- From: Kitch Barnicle <barnicle@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:14:37 -0600
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Chair : Jon Gunderson Scribe: Kitch Attendance Harvey Bingham Gregory Rosmaita David Poelhman Mickey Quezner Ian Jacobs Regrets Jim Allen Charles McCathie-Neville Eric Hansen Announcements 1.Next UA FTF meetings in Boston on 1-2 March 20001 Review Action Items (see details below) HB: 1. Harvey has posted material to the list, regarding NISO/DAISY AG: 2. Al Gilman sent link to list regarding point of sale topic. MQ: 3. Link to current implementation report http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-IMP-20001113/ for review of materials submited by Mickey Quezner. Other topics: We should be getting comments from WCAG soon. Discussion 1.Issues list changes related to additional last call comments 2.Issue #392: Checkpoint 1.4: Overly broad http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#392 JG: is there an implementation of mouse emulation (e.g mouse over) with keyboard. For example, using JAWS can you tell if there is an event associated with an element. GR: when on element, can query status bar for some information JG: we need to show implementation for keyboard support for accessing pointer based events. GR: need to trust the script and the integrity of the script. AT would still be guessing what would happen JG: But could AT tell you that there is an event associated with this element, not necessarily what the script will do JG: we would like to be able to avoid going to CR IJ: a question remains as to whether our list of active elements should include things with associated mouse events Action IJ: 1.4 needs to be re-written in light of changes in checkpoint 1.1 Action Working Group: look for user agents that implement mouse events like mouse over with the keyboard Action: JG to ask PF people, especially Rich, about this issue 3.Issue #393: Checkpoint 1.2: Change to P2 for exposing through other programmatic means. http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#393 JG: related to issue 326 - this issue being addressed in association with issue 326 Resolved: issue being addressed in response to issue 326 4.Issue #394: Checkpoint 2.1: Vague about what cannot be provided through a source view http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#394 IJ: if we can provide guidance may be able to satisfy his issue. JG: while source provides access to content, other techniques would allow more efficient querying of information IJ: don't know if much guidance is necessary, do what the specs tell you, if not could end up rendering source JG: 6.2 vs. 2.1 ? JG: we want all content available through UI IJ: we cannot give a precise line here, first follow specs, then use conventions IJ: propose we say when you implement specs according to 6.2, then you should render according to these specs, when specs do not exist may render source, UA's could use heuristics to do a better job then source. IJ: could re-write note ..to say use specs IJ: We may want to have a section on security issues, acknowledging that we know of some open issues regarding security but haven't addressed them in this document. We could go to the director or coordination group. The group needs to decide how to approach this issue. Ian will create a new section GR: should reference digital signature work. IJ: UA should be able to conform, despite limitation imposed by security/copyright issues IJ: if some user has access to material, every user should have access. It may be that no user has access to source for example due to security issues. IJ: Client side timing. For server side timing the user agent could inform the user that i'm about to time out, i need an extension Action IJ: proposed text in 2.1 Resolved: Ian will provide new note for clarification. Working group can comment on note. 5.Issue #395: Checkpoint 3.8: Make images optional http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#395 IJ: addressed by checkpoint 2.3. But, HTML has longdesc and alt. How do you know which to render. IJ: Put a place holder in 3.8, specs may tell you what the best place holder is IJ Proposal: A) make 3.8 consistent with 3.2 in its use of the term placeholder B) both 3.8 and 3.2 could cross-referenced to 2.3, for example render an equivalent it its place and add comment that some configurable would be desirable regarding which place holder to render Discussion regarding whether 3.8 applies to content and chrome or just content. Original intent of group was that this checkpoint apply to author-supplied content. IJ: proposal - add a p1 checkpoint to turn of blinking in the user interface. JG: could be a problem defining what is blinking Action IJ: add a note to 5.8 - content requirements may also apply to user interface 6.Issue #396: New requirement: Allow user to override absolute values http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#396 IJ: some may be identified by specification Resolved: a) we are not including a general resizing requirement in UAAG 1.0 b) conformance to some specs requires resizing (e.g. SVG) c) conformance to some specs also requires override of author supplied info (e.g. CSS) Action IJ: mention the second and third comment above in section 1.2 7.Issue #397: Checkpoint 4.3 (and other color checkpoints): Need to define "system colors" http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#397 Resolved: We mean range of colors supported by the system. Action IJ: Ian will work on editing the document to clarify the issue. 8.Issue #398: Checkpoint 4.5 (4.6, 4.8, 4.9): Need definition of "not recognized as style" http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#398 IJ: what we mean, some content is meant for stylistic purposes, and has a lower priority then other content. We need to clarify the wording and make sure we have rational to show that the style is less important than the content. Action IJ: a) clarify "recognize style" b) need more rational - refer to WCAG - style less important than other content c) add note 4.5 - give example of multimedia content that can be recognized as style 9.Issue #399: Checkpoint 4.7: Implementation experience for this? http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#399 Note: We have to make the applicability clause clear. It has to do with controlling certain formats for this checkpoint. [Ian, I'm not sure if i captured this correctly.
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2000 16:05:07 UTC