Re: Minutes: March 20, 2015 SVG Accessibility Task Force Meeting

Hi Amelia,

The Indie UI effort was suddenly stalled due to chartering issues. This is
a source of frustration for many of us.  I want to see s joint task force
between PF and WebApps to get that done. Where the actual final spec
changes go - webapps or PF really does not matter to me.

Regarding the use cases, Fred is going to bringing 24 charts (use cases) to
the next call and show how they addressed access in RAVE (Rapid Adaptive
Visualization Engine) that many IBM product teams use to produce graphs and
charts. I think we need to determine what was effective and what was not in
the solution. Charles and Jason have an action item to reach out to ETS on
STEM graphics and bring back use cases/samples.

I am going to look at the Connectors spec.

We are dividing and conquering on the use cases.

Would you be willing to look at drawings, like subway maps, that tend to
wrap back on themselves (not just a tree structure)?

I hope you feel better.

Best,

Rich



Rich Schwerdtfeger



From:	Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
To:	public-svg-a11y@w3.org
Cc:	Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Date:	03/20/2015 10:32 AM
Subject:	Re: Minutes: March 20, 2015 SVG Accessibility Task Force
            Meeting



Belated regrets from me...
Busy week + cold virus added up to me happily sleeping in this morning
before remembering that it was Friday!

A couple comments on the topics in the minutes:

1)
I don't think we should get bogged down too much in touch input vs keyboard
input vs mouse input.  Instead, we should try to work with the Indie UI
model (http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/indieui) where we focus on events based
on their intent, and try to encourage re-use of the browser's native
associations between input and outcome, whether that is arrow keys or swipe
gestures.

We would therefore need to focus on which navigation and interaction events
make sense within a 2D graphical document, how they should be interpretted,
and whether there are required event types not currently identified in the
Indie UI spec.

2)
I like the idea of continuing with work on charts.  I think it is one area
where people are really sensitive to the issue of accessibility in
graphics, and therefore is an area where we could make a big impact.  I
agree that it is really important to talk with people more familiar with
end user issues to identify which features of charts and diagrams pose the
greatest accessibility problems.

In January, I had started writing a "why this is important/ what we're
trying to achieve" intro for a charts taxonomy document; I'll try to get
that cleaned up and post it on the wiki this week or next.

3)
At the same time, I don't want to abandon the work we've been doing the
past few weeks on use cases and requirements for graphics in general (not
just charts).  I would like to follow up that discussion by organizing it
into a list of solutions (accommodations).  These would be annotated by (a)
whom the accommodation helps, including whether there are benefits for
"able-bodied" users and (b) whether they would need to be implemented at
the author level or at the browser/AT level, and whether they need new
specs to allow authors to communicate their intent to browsers.

And when I say "I would like to follow up", I mean: "I would like it if we
collectively followed up, and I'll do it myself eventually if no one else
jumps in"!

4)
Fred:  What's RAID?



On 20 March 2015 at 08:11, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com> wrote:
  http://www.w3.org/2015/03/20-svg-a11y-minutes.html


  Rich Schwerdtfeger