{minutes} HTML WG telcon 2009-08-13 for review


                      HTML Weekly Teleconference

13 Aug 2009


      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2009JulSep/0014.html


          Rich, DanC, Sam, Shepazu, Julian, msporny_, Cynthia_Shelly,
          MikeSmith, dsinger, Cooper, Matt_May, Adrian, johndrinkwater,
          mjs, Mike, Chris_Wilson, smedero, kliehm

          Chris_Wilson, Laura_Carlson




     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Issue-35/Action-114 aria-processing
         2. [5]Issue-32/Action-128 table-summary
         3. [6]Issue-74/Action-133 canvas-accessibility
         4. [7]creation of an HTML Accessibility Task Force
         5. [8]Action-34 authoring-guide
         6. [9]Action-106 test-suite-coordination
         7. [10]Action-115 TPAC-participants-signup
         8. [11]Issue-4/Action-129 html-versioning
         9. [12]Clearing out cruft in the issues list
        10. [13]Heartbeat publication poll (reminder)
     * [14]Summary of Action Items

   <MikeSmith> trackbot, start meeting

   <trackbot> Date: 13 August 2009

   <scribe> scribe: DanC

   <pimpbot> Title: {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2009-08-13 from Sam Ruby on
   2009-08-12 (public-html-wg-announce@w3.org from July to September
   2009) (at lists.w3.org)

   <rubys> next agedum

Issue-35/Action-114 aria-processing

   Sam: I'd like to get the stuff blocking Ian Hickson's progress

   MC: the WAI PF WG is processing last call comments in batch, since
   they can interact. But since this is blocking progress, perhaps we
   could tentatively share our response in this case

   Sam: that would be great

   MC: I don't have the details to hand...

   Rich: there have been several related comments [related to what?
   scribe could use some help]

   Rich: where's the best place to send our tentative response?

   Sam: on public-html is fine

   MC: I can collaborate with concerned parties and get that out in a
   few days

   Rich: current [aria] design is that with the exception of @role,
   host language overrides.

   [discussion of details of @role and other details exceeds scribe's

   [scribe hopes this will get replayed in email]

   mjs: I see 2 separate issues here...
   ... with aria state conflicting with native state...
   ... one is w.r.t. implementation; e.g. in the case of input
   type=-radio_button role=check_box, what does the assistive tech do?

   mjs: 2nd issue is w.r.t. conformance... a host language making
   something [non?]conforming are [orthoganal?] to the implementation

   MC: tentatively, yes that [help? that=?] is a way we'd be willing to

   mjs: tentative answers are totally OK...
   ... specifically on @role...
   ... I think Ian and some others are inclined to say some values of
   @role in some cases are non-conforming

   <Philip> "< Hixie> e.g. <h1 role=checkbox> shouldn't be valid
   either, and should act like an <h1> to ATs, not a checkbox"

   <Philip> (from #whatwg last night)

   <msporny_> DanC, combobox on role="checkbox" should raise a
   validation error.

   mjs gives some details regarding strong and not so strong

   <dsinger> I think maciej is asking that some of these conflicts at
   least should be conformance errors?

   Rich: that [some @role cases being non-conformting] sounds,
   tentatively, like something we could work together on, yes.

   <msporny_> so <input type="radiobutton" role="combobox" ...> should
   raise a validation error.

   <shepazu> [that all seems reasonable and obvious to me... why would
   this have been blocking?]

   mjs: yes, we'll be sure to get adequate review on this... but
   specifically, there's a prohibition on [more details that sound
   familiar from public-html email... about a specific ARIA constraint
   about host langauges overriding]

   Rich: MC, I think we can take this back to the [WAI PF] WG

   Rich: anybody else in that call/collaboration?

   mjs: I suggest hsivonen; much of the technical detail I'm relaying
   come from him

   Rich: many thanks for the review comments; these are helpful for
   crafting the next ARIA draft

   <msporny_> Yes, Maciej - appreciate your comments, they have been
   very helpful (even if I don't agree with all of them)

   DanC: so who has the ball?

   MC: so I can send tentative details. and 2nd, work with macie and
   hsivonen and Ian

   action-114 due next week

   <trackbot> ACTION-114 Report progress on ARIA TF due date now next

Issue-32/Action-128 table-summary

   <rubys> [15]http://dev.w3.org/html5/pf-summary/spec.html

     [15] http://dev.w3.org/html5/pf-summary/spec.html

   <pimpbot> Title: HTML 5 (at dev.w3.org)

   <DanC>(I couldn't find the relevant part of
   [16]http://dev.w3.org/html5/pf-summary/spec.html , fwiw)

     [16] http://dev.w3.org/html5/pf-summary/spec.html


   <trackbot> ACTION-128 -- Cynthia Shelly to work with PF to find an
   owner for drafting @summary text proposal -- due 2009-08-06 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/128

     [17] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/128

   <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-128 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)

   Cynthia: let's continue this action for a few weeks

   DanC: it looks done, to me; what's left to do?

