- From: Nikos Andronikos <Nikos.Andronikos@cisra.canon.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 23:17:06 +0000
- To: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
The minutes from today’s telcon are at:
http://www.w3.org/2015/11/12-svg-minutes.html
and as text below.
[1] W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
SVG Working Group Teleconference
12 Nov 2015
[2]Agenda
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Nov/0023.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2015/11/12-svg-irc
Attendees
Present
nikos, ed, heycam, AmeliaBR, fesch, BogdanBrinza, Tav
Regrets
Chair
Cameron
Scribe
Nikos
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Accessibility Task Force documents
2. [6]ARIA Graphics module
3. [7]new TR stylesheets
* [8]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
Accessibility Task Force documents
<AmeliaBR>
[10]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Nov/0022.h
tml
[10] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2015Nov/0022.html
AmeliaBR: There's two docs. One is an updated draft, the ARIA
team is hoping to publish that next week
... other is first pass wd - won't be published for a few weeks
but if we can sign off on it that would be good
<AmeliaBR>
[11]https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/svg-aam/svg-aam.html
[11] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/svg-aam/svg-aam.html
AmeliaBR: This is the SVG accessibility api mapping spec
... Purpose is to define how browsers should map svg specific
features to the OS accessibility api
... that are then used by screen readers, special input
devices, etc
... OS accessibility APIs have a standard way of describing
everything and they have to work with the content of the web
site as well
... there's a core accessibility API mapping guide that defines
how the basic ARIA roles should map
... but that doesn't cover the unique features of a given
langauge
... so there'll be a HTML mapping guide, covering form elements
and other interactive elements
... then there's this guide which talks about SVG features
... Starts with introduction
... talks about how dom tree maps to simplified accessibility
tree that the assisted technologies need to work with
... Important terms has a long list of terms that are common to
all ARIA specs
... Then there's a section on keyboard navigation that
references the new tabindex requirement from SVG 2
... shouldn't be too controversial - just basic tab index
navigation
... Then we get into the specifics. I should mention the entire
TOC of this document mirrors the TOC of the core mapping doc
... Many of the sections are very short and say follow core
spec
... Where we need SVG specific roles they're described
... core spec has rules for how elements in general are exposed
in this accessibility API
... and which elements are exposed
... general approach is to keep it as simple as possible
... not give unimportant info to assistive tools
... e.g. hidden content and things that don't have layout
information
... that's where things get trick y with svg because we have a
lot of content that isn't rendered directly on screen -
filters, gradients, etc
... there's also much more complex rules for pointer events
... something can have pointer events even if invisible
... there's about 6 or 8 options for pointer events
... so we need some svg specific rules that say even if this
element does not cause any pixels to change, if it reacts to
pointer events then it is still perceivable to a user of a
mouse who can see the end result of clicking, therefore it
should be accessible to users of assisted tech
... there's a note explaining that, we need to do some work
with the core group on making sure the defs in the core are
general enough to account for these svg specifics
... other editors note is about how we handle desc element
... svg 1 spec talks about using css to make an alternate
presentation of desc
... so you can display html instead of graphcs - but that
doesn't work on any ua
... so we allow any html in desc but it's not going to display
anywhere
... this is tricky because if something isn't drawn on the
screen there's no way for someone to browse to it and read it
in a structured way
... we still use the description, but treat it as plain text
... similar to an alt
heycam: is there a reason that can't work?
AmeliaBR: there are practical reasons in that it doesn't work
now, there's also the more intentional reason that we don't
want to encourage a screen reader experience that is
disconnected from the visual experience
... having complex content that doesn't show up on the screen
can be problematic and confusing
... could happen in future, we've talked about it in the TF -
that's why we have a note
... was suggested that we could have html structured tooltips
instead of plain text
... but the tech isn't there yet, and there isn't a framework
for creating it
heycam: if the TF has specific suggestions on what should
change in SVG 2, then it would be good to hear them
AmeliaBR: right now we want to make sure the text in the SVG 2
spec doesn't imply to authors that they can do things that
won't have any effect
... so might want to add a note to the desc element
... so although it's allowed, it's not exposed currently to
assistive tech
... I've had complaints from authors about why it doesn't work
... There are some issues on aria roles
... part of the second doc is trying to fix this
... First question is what to do with the use element
... right now we're mapping it as an image
... you can't access the internal content
... the only way we use the source graphic is as a name and
description
... so we tell browsers to look at the source graphic and see
if it has a title instead
... problem with that is if we end up in SVG 2 moving to a
shadow dom based thing, where the contents of teh use element
are a complete dom tree that scripts can interact with, then
that needs to be reflected in the accessibility tree
... so depends where the svg 2 spec goes with use
... svg 1.1 had the element instance tree that could have
conceivably be used, but wasn't implemented
... so there's a note, and we're trying to get feedback from
users
... but we need a decision from SVG WG about how use elements
are handled wrt shadow dom specs
... is there a desire to keep use elements simple and use
custom elements for other things?
shepazu: Just want to say that we're requesting approval for
updated publication of the AAM spec and publication of the
other spec
... so we have two svg accessibility specs and they're joint
deliverables wit the SVG and APA WG
... we need approval from both WGs to move them forward
... It's good that Amelia is giving you details on the spec,
but we should also open the floor to questions
AmeliaBR: To be clear, these issues, we're planning to publish
with them as notes in the document
heycam: that's fine, from what I can see there's not that many
issues
shepazu: There is obviously a need for ongoing co-ordination
between SVG and accessibility TF about the issues
... but I don't think these are show stoppers, think we could
sort them out in the course of the next publication
... but it is something the svg wg will ultimately have to be
responsible for and accept
heycam: So does anyone have any questions about publication of
this first document?
