User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference, 11 Mar 2010

W3C
- DRAFT -
User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
11 Mar 2010

HTML Minutes: http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010JanMar/0110.html
IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-irc


Attendees

Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: AllanJ on Make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Greg to rewrite the new 5.1.x [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to 'add link to ERT to Resources for 3.4.1' 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to 'remove the word enabled from 3.4.2' [recorded 
in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 from 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq8 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to Move 3.3.3 to 5.1.x [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to update 3.4.2 with the results from the survey 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/ from Kim, Greg and Jim. 
Jim has a complete example in the minutes. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to update document with above discussion of 3.5.1 
and the editorial items from the Survey 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq10 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action10]
[NEW] ACTION: member:AllanJ on Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action04]


Present
     [Microsoft], AllanJ, Greg, sharper, KimPatch, Jeanne, Harper_Simon, 
Allan_James, Ford_Kelly, Lowney_Greg, Patch_Kim, Spellman_Jeanne
Regrets
     Hakkinen_Mark, Mark_H
Chair
     Jim_Allan, Kelly_Ford
Scribe
     Sharper, Harper_Simon, kford

Contents

     * Topics
          1. Daylight saving time
          2. Publishing
          3. F2F November 1-5 Lyon, France
          4. Discuss survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/
          5. charter
          6. Discuss Draft Charter
          7. Discuss survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/
          8. Proposal for 3.3.7 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq7
          9. Proposal for 3.4.1 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq8
         10. Proposal for 3.4.2 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq9
         11. Proposal for 3.5.1 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq10
     * Summary of Action Items

<trackbot> Date: 11 March 2010

<AllanJ> scribe: Sharper

trackbot, start meeting

<scribe> chair: Ford_Kelly, Allan_James

<trackbot> Meeting: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group 
Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 11 March 2010

<scribe> scribe: Harper_Simon

<scribe> ScribeNick: sharper

This weeks Survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/

Please monitor your open Action Items: 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/actions/open

Open Issues: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/issues/open

Current editors draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/ED-UAAG20-20100308/

Current Techniques Document: 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/ED-IMPLEMENTING-UAAG20-20100308/
Daylight saving time

resolved: DST starts in the USA next week - Harmonisation with UK by 
28th March
Publishing

RESOLUTION: Congratulations to everyone - well done all and Jeanne 
especially for the editing job.
F2F November 1-5 Lyon, France

JA: who can attend if we have one?

SH: I could make it possibly

GL: Possibly

JS: I'll probably be going

KF: Not sure yet

KP: not sure either

JA: Not sure either
... deadlines JS: next couple of weeks
... sounding like not...
... Lets come back to this in couple of weeks

RESOLUTION: Lets come back to this in couple of weeks (Deadline: April 
16th to decide)
Discuss survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/
charter

<AllanJ> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/draft_uawg_charter_08mar10.html
Discuss Draft Charter

Location: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2010/draft_uawg_charter_08mar10.html

General Discussion Regarding Charter

JS: Any objections to it

KF: Can it be amended?

JS: Can be changed in 3 years when we renew.

<AllanJ> The mission of the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working 
Group (UAWG), part of the WAI Technical Activity, is to produce 
guidelines for the development of accessible user agents (e.g., 
browsers, media players, etc.) and their interoperability with assistive 
technology. A user agent is software that retrieves and renders Web 
content, including text, graphics, sounds, video, images, etc.

RESOLUTION: Change first sentence as per JA above - then approved.
... Approved regardless, change first sentence if possible.
Discuss survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/
Proposal for 3.3.7 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq7

GL: Now 3.3.3

JA: Thoughts?

GL: Not really relationships

JA: Agrees?

No-one wishes to keep it in 3.3.3?

JA: 3.5.1?

All: Agrees

SH: Scratch that 3.5.1 - 5.1

RESOLUTION: 5.1 is agreed

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to Move 3.3.3 to 5.1.x [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-330 - Move 3.3.3 to 5.1.x [on Jeanne Spellman 
- due 2010-03-18].

<scribe> ACTION: Greg to rewrite the new 5.1.x [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-331 - Rewrite the new 5.1.x [on Greg Lowney - 
due 2010-03-18].

RESOLUTION: Actions created
Proposal for 3.4.1 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq8

<kford> Adding seems fine to me.