   <mjs> presumably something has to be posted to public-html for this
   item to be done

   Cynthia: get review/consensus from various people in WAI PF and HTML
   WG. Have we talked about the TF proposal yet?

   Sam: not yet; that's on today's agenda

   action-128 due next week

   <trackbot> ACTION-128 Work with PF to find an owner for drafting
   @summary text proposal due date now next week

Issue-74/Action-133 canvas-accessibility


   <trackbot> ACTION-133 -- Richard Schwerdtfeger to develop an
   accessibility API and model for canvas as well as attributes to
   specify alternative content -- due 2009-12-17 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/133

     [18] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/133

   <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-133 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)

   Sam: is a december timeframe OK?

   Rich: I'm working on this... looking at implementation stuff...

   Cynthia: help from mozilla, opera and/or mac/apple would help

   dsinger: ok... I've been looking more at accessibility of
   audio/video, but perhaps we should bump up the priority of canvas

   mjs: what would help most in particular?

   Rich: I'm interested to talk to developers of canvas applications

   Doug: perhaps the bespin developers?
   ... things like processing.js that are just images aren't as
   relevant as something like bespin

   <dsinger> There are always 'tour-de-force' demonstrations (like
   writing an editor in Canvas), but we should probably focus on
   'reasonable' uses

   Cynthia: we'd also like help from somebody that knows the apple
   accessibility APIs

   <Philip> Perhaps canvas graphing libraries are interesting

   <Philip> (Canvas games presumably aren't interesting, because
   they're usually inherently visual and can't be non-visually

   Doug: are there limits to our expectations on canvas accessibility?
   e.g. a shoot-em-up-game

   Cynthia: yes, a review of the use cases to consider practical
   limitations makes sense

   <kliehm> (Cannot get into telcon, is full) At PF Task Force we
   agreed to examine the canvas examples on Laura's wiki page and note
   down use cases. Bespin probably could have a shadow fallback DOM
   with paragraphs, list items, code, and buttons. We need to identify
   common cases first, then look for a solution.

   <jgraham> I thought avoiding the performance penalty of DOM was a
   goal of bespin

   <kliehm> @jgraham, speed is an issue as canvas is faster than SVG,
   also convenience: canvas / JavaScript is made for human developers,
   SVG / XML is output from machines. But keeping objects for re-use in
   the DOM as a memory could be an argument for developers, enhancing
   accessibility at the same time.

creation of an HTML Accessibility Task Force

   Sam: volunteers for this task force?

   <msporny_> +1 for HTML Accessibility Task Force

   <msporny_> (creation of, not volunteering)

   Doug: I'm interested

   <kliehm> +1 (and help reviewing the wiki use cases appreciated)

   Sam: I gather there's plenty of support; any against?

   dsinger: I don't think actual technical discussion of accessibility
   is drowning out other issues in public-html...

   dsinger: and which IPR realm would it work under? [not sure I
   scribed that right]

   <msporny_> I don't support the process of breaking off into a
   separate group either.

   dsinger: there are also governance issues... would the TF be
   advisory? it couldn't make binding decisions because it's not the
   actual WG

   <masinter> This is a HTML-WG telephone call, so I would assume it
   would be a HTML-WG task force

   <rubys> @masinter: joint, per

     [19] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/html-task-force

   <masinter> @rubys I understand now, sorry

   dsinger: I'm frustrated that process keeps coming up to the
   exclusion of progress on the technical issues

   MC: [missed; help?]

   mjs: I think it's fine for people to get together and hash out
   proposals before bringing them to the HTML WG is fine, but HTML WG
   decisions need to get a healthy amount of discussion in

   mjs: also, it's not good to spend _too_ much time baking proposals,
   because that can [raise social issues] too

   <Zakim> msporny_, you wanted to discuss keeping AT TF on HTML WG
   mailing list.

   manu: I think it's fine to use the public-html mailing list [I think
   I missed the gist of his point]

   Cynthia: with some hesitation, I feel obliged to bring up culture
   differences. I've been contacted by people who have posted to
   public-html and the response seemed like a flame

   <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say I expect it would be ok to use
   the HTML list as the task force list

   MC: xtech was our original proposal so as not to deluge public-html,
   but perhaps public-html would work... I could discuss that with
   concerned parties
   ... there's also a question of which tracker to use

   <Zakim> dsinger, you wanted to admit he's thinking of something

   <dsinger> I have discussed with a few people having an informal
   get-together to talk over issues, ideas, and experiments for
   audio/video accessibility. We will probably try to organize this
   before the TPAC, so ideas that come up can be brought back to the
   tech. meetings.

