MATF Minutes 26 May 2016

*MATF Minutes 26 May 2016 link: 
*https://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-mobile-a11y-minutes.html

*Text of minutes:*


  Mobile Accessibility Task Force Teleconference


    26 May 2016

See also: IRC log <http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-mobile-a11y-irc>


    Attendees

Present
    Kathy, Kim, Henny, jeanne, Marc, David, Jon, Detlev
Regrets
    Alistair, Patrick, Alan
Chair
    Kathleen_Wahlbin
Scribe
    Kim


    Contents

  * Topics <https://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#agenda>
     1. Finalizing Guideline 3.4 - Orientation
        https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_revision_of_3.4.1
        <https://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#item01>
     2. Discussion on Guideline 2.6 -- Make it easier to use the
        physical features of the phone
        <https://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#item02>
  * Summary of Action Items
    <https://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
  * Summary of Resolutions
    <https://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

<Kathy> 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_revision_of_3.4.1

<Kathy> 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Guideline_2.6:_Make_it_easier_to_use_the_physical_features_of_the_phone.


      Finalizing Guideline 3.4 - Orientation
      https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_revision_of_3.4.1


      Discussion on Guideline 2.6 -- Make it easier to use the physical
      features of the phone

Kathy: David's comment -- whether or not keyboard operability is already 
required in 2.1.1 so whether it's needed here. Jonathan agreed with that

<chriscm> Hey All. Internet struggles. Hopefully connected to the WebEx 
shortly.

Henny: What input

Kathy: have to discuss what actually falls under device manipulation
... cross out and/or keyboard -- that would mean that if they were 
available by keyboard we're still requiring those to be by touch because 
we've got rid of the or, but it does keep them kind of separate from 
each other
... we could think about combining some of those in the future

<jeanne> definition of device manipulation -> 
https://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/#def-device-manipulation

Kathy: we can leave the and/or keyboard in there for now and come back 
and revisit that.
... revisiting now...

Jon: ultimately if they were available -- we would say how they were 
performed -- I have a concern but not a suggestion
... maybe supplement 2.1.1

Kathy: we could do that for WCAG 3.0 not for 2.1. 2.1 we can only add 
success criteria guidelines or add techniques to existing success 
criteria. Can't change existing success criteria.

<Kathy> 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Guideline_2.6:_Make_it_easier_to_use_the_physical_features_of_the_phone.

<davidmacdonald> i'm in late

<davidmacdonald> hi

<marcjohlic> And existing 2.1.1 Keyboard: 
https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/keyboard-operation-keyboard-operable.html

<davidmacdonald> getting my mike together... understand, but can't talk yet

(need to add "." at end of 2.6 link above, because it disappears when 
you click on it)

Jon: how is this different from 2.5?
... already have the criteria that says everything must be available by 
touch

<Kathy> 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Guideline_2.6:_Make_it_easier_to_use_the_physical_features_of_the_phone.

Kathy: maybe we need to add notes under the touch -- or we could have a 
failure that advice manipulation gesture is the only way to accomplish a 
key task under 2.5.1
... 2.5.1 saying everything needs to be available by touch

David: traveling on the road do not have access to the keyboard, it's a 
lot to ask keyboard and touch available -- we might get pushback on it 
but I think it's worth bringing to group

Kathy: Key Point is 2.5.1 already requiring touch, and we already have 
success criteria requiring keyboard, so this is not needed at all

<Kathy> https://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/touch.html

David: is it requiring everything by touch or requiring everything that 
is available by touch still available with accessibility

Kathy: referring back to touch and pointer -- you could argue that 
device in a place in gesture isn't available via touch right now...

David: this is just requiring that once you turn on your assistive 
technology touch that was already there works. This doesn't require you 
to have a touch gesture for everything

Jon: I didn't realize we had left this out of 2.5 -- I think everything 
should be available by touch

David: turn 2.5.1 into 2.5.2 and do new 2.5.1 everything required by touch

Kathy: have been requiring touch or keyboard but not necessarily both
... I can see the arguments on both sides -- everything needs to be 
available by touch when touch is the primary way of interaction

David: the way that we used to think about a desktop with a keyboard so 
everything is accessible by keyboard on a mobile device it really is touch

kathy: it's already everything by keyboard, also adding everything by touch
... speech is another way of interacting with keyboard. That was Henny's 
point earlier that we have to be considering speech API

David: do we like the idea of requiring touch in addition to keyboard
... the new 2.5..1 everything is available by touch. The new 2.5.2 
everything available by touch is still available by touch with AT

Jon: developer standpoint: I can create controls on the screen or 
keystrokes and that's the current requirement. But the keystrokes would 
require someone to have a keyboard. so I think I'm in favor because that 
breaks out a loophole requiring people to carry around a keyboard in 
order to operate the mobile device. Maybe doesn't go far enough with 
some of the issues for speech users ...

