- From: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:47:30 -0600
- To: "'UAWG list'" <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 11 Feb 2010 See also: IRC log http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-irc Attendees Present Simon, Jim, Kelly, Kim, Jim, greg, Jeanne Regrets Mark_H, Patrick_L, Jan_R, Bim_E Chair Jim_Allan, Kelly_Ford Scribe Kelly, jeanne, allanJ Contents * Topics 1. resolution for publishing working draft 2. Discuss "I'm Worried" 3. Action 282 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010JanMar/0054.html 4. action-280 fallback http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010JanMar/0055.html * Summary of Action Items Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: jallan to create use case for no-script etc. for implementation doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action05] [NEW] ACTION: jeanne to add role and state to the list on action-284 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action04] [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to add the list of alternative content to Implementing section 3. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action03] [NEW] ACTION: SH to review UAAG for how it supports commonly known disabilities. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action01] [NEW] ACTION: sharper to review UAAG for how it supports various disabilities. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action02] <trackbot> Date: 11 February 2010 <AllanJ> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010JanMar/0052.html <kford> Who si going to scribe today? I can if there isn't someone else. <kford> scribe: Kelly resolution for publishing working draft <kford> JAllan: We have to have a resolution in the minutes that says we agree to publish for a first working draft. <kford> Jeanne: Best solution is to wait until after F2F. Publish in March and promote last draft before working call. <kford> Jeanne: How to people feel about this? <kford> JAllan: Any objections to publishing first working draft to implamentation document in March? <kford> JAllan: No objections. <jeanne> RESOLUTION: Publish the Implementing UAAG 2.0 as a First Public Working Draft. Discuss "I'm Worried" <kford> SH: I was silent on the call but as people were discussing things it came to my mind that were were talking about items that were very specific to certain disabilities. <kford> SH: I'm concerned for example how people could be successful with some of our guidelines and addressing the needs for people with cognitive disabilities. <kford> SH: I'm thinking we need to find ways to make user agents open themselves up more for intermediary agents to do some sort of translation. <kford> SH: I've sent some of my responses and such to the list where we've been discussing this. <kford> SH summarizes his e-mail. <AllanJ> KF: to what extent insuring that UA has good programatic access would address your concerns... <AllanJ> ... so that a UA could write to provide this <AllanJ> SH: GL2 covers a lot <AllanJ> ... we have presumptions, menuing commands are in text and can be read <AllanJ> ... how does that help folks with cognitive problems who may need pictograms, or signlanguage <AllanJ> ... english is a second language for most sign language speakers <AllanJ> ... if taken to extremes, no UA could not meet all level A <AllanJ> ... need some mechanism for extensions, external agents, etc. to provide transformation of content and UI <kford> GL: You raised a lot of good issues. <kford> GL: I think we should take on SC and go through it as an example. <kford> GL: Saying something must be perceivable versus presented as visual text. <kford> GL: I agree that assistive technology coompat is important but I don't think it is enough. <kford> GL: For example a browser with no keyb9oard access saying you could use voice input for anything you wanted to do with the keyboard isn't enough. This wouldn't be accessible. <kford> SH: Would a browser on the Macintosh that obtained keyboard access only when you turned on the OS accessibility pass our guidelines? <AllanJ> GL: keyboards even when referenced are assumed to include emulators. <kford> /me testing <AllanJ> ... everything even pads are doing keyboard emulation even with gestures <AllanJ> SH: keyboard access means keyboard emulation by some other mechanism. <kford> SH: We've mixed our terms. We say you should provide keyboard access but what we mean is really that something <kford> SH: that allows for some sort of intermediate control. <AllanJ> KF: not following this. <AllanJ> SH: keyboard access = speech or switch to emulate the keyboard, but its the same as API <AllanJ> KF: where are we making this connection <kford> JA: What I'm hearing you say is that when we say keyboard, the brwoser doesn't provide a keyboard so this already comes from the operating system. <kford> JA: I think you may be going way too far down the chain. <kford> SH: I'm not saying this at all. I'm saying we are saying that you can control by the keyboard, or some other mechanism or emulation. <kford> Much