... And is everyone in favour of publishing?
nikos: yes
shepazu: +1
<ed> +1
<AmeliaBR> RESOLUTION: SVG WG endorses publication of a new
working draft of the SVG Accessibility API Mappings
specification.
AmeliaBR: We'll try to publish that next week - so be quick if
you have questions or concerns
... but it is just an updated WD which we'll continue working
on over the next few months
ARIA Graphics module
<AmeliaBR>
[12]http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/graphics.html
[12] http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/graphics.html
AmeliaBR: one of the issues we came up with in the mapping
guide is there's very few roles for graphics
... image was defined so that all child dom nodes would be
ignored
... that's not useful for SVG where you want people to explore
the sub components that might have their own titles and
descriptions and event handlers
... so we need a more nuanced approach to graphics
... Long term goal is to create an ARIA model for describing
charts and graphs
... where assistive tech can add extra understanding
... we're not there yet
... this is a basic set of roles for describing structured
graphics
... where components have titles and description
<AmeliaBR>
[13]http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/graphics.html#roles
[13] http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/graphics.html#roles
AmeliaBR: That section defines the new roles
... Graphics document is the default role for the svg element
... Difference from exiting image is that graphics-doc has
meaningful child content
heycam: What would be the difference between the experience if
you have inline SVG that does have graphics-doc and one that
doesn't?
AmeliaBR: Assuming the alternative is what browsers currently
do - they map to a grouping role or an existing graphics role
that doesn't have an ARIA equivalent
... they wouldn't see a lot - in future, new tools might allow
arrow key navigation instead of dom order navigation
... or other things, if you have a braille doc it could be
aware you're dealing with graphics content
heycam: so it's an indication that there's 2d presented
information that isn't some hierarchically ordered document?
AmeliaBR: the assumption is with a plain text doc that there's
a single reading order
... with graphics that doesn't always work
... so the new role is a signal to tech that they can apply
different heuristics
... based on 2d layout
... we're not defining what they would be yet, just enabling
that
shepazu: So what we're defining is a framework for future work
... want to allow accessible visualisations and allow screen
readers to explore them in novel ways
AmeliaBR: there'll either be separate domain specific specs or
a level 2 of this document
heycam: so we have the graphics-doc role that says the whole
document is an explorable graphic
AmeliaBR: graphics-object is an alternative to group
... it's adding semantics so distinctions between groups in a
document can be described
... final role is graphics-symbol
... for things that are conceptually a categorical item - e.g.
data points on scatter plot or astrological male and female
symbols
... you don't want to delve inside these objects
... this is the role we will propose as the default role for
basic shapes in SVG
... The idea is that these roles will become default roles for
SVG. We haven't updated to the other spec to refer to this one
yet as we won't be publishing this one until December. But
there's notes currently.
ed: anyone opposed to publishing this document?
BogdanBrinza: no
RESOLUTION: SVG WG approves publication of WAI-ARIA Graphics
Module draft
AmeliaBR: if any of you have time to have a look at these
specs, and especially the editor's note
... we are looking for examples of use
new TR stylesheets
[14]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2015OctDec/0
009.html
[14] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2015OctDec/0009.html
shepazu: You can see an example
... in 2016, all published specs will need to use these style
sheets
... so we need to make sure our specs will work with this style
<shepazu>
[15]http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/style/design/w3c-restyle/201
6/sample
[15] http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/style/design/w3c-restyle/2016/sample
shepazu: Have seen some problems when there's a large table or
if there's a large image. Because the spec space is now
narrower, that can be a problem
But starting in Jan we'll be publishing with these styles, so
we might need to do some changes to the spec generation scripts
scribe: This is almost all CSS - there's very little change to
the markup
... we haven't updated our style for 15 years. Future revisions
may include script libraries and other things to improve it
... but for the moment, it's almost all just style sheet
changes
AmeliaBR: Have you tried to put the style sheet on our current
specs?
shepazu: not yet, but we should
AmeliaBR: maybe a branch on github
Tav: annotations aren't included in this
shepazu: Still working on that
... One of the points of this is that we want to start
encouraging a common style for all W3C specs
... We'll try to find the best practices and apply them to all
specs
... each group may still need variations of course
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
The information contained in this email message and any attachments may be confidential and may also be the subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately advise the sender by return email and delete the information from your system.
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2015 23:17:45 UTC