- From: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:38:08 -0500
- To: WAI-ua <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+=z1WncweN8ZgYotGLNLfs7Lfd+5KyrRg_2XicdVSw2PxKPjQ@mail.gmail.com>
from: http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html
User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 15 Aug 2013
See also: IRC log http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-irc
<http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-irc>
Attendees
Presentkford, Greg_Lowney, Jim_Allan, Jeanne, Kim_PatchRegretsJanChairjimallan,
kellyfordScribeGreg
Contents
- Topics <http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#agenda>
1. Proposal for 1.8.6<http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item01>
2. UAAG2: Clarifying obscuration -
Jan<http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item02>
3. Survey from 4 July start on question 5 -
JR17<http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item03>
4. 2.2.4 comment JR17<http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item04>
5. 2.3.3 JR20 <http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item05>
6. 2.7.4 JR29 <http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item06>
7. 2.11.4 JR36 <http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item07>
8. 3.1.1 JR40 <http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item08>
9. 4.1.2 JR44 <http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#item09>
- Summary of Action
Items<http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
------------------------------
<trackbot> Date: 15 August 2013
Summary of Action Items *[NEW]* *ACTION:* jeanne to add "1.8.6: Zoom: The
user can rescale content within top level graphical viewports as follows:
(Level A) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action01
]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* jeanne to change wording of 2.2.4 change to The user can
request notification when sequential navigation wraps at the beginning or
end of a document, and can prevent such wrapping [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action04]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* Jeanne to review 3.1.1 Reduce Interruptions to determine
whether there's need to reduce ambiguity as to whether "in UA UI" applies
to both "non-essential..." and "updating/changing..." [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action05]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* jim to review obscure 1.1.4 [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action02]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* wording of 2.2.4 change to The user can request
notification when sequential navigation wraps at the beginning or end of a
document, and can prevent such wrapping. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action03]Proposal for 1.8.6
<allanj> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2013JulSep/0030.html
Jan did proposal, Greg suggested changes, and Jan agreed.
<allanj> Proposed
<allanj> 1.8.6: Zoom: The user can rescale content within top level
graphical viewports as follows: (Level A)
<allanj> Zoom in: to 500% or more of the default size; and
<allanj> Zoom out: to 10% or less of the default size, so the content fits
within the height or width of the viewport. (Level AA)
<allanj> ignore above
<allanj> here is correct
<allanj> 1.8.6: Zoom: The user can rescale content within top level
graphical viewports as follows: (Level A)
<allanj> a) Zoom in: to 500% or more of the default size; and
<allanj> b) Zoom out: to 10% or less of the default size, or enough to let
the content fit within the height or width of its viewport, whichever size
is smaller.
<allanj> +1
No objections.
<allanj> *ACTION:* jeanne to add "1.8.6: Zoom: The user can rescale content
within top level graphical viewports as follows: (Level A) [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-864 - Add "1.8.6: zoom: the user can rescale
content within top level graphical viewports as follows: (level a) [on
Jeanne F Spellman - due 2013-08-22].
<allanj> a) Zoom in: to 500% or more of the default size; and
<allanj> b) Zoom out: to 10% or less of the default size, or enough to let
the content fit within the height or width of its viewport, whichever size
is smaller.
<allanj> to the document
UAAG2: Clarifying obscuration - Jan
<allanj> kim, this is the tread.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2013JulSep/0032.html related
to captions obscuring underlying video
Greg: Perhaps we should just use simpler and more limited wording just
requiring the option for transparent background behind caption text. Not
sure what else Jan would like to cover with "not fully obscure".
Jeanne: Perhaps should drop this requirement, as it's complicated and
doesn't have that much benefit for accessibility.
Jim: This is only AAA.
Jeanne: Not sure the original comment justifies this much work.
Jim: Jan's original comments were: JR5 This is a lot of configurability.
JR6: Right-and-left is a challenge with horizontally flowing languages like
English.
<allanj> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2013JulSep/0025.html
<allanj> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2013JulSep/0031.html
<allanj> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2013JulSep/0032.html
Greg: The transparency vs. "fully obscure" discussion is about 1.1.4.d.
