- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 15:50:46 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
WAI UA Teleconf
9 Mar 2000
Jon Gunderson (Chair)
Ian Jacobs (Scribe)
Harvey Bingham
Eric Hansen
Gregory Rosmaita
David Poehlman
Hans Riesebos
Mark Novak
Marja Koivunen
Mickey Quenzer
Dick Brown
Charles McCathieNevile
Rich Schwerdtfeger
Regrets:
Kitch Barnicle
Absent:
Denis Anson
Jim Allan
Next meeting: 16 March
Agenda [1]
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JanMar/0454.html
1) Review of Open Action Items
Open Action Items
-----
All done except maybe number 7.
1.IJ: Split checkpoint 5.1 (28 January Draft) into read and UI write
as
stated in minutes
2.IJ: Add a cross-reference from 2.1 to 5.1 and say in 5.1 that this
is
a special case of 2.1
3.IJ: Add techniques to checkpoint 7.2 for synchronous multi-media
presentation (space and time)
4.IJ: Ensure that techniques for checkpoint 1.5 talk about using
status
bar to display message
5.IJ: Incorporate proposal for checkpoint 1.5 from minutes
6.IJ: Update the document based on todays resolutions on 9 March
Telecon
7.IJ: Add rationale to Checkpoint 1.5: if you're deaf blind you might
need this (Braille display).
Status: Not done.
-----
8.CMN: Suggest some techniques related to the good bits of the DOM
Level
2 event module (related to checkpoint on notification 5.4).
9.DB: Ask IE Team about publication of review of IE 5 and Pri 1
checkpoints
Status: Dropped.
10.DP: Send NN profile info.
Status: Done.
11.JA: Rewrite techniques for 3.3 (see minutes)
Status: Dropped.
12.MR: Review techniques for topic 3.1 (Multi-media)
Status: Dropped.
13.MR: Review techniques for Guideline 4 (Multi-media)
Status: Dropped.
2) Re: ftf.
IJ: If there are no objections to going to PR, we'll have
a face-to-face in New Jersey 10/11 April.
Action IJ: Put up meeting page for ftf.
3) Ian summary of where we are in the PR process.
4) Review of list of changes:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/wai-ua-wd-changes.html
EH: Comments on word "automatic" in 2.3. Is this necessary?
JG: My main concern is that people understand that the UA
pauses itself.
EH: Ok.
HB: What about breaking sync?
CMN: There are cases when you can't do anything about it,
e.g., real world events.
HB: What about auction events?
CMN: You can't slow down the real world. The requirement
doesn't apply.
GR: Auction houses notify through color changes <frown>
critical events.
--
2.6
a) Added collated text transcript
b) Moved note to checkpoint, added
"author-supplied" synch cues.
MK: Sounds ok to me.
MQ: What about adding the word "indexing"?
HB: Indexing in the sense of marking time?
MQ: Marking time.
--
4.7:
MK, EH: Ok.
4.16: Allow the user to configure viewports,
prompts, and windows opened on user agent initiation.
IJ: We could harmonize wording with that of 9.2. Use
"not explicitly done by the user."
DP, CMN: Yes,
GR: I think that the focus is to allow the user to configure
whether or not the UA. "Allow the user to configure
whether the user agent will automatically open a viewport,
prompt, or window.
EH: That's a new requirement.
CMN: There are other configuration issues.
GR: It's one thing to control the size/position of something
once created and another to talk about suppressing the
creation.
IJ: As I recall, we agreed in Austin to put all of it in 4.16.
CMN: I agree with Gregory - there are two separate requirements.
GR: I propose to split the checkpoint:
a) Allow the user to configure the visual rendering.
b) Allow the user to configure alert mechanisms used on opening.
c) Respect user settings when opening windows.
IJ: Sounds like three:
a) Suppress spawning AND/OR prevent focus shifting.
b) Configure alert of spawning.
c) Style the user interface.
IJ: I don't think "respect user settings" get us much.
Action IJ: Add to definition of Configure that users should
be able to save settings.
JG: How does all this relate to focus changes (4.15)?
IJ: Why are spawned windows an issue if there's no
focus change and you're notified?
GR: Yes, 4.15 and 4.16 are related.
RESOLVED:
1) MOve note after 4.16 to 4.16 techniques with some
clarification.
2) Link from 4.16 techniques to 4.15 techs.
3) Reword 4.16.
Action Ian: Send proposal to list to clarify.
------
Action IJ: Add a reference to the XHTML Recommendation.
Action IJ: For 5.1, add a technique to take into DOMs defined
by other specifications (e.g., SVG).
------
5.8:
HR: Ok
RS: Ok.
6.2:
Bug: Ian forgot to add "available"
Action:
- FIx bug
- Explain what a W3C Rec is in the techniques document.
8.4: Ok.
9.4: s/portion/proportion
10.7: Action Ian: Add "in" a profile.
-----------
CMN: Is minority objection propagated?
IJ: Yes.
GR: In the definition of documentation, it doesn't talk about updates.
IJ: That's in 1.2.
GR: Things that are supplemental, but provided by the vendor.
Action IJ: Add something about with the product or available
elsewhere.
------------------------------
GO TO PR?
IJ: Any objections to going to PR?
None.
--
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Thursday, 9 March 2000 15:51:52 UTC