W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 1999

MINUTES: W3C WAI User Agent Telecon 28 April 1999

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 03:44:39 -0500
Message-Id: <199904282047.PAA01259@staff1.cso.uiuc.edu>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org

Chair: JG-Jon Gunderson 

Scribe: JA-Jim Allan 

HB-Harvey Bingam 
CMN-Charles MacCathieNevile
MN-Mark Novack

Ian Jacobs 


Completed Action Items 

MN: Will post message about ua implementation 
JG and DA: Denis Anson about contributing on navigation commands 

Continued Action Items 

RR: Rewrite 7.2.2 as you want it (centered around information). 
IJ: Write Danny Weitzner to find out of ecommerce folks (fee links) have
requirements on UAs. 
IJ: Write Danny Weitzner an email about this. ii) Resolved: Make 6.1.11 a
priority 2. Agenda Item 3) Navigation/Search Functionality review. Refer to
list of checkpoints in the agenda [1] that involve navigation and searching. 
Editors: Add Cross link in 5.2.4 (and 5.2.6) to 7.3.3. 
CMN: 7.2.2, 7.2.6 write techniques 
JG: Techniques for 7.2.2 comment on MN previous work on this checkpoint 
JG : write checkpoint 7.2.1 techiques 
JG: contact rob (ms) about 724,5,6; contact rich s (ibm) and peter korn
(sun) to get techniques also for checkpoint 7.2.4,5,6 
JA: look at nav stuff and propose checkpoints and techniques, by Monday
(maybe) techniques what attributes are important to search for group to
review and assign more tasks at next meeting. 

New Action Items 

CMN: Will write techniques section for the checkpoint on navigating the
document tree, will include eamples of speech rendering of the walking
structures (Due 5/3) 
JG: rewrite navigation proposal , add walking the tree, based on todays
discussion (Due 4/30) 


Won't address XFO isseu (#39 in the issues list) at the moment, will wait
until other working groups have tme to process. 
Include a checkpoint on navigating the tree 


JG: Review Action Items 

CMN waiting for other input 
JA bogged down still working 
MN posted info to list last week 
Dennis Anson posted nav information how nav concepts are addressed by check
JG also posted a proposal- checkpoints and techniques review both to come
to closure 
Dennis proposal discussion 3 types of pages - gateway, query, content JG
need to add interactive pages 

HB: thats buried in query pages 

JG: 2 types of users familiar with page and unfamiliar related checkpoints
to types of pages 

HB: likes concepts presented 

JG: my proposal concerns checkpoints and techniques and reach resolution
listed checkpoints, subgroups,

JA: nested lists, bullet indication jg: chuncking, moving to new list need
something that says view attribute of list item cmn: sounds like search for
thing that is the same jg: when you enter a list item or sublist item
orient to list-how many items in list, relation to other list, cmn: walk
the document tree 

JG: document tree is not alway walkable, if you add image then the image
becomes a node cmn: example at hand, moving down list, children are 10 list
item, first 5 are list item, 6 and seven are also lists, allows us to do
wha we want 

JG: Opperman objectd 

CMN: opperman was wrong 

JG: what about inline elements that fragment words cmn: then read the text,
do both things, traverse active elements hb: mixture of pcdata with
embedded other inlines, pcdata is sibling in the dom para with some words
bold, bold is a sibling, 

CMN: content follows text logically, node to siblings, text---bold
node---text etc cmn: node 47 children, what type of node it is, then tell
me more, configure how it tells you information 

JG: ACTION: cmn to write checkpoint for node navigation description with
speech output, how are inline elements handled write a proposed checkpoint
walking the tree with techniques 

HB: tree is only one implementation of dom, don't presume tree, other views
may be easier to implement jg: must view how user sees and interacts with
infromation cmn: how does user see a page, if not a tree then what 

JG: view it as linear, no concept of nodes, siblings, etc, could be very
complex, must work in all situations, if i must navigate 3 format table to
get text it gets confusing. 

HB: look at dennis's materials, sequentially nav headers 

JG: sequential nav of headers should be checkpoint 

HB: distinguish page type by nav type

JG: 3 types of techniques sequential search text sublist of elements - text
content and attrib values 

HB: what about prior previous 

JG: part of cmn action 

MN: keep tree metaphor, user understanding not important, sequential next
similar item - what user wants, immaterial the technical aspect, just do it. 

