- From: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 22:00:40 +0100
- To: Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-publ-wg@w3.org
Could you please add me to the list of attendants? Thank you. Regards, Daniel On 21 July 2017 at 08:26, Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Accessibility Task Force. > > > > Following are the minutes for the conference call held on July 20, 2017, at > 16 UTC. > > I have cleaned them in this copy, and the link to original unclean minutes > are also provided at the end of email. > > > > > > Presenttzviya, mattg, Avneesh, laudrain, rdeltour, clapierre, George, > Bill_Kasdorf, Romain, Mia, Jason. > > > > Contents > > •Topics > > •Summary of Action Items > > •Summary of Resolutions > > > > > > <laudrain> scribenick: laudrain > > > > Avneesh: 4 topics, equal time > > ... 1. Update on WCAG > > ... background > > WCAG 2.1 is incremental release. The vision is to get all the accessibility > requirements of publishing in WCAG, but it may be possible in silver. In > WCAG 2.1 we are trying to get as many things inside as possible, these may > not be in the structure that we want, but it is for starting the process. > > The biggest thing is accessibility metadata. It would go into conformance > section or AAA of WCAG 2.1. In publishing world it is a high priority item > but WCAG 2.1 structure does not allow deeper acceptance. > > Then is logical reading order. Section 1.3.2 of WCAG address it in a way. > Matt will be proposing some change in language. > > then multiple ways of navigation (section 2.4). It is for publishing > requirement of page numbers. We will be proposing technique to WCAG. > > > > Then we have other gaps that were identified by DPUB IG note, it includes > issues like: deeply nested heading, skippability, escapability and > pronunciation lexicons etc.. > > Some of these needs more work for example what does escapability and > skippability mean for text only publications and what it means for audio > sync text publications. > > George: we know what we can have in 2.1, and then continue in siliver. > > Tzviya: Regarding DPUB gap analysis note, it is not a document created by > this group so we should sent it for review of people in this group. > > <tzviya> http://w3c.github.io/dpub-accessibility > > Tzviya: see note and review with the larger PWG > > <tzviya> > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2017JulSep/0026.html > > Tzviya: headings and iFrame : WCAG doesn’t address heading requirements. > > > > Avneesh: big picture is that we now know what can go in WCAG 2.1 and > timeline of silver is out of sync, so we need to do some work in PWG. The > question is how to do it.One way is to create a document for publishing > specific accessibility requirement, which acts as reference for PWG and also > for feeding the requirements in Silver. > > > > Tzviya: You can do it on an informal document on wiki. > > <tzviya> final version of DPUB note: > https://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-accessibility/ > > George: can't it be requirement in Publishing? ... If it cannot go to WCAG? > > > > Avneesh: this group write with the same structure as WCAG, higher level > principles and techniques below it. And for the intergroup relationships, > would it be good to have the taskforce under PWG, AG and APA. It will > resolve such issues. The document can inform what we want to accomplish and > add to WCAG in longer term. > > Tzviya: Such a combined task force will be difficult to manage. > > > > George: nested heading is not a requirement in WCAG, should we put in Pub > requirements? Can we have it More stringent in Pub than in general Web? > > Avneesh: It is possible in WCAG if it becomes modular, which does not look > posible in 2.1. The main question is what is the scope of the document? > > Tzviya: not a formal document, oon a wiki and refreshed regularly > > Avneesh: We can start from wiki and then see if it needs to mature as a > working group note. > > Matt: make sure the WP is accessible, may feed technique for it. > > Avneesh: We should start immediately on this doc, and list the principles > before November this year. > > +1 > > > > George: hard core requirements are difficult to put forward, but with > SHOULD, as company accomplish the best as possible > > Avneesh: Lets discuss the structure of the document in next calls. > > > > Charles: agree wiki approach ... list of SHOULD or MAY, tu MUST in the > publishing side of it > > Avneesh: My understanding is to start from conceptual form (principles) and > then develop techniques as the working group develops the sepcifications. > > BillK: recommendation differ from WP/PWP/EPUB4 > > ... more stringent for EPUB > > Tzviya: first draft as a structure, and fills gaps afterwards > > Avneesh: Bill, this is why we should start from principles because > principles will be same for WP, PWP and EPUB 4, but techniques may differ. > > George: requirements are difficult to address in PWP, EPUB 4 etc. if it > doesn’t exist in WP. > > > > 2. Horizontal review > > Avneesh: APA has a checklist that should be used from first working draft > and it should be again checked before reaching CR. Once we are done with > checklist then the specifications are to be sent to APA group for review. > > <Avneesh> http://w3c.github.io/apa/fast/checklist.html > > Tzviya: not only a formal horizontal review , we should keep an eye on ways > to accomplish thing that are not accessible > > Avneesh: Yes it should start from design stage itself. > > Matt: need to ne involved in discussions > > ... s/ ne / be / > > > > Avneesh: Matt, for catching attention of the group can we put an a11y label > in Github? > > Tzviya: Gh is now chaos > > ... more smaller issues easier to understand > > ... the name of the issue should alert on a11y. However having a label > would be good. > > Avneesh: For example, the Nav doc discussion that is happening, how > accessibility piece comes in this discussion. Accessibility is user > experience, we need navigation, but it does not matter if the navigation > comes from JSON or from HTML navigation file. > > Matt: we need clarity on requirement for the UA > > Tzviya: philsophical questions should not be in Github , but in call > > > > 3. Assign group members for acting as liaison with other W3C groups > > Avneesh: WCAG: we have Avneesh, Matt, Romain > > Tzviya: if you need me you can inform me. I can be on some of those calls. > > Matt: we may need to do a review in the group for 2.1 progression > > Romain: I am in ACT group but not in plenary calls. > > Avneesh: agenda is sent in advance. So, we can join the call when we have > relevant topics. > > Charles: We can have some people monitoring, look agenda items, and alert > others when larger group is required. > > George: let the group know when we need to join > > > > Avneesh: APA ? > > George: Janina attends and chairs the APA > > <clapierre> Isn't Jason White also on APA? not sure if Jason is also active > or participating with this group > > George: we should familiarise with their checklist > > Tzviya: Jason is also in APA. > > Jason: just join from the WCAG meeting, on metadata > > Tzviya: I do not think that we need to do much inside the APA group. > > Avneesh: It looks we have sufficient number of people there. ARIA? > > Jason: ARIA 1.1 goes to rec > > Avneesh: Tzviya and Charles already there > > George: relation between DPUB ARIA and ARIA? > > Avneesh: DPUB ARIA is a module of ARIA. > > Charles: co-chairing the personalization TF in ARIA > > Tzviya:Another task force is starting in ARIA, the CSS ARIA TF > > ... could someone join? > > Jason: need to be strategic in group involvement > > Tzviya: very helpful > > Avneesh: what is priority? > > Jason: new layout features and AT > > ... how screen reader engage that, box and grid layout, CSS doen’t reflex > the DOM order > > ... how to make things available for the AT > > Avneesh: It may be interesting for main PWG group also. > > > > Avneesh: Silver TF? > > Jason: WCAG may be incrementally adding requirements, or larger scale > revision may happen with Silver: AG has not decided yet > > Avneesh: Is it right time to start our influence or wait? > > Jason: wait after 2.1 > > ... not possible to add in 2.1 > > ... AG mostly developing support to gather requirements. > > ... may be input in their survey process? > > > > Avneesh: Task forces, Cognitiv TF? > > Tzviya: cogo has become the personalisation TF > > Jason: Not really. The coga is under WCAG, and personalization under ARIA. > digital pub should be represented there > > Avneesh: WAI? > > Tzviya: Mainly emails and sharing of information. > > Jason: EO group > > <tzviya> EOWG charter https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2015/charter6-2015-09 > > Jason: AG request for review > > Avneesh: We should have liaison from this group or the business group? The > business group has responsibility of communications. > > Tzviya: the BISG is involved with EO > > ... be more familiar with the work there > > BillK: As AC rep for BISG, would have more engagement with EO. I can be > liaison with this group. > > Avneesh: any other groups? > > George: EO, training materiel an best practices, would be great to have it > for publishing. > > ... EO meets at CSUN > > Mia: can join in for EO as well > > > > 4. Work on audio sync text. > > Avneesh: Media Overlays is using smil which is outdated technology in W3C > > Marisa We should get away from SMIL, choice between flat list or something > more structured > > Avneesh: We are in W3C, and we need to be clear about process that we used > for making decisions. So, may be we should start from documenting > requirements. What are the minimum user requirements, what are advance > requirements, should it be designed for only browsers or is it designed for > reading systems also. > > Marisa: ok > > Avneesh: Marisa, Daniel and I can start work on this document, we will first > bring it to this group and then to main group. > > Daniel: in Redium2, working with a replacement of smile in JSON syntax > > ... clipping in and out, reusing existing Web technologies > > ... slightly ahead in Readium2 project > > Tzviya: great, but for the rec, we have to write. > > Daniel: This was to inform the group. I agree that we should start from > requirements. > > > > Avneesh: meeting every week? do we need a poll? > > ... poll tomorrow. > > > > Summary of Action Items > > > > Summary of Resolutions > > [End of minutes] > > > > The minutes are at: > > http://www.w3.org/2017/07/20-pwg-a11y-minutes.html > > > > With regards > > Avneesh
Received on Sunday, 23 July 2017 21:01:23 UTC