- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 17:46:17 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
UA/GL teleconference to coordinate issues 26 August 1999 Present: Gregg Vanderheiden Chuck Letourneau Wendy Chisholm Ian Jacobs Al Gilman Jon Gunderson Charles McCathieNevile Gregory Rosmaita Jason White Marja Koivunen Dean Denman (The Lighthouse, joined after 1 hour). Next scheduled meeting of GL WG: 9 September. Note 1: We will try to schedule a meeting for 2 September. If we can schedule this meeting, we will invite UA to join the GL call to discuss outstanding issues on 9 September. Note 2: Meetings will henceforth last 90 minutes. Agenda [1] [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/meetings/19990826.html#agenda ---------------------- 1) Review of action items 2) Navigation bars 3) Long description media types 4) Specificity of checkpoint 1.5 5) Metadata [Not covered] ---------------------- 1) Review of action items. (Previous minutes) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/1999JulSep/0266.html CL: Talked to Coodination Group about a standard set of questions for Web development "instructors". Judy said good idea, and falls within EO, but no time to address this today. JW: Two other points made as well: a) EO has clarification of guidelines on their agenda b) Concerns about "scope creep" for GL. WC: Rob sent a note to GL with questions. 2) Navigation bars JW: Al's suggestion [1] regarding a mode in which DIV/title can be regarded as a container that can be skipped is a valid suggestion. I do have reservations about the use of MAP to contain navigational links. Don't want to use this unless in a spec. Could propose to HTML WG, but don't want to endorse without making it part of the specification. Furthermore, future technologies (schemas) will allow us to do this correctly. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/1999JulSep/0293.html CMN: a) For DIV/title: It's a backwards step. It's the navigational equivalent of using FONT everywhere to create structural illusions. b) For MAP: The suggestion comes directly from the HTML 4.0 specification [2]. Shows how to use MAP with straight text. Similar situation as we were in with longdesc. We recommended that people used d-links until longdesc was supported. Similar with MAP: use of MAP as block-level container is supported - it is rendered. HTML 4.01 has this. [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html/struct/objects.html#h-13.6 c) The "skip navbar link" is a hack that is similar to the d-link. Useful if understood by humans, but not machine recognizable. GV: (Scribe missed comments) JW: About DIV - it's a container element for style sheets and other purposes. When it does this, in an outline reading of the document, it should appear as part of outline. WC: DIV with a human-readable title is a bridge to XML. Are there other elements that need to be grouped (e.g., images)? CMN: But using DIV this way takes you out of the "standard" hierarchy. So it's like the XML approach, but it's not XML. So use xhtml instead. IJ: a) For medium term: use schemas. Don't focus on HTML but move towards xhtml + schemas. b) For immediate: use scripts (for example). What problem are we trying to solve? GV: a) We can add additional functionalities to existing browsers (plug-ins). So don't focus only on short-term solution. b) What strategies apply today? JW: I see DIV as the only short-term generic solution for adding structure that we're looking for. I think the long-term solutions should be schemas. IJ (to CMN): How does DIV/title strike you in the short term? CMN: Marginally inferior to MAP/title solution. HTML 4.0 doesn't say explicitly that you don't need an image. CMN notes: MAP content is rendered by all browsers I've tested but Amaya. IJ: HTML 4.01 language of 13.6.1 section on rendering of block-level content of MAP is new. Since HTML 4.01 in PR now, good time to ask an AC member to add a phrase that would be helpful to address this issue (e.g., no image necessary, "should" render content). JW: Two times to render content: a) Image map not represented in display medium. b) No image associated with MAP element. So I propose adding to HTML 4.01 a comment about rendering MAP block content along the lines of "The user agent should render MAP content, notably when there is no associated image." (Note use of "should".) [Scribe note: Suppose the user were able to configure the browser to render or not to render block content in a MAP element. UAs would not be able to render a document progressively in "don't render block content" mode since that would imply having to wait for all images (in fact, all content) to know whether the MAP was associated with any of them.] CMN: What about OBJECT element? If you want to do what Jason suggests, do this: <OBJECT data="image.gif"> <MAP name="foo"> ...block content... </MAP> </OBJECT> Doing this, you get links instead of the image (if MAP content is rendered). GV: Are we trying to push understanding of MAP to far? Is this just a loophole we are exploiting? AG: HTML 4's intention was to allow authors to specify URLs one time only. CMN: Also to allow image maps or text links, both based on a single element content. The spec allows this, but doesn't say that you can do this even if you never intended to use an image. GV: What about case of