- From: Kim Patch <kim@redstartsystems.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:10:04 -0400
- To: "public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <576C09DC.6050205@redstartsystems.com>
*MATF Minutes 23 June 2016 link:
*https://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html
*Text of minutes:*
Mobile Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
23 Jun 2016
See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-irc>
Attendees
Present
Kathy, patrick_h_lauke, Kim, shadi, DavidMacDonald, jeanne,
jon_avila, JatinVaishnav, Chris
Regrets
Henny, Alan
Chair
Kathleen_Wahlbin
Scribe
Kim
Contents
* Topics <https://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#agenda>
1. Survey
<https://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#item01>
2. feedback from WCAG working group
<https://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#item02>
* Summary of Action Items
<https://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
* Summary of Resolutions
<https://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<Kathy> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/66524/MATF-062216/
Kathy: fill in questionnaire to find out what dates work this summer
<patrick_h_lauke> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/66524/MATF-062216/
<Kathy> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/66524/MATF-062116/results
Survey
feedback from WCAG working group
Kathy: First survey just some feedback. overall a lot of the feedback,
and the reason I wanted to start with this is a lot of feedback around
touch and pointer with the difference. Discussion -- can we just a touch
is required. I'll put out another survey later.
... if you haven't read through the comments, we'll give people a few
minutes to do so. Read through the first few. I want to have a
conversation about pointer and what were doing. We focused on touch and
then threw in pointer. A lot of the comments we got back from the
working group were around what we meant by a lot of the stuff that we
added toward the end
<patrick_h_lauke> i'm going via skype...and hearing a lot of snap
crackle and pop...and some words cutting out occasionally
<jon_avila> not garbled for me. But I do hear static and noise such as
when someone is on a wireless (no mobile handset) I wonder if it's
coming from Kim Patch
<chriscm> I have completely lost audio...
<patrick_h_lauke> we're all quiet chris
<patrick_h_lauke> just waiting for somebody to call back in...
<jon_avila> Perhaps it's high gain on a computer mic
<chriscm> I'm getting weird static now. Like someone tapping their foot
on a gain control.
Kathy: talking about first two
... what are people's thoughts about point or versus touch -- additional
clarity
David: Patrick's points -- touch and pointer are different because of
the end pointer obstructing -- pointer is smaller than finger. They do
seem different. Talking about extensibility there may be times when it's
important for us to distinguish. We have the one example right now --
sizes. There may be others
Patrick: I think having pointer in general provided we give good
definition is good for situations where we don't want to repeat
ourselves. We want to include touch and mouse and stylus. But I don't
see a problem when we need just one specific type of pointer to
specifically call out for touch rather than using general language.And
we could probably clarify or add a note to an SC to say...
... why we are actually just mentioning touch here Other places where we
don't,, general
... provide a definition of pointer which includes mouse touch and
stylus foreshadowing -- people might not have seen it but written email
right before this call about my initial attempt at defining what pointer
is what keyboard is etc. -- one of my actions. Definition pointer means
touch mouse stylus.Then kind of pointer, actually you the word touch And
then maybe add a note that says...
... this is only applicable to a touch pointer because finger is bigger
etc. etc.
<patrick_h_lauke> my email about pointer
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobile-a11y-tf/2016Jun/0028.html
David: criticism using language that is cryptic. I've just never heard
the word pointer being used as a touch event
Patrick: pointer event specification which is a roundabout reference
clearly but it is already used now in another specification
... pointer specification covers mouse, touch and stylus
<patrick_h_lauke> for ref: REC version of pointer events
https://www.w3.org/TR/pointerevents/
<jeanne> +1 for using W3C definitions
<davidmacdonald> https://w3c.github.io/pointerevents/#glossary
<davidmacdonald> Fig. 1 A pointer is a hardware agnostic representation
of input devices that can target a specific coordinate (or set of
coordinates) on a screen.