JG: techniques - use algorithm to implement checkpoints 

MN: yes-lists with sublist, headers with subheaders, can do them, walking
some kind of tree, but user doesn't care, just wants to do a task. 

MN: this is a good start, based on other browsers, must evolve, get global
stuff and review, 

JG: must have this done by next week, or we go to recommendation in
december instead of fall, look at stuff now, to move to recommendation. 

CMN: we are close to checkpoint list, need some work, main comment- doesnt
say navigate the tree, propose checkpoint, priorities are a little off 

JG: what about proposed list, ok then add doc tree 

CMN: drop prioity, then doc tree provides most features, need list, fix
prioities, add check point for tree, and tree may replace items on the list 

HB: walking dom provides access to hierarchy and attribute value. 

JA: /* comment */

JG: how do checkpoints reflect functional navigation, go to next parent,
child, what do people think? 

HB: like concept of walking tree, but breaks in tables, 

JG: covered in table 

HB: tree walking 

JG: want several checkpoints related to waling functions or one checkpoint
that says walk the tree?

CMN: one check point - naviagate whole document tree allow specific types
of navigation. Checkpoint that states moving from active element to active
element is not walking the document tree 

JG: Is not moving from active element to active element just a searching
function of the dcoument tree 

CMN: This funtion does not need the document tree to be implemented, the
function could search a linear object of elements and get the same results

JG: need check points that specify specific navigation commands?

CMN: nav whole document, then need convient/specific access 

MN: need general then specific implementations 

JG: Do we need a checkpoint that says view this node 

CMN: no

JG: functional checkpoints are necessary, there is a fundamental level of
navigation commands for dom nav 

JG: what is check point to allow user to nav doc tree 

CMN: tree is only one represenation, possible to show doc as linear object,
goes down wire a serial object, navigate the document navigate the doc tree
because of dom 

JG: Navigating the document tree is a big check point, don't we need little
checkpoints related to: nav to next child, next sibling view all elements
on node 

CMN: don't need alot of checkpoints, just one, need to walk around tree 

JG: need more specifics, foward and backward 

CMN: just one checkpoint mn: major heading 

CMN: guildine say navigate document tree, guideline should say nav the
document. Checkpoint nav the tree. Elaborate on navigation of the document
tree in techniques 

MN: convient checkpoint cmn: nav doc sequentially first nav doc as tree
then move element to element, serial nav mn: convience function 

CMN: then nav list of links. 

JA: yes, agree with cmn and mn, we all want the same thing, words are
getting in the way. 

CMN: add one checkpoint action item 

RESOLVED: check point to nav docu tree 

JG: Then searching is not tree navigation, 

HB: seperate content from attribute 

JG: may be other representation other than tree, what does lynx use cmn:
serial document **

ACTION: JG rewrite proposal , add walking the tree, based on todays

JG: people need to think about it, if you are walking tree in speech, what
to tell people at each node, need to convey to developer,

JG: Need to get navigation finished by next week tohave any hopw of moving
to recommendation in the fall, imperative, please try to think about this
issue this week so we can come to resolution next week


JG: new issue from IG, may be outside charter, authors tools, 

CMN: XFO flow object description, structure stripped, 

JG: outside our scope, only authoring tools 

CMN: potential issue, read ?? ways of dealing with it, useragent not accept
XFO jg: how will ua know cmn: xfo formating of xml, for xml ua, new tags 

JG: is there any thing we should implement 

CMN: ua should implement styling -xsl not xfo 

JG: xsl still in development cmn: let xsl group deal with it, maybe invite
Hol?? to the group in norway jg: cmn please write and ask Hol? to join 

JG: If we have some statement about XFO-the only thing that ua could do
would be implementation of xml markup 

CMN: dont know how the issuue be handled 

JG: RESOLUTON won't address XFO at the moment, will wait until other
working groups have tme to process. 

Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
1207 S. Oak Street
Champaign, IL 61820

Voice: 217-244-5870
Fax: 217-333-0248
E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 1999 16:47:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:38:21 UTC