Minutes: User Agent Telecon 27 Feb 2014

http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html


User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

27 Feb 2014

See also: IRC log
 http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-irc


Attendees

PresentEric, Greg_Lowney, Jim_Allan, Kim_Patch, +1.508.877.aaaa, jeanne,
JanRegretskellyChairJimallan, KellyFordScribeallanj

Contents

Topics

Possible conflict between 2.4.5 and 2.11.2 / 2.11.3
LG 03 2.4.5 Alternative Content Search
LG04 2.4.3 search match highlight
OP02 GL2 all SC
OP03 GL2.10
OP04 Summary GL 1.10
OP05 3.1.1 "non-essential"

Summary of Action Items

________________________________

<trackbot> Date: 27 February 2014

current comments spreadsheet http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2014/LCcomments.html

Possible conflict between 2.4.5 and 2.11.2 / 2.11.3

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-uaag2-comments/2014Jan/0010.html

2.11.2 and 2.11.3 requires the ability to block execution or playback of
media. However in 2.4.5, searching a page should also search in captions,
which may not be loaded as per 2.11.2 / 2.11.3. The examples for 2.4.5
mention that the user agent moves to the specified point in the video.

LG 03 2.4.5 Alternative Content Search

<scribe> scribe: allanj

js: should say that media should load, but should not play

jr: shouldn't that be up to the UA, as to when things download, and the
author says to not play

gl: but if captions are not downloaded yet and user searches, how is user
to know if captions were downloaded or not.

jr: how to communicate to the user.
... youtube - user looking a place holder, and UA says ah you searched, but
captions not searched, because video not loaded

gl: perhaps something for sophisticated users. give the user feed back on
things that are not searched

ja: embeded user agent (media player), that provides the search
functionality, not the parent UA

jr: the media player (is the UA) and it does the searching,

ja: do we put some comment in the intent about media player being the UA,
and it does the searching.

<Jan> This might be an implementation:
http://www.3playmedia.com/services-features/plugins/captions-plugin/

<jeanne> Conversation with PLH :

<jeanne> <jeanne> In HTML5, if there is a captioned video with a separate
captions file, are the captions loaded at page load or when the video is
loaded? We are trying to figure out if a page find function would work on
captions.

<jeanne> <plh> my guess would be when the video is loaded at most, ie I
don't think HTML spec precludes implementation to preload them

<jeanne> <jeanne> thanks

<jeanne> <plh> there is a whole debate on preloading videos

<jeanne> <plh> and depending on devices, networks, etc, implmenetations
will behave differently

<jeanne> <jeanne> But would loading the caption file have to happen when
the video is loaded, or could it be loaded earlier?

<jeanne> <plh> it could happen earlier

<jeanne> <jeanne> Ah, good. That helps.

<jeanne> <plh> but I didn't look to see what's the current strategies of
implementations

<scribe> ACTION: Jim to write additional intent for 2.4.5 stating the media
player is the user agent that will search captions, the parent UA (desktop
browser) does not know the captions exist, only the player does. and only
the player can search the captions [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-950 - Write additional intent for 2.4.5 stating
the media player is the user agent that will search captions, the parent ua
(desktop browser) does not know the captions exist, only the player does.
and only the player can search the captions [on Jim Allan - due 2014-03-06].

jr: there may be ua with native media players, that may be able to search
captions

gl: comment was about loading and searching, the action should address both
comments

<Greg> That is, search can be impeded when nested players aren't executed,
scripts aren't executed, or natively-handled media isn't loaded yet for a
variety of reasons.

LG04 2.4.3 search match highlight

In 2.4.3, a search match must be highlighted. However there doesn't seem to
be a requirement to customize the way those results are displayed. By
adding search matches to 1.3.1, those matches would need to be customizable
as per 1.3.2.

<Greg> "Found search results"

jr: this is a level A SC. if you can't change found search results, they
you fail UAAG. is this such a huge issue that would fail

gl: but the actual highlighting options are AA (1.3.2)

jr: ok with addition to 1.3.1

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to add "found search results" to list for 1.3.1
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-951 - Add "found search results" to list for
1.3.1 [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-03-06].

js: I will find proper term

OP02 GL2 all SC

jr: so why doesn't this make sense. is it because they have no keyboards

gl: push back, we have this covered in a global statement.

