- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:46:25 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
10 October 2000 UA Guidelines Teleconference
Present:
Jon Gunderson (Chair)
Ian Jacobs (Chair)
Tim Lacy
Charles McCathieNevile
Eric Hansen
Gregory Rosmaita
Regrets:
Kitch Barnicle
David Poehlman
Absent:
Jim Allan
Rich Schwerdtfeger
Harvey Bingham
Mickey Quenzer
Next meetings: 12 October. Regrets TL.
TL: If you don't here from me by 14 October, I'm ok to
go to last call.
Agenda:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0042.html
Minutes of previous meeting 28 September:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JulSep/0493.html
Review Action Items
Announcements
1. FTF meeting update and call for participation
16-17 November.
Confirmed: JG, IJ, DP, HB, JA (phone), probably
someone from Microsoft, probably
someone from AOL
Regrets: CMN, KB, Lake Rocca, Glen Gordon, Mark Novak
Maybe : DA, HR, RS, AG, EH
JG: No objections to having the meeting then.
CMN: I could make a december meeting.
Action JG and IJ: Ensure that we have enough people committed
to attend the meeting. IJ put up meeting page.
Action TL: Find out whether definitive yes from Microsoft.
2. Taking measures to reduce spam
IJ: I requested a change to the mailing list.
3. XHTML 2.0 requirements to PF WG?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0003.html
4.Please review list of invited last call reviewers
http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2000/09/reviewers-last-call-2.html
Action GR: Request Dolphin review
Action TL: Request Microsoft Multimedia group review
Discussion
1.Last call scheduling issues
IJ: Attempting to go to last call 19 October.
GR: I have only gotten a copy of the document since Saturday. I
doubt I will have a chance to review the whole thing by Thursday.
Resolved:
- Delete redundant parts of 10.5 w.r.t. 10.4.
GR: Missing from this is a pass-through requirement when conflicts
occur.
JG: Pass-through is covered by AT.
IJ: WCAG and ATAG has committed to last call review.
3.Issue 318: Scaling vector graphics content like SVG
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JulSep/0497.html
Status: Looks to complicated to add any new information for this
version
Refer to thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0004.html
JG: There are a number of complicated issues, and WCAG has just
started to example SVG accessibility. I propose that we do not try
to address this in UAAG 1.0.
GR: At the Bristol meetings, we discussed SVG techniques and have
some UA issues.
CMN: I intend to send them to the UA list. I'll be dining with SVG
people next week. I don't think we should specifically include new
SVG requirements at this stage. However, I think we should go as
far as we can in the existing document (techniques in particular).
JG: We don't have SVG implementation experience. This makes it
harder to "skip" Candidate Rec period.
IJ: We don't have any requirement for non-text objects (e.g.,
lines) outside of what you can do with style sheets.
GR: Important to note that alt text needs to be stylable.
Problems: control of size, clipping.
Resolved:
- Do not add additional requirements for SVG to UAAG 1.0.
- Mention SVG in note after checkpoint 4.1.
JG: Anyone may submit SVG techniques for current checkpoints.
EH: I think that it's important to document rationale for this
decision, why out of scope.
IJ: E.g.,
1) We think that this is an important topic, but lack
implementation experience.
2) Some requirements are already covered.
3) We haven't considered to date and we want to go to last
call without opening a new topic at this point.
4.Issue 319: Adding a GUI label for conformance
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0009.html
IJ: I am afraid to use an acronym such as "GUI". GR has said
he doesn't want to use "Graphical" as a label. What about "Basic"?
JG: Tim, do you think such a label would be useful?
TL: I am not sure whether an additional label is useful or not.
Resolved:
- Add another abbreviation label "Basic":
Text, Color, Image, Animation
- Adopt corrected lists of checkpoints from Jon
5.Issue 320: Adding a checkpoint on ignoring position markup to
support
authors in creating content that transforms gracefully
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0008.html
IJ: Would "break" HTML specifications,
JG: We have implementation experience.
CMN: I think that this is an attempted repair functionality.
I don't see the argument for making it a checkpoint.
JG: Useful for people to test linearization of tables.
GR: I would support such a requirement. I'd also suggest that
that tables be deprecated in XHTML 2.0 (since presentation only).
I think that this is useful for people who don't know about Lynx
or who don't know about tablin.
IJ, CMN: We disagree with the latter statement.
TL: I don't think this functionality belongs in the user agent.
CMN: As repair techniques go, this is not a great one. It would
make more sense to include a table linearizer.
Resolved: Resolved: Since there is not unanimity about such
a requirement, and this issue wasn't raised in PR and Last Call,
no new requirement.
EH: We've had debates about whether linearized table should
count as a text equivalent. I think it can be classed as an
equivalent of some kind. I think we should include "linearized
table" as a class of equivalent for tables.
JG: That would be WCAG's responsibility.
EH: I'm ok with not saying that it's a text equivalent. But
an equivalent of some kind.
6. IJ Proposed for 8.7: Delete "identifying
(through a standard interface where available" from 8.7. So it
becomes "Provide a mechanism for highlighting the current viewport,
selection, and focus."
Action IJ: Send to list.
Open Action Items
1.GR: Proposed repair checkpoints
2.KB: Submit technique on providing information on current item and
number of items in search
--
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 831 457-2842
Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2000 14:46:26 UTC