- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 13:51:07 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
WAI UAGL Teleconference
19 January 1999
Participants:
Jon Gunderson
Ian Jacobs
Gregory Rosmaita
Dick Brown
Kitch Barnicle
David Poehlman
Harvey Bingham
Rich Schwertdfeger
Regrets:
Charles McCathieNevile
Denis Anson
Charles McCathieNevile
NEXT MEETING: 20 January 2000 @2pm ET
Agenda [1]
[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JanMar/0119.html
1) Review of action items
1.IJ: Update document with resolutions for issue LC#162
Done.
2.IJ: Update document with resolutions for issue LC#166
Done.
3.IJ: Update document with resolutions for issue LC#175
Done.
4.IJ: Update document with resolutions for Issue LC#176
Done.
5.IJ: Repropose checkpoint 1.5
Not done.
6.IJ: Add info related to searching for non-rendered information (or
searches using voice output user agents) to appendix
Need to verify.
7.IJ: Adopt changes in wording for Checkpoint 1.1
Not done.
8.JG: Find a host/date for next FTF meeting
See below.
9.JG: Take issue of mobile devices/guidelines in next WAI CG
meeting.
Done.
10.CMN: Follow up on this with some learning disability people on
graphical configuration issue
No info.
11.DA: Follow up with Alan Cantor on what is the critical component(s)
for graphical configuration (done by email during meeting)
Done.
12.DB: Send proposal for single key access wording for checkpoint
10.3
done.
13.DB: Ask IE Team about publication of review of IE 5 and Pri 1
checkpoints.
pending.
14.DB: Find out how developers find out which appropriate triggers to
use
in Windows for using built-in accessibility
features (i.e. sound sentry, show sounds, ...)
pending.
15.DP: Propose new Checkpoint 1.5 for access to system messages
Done.
16.GR: Send to the list techniques for how to use and control focus to
not have new windows cause problems for usability. In particular, how
this
will work with ATs.
Pending. Will ask RS at PF face-to-face.
17.GR: Send screen shot of JFW link list to the list
Done.
18.GR: Remind DP of this action to proposed new text for checkpoint
1.5
Done.
19.MK: Find out techniques for sending text search requests to servers
of
streamed text.
No info.
20.MR: Review techniques for topic 3.1 (Multi-media)
21.MR: Review techniques for Guideline 4 (Multi-media)
22.MR: Run a multimedia player through the guidelines for January.
All pending.
23.MQ: Ask Mark about meaning of comment raised in Issue #167
24.MQ: Ask Mark Hakkinen about telephone browsers and the
guidelines.
No info.
25.WC: Take form submission to GL WG to discuss issues related to
inadvertent submission.
Done.
2) Announcements
Regular UA telecon scheduled 20 January 2000 at 2:00 pm to 3:30 pm
Eastern Standard Time, USA
http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2000/01/wai-ua-telecon-20000120.html
3) Discussion
1.Candidate Recommendation planning update
IJ: Once we get the issues resolved (tomorrow),
the WG needs to say "We want to go to CR".
- Aim for 24th for CR.
- Aim to resolve all issues (and document objections)
by tomorrow.
- Update materials for Friday.
Action DB: Schedule time with IE team for next tuesday when
CMN will be in Seattle to review the CR if ready.
KB: What if all developers say "We don't expect to satisfy
these 5 or they shouldn't be on the list?"
IJ: Valuable information that should be considered by the WG.
2.Face to face planning update
JG: We have an invitation from RFBD (Princeton, NJ).
PWWorks may be "co-host".
No objections to general location (east coast).
3.Updated working draft of the guidelines and techniques published on
15
January
IJ:
- new short names
- some new text in there awaiting WG approval.
13.WD#186: Proposed removal of Note in 2.1
http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#186
HB: I think "concurrent" is better than "simultaneous".
Resolved: Approved.
Action IJ: Make change for 2.1 note.
14.WD#187: Proposed change in wording to 1.6 (profiles)
http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#187
IJ: Note the change - no longer required only on systems
with multiple users.
HB: Reword to be "through a profile".
Resolved: Approved.
Action IJ: Make change with clarification.
16.WD#189: Proposed change to checkpoint 2.3 (missing alt info)
http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#189
KB: Required by "whom"?
IJ: The markup language definition, not WCAG.
Resolved: Approved.
Action IJ: Make change wtih clarification.
4.WD#185: clarification of "single key" access
http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#185
Refer to DB's proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JanMar/0099.html
DB: Sticky keys on means that you accomplish something with
single keys in sequence.
JB: I think we want to highlight that you want really single
key, direct access (e.g., "F4" and that's it). I think
people want to highlight the ability to do this, but
not make it an absolute requirement.
DB: I don't think you'll get developers to add single-key
when sticky keys and sequences exist.
DP: I think the objective is to perform a single action with
a single key.
KB: In IE, you can get to most of the functions, but can be
very inefficient for some users. The goal (according to
Bryan Campbell) is to let users configure a small number
of single key bindings for important actions. Sequences
ok for the rest.
DB: I think that this is less important than other accessibility
features. I can, with sticky keys today, do some things
faster than some users with a mouse.
JG: Refer to Alan Cantor's email about keyboard efficiency
as well.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JanMar/0098.html
Consensus:
We don't expect all functionalities to be bound to single
keys at the same time.
IJ: Also, I think there are some contexts where you are
inherently doing N things (e.g., the print control panel).
I only mean "things that only require one step".
DP: Save input configurations in the user's profile.
JG: Note that this is possible in Word. We're asking for the
functionality in user agents.
GR: Note that Opera is a user agent that recognizes different
modes, so that in form edit mode, single key strokes aren't
available to the user.
IJ: noted - there may be modes in which some single keys
are not available (e.g., "p" should not be available
in editing mode).
Proposed:
- Split 10.3 into two. Make single-key a special case of old
10.3.
Action Ian: Propose split to list. Priority 2 for new checkpoint.
Incorporate these pieces:
- Not all at once
- Some keys not available at certain times.
- Intended for one-step operations.
5.LC#142: Checkpoint 1.5 (output device-independence) needs
clarification.
http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#142
Refer to proposal from DP:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JanMar/0122.html
DP: Goal of not having my input be sent to the wrong window.
GR: I would like to talk to RS face-to-face about some of the
focus issues.
JG: I have problems with "all output device APIs". Which ones?
The printer?
JG: I think the goal is that messages are rendered through
system controls.
IJ: I think the actual requirement is device-independent access
to information. System controls are the best way to do this
since ATs can monitor them.
IJ: I think 1.5 may be covered by 5.2, 9.1, and 5.6. However,
1.5 is P1.
JG: Problem of support for beeps: is morse code necessary?
DP: Refer to 9 December minutes as well.
Proposed:
- Modify 9.1 to include controls
- Add checkpoint to G4 to includes messages. In techniques
talk about different priorities of messages.
- Modify 1.5 about mode-independence of messages.
(Don't just use sound or animations).
Action IJ: Propose changes to the list.
--
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814
Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2000 13:51:11 UTC