Jan's original comment on 1.1.4 was "JR3 (a) seems like a lot at AA,
especially since captions typically overlay the lower portion of the video.
Others make sense."
Kim: say "functionally obscure" instead of "fully obscure"?
Jeanne: How could you test "functionally obscure"?
Jim: QuickTime etc. put captions in a separate window; if video players
could do that it would be fine. Proposal in HTML5 is that they support this.
Greg: But Jan's concern on the earlier call was that having captions in a
separate area may not be feasible on small devices, and that reducing the
size of the primary media to allow captions to be in a separate area of a
small screen would effectively obscure the primary media, even though it's
not covered, it's too small.
Jim: say not more than 15% coverage?
Jeanne: What about people with low vision who want very large captions?
... How about removing the contentious part of this SC?
Jim: Want to postpone this in order to get to the survey.
Jeanne proposes drop D, the point about obscuring the primary media.
Kim: Put as suggestion in the Implementing document.
<allanj> *ACTION:* jim to review obscure 1.1.4 [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-865 - Review obscure 1.1.4 [on Jim Allan - due
2013-08-22].
Survey from 4 July start on question 5 - JR17
<allanj> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20130702/results#xq10
2.2.4 comment JR17
Jeanne: Doesn't feel it meets qualifications for Level A, doesn't block
access, just makes it more difficult.
Kim: fatigue and confusion.
Jim: All but Greg agree on AA.
<allanj> 4 wordings that are functionally the same
Greg: We have four wordings, all functionally the same, so the editorial
subgroup could work on that.
... I also suggested requiring active notification, such as a message box,
not just a passive message down on the status bar.
Jeanne: push back from manufacturers not wanting requirements on UI such as
dialog boxes.
Greg: Not requiring message boxes all the time, just the option.
Jeanne: Benefit not worth the fight, considering the push back we'd get.
Greg: Defer to Jeanne, although unhappily.
Jim: could this be done with extensions?
Greg: In my email I cited a thread where it was revealed it could not be
done in Firefox today.
Jeanne: Good enough to suggest active notification in Intent and Examples?
Greg: Better than nothing.
... I can't tell you how angry it makes me--not the UAAG decision but the
browser manufacturers who make search and navigation so difficult for me
and many others.
<KimPatch> *ACTION:* wording of 2.2.4 change to The user can request
notification when sequential navigation wraps at the beginning or end of a
document, and can prevent such wrapping. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action03]
Greg: ...and refuse to fix it even after years of complaints.
<trackbot> Error finding 'wording'. You can review and register nicknames
at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/tracker/users>.
<KimPatch> suggest active notification in Intent and examples
<allanj> *ACTION:* jeanne to change wording of 2.2.4 change to The user can
request notification when sequential navigation wraps at the beginning or
end of a document, and can prevent such wrapping [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-866 - Change wording of 2.2.4 change to the user
can request notification when sequential navigation wraps at the beginning
or end of a document, and can prevent such wrapping [on Jeanne F Spellman -
due 2013-08-22].
2.3.3 JR20
<allanj> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20130702/results#xq11
Existing
2.3.3 Direct activation of Enabled Elements: The user can move directly to
and activate any enabled element in rendered content. (Level A)
Proposed
Level AA
Kim: Not having it is the equivalent of your car only going 30 miles per
hour instead of 60. If it's that difficult, you won't use it as often.
... Mouseless Browsing handles large numbers of links by only numbering
those visible on the screen.
<allanj> this is the Mouseless Browsing SC
Greg: I realize my concern is unwarranted as the wording doesn't require a
single key for each element, so typing long numbers followed by a hotkey
would work.
Kelly: We could keep it A but expect push back from manufacturers.
Jim: Extensions provide this, so shouldn't be an issue.
Kelly: But for cases where extensions don't exist...
... To the extent manufacturers value compliance, having more Level A is
good, but when they don't having more Level A discourages adoption.
Resolution: keep 2.2.3 at Level A.
Jeanne: "the working group feels this is essential for users relying on
speech input, and there are numerous examples available."
2.7.4 JR29
<allanj> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20130702/results#xq12
Comment
JR29: AAA perhaps?
