- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:51:36 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
19 April 2001 UA Guidelines Teleconference Agenda announcement: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001AprJun/0041 Reference document 11 April 2001 Guidelines: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-20010411/ Minutes of previous meeting 5 April: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001AprJun/0009 Next meeting: 26 April teleconference: Regrets: IJ (for 26 April and 3 May). Present: Jon Gunderson (Chair), Ian Jacobs (scribe), Harvey Bingham, David Poehlman, Tim Lacy, Mickey Quenzer, Eric Hansen, Jim Allan Regrets: Gregory Rosmaita Absent: Denis Anson, Rich Schwerdtfeger, Charles McCathieNevile ---------- Discussion ---------- 1) What we should be doing now: implementations JG: We need to be thinking about implementations now. We should be preparing to be using Candidate Recommendation period to test the checkpoints, and to show that they improve accessibility. We should be a little less concerned with improving the document. The goal is getting conformance, implementation, and outreach. 2) Proposed clarification to checkpoint 12.5: (This and following points come from: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001AprJun/0034 Resolved: Adopt proposal. 3) Changing "for all" to narrower scope for checkpoints 2.1, 2.2, 8.1, and 8.2 Proposed in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001AprJun/0044 Resolved: - The user agent is not required to conform for *all* formats. - The claim should include information about which formats are implemented for the purposes of conformance. - The claim should include information about which APIs are implemented for the purposes of conformance. Action IJ: Edit the text of checkpoints 2.1, 2.2, 8.1, and 8.2 so that UAs are not required to conform for all formats that are implemented. 4) What should be done with lost packets? Resolved: - We do not require the user agent to buffer lost packets when the user has paused a presentation. - Clarify in the document that for some live presentations, there may be information loss when pause happens for 2.4, 3.5, and 4.4 - Technique: In this case, I think we should suggest in the techniques document that the user agent should alert the user (notably in the configuration to pause automatically) that pausing may lead to information loss. We can also recommend some buffering. 5) Will checkpoint 2.4 be useful in heavily interactive presentations? Resolved: - We agree, there is some content where 2.4 pausing may not result in optimal usability. But the user can always turn off the configuration if they want to. - Add a technique to allow the user element-level control (e.g., to not pause for a particular element). 6) What is the scope of 2.4? What must be paused? JG: From a user's perspective, I would expect the user agent to pause both streams. Most tools only offer one pause button. IJ: I think that in SMIL you always know that the streams are going on in parallel (through <par>). Resolved: - We don't specify what should happen in this case. Checkpoint 2.6 covers the case of synchronized content. We don't say anything about what the user agent should do when there are unsynchronized streams. We are presuming that both streams will be available at another time. - Add a cross reference from 2.4 to 2.6 and state that when the presentation is paused, we expect that synchronized content would be paused as well. 7) Checkpoint 3.3 (blinking/animation) and streams - Clarify that animation effect and text stream (text arrives over time) are independent. Give the movie subtitles example as text that arrives over time but is not animated. - This is related to refresh (e.g,. a stock ticker). Checkpoint 3.5 applies. Action IJ: Make mention of animations, text streams, and refresh in the document. /* Jim leaves */ 8) Checkpoint 4.6: Captions positioning. Resolved: - Allow technique of captions in another viewport for 4.6. - Sample rewrite of checkpoint: "For graphical viewports, allow the user to position text transcripts, collated text transcripts, and captions in the same or another viewport." 9) Checkpoint 4.6: Captions positioning and layout issues. JG: What happens when I want to increase the font size and that causes layout problems? JG: I think that we will need to test this checkpoint in CR. JQ: Quicktime Player Pro lets you query the tracks of a movie, and for some of the tracks, you can change some of the properties. I can move captions around on the screen. But I can't change the font size of the captions from the same user interface. Resolved: - Add Note to 4.6 that this involves user override of author-specified layout. - Add Note to 4.6 that the user agent isn't required to reflow the presentation (i.e., lay it out differently) - If the format doesn't allow the user agent to reposition the content, then the control applicability provision is relevant. 10) Definition of "override". Resolved: - Define "user override" in the document. - "User override" can mean: a) Turn off or on. b) Replace one value with another. 11) Issue 8: Checkpoint 10.9: Scope of position indicator? Resolved: - Don't state the granularity of the proportion indicator. - Include the technique that is mentioned in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001AprJun/0044 ----------- New actions ----------- JG: Create third last call issues list. ----------------- Completed actions ----------------- HB: Talk to EO about publishing "How do people with disabilities use the Web". Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0555 Update: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001AprJun/0043 TL: Ask someone from Microsoft whether they will evaluate the guidelines with a product. TL: I sent mail to a number of product managers asking for review of the last call document before 4 May. Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0137 7.DP: Review navigation checkpoints for techniques Done: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001AprJun/0039 ------------ Open actions ------------ IJ: Coordinate usability testing of the guidelines (JRG volunteers to be one of the testers). Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0137 CMN: Find out from SYMM WG whether repositioning of objects will appear in the spec (or should be in UAAG). Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0357 RS: Send pointer to information about universal access gateway to the WG. Source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0258 GR: Review event checkpoints for techniques MQ: Review speech checkpoints -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2001 15:51:41 UTC