<jon_avila> A finger and a stylus is also a pointing device -- but I see
that a stylus could be used in a way that is not a pointer
Kim: object, and then what it does
<jon_avila> I agree. Mouse can scroll too but also can be used to point
Kim: touch, force touch, plain stylus, tilt and pressure stylus
Jeanne: mouse also has different capabilities
Patrick: pressure sensitive touch is still very new. Definition for
pointer events was to unify these because they are in many aspects the
same thing, it's worth using that terminology, particularly since it's
referenced in a WC3 document.
<patrick_h_lauke> definition for pointer: A hardware agnostic
representation of input devices that can target a specific coordinate
(or set of coordinates) on a screen, such as a mouse, pen, or touch contact.
Kathy: if you look at the definition of pointer event it doesn't include
touch as well. So do we mean changing this to just pointer instead of
touch pointer?
Patrick: my thinking is yes except where it needs to be separately
called out -- where it's specific to touch
Jeanne: pointer and touch, clear it's hierarchical
Kathy: make it clear in the understanding document
<patrick_h_lauke> touch comes under pointer, so if anything "pointer,
including touch"
<patrick_h_lauke> if we're talking hierarchical
<jeanne> +1 pointer, including touch
<patrick_h_lauke> or just pointer, and have clear glossary definition
<patrick_h_lauke> and cross-link "pointer" to it
Kathy: when I look at these definitions I agree from an end-user
perspective that it's very clear that it covers touch and people might
not necessarily think pointer can be touch right from the very beginning
but if we are going to go with the W3C definition it's got to be
confusing to just call out touch
David: should go with existing definition
Kathy: make it clear in the guideline -- referencing pointer instead of
touch
... is anyone against using it and doing that
Patrick: if we say pointer and then point to our definition which
clearly includes touch as well than that should be clear. And also make
it clear in understanding
David: might want to take it one step further with a nonnormative note
on first reference in the SC.
Patrick: definition says such as mouse, touch, pen -- doesn't try to
split the hair between what's a pen and what's a stylus and what's a pencil
<patrick_h_lauke> "input devices that can target a specific coordinate
(or set of coordinates) on a screen, such as a mouse, pen, or touch
contact."
Patrick: it targets specific code
David: and 2.5 guideline we could even say pointer with brackets
including touch
Kathy: if were really going this direction and I agree that we should --
we don't necessarily want to include things in here that would be a
device that target specific coordinates.the only reason were doing this
now is right this moment people are wondering what to do with mobile and
touch screens. But if we have a new technology two years down the road
and now it's something else you...
... wouldn't want to have including touch and this and that. That list
will just grow. I'd rather do it in the understanding..
David: okay -- so we take out touch, and mainly put a note underneath
saying point includes touch
Patrick: just clarify that pointer covers and include the actual definition
... keen to call back and say we now include touch as well -- give them
equal chance to be in the limelight
David: moving towards cutting the word touch and all this language and
just having pointer
Patrick: I think it would simplify things a lot and avoid a lot of
repetition. In situations where we do mean all these types of pointers.
And then run the danger of new type of input which is a pointer but
isn't called out we don't have to then add the new hollo lens pointer or
whatever. Then it's reasonably future proved
David: specific type we would just stick with touch
Kathy: before we get to a resolution does anyone disagree with that
Hearing no objections we have a resolution
<davidmacdonald> Remove last sentence 2.5: Although the definition of
"pointer" includes touch, we include touch and pointer for clarity. When
we use the term touch, we just mean touch.
*RESOLUTION: add pointer definition to glossary and reference this
definition where we generally mean pointing device*
David: so in situations where it's different we would say for Touch it's
this, for other types of pointers it's this
Patrick: I'd probably expand that to fine input such as pointer and
mouse and course input such as. Fine and course are established. I'll
include that in updating github
<patrick_h_lauke> *ACTION:* patrick to update github version
http://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/ to include pointer, add
definition of coarse/fine etc as per MQ Lvl 4 etc [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-55 - Update github version
http://w3c.github.io/mobile-a11y-extension/ to include pointer, add
definition of coarse/fine etc as per mq lvl 4 etc [on Patrick Lauke -
due 2016-06-30].
