MATF Minutes 7 April 2016

*MATF Minutes 7 April 2016 link: *
https://www.w3.org/2016/04/07-mobile-a11y-minutes.html

*Text of minutes:*
Mobile Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
07 Apr 2016

See also: IRC log
Attendees

Present
     Alan, David, Detlev, Kathy, Kim, Marc, jon_avila, marcjohlic
Regrets
Chair
     Kathleen_Wahlbin
Scribe
     Kim

Contents

     Topics
     Summary of Action Items
     Summary of Resolutions

Kathy: goal today is to finalize touch and pointer. Goal is to have that 
all ready to go
... April 26 date to talk about it with WCAG working group, so those on 
that group please make sure to be there for that call
... on wiki -- link to all of the different conversations that we had on 
the mailing list as well as linking to any of the other documentation we 
have

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/HISTORY:_Touch_and_Pointer

Kathy: ultimate goal is to have that pulled together by the 26 so when 
people are looking at this they can see conversations -- back and forth. 
There were lots of good conversations and back and forth in email

David: not sure whether will have it mature enough for the 26. There's 
enough instability around what people think that there seems to be a lot 
pulled in different directions. I'm just not sure where it's going to 
land. My experience with success criteria and WC3 things like this when 
there's a lot of things pulling in different directions usually doesn't 
solve itself right away. There's...
... quite a bit of direction -- Chris was saying he was concerned about 
the whole touchdown versus touchup. My proposal is still the same. In 
other words the way it's written right now is a very open -- there's a 
lot of ways to meet the success criteria

<Kathy> https://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/#touch-and-pointer

David: telephone guy on the phone I can go back a couple numbers and 
it's no problem. So I'm not sure if we understand what were trying to do 
with it and if we do that maybe I'm not saying something right. Patrick 
has some concerns, and he was sort of thinking of it as more of UAAG
... But when I can I have control over that until at least WCAG 3

Jon: keep it touchup touchdown, need to figure out what authors need to 
do given the current state of accessibility. Need to give them 
instruction to do that

Kathy: is there changes that you'd like to see John on 2.5.3 based on 
what we have there today

<David_> 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_revision_of_2.5.3#Proposed_2.5.3

<Detlev> Can you paste a link to the latest version of SC 2.5.3?

Jon: some notes about touchup -- just broaden that to say for some users 
touchup, touchdown

David: adding a couple sentences to understanding?

Kathy: I agree with you David that we have a lot of varying opinions on 
this and we may not have this in a final state by the time we go to the 
working group but I think it's worthwhile getting the reaction of the 
working group and saying this is something that we've done and we can 
list out the back and forth that we've got in history as well, and kind 
of bring it up and see where -- and...
... maybe get the advice of others on the working group, see what people 
think. Going back and forth in task force right now and end up 
revisiting that in working group. Better get reaction now. Not 
necessarily looking for things to be final final. It's okay if there are 
things we still have some questions on
... anybody else have comments on 2.5.3. Marc, Detlev
... email thread 2.5.3 from this week or last week

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobile-a11y-tf/2016Apr/0008.html

David: hand shaking issue with touchup touchdown
... touch than want to get off of it, that's why most functions are on 
touchdown

Jon: I'm okay with it but it doesn't address Chris's concern -- give 
user different options

David: as success criterion more difficult because then they can either 
operate on touchup or touchdown, that's a higher requirement for 
authors. touchup important thing -- BBC required only touchup

Detlev: I can't really see the use case -- can someone sum up Chris's 
argument

David: I was reading his email closely -- think about a geriatric person 
-- might not get the target when they go down, or get it and then move 
off of it -- they're going to lose their focus if it's on touchup. That 
was his point -- Gregg said that also.
... my feeling in response to that is the person might try to hit a 
button and they won't get it right because their hand shook, but they 
might need to move off it -- I think it's the same person. And if it is, 
the issue is what gives us more support. If you have a handshake and you 
go through midair there's a lot more chance that you're going to get it 
wrong before you hit it than after...
... you hit it

Detlev: we might just drop this, touchup and touchdown -- might be the 
case where we can't require. BBC thought it had a case and included -- 
let's go back to Henny and see if there's research backing this up, how 
they came up with this. Or one could try to separate reversible things 
from nonreversible things. If this is just a link for example then 
obviously could just use back to get out of...
... it. If it's a form to submit something the confirmation thing would 
come in but that could be independent of the type of touch activation, 
so I'm not really sure whether we have a case here, even if it's the 
case where we have both types of users, one benefit from touchdown, the 
other from touchup.