bulleted list of links? You wouldn't want to put that in a MAP. CMN: Users approach these lists differently than navbars. JW: I'd like to separate a) How MAP is defined b) Technique of when it should be used for grouping links. Author discretion enters here. MK: There can be a lot of navbars in a document (e.g., CNN site). Users want to be able not just to skip, but to return to navbars. WC: For DIV/title, if author puts information in "title", UA can present this information to the user. CMN: MAP/title will allow the same thing. JW: With appropriate wording in HTML 4.01, I'd agree with Charles' proposal. Otherwise, I'd opt for DIV with title. IJ: What about scripts? AG: Problem of Lynx, which doesn't support scripts. CMN: Then include a "skip nav bar" in the block of links. But this pushes the problem from one of listening to physically tabbing through a list of links. The "skip nav bar" approach is still the solution here. Or use a browser with a structure view (e.g., Amaya). WG: So first link inside of MAP is to jump over the others? CMN: So this will work today (e.g., with scripts, CSS) and tomorrow. Also, use an image map up front and text links at the bottom. Conclusion: a) For today, use MAP/title. Put a link in the MAP to skip over the others. Use CSS or scripting to hide it. Also, put image map at the top and text links at the bottom. WC: Some bugs using tabindex within frames in at least IE 5. Don't believe supported in NN 4.0 b) For tomorrow: Use MAP with semantics as written in the spec. JW: Ask PF WG to consider this scenario and other structural navigation issues when considering schemas. Actions: 1) CMN: Raise awareness with AC Members about enhancing accessibility in HTML 4.01. JW: I will dissent use of MAP unless the update is made to HTML 4.01. 2) WC: Propose techniques based on this discussion. JG: Does this discussion represent consensus between UA and GL? WC: No. I will write up the GL side of this discussion, send to GL for comments, then send to UA. CMN: UAs should expect to find MAP if they expect to skip blocks of links. MK: What about getting to the central content of the page? AG: You may find repeated MAP elements, but you won't, from this proposal, know how to find the primary content. There are undoubtedly refinements to be made. 3) Long description media types See Al's proposal. [3] [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/1999JulSep/0297.html GV: longdesc was designed to lead to something really accessible. Other than "why limit it if we don't have to", what's the benefit for making this more than text? AG: We're trying not to make it different than a standard URI reference, which doesn't limit to a specific media type. IJ: But no "type" attribute with longdesc. GV: But putting audio at the end of longdesc raises barriers. AG: But to meet WCAG, you'd need an auditory description to accompany the audio clip. JW: I don't think it's approprite to limit content types for longdesc in an HTML spec. I think the WCAG should have jurisdiction. MK: "longdesc" also used in SMIL. GV: I'd like to register nervousness on this point. I fear people will put content out their that will impose too many layers before getting to accessible content. IJ: Drop longdesc from SMIL and use schemas. CMN: Drop IMG entirely. /* Chuck leaves the call */ JW: In response to Greg's concern, I'd be willing to have non-normative language in an HTML spec that longdesc generally points to text. GV: Use the Techniques Doc to address the longdesc issue. CMN: Having text is nowhere near as good as having full markup: Put HTML at the end of a longdesc. GV: Why use a movie at the end of a longdesc? CMN: E.g., instructional videos. GV: Why not put it on the main page? CMN: No particular way to do it. The primary version may be images plus text. The decision of what is main and what is secondary is up to the author. IJ: This sounds like a cognitive technique: put text as primary content, video as complement. JW: Longdesc should not designate plain text alone, but markup. CMN: Yes, at a minimum, refer to markup. JW: But this should not be normative in the HTML spec. GV: We need to talk about the purpose of longdesc: should limit it to a description of the image, not supplemental information about the context in which the image occurs. Similar to using alt text just for the purposes of a tool tip. Warning: if the function goes beyond a description of the image, this could lead to problems. AG: What about content negotation? You get text or video depending on preferences. Refer also to CC/PP. IJ: Distinguish a) Function of longdesc b) Content types. GV: But users may not know how to adjust clients to get different types. WG: How used in SMIL? MK: Every media object has it (audio, video, textstream, ...) CMN: Working from the HTML 4.0 spec [4] [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html/struct/objects.html#edef-IMG WC: Conclusion - we need to get consensus on the list about what's the intended use of "longdesc". 4) Specificity of checkpoint 1.5 1.5 Until user agents render text equivalents for client-side image map links, provide redundant text links for each active region of a client-side image map. Action IJ: Send proposal to GL list about broadening language to refer to device-independence, not just text.
Received on Thursday, 26 August 1999 17:46:59 UTC