Kathy: I like that. When we talked about this originally I thought that 
was the direction we were going to go and then we had. Trying to think 
back why we didn't do that to begin with. We did have conversations 
about this before

<jon_avila> 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Touch_Accessibility_(Guideline_2.5) 
<https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Touch_Accessibility_%28Guideline_2.5%29>

Kathy: also feedback from WCAG working group -- a fair bit so far, they 
have until next week to send it back.

Marc: through touch or keyboard?

<Detlev> sorry to be late - had computer trouble

David: what about about touch on mobile views

Kathy: touch on laptops etc.

David: touch only SC

Kathy: failure about device manipulation

David: failure it's only available by keyboard

Kathy: then were going to get into what if a device is to have a 
touchscreen, or an application is only meant for desktop through 
keyboard interaction
... not everything has touchscreen
... nonverbal user can't use speech, doesn't have keyboard. Keyboard 
alone, speech alone is not sufficient to go through

Jeanne: example of a person who's using a tablet that's bolted to the 
wheelchair where the undo function is only available through shake. That 
person would not be able to undo things on their tablet. Touch user, 
don't have keyboard, but can't shake the device

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to give the example of the person with a 
tablet bolted to their wheelchair and cannot shake the device to undo.

Marc: rather than including almost writing in a way so you're not 
excluding the methods of input that are available on the device. You're 
not locking someone somehow into a shake gesture or you are not locking 
someone into only doing it on the keyboard. But is there a way to write 
a success criteria that would cover that or do we have to cover them all 
separately

Chris: iif you use onclick events in JavaScript those by default respond 
to etc. Others don't

<Henny> I have to drop off. School pick up.

Marc: yes exactly I don't know if there's a way to write that for 
devices just yet

Chris: and any wording that I can think of off the top of my head would 
be extremely device specific

Marc: I'm just a have a way to address all at once rather than have to 
address all specifically

Kathy: more of a 3.0 topic because it goes into revisiting the whole 
keyword success criteria
... I like the way that you're thinking -- anticipate things in the 
future but right now we have to stay within the existing success 
criteria and add on to those

Chris: talkback trap -- I think the keyboard if you are thinking about 
the way WCAG exists right now -- if it works on the keyboard it's 
probably reasonably accessible. Because each operating system variant if 
it works on the keyboard that suggests that people are following the 
correct programming practices etc. If we're talking about a 2.1 
extensionI believe the way to accomplish what were...
... talking about his let's focus on the keyboard/touch and the 
sequential navigation thing. And maybe in 3.0 we can be a little more 
abstract and talk about it in the way that Marc is wanting to

Kathy: are there scenarios right now that if something is keyboard 
accessible it doesn't have a touch equivalent
... I had one last night -- skip link kept Kicking me out to the URL 
bar. Keyboard accessible worked on the desktop, when you're using touch 
doesn't work
... that gets into things that are with screenreader turned on. This is 
going back to the point of where we were originally with saying 
everything is available by touch. Think the conversation went -- what's 
not going to be available is keyboard is available. Is there anything in 
touch that's not going to be. I think there might be a few cases.

Chris: you might get 75,80% of the way there by focusing on the keyboard.

Kathy: we can have suggestions for things to be included in 3.0 but were 
not working on that right now
... everything available by touch is not necessarily out of scope -- 
question is is it needed

Kim: everything needs to be keyboard enabled, everything doesn't need to 
be device manipulation enabled, but touch is in the middle -- question 
is do we need everything to be available by touch

Detlev: I can't think of anything right now which wouldn't be able to 
work by a virtual keyboard

David: are we solving a real problem
... we could do a new success criteria that says everything is available 
by touch but are we going to be solving a whole bunch of people's 
problems if we do that -- it's a huge burden on developers. Is it more 
of a usability thing everybody is going to be using touch so we 
shouldn't worry about it

Jon: we were focusing on device manipulation gestures -- what are the 
equivalent for those with the keyboard. Assistive touch and Samsung but 
how would you do that with a native android

<Kathy> I guess the WebEx cuts off at noon

<chriscm> LOL, nice chatting with everyone I guess.... :)

<davidmacdonald> ooops, guess that topic is over :)

<Kathy> we will pick up the conversation next week

<Kathy> thanks everyone

<jon_avila> http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/device/orientation/

<Detlev> got kicked out by webex

<marcjohlic> :D

<davidmacdonald> So the big question is if we require everything to be 
available by touch, are we solving real barriers or should we tighten it 
up i.e., all non touch, non keyboard manipulation is available by touch

Kim: another question is is it easy to do -- if there are use cases and 
it's just a matter of making sure there's a virtual keyboard for 
everything it may be not such a headache for developers

<davidmacdonald> I think that is where we should go.... "all device 
manipulation is available by touch" with a definition of manipulation 
already there.

<davidmacdonald> hope that's captured in minutes.


    Summary of Action Items


    Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl 
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> 
version 1.144 (CVS log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
$Date: 2016/05/26 16:08:26 $


------------------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________
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


www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch>
___________________________________________________

Received on Thursday, 26 May 2016 16:11:57 UTC