David: I don't think that's generally the case. I think the touchup is 
10 times or maybe 20 times more beneficial than a touchdown. And there 
are very few situations where a touchdown would be the best thing. 
Because that's when the person is selecting something. We want to have a 
difference between selecting an activation. So you should be able to put 
your hand on something and say I don't...
... want to do that -- change your mind and move your finger off of it

Jon: why don't we come up with wording similar to other criteria

Detlev: predictable touch?

Jon: say a checkbox, press it and it didn't work, so you press it again, 
but it toggles and unchecks. If we could put something in there to help 
users accurately work with touch events so it didn't require a certain 
length of time for a press and that would help prevent them from 
activating and then deactivating

Detlev: some touch gestures where you hold finger down longer -- is 
there a clear recommendation for dwell time? We have a recommendation 
which was put into question by Chris which is trigger things on touchup 
rather than touchdown. If that holds then is there anything similar to 
dwell time which can be put in a few words? Say don't use the duration 
of touch to do anything -- if some systems...
... have something happening when you hold your finger for longer that's 
putting us into a difficult position -- might want to use that dwell 
time and potentially do something -- do we have a clear recommendation 
for that case?
... is there something we could put is a simple do or don't for dwelltime

Jon: session -- people pushing off of the screen, dwell time huge issue. 
Accidentally activate need to be able to recover. Just like keyboard 
access needs to be doable without having the user hold down the key for 
a certain amount of time

Detlev: alternative for actions that are triggered through given dwell 
time -- but that would be a different success criterion if it becomes one

David: making changes in wiki
... the intent of the success criterion

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_revision_of_2.5.3#Proposed_2.5.3

David: this is really the crux of it -- somebody gets their hand on it, 
they change their mind and they want to move their hand away

Jon: so I think the idea that we want to support touchup or provide 
another mechanism is good -- that allows for touchdown as long as you 
have one of those other actions
... trying to look up other research on this -- Jennifer's research is 
not published it

David: maybe we can write down a couple of questions to ask them

Kathy: or just send them this and ask their opinion -- if they would 
recommend anything different

Detlev: you wouldn't press your finger for a length of time and then 
lift up and expect something to happen -- does that really apply

Kathy: take out long press in example? add another example about long 
press or 3-D touch or something like that?

Detlev: one idea is do not require long press -- give users an 
alternative, but that something different it would confuse to have that 
as example

Alan: can we say with the exception of long press and 3-D

Detlev: lump long touch and 3-D

Kathy: failure in there about actions only being available through long 
touch and 3-D touch

Detlev: do we have a failure sketched for long press already -- 
something like long presses should not be the only way to do things

Kathy: we have a failure now

David: think that through in context of the success criterion -- if 
there's a way they can turn off long press so that it will happen on 
touchup -- I think with a little bit of work in a couple examples here 
on this we could be ready for presenting this to a larger group if 
everybody on our committee is on board with it

Kathy: I think we might want to add a little bit more to the explanation 
or examples about 3D and long touch. Even if we have it as a failure, 
having it in the explanation might help more

Detlev: also would be good to find examples of that failure. I'm not 
aware of anything where something you can trigger with long presses is 
not available in a different way anywhere
... if we don't have a single example than just a hypothetical failure 
-- still valid

Kathy: tough -- even if we come up with an example things change 
quickly. Telephone dialer, Backspace

Detlev: aim at web authors trying to calculate long presses to do 
certain things -- difficult to find examples of that

Kathy: in touchup intent, talk about long press gestures can be used but 
they need to provide a way that either provides confirmation is 
reversible or makes another mechanism available

long press on app, changes to the mode where you can delete

David: system level

Kathy: one of the big complaints people have in general is it's not 
simple enough -- how do you feel now about the language that's in there

Detlev: easier -- I immediately know what touchup means. I think it's 
better than before

Jon: iphone home screen if you put finger down and hold you can't 
activate it -- requires some kind of timing. When you hold it goes dark 
and then light again. If you lift up your finger without holding it down 
long enough to trigger the long press the icon doesn't activated all.
... similar to not requiring specific timing for keystrokes, need 
something like that for touch

David: made changes, also put in example of phone dialer

Kathy: two instances of another need wordsmithing.

Detlev: change needed -- type of interaction that's predictable

Kathy: David will finish wordsmithing and email out to larger group. If 
anyone else sees changes, please suggest in email. Made good progress 
this week -- continue to work on it on list.
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.144 (CVS log)
$Date: 2016/04/07 16:03:54 $
___________________________________________________
Kimberly Patch
President
Redstart Systems
(617) 325-3966
kim@redstartsystems.com <mailto:kim@redstartsystems.com>

www.redstartsystems.com <http://www.redstartsystems.com>
- making speech fly

Blog: Patch on Speech
+Kim Patch
@RedstartSystems
www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch>
___________________________________________________