   <Zakim> msporny_, you wanted to discuss expertise not being valued
   (RDFa experience)

   Manu: my experience is that when we engaged the HTML WG directly,
   that's when the bulk of the useful feedback came. So while I'm
   sympathetic to the flaming concerns, I don't think that [should be
   the overriding factor?]

   <dsinger> So, I am not opposed to smaller groups getting together to
   discuss ideas - I am in favor!

   dsinger: I'm hesitant about formalizing a task force, though I'm
   fine with small groups getting together to make proposals; I'm
   engaged in doing that myself with video/audio accessibility

   <mjs> I think on canvas accessibility and video accessibility,
   technical discussion of the issues will be much more productive

   <mjs> and posting on public-html will be a great way to recruit
   technical help

Action-34 authoring-guide

   <MikeSmith> action-34 is not related to any of my actions

   DanC: This was assigned to Lachlan for a long time; then it got
   assigned to me when I wasn't here; I didn't mind too much, but it's
   been a while now and I haven't made any progress and I'm not sure
   when/if I will. I'm inclined to close/withdraw

   close ACTION-34

   <trackbot> ACTION-34 Prepare "Web Developer's Guide to HTML5" for
   publication in some way, as discussed on 2007-11-28 phone conference

Action-106 test-suite-coordination

   <MikeSmith> action-106?

   <trackbot> ACTION-106 -- Dan Connolly to work out with co-chair and
   staff how to spark test suite coordination next week -- due
   2009-06-30 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/106

     [20] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/106

   <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-106 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)

   DanC: I
   ... I'm ambivalent about keeping test suite stuff in the tracker

   <scribe> ACTION: Doug look at ways to integrate test from browsers
   into a WG test suite [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-134 - Look at ways to integrate test from
   browsers into a WG test suite [on Doug Schepers - due 2009-08-20].

   action-134 due 15 Sep

   <trackbot> ACTION-134 Look at ways to integrate test from browsers
   into a WG test suite due date now 15 Sep

   close action-106

   <trackbot> ACTION-106 Work out with co-chair and staff how to spark
   test suite coordination next week closed

Action-115 TPAC-participants-signup

   Sam: I'm willing to make an announcement about TPAC registration. Is
   that the next step?

   Mike: yes.

   Sam: OK. will do.

Issue-4/Action-129 html-versioning

   <masinter> action-129?

   <trackbot> ACTION-129 -- Larry Masinter to insure that the
   versioning discussion at least touches on XHTML 2 interactions with
   the /1999/xhtml namespace -- due 2009-08-13 -- CLOSED

   close action-129

   <trackbot> ACTION-129 insure that the versioning discussion at least
   touches on XHTML 2 interactions with the /1999/xhtml namespace

   <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/129

     [22] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/129

   <pimpbot> Title: ACTION-129 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)

Clearing out cruft in the issues list

   Sam: mjs suggested dispositions for a number of issues...

   mjs: it was a little rushed and maybe not under the best subject
   heading... I could make a more clear presentation of the suggestions

   mjs: I think there's cruft in the issue tracker...

   <DanC+1 a summary of why to close for each issue, please

   <msporny_> +1 for cruft in the issue tracker, and support Maciej's
   efforts to close items.

   <dsinger> notes that if we make a mistake, it's not exactly hard to
   create issues etc.

   <dsinger> so as long as we close 'without prejudice' i.e. allowing
   people to re-open without lots of justification, we're fine

   <masinter> Is there a way of insuring that the people who raised the
   issue in the first place have had a chance to respond to closing it?

   <dsinger> perhaps the name of the raiser could be indicated on each
   issue, in the email?

   <mjs> I can Cc the originators

   <dsinger> e.g. issue-314159 (raised by Mordred) should the HTML WG
   kill orcs?

   [discussion of mechanics]

   Sam: ok, so a separate message for each message to public-html,
   copied to the originator and a summary on the announce list

Heartbeat publication poll (reminder)

   Sam: reminder, the poll is ongoing

   <rubys> [23]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd08/

     [23] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd08/

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Doug look at ways to integrate test from browsers into
   a WG test suite [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [25]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([26]CVS log)
    $Date: 2009/08/13 22:05:10 $

     [25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 22:07:14 UTC