discussion on this topic. <Greg> Greg: Principles and Guidelines are supposed to be broad, vague, and subjective. We don't require conformance with them. Rather, a UA that wants certification for a certain level needs to comply with specific Success Criteria, which ARE supposed to be specific, objective, measurable, and narrow in scope. <kford> GL: Simon, you are suggesting that there are additional items we should promote/recommend. <kford> SH: I think this is difficult for us because we don't have someone who does this sort of work is an expert. <kford> KP: If you have a universal control, any9one who wants to provide pictures for example could connect to this. <AllanJ> SH: GL 5 says nothing about how to make the UI understandable to someone with a cognitive disability <AllanJ> ... how is the UI unterstandable if the UI does no include pictograms <kford> GL: We need to be including items that have two UA already providing this. <kford> SH: What I'd like to do is go through the UA guidelines and see how they match or support accessibility in the different kinds of commonly understood disabilities. <kford> ACTION: SH to review UAAG for how it supports commonly known disabilities. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action01] <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - SH <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. sharper, shayes) <kford> ACTION: sharper to review UAAG for how it supports various disabilities. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action02] <trackbot> Created ACTION-283 - Review UAAG for how it supports various disabilities. [on Simon Harper - due 2010-02-18]. <Greg> From ISO 9241-141: <Greg> 9.3 Keyboard input <Greg> 9.3.1 General <Greg> Although the provisions of this subclause refer to keyboard input, the source of such input can be a variety of software and hardware alternative input devices. <Greg> In this section, "keyboard" should be interpreted as referencing a logical device rather than a physical keyboard. <kford> Group now talking about JA action 282. Action 282 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010JanMar/0054.html <kford> JA recaps mail discussion. <kford> JA: I tried going into HTML 5 also. Think about this and review. <kford> JA: Some things I didn't include because they seem like top level elements. My assumption is that they show in the DOM. <kford> The unique one is the detail and summary elements in HTML 5. <AllanJ> from greg: a) raw HTML associated with an element or range, <AllanJ> b) filename associated with an IMG, <AllanJ> c) title attribute for any element <jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne to add the list of alternative content to Implementing section 3. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action03] <trackbot> Created ACTION-284 - Add the list of alternative content to Implementing section 3. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-02-18]. <kford> JA: How should we deal with microformats? <kford> JA: there is some talk in HTML 5 about these? <AllanJ> GL: what about WAI-ROLE and STATE info might be alternative content <kford> group talking further about alternative contents. <kford> Various add-ons and ways UA expose this. <jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to add role and state to the list on action-284 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action04] <trackbot> Created ACTION-285 - Add role and state to the list on action-284 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-02-18]. action-280 fallback http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010JanMar/0055.html <kford> JA: Any objections to this going to our docs? <kford> JA: this would be under GL 3.11. <jeanne> jeanne to add email use case to section 3.1.1-2 from the email /2010JanMar/0055.html <kford> /me Jeanne would you able to close things up today? I have a situation brewing here. <kford> Group talking further about where and how to locate this text. <kford> JA: I thought noframes and noscript might fall into this. <jeanne> scribe: jeanne Kim: I generally like more information Kelly: what is the harm? <kford> /me Apologies but I am going to have to leave. Greg: this may require more of the user agent. Since it is level AA, it should be alright. I don't want to make it lvl A and require it of everyone. <AllanJ> scribe: allanJ discussion of no-script and no-frame as alternative content GL: need to consider development time and effort <scribe> ACTION: jallan to create use case for no-script etc. for implementation doc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-ua-minutes.html#action05] <trackbot> Created ACTION-286 - Create use case for no-script etc. for implementation doc [on Jim Allan - due 2010-02-18]. Jim Allan, Accessibility Coordinator & Webmaster Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired 1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756 voice 512.206.9315 fax: 512.206.9264 http://www.tsbvi.edu/ "We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964
Received on Thursday, 11 February 2010 19:48:12 UTC