Kathy: that takes us through updating all touch and pointer comments.
<davidmacdonald> remove from 2.5.2: Anywhere where we say "touch and
pointer" we recognized that touch is included in the definition of
pointer, but we include touch for clarity and ease of reading.
Kathy: the only thing that Rachel pointed out that we might want to
include is pointer events on nonmobile platforms. That may be a moot
point now. People generally don't think of pointers being just on a
mobile device
Patrick: we could be ultra-specific and mention in the definition that
touch applies to any kind of touch screen. But then again probably a
wider question -- if this isn't specifically mobile extension people
wouldn't jump to the conclusion that touche is purely for mobile devices.
Kathy: incorporated into 2.1 -- not mobile extension.
Patrick: in that case I don't think developers would assume,
particularly because touch screens on non-mobile devices are becoming
more common
... we just need to make sure we're using generic language
Kathy: any other comments for one and two in survey.
... I'm also going to update the wiki on our resolution
... WCAG comments survey #3
... Two different Github documents. One which is the mobile extension.
Another which is just the touch and pointer.. We should be making
changes to just the touch and pointer right now so we can get that one
all wrapped up. Only the items that are finished and completed will go
into 2.1
Jeanne: to clarify both documents should be the same except for the
labeling. If Patrick updates the full document it would be easy to
publish a separate one for touch if we needed again. Working on the
original would be better
<patrick_h_lauke> http://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/
<davidmacdonald> adjiust 2.5 intent: Platforms today can be operated
through a number of different devices including touch, stylus, pen,
<add> and mouse</add> in addition to <remove>mouse and </remove>keyboard.
Patrick: swipes not used with AT, but that's okay because of 2.1.1
Kathy: we were requiring it to actually work with touch even if it
worked with keyboard, touch was required. So 2.1.1 was not in a position
to satisfy this
Patrick: per my email about pointer interfaces and keyboard interfaces I
think one of the problems which then caused this problem is -- the use
of keyboard -- the way it's defined brings it back to keystroke
... if it's a possibility for 2.1 even those SCs could be modified
Kathy: we can't for 2.1. We can for 3.0. We should make a note based on
these comments that we should modify that for 3.0. Right now we can't
for 2.1
Patrick: well, I'll withdraw my sensible comments and will have to
monkey patch it further
Kathy: past discussions -- if we could modify this keyboard stuff some
of this other stuff would not be needed
Patrick: the least destructive changes to modified the definition of
keyboard so that it does not just send sequential keyboard information
-- extend this glossary definition
... glossary is normative, but expanding that normative definition --
may be scope to do that?
<jon_avila> That would open things up too much to allow for speech or
other things to meet 2.1.1
Jeanne: Andrewdid say we can work on definitions
<jon_avila> agaree with David that is important for 2.1.1
David: really want to bring Greg into conversation he was adamant about
sending keystroke information. Back in the day we were using a lot of
serial keystroke information
... we might want to talk to an engineer -- between sequential
navigation and send keystrokes
Kathy: different input, also speech -- pick up this conversation again
to see what we can actually do with definitions, good information as to
what we can and can't do there.
... feel free to further discuss over email.
Summary of Action Items
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* patrick to update github version
http://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/ to include pointer, add
definition of coarse/fine etc as per MQ Lvl 4 etc [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
Summary of Resolutions
1. add pointer definition to glossary and reference this definition
where we generally mean pointing device
<https://www.w3.org/2016/06/23-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#resolution01>
[End of minutes]
--
___________________________________________________
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
@RedstartSystems
www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch>
___________________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 23 June 2016 16:10:54 UTC