Existing
2.7.4 Change preference settings outside the user interface: The user can
adjust any preference settings required to meet the User Agent
Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 2.0 from outside the user agent user
interface. (Level AA)
Resolution: 2.7.4 change to AAA
2.11.4 JR36
Comment
JR36: Could this be AA?
Existing
2.11.4 Playback Rate Adjustment for Prerecorded Content: The user can
adjust the playback rate of prerecorded time-based media content, such that
all of the following are true: (Level A)
<allanj> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20130702/results#xq13
a. The user can adjust the playback rate of the time-based media tracks to
between 50% and 250% of real time.
b. Speech whose playback rate has been adjusted by the user.
maintains pitch in order to limit degradation of the speech quality. c.
Audio and video tracks remain synchronized across this required range of
playback rates.
d. The user agent provides a function that resets the playback rate to
normal (100%).
Kim: Disagrees but not strongly enough to veto it alone.
Resolution: 2.114. change to AA.
3.1.1 JR40
<allanj> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20130702/results#xq14
Comment
JR40: Maybe remove "and rendered content". Only mechanism for this in
content would seem to be politeness level and implementing that is should
following the content spec.
Existing
3.1.1 Reduce Interruptions: The user can avoid or defer recognized
non-essential or low priority messages and updating/changing information in
the user agent user interface and rendered content.(Level AA)
Proposed
3.1.1 Reduce Interruptions: The user can avoid or defer recognized
non-essential or low priority messages and updating/changing information in
the user agent user interface.(Level AA)
Agree with the proposal 5
Disagree with the proposal 0
Neutral, will accept consensus of the group 1
Suggest the following changes to the proposal 1
<allanj> jan proposal +1
Jim: Prefer Jan's wording to Eric's.
Jeanne: Feels Jan's is more testable because it talks about non-essential
and low priority and updating information, the last two map to ARIA and
therefore are more testable.
If we remove the "in rendered content" then we don't need "recognized".
<allanj> 3.1.1 Reduce Interruptions: The user can avoid or defer
non-essential or low priority messages and updating/changing information in
the user agent user interface.(Level AA)
The sentence is structured "The user can A and B in C"; is there ambiguity
whether C applies to both A and B, or only to B?
<scribe> *ACTION:* Jeanne to review 3.1.1 Reduce Interruptions to determine
whether there's need to reduce ambiguity as to whether "in UA UI" applies
to both "non-essential..." and "updating/changing..." [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2013/08/15-ua-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-867 - Review 3.1.1 reduce interruptions to
determine whether there's need to reduce ambiguity as to whether "in ua ui"
applies to both "non-essential..." and "updating/changing..." [on Jeanne F
Spellman - due 2013-08-22].
Resolution: change wording of 3.1.1 and see action 867 for final wording
Kim: Are non-essential and low-priority messages different? If so, could
simplify sentence.
4.1.2 JR44
<allanj> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20130702/results#xq15
Comment
JR44: Isn't this (4.1.2) implementation detail for 4.1.1?
Existing
4.1.1 Platform Accessibility Services: The user agent supports relevant
platform accessibility services. (Level A)
4.1.2 Name, Role, State, Value, Description: For all user interface
components including user interface , rendered content , generated content,
and alternative content, the user agent makes available the name, role,
state, value, and description via platform accessibility services. (Level A)
Proposed
Remove 4.1.2, merging the IER with 4.1.1
<allanj> ok with rejecting proposal and leaving them as they are
Greg: I think I prefer existing wording, because if the platform API
supports these four attributes but does not require them, 4.1.1 gives the
general "support the API including all it requires" (which lacking in Jim's
rewrite), plus 4.1.2 sets a minimum required even if the API leaves them
optional.
I don't mind combining them in theory but prefer existing wording over any
attempt to combine them I've yet seen.
Resolution: Not accept proposal for combining 4.1.1 and 4.2.2 , as leaving
them separate success criteria provides more protection for assistive
technology
<allanj> next item will be JR47 5.1.1
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/36791/20130702/results#xq16
<allanj> regrets next week for Greg
[End of minutes]
------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's
scribe.perl<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm>version
1.138 (CVS
log <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
$Date: 2013-08-15 18:35:41 $
--
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, 15 August 2013 18:38:36 UTC