steve F has stepped down as editor, there is a proposed replacement
>
> waiting for movement there
>
> PC: there has been some off-line discussion, including why is it taking
> so long? Appears to be blocked by the longdesc decision
> ... trying to understand what's next. Chairs looking to "unblock it"
>
> JB: there are some dicsussion on this already. Different TF participants
> have concerns on moving forward without the longdesc decision addressed
> ... depending on how that goes, there may be some significant changes
> required to the Alt Text Document
> ... could create some misunderstanding to release it as is
> ... the document is a TF document, and request that the WG respect that,
> and allow this to follow its course
>
> JF: mostly to plus one Judy
>
> PC: Aware of the discussion & history
>
> if there are issues, then file the bugs
>
> PC: keeping this in limbo does no-one any favors
>
> <Zakim> liam, you wanted to object to a heartbeat as-is very strongly as
> it could be very damaging, it basically contradicts longdesc, and yes there
> are bugs filed
>
> LIam: object strongly to publish this as is, due to issues around the
> longdesc sensitivity
>
> This is bad and damaging to publish this with wrong info
>
> JF: +1 to Liam
>
> <paulc> Links to the bugs?
>
> JS: suggest that we may in fact be past the blockage now.
> ... whichever way the Director goes with the longdesc doc will have an
> impact on the ALt Text document.
>
> <liam> I filed https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26868 26869
> and 26870 which are deliberately fairly high-level
>
> PC: have not replaced the editor, gaterhing data on what we should do next
> ... believe we should keep Steve's name on the doc as editor
>
> <ShaneM> tied up on another call. I have volunteered to take on whatever
> additional editing is needed.
>
> <ShaneM> (have also volunteered)
>
> JB: this needs to be handled at a coordination level
>
> JS: history of this doc tells us the original reason that the work on
> this document started is no longer there. It was to off-set some poor
> information in the earlier HTML 5 document, and it has had an impact on the
> HJTML5 spec - it succeeded in doing what it set out to do
> ... now we need to ensure that 2 W3C documents are in sync, and not saying
> different things
>
> PC: are there bugs there?
>
> JS: nont filed yet, but do not anticipate this being a long process
>
> CS: perhaps ask WCAG if they want to take up the Best Practices as WCAG
> Techniques
>
> JB: the content of this document actually spans several different
> resources - including WCAG Techniques - there are also types of "tutorial"
> content. Don't want to lose what Steve has contributed there
>
> <paulc> If it is true that this document serves a significant different
> role than the current WD at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-alt-techniques-20121025/ then that is a
> strong reason to get a new document on the TR page.
>
> JB: thus it doesn't directly map just to WCAG - spans multiple
> viewpoints. Strong opinion that this document be maintained by WAI groups
> in the future
>
> <paulc> And I keep hearing that there are more and more yet defined
> changes to the current document so arguing against a heartbeat now seems
> wrong.
>
> <janina> Paul, I was trying to say that it serves a different role today
> than the role for which it was initially created
>
> JB: there is a syncronization concern, but hope is to address that fairly
> quickly (after the longdesc decision)
> ... moving forward (new techiques, etc.) to also keep all that sync'd there
>
> <ShaneM> Won't this document need to go through another CfC round if we
> edit it substantially with longdesc stuff?
>
> JB: the number of changes are small and finite, but unsure if they are
> all filed as bugs
>
> <paulc> There are no bugs for what Janina referred to.
>
> JS: the original CfC was also flawed
>
> <paulc> Please file the ALL the bugs that describe the work that needs to
> be done on this document.
>
> PC: heard Liam's concern about 2 documents that are in conflict - but now
> hearing that there are multiple new content to be added
> ... don't understand why a heartbeat cannot be published now
>
> JB: this has been explained in multiple ways - the TF feels very strongly
> here to not do this, don't understand why that cannot be respected?
>
> PC: can do that. people need to file the bugs and indicate what needs to
> be done
> ... concern is that this document will not be published even into December
>
> JB: have already previewed the EO work, so there should not be a huge
> impediment there
> ... this TF has stated multiple times what we believe is the most prudent
> path
>
> PC: Can respect this if TF can clearly define the bar that needs to be met
>
> JB: clarity is the dependance on the longdesc decision
>
> JS: I would say that that represents 90% of that
> ... however if we end up with enough significant changes there may be a
> need for another CfC
>
> JB: Makes sense to look at this after the bugs are filed
> Canvas 2D -- Missing requirement in the CR spec
>
> JS: What needs to happen next is on Janina (me) - Q: did the canvas group
> meet? What needs to happen next?
>
> <paulc> See
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2014OctDec/0000.html
>
> PC: believe this is being handled by the canvas TF
> ... next meeting on 10/10
>
> <paulc> Agenda for Canvas TF meeting 10/10 -
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2014OctDec/0010.html
> TF Work Items (HTML.Next)
>
> JS: have reviewed minutes going back to June, looking at what would
> constitute HTML.next
> ... ASking Cyns about Menus - will we have time to look at this before or
> at TPAC?
>
> CS: unfortunately no
>
> JF: ideas and discussion on transcripts
>
> <paulc> TPAC Ad hoc meetings:
> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2014/ad-hoc-meetings
>
> PC: there is a wiki page for ad-hoc meetins at TPAC
>
> <paulc> See TPAC home page: http://www.w3.org/2014/11/TPAC/#participation
>
> PC: there does not seem to be a direct link off of the TPAC page, but use
> the link(s) provided
>
> <liam> [ list of tpac registrants at
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2014/registrants ]
>
> Select participation and under the AC meetings and dinner, there is a
> section for ad-hoc meetings
>
> JS: next items owned by Chaals - accesskey and web-payments
> ... that leaves footnotes - expect that will come from D-pub
> ... let them help lay out requirements
> ... seem to be the key items
>
> JF: David MacDonald and I have had a few brief discussions around
> footnotes
>
> Liam: dpub community has concerns around footnotes as well - need to know
> what kind of link it is
>
> JS: any other comments?
> ... adjourned.
> Summary of Action Items
>
> [End of minutes]
>