<Jan> Platform Limitations: If the platform (hardware or operating system)
does not support a capability necessary for a given UAAG 2.0 success
criterion, list the success criterion and the feature (e.g. a mobile
operating system does not support platform accessibility services,
therefore the user agent cannot meet success criterion 4.1.2). For these
listed technologies, the user agent can claim...

<Jan> ...that the success criteria do not apply.

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/UAAG20/#conformance-req-components

<Greg> Definition of keyboard: keyboard

<Greg> The letter, symbol and command keys or key indicators that allow a
user to control a computing device. Assistive technologies have
traditionally relied on the keyboard interface as a universal, or modality
independent interface. In this document references to keyboard include
keyboard emulators and keyboard interfaces that make use of the keyboard's
role as a modality independent...

<Greg> ...interface (see Modality Independent Controls). *Keyboard
emulators and interfaces may be used on devices which do not have a
physical keyboard, such as mobile devices based on touchscreen input.*

gl: perhaps having an application note is in order

ja: link to def. but note is more prominent

<Greg> That's subtle and buried in a definition. I think this warrants
something more prominent, such as a global Applicability Note, because it's
so commonly misunderstood.

<Greg> That is, under "UAAG 2.0 Conformance Applicability Notes" unless we
can come up with a better location that's likely to be read.

ja: what about note on GL2. Note: Users interacting with a web browser may
do so using one or more input methods including keyboard, mouse, speech,
touch, and gesture. It's critical that each user be free to use whatever
input method or combination of methods works best for a given situation. If
every potential user task is made accessible via modality independent
controls that any input...
... technology can access, a user can use what works best. For instance, if
a user can't use or doesn't have access to a mouse, but can use and access
a keyboard, the keyboard can call a modality independent control to
activate an OnMouseOver event. See Independent User Interface: Events for
additional information on APIs and techniques for modality independent
controls.

gl: add to note. another instance, user is on a mobile devide that lacks
keyboard and uses taps, wirelessly connected devices, voice commands to
simulated discrete input or keyboard input

<Greg> Add after the "For instance" already in the Note for Principle 2.

"Another example would be a user is on a mobile device that lacks keyboard
and uses taps, wirelessly connected devices, voice commands to simulated
discrete input or keyboard input."

<KimPatch> Another example is a user on a mobile device that lacks keyboard
who uses uses taps, wirelessly connected devices, and voice commands to
simulate discrete or keyboard input.

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to add "Another example would be a user is on a
mobile device that lacks keyboard and uses taps, wirelessly connected
devices, voice commands to simulated discrete input or keyboard input."
before last sentence in Note for Principle 2 [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-952 - Add "another example would be a user is on
a mobile device that lacks keyboard and uses taps, wirelessly connected
devices, voice commands to simulated discrete input or keyboard input."
before last sentence in note for principle 2 [on Jeanne F Spellman - due
2014-03-06].

OP03 GL2.10

"Maybe I'm not understanding this correctly, but I'm not sure how browsers
could predict flashing content in a video and prevent it ahead of time. A
lot of video on the web is in the form of a plugin (like flash) which is
essentially sandboxed outside of the browser's direct control itself so
even determining if that video is flashing is difficult at best. So this
seems a bit overly...

scribe: difficult to actually implement in real life.

Ultimately, I think it should be up to web authors to follow the WCAG
guidelines regarding flashing content and including it here in the UAAG is
not prudent. You *could* however, mention it here that user agents should
not allow flashing content in the part of the UI like the browser chrome or
the settings pages etc - though I think its improbable that browsers will
ever do it on purpose as...

scribe: it is."

gl: the summary says 'content' the SC are only about UAUI, change summary

ja: remove "and rendered content" from summary of GL2.10

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to remove "and rendered content" from summary of
GL2.10 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-953 - Remove "and rendered content" from summary
of gl2.10 [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-03-06].

OP04 Summary GL 1.10

" I think there are browser extensions which do a similar job, and if not,
can be made to do a similar job.

In general, a lot of the guidelines in the UAAG would be better solved if
we let browser extensions do the job rather than ask user agents themselves
to do it. I would very strongly suggest the guidelines allow the user
agents do the things mentioned in the guidelines themselves, or
*alternatively provide an API for extensions to be able to do it*."

ja: I think UAAG does not make this concept clear enough?

<Jan> User agent information:

<Jan> ...