JA: Gregs changes seem fine? Agree

<scribe> ACTION: AllanJ on Make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - AllanJ

<scribe> ACTION: member:AllanJ on Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax

<AllanJ> > ACTION: jAllan to Make Greg's changes to 3.4.1

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [recorded 
in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-332 - Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 [on 
Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].

<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 from 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq8 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-333 - Make Greg's changes to 3.4.1 from 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq8 [on Jeanne 
Spellman - due 2010-03-18].

<kford> Scribe: kford

<scribe> Scribe: SHarper

<jeanne> close action-332

<trackbot> ACTION-332 Make member:Greg's changes to 3.4.1 closed

<scribe> scribe: sharper

Discussion re PL's comments

GL: sounds like when it's not require the UA should still do repair - 
should be under 3.4.2 or some such based on the kind of rep[air
... could say supported by teh technology spec.
... wordsmithing on the fly

<Greg> Could replace "required" by "supported", but don't want to make 
it so broad that UA is required to craft longdesc for every image.

<AllanJ> add link to ERT to Resources for 3.4.1

GL: maybe too broad for Level A if required

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to 'add link to ERT to Resources for 3.4.1' 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-334 - 'add link to ERT to Resources for 3.4.1' 
[on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].

<Greg> In discussion, we find that "repair text" is defined so it is 
only applicable where alt content is required (not just supported).

RESOLUTION: Lets wait for PL to elaborate
Proposal for 3.4.2 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq9

<kford> /me I need to step out for one second

General discussion as to the meaning of 'enabled elements'

GL: Scoping the possible miss-interpretations

<Greg> E.g. if there's a graphical button which is currently disabled, 
the user can still benefit from finding out info about it. That argues 
for not limiting this to enabled elements.

GL: proposes remove the 'for enabled elements'

<kford> /me apologies and I'm back

KP +1

KF +1

SH +1

JA: +1

JS +1

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to 'remove the word enabled from 3.4.2' 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action08]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-335 - 'remove the word enabled from 3.4.2' [on 
Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-03-18].

JA: could be generalized for all users. right click on an image to get a 
context menu, then choose properties to get available information about 
the image without have to find the image in the source code.

<AllanJ> add an example. A user wanting addional information on an image 
could right click on an image to get a context menu, then choose 
properties to get available information about the image without have to 
find the image in the source code.

<jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne to update 3.4.2 with the results from the survey 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/ from Kim, Greg and Jim. 
Jim has a complete example in the minutes. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action09]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-336 - Update 3.4.2 with the results from the 
survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/ from Kim, Greg and 
Jim. Jim has a complete example in the minutes. [on Jeanne Spellman - 
due 2010-03-18].

RESOLUTION: Accept JA changes + KP edits + GL Minor Changes (all from 
survey) + remove enabled.
Proposal for 3.5.1 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq10

KP: Minor wording changes

GL: As written it doesn't make clear that these four classes must be 
highlighted in distinct ways. If, for example, a user agent highlighted 
selected text, visited links, and unvisited links identically, it would 
comply with the letter but not the intent of the criterion. Perhaps 
instead of "highlight" it could read "visually distinguish" or 
"highlight...so that each is uniquely distinguished, within the limits 
of the output technology". The last caveat is need

for cases such as pure text browsers, which may only have one or two 
methods of highlighting text. Add this discussion to the Intent section 
as well.

GL: Also, 3 minor changes

KP: should look at the document for highlight and visually distinguish

<Greg> "3.5.1 Highlighted items: The user has the option to highlight 
the following classes of information so that each is uniquely 
distinguished, within the limits of the output technology (Level A)"

<Greg> We may be able to leave off the "within the limits of the output 
technology" if we agree, for example, that a purely text browser can use 
characters like *, **, and _ to highlight ranges of text.

<AllanJ> proposed: 3.5.1 Highlighted items: The user has the option to 
highlight the following classes of information so that each is uniquely 
distinguished.

JA: Objections?

All: None.

<jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne to update document with above discussion of 
3.5.1 and the editorial items from the Survey 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq10 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2010/03/11-ua-minutes.html#action10]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-337 - Update document with above discussion of 
3.5.1 and the editorial items from the Survey 
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20100302/results#xq10 [on Jeanne 
Spellman - due 2010-03-18].

RESOLUTION: return to 3.5.2 + other items from the survey.

[End of minutes]

Received on Thursday, 11 March 2010 19:43:14 UTC