<Jan> Plugins or extensions (including version numbers) needed to meet the
success criteria (e.g. mouseless browsing)

ja: this is in the conformance. Too buried

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/UAAG20/#conformance-req-components

js: have another comment on this from Chrome

gl: applicability note?

jr: don't think API support is enough. it needs to be an actual extension.
which we have in our text

js: keeping a simplified UI and many SC can be met through the use of
estensions

<Greg> "6. Extensions: Success criteria can be met by a user agent alone or
in conjunction with extensions and add-ons, as long as those are available
to users. See Components of UAAG 2.0 Conformance Claims."

<Greg> That would go under Components of UAAG 2.0 Conformance Claims.

<Greg> Sorry, that's under Components of UAAG 2.0 Conformance Claims.

should go in UAAG 2.0 Conformance Applicability Notes:

<Greg> Sorry, that should be under UAAG 2.0 Conformance Applicability Notes.

<Greg> There are 5 existing notes in the Editor's Draft of 20 February 2014.

<Greg> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2014/ED-IMPLEMENTING-UAAG20-20140220/

ja: any objections to adding new language to UAAG 2.0 Conformance
Applicability Notes:

all concur

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to add "6. Extensions: Success criteria can be met
by a user agent alone or in conjunction with extensions and add-ons, as
long as those are available to users. See Components of UAAG 2.0
Conformance Claims." to UAAG 2.0 Conformance Applicability Notes [recorded
in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-954 - Add "6. extensions: success criteria can be
met by a user agent alone or in conjunction with extensions and add-ons, as
long as those are available to users. see components of uaag 2.0
conformance claims." to uaag 2.0 conformance applicability notes [on Jeanne
F Spellman - due 2014-03-06].

OP05 3.1.1 "non-essential"

OP05: It's not clear what 'non-essential' means. It is highly subjective,
and would defer from web app to web app and from user to user. In general,
we try to make sure we ask as little from the user as possible, but
sometimes asking for permission is important. I'm not sure on what criteria
would compliance be judged with respect to something being considered
'essential' or 'non-essential'.

gl: we specifically say "recognized" so the UA knows which messages these
are

ja: we talked about ARIA alert politeness levels
... comment is talking about testing.

<Greg> "The SC uses the term 'recognized' which is explicitly limited to
things that are objectively determinable, and in the example is WAI-ARIA
markup that lets the author identify something as low priority."

ja: would think if UA followed aria-politeness recommendations it would pass

<jeanne> Cognative Accessibility Task Force made comments ->
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-uaag2-comments/2014Feb/0000.html

aria - http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/states_and_properties#aria-live

"The SC uses the term 'recognized' which is explicitly limited to things
that are objectively determinable, and in the example is WAI-ARIA markup
(aria-live) that lets the author identify something as low priority."
http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/states_and_properties#aria-live

"The SC uses the term 'recognized messages' which is explicitly limited to
things that are objectively determinable, and in the example is WAI-ARIA
markup (aria-live) that lets the author identify something as low
priority." http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/states_and_properties#aria-live

gl: no objection to leaving in 'non-essential' anticipating future markup

rrsagent: make minutes

<Greg> I'd leave in "non-essential" in case future WAI markup allowed
marking things as essential and non-essential, just as it already does for
high and low priority. Because the SC is already limited to "recognized"
attributes, the language would have no negative effect.

<Greg> But if people want to take it out, okay.

<jeanne> ACTION: jeanne to remove "non-essential" from 3.1.1.a [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-955 - Remove "non-essential" from 3.1.1.a [on
Jeanne F Spellman - due 2014-03-06].

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to add "6. Extensions: Success criteria can be met by
a user agent alone or in conjunction with extensions and add-ons, as long
as those are available to users. See Components of UAAG 2.0 Conformance
Claims." to UAAG 2.0 Conformance Applicability Notes [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to add "Another example would be a user is on a mobile
device that lacks keyboard and uses taps, wirelessly connected devices,
voice commands to simulated discrete input or keyboard input." before last
sentence in Note for Principle 2 [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to add "found search results" to list for 1.3.1
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to remove "and rendered content" from summary of
GL2.10 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to remove "non-essential" from 3.1.1.a [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Jim to write additional intent for 2.4.5 stating the media
player is the user agent that will search captions, the parent UA (desktop
browser) does not know the captions exist, only the player does. and only
the player can search the captions [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2014/02/27-ua-minutes.html#action01]

[End of minutes]

--
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