IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-01-21
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 00:01:53 [Zakim]
- -JasonWhite
- 00:02:04 [Zakim]
- -Gregg_Vanderheiden
- 00:02:05 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 00:02:06 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG(plan)6:00PM has ended
- 00:02:07 [Zakim]
- Attendees were JasonWhite, Ben, Wendy, Gregg_Vanderheiden, JasonWhite
- 00:09:09 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 00:09:09 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 00:09:12 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 00:09:12 [RRSAgent]
- I see 2 open action items:
- 00:09:12 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy call people who aren't responding to email about action items. [1]
- 00:09:12 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/20-wai-wcag-irc#T23-32-44
- 00:09:12 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy ask judy about funding for jason for csun [2]
- 00:09:12 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/20-wai-wcag-irc#T23-56-09
- 15:07:47 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:08:19 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:08:19 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see +1.703.265.aaaa, Michael_Cooper, Dave_MacDonald, Chris_Ridpath, tom, DanBri, Charles (muted), Jonathan, Wendy
- 15:08:24 [ChrisR]
- Here's a demo document that shows what the WCAG HTML test suite may look like:
- 15:08:25 [ChrisR]
- http://www.aprompt.ca/temp/TestSuiteWcag2-0Html.html
- 15:08:35 [ben]
- zakim, Charles is Ben
- 15:08:37 [Zakim]
- +Ben; got it
- 15:08:43 [ChrisR]
- Note: The URL of the test doc is very temporary.
- 15:08:45 [wendy]
- zakim, +1.703.265.aaaa is Don_Evans
- 15:08:45 [Zakim]
- +Don_Evans; got it
- 15:10:30 [sh1mmer]
- sh1mmer has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:10:47 [sh1mmer]
- hi can I get that url again pls?
- 15:10:59 [ben]
- http://www.aprompt.ca/temp/TestSuiteWcag2-0Html.html
- 15:11:07 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, who's on the call
- 15:11:07 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who's on the call', sh1mmer
- 15:11:32 [wendy]
- have you looked at using UAAG 1.0 test files?
- 15:12:16 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, I am tom
- 15:12:16 [Zakim]
- ok, sh1mmer, I now associate you with tom
- 15:12:52 [wendy]
- chris has been doing one test per file. UAAG and HTML tests have more than one test in a file.
- 15:13:07 [wendy]
- UAAG has examples as well as test files. examples help identify the test.
- 15:13:41 [wendy]
- Charles has a student who is doing something similar to Chris, but using RDF instead of XML.
- 15:13:50 [wendy]
- EuroAccessibility building a suite of tests.
- 15:15:13 [chaalsBRS]
- http://www.euroaccessibility.org/tf3_doc/checklistbridgingdocumentversion0a1.htm - EuroAccessibility's current draft list of tests
- 15:15:47 [chaalsBRS]
- No "latest version URI" :(
- 15:18:07 [Zakim]
- +David_D
- 15:18:32 [MichaelC]
- ack chaalsBRS
- 15:18:32 [Zakim]
- chaalsBRS, you wanted to say that checks and techniques aren't one to one, and a mapping should be added
- 15:20:03 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 15:20:36 [wendy]
- are tests designed for automatic tools? e.g., "alt-text no longer than 150 characters"
- 15:20:43 [wendy]
- concern about a test like that (seems ambiguous)
- 15:21:02 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 15:21:12 [wendy]
- we should spell out as much as possible.
- 15:21:19 [wendy]
- spell out if not spelled out in techniques?
- 15:21:38 [wendy]
- if a long title causes an accessibility problem, should spell it out somewhere.
- 15:21:42 [wendy]
- q+
- 15:22:04 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 15:22:16 [ben]
- q+
- 15:22:18 [wendy]
- ack charles
- 15:22:18 [Zakim]
- charles, you wanted to suggest we should be in the middle of auto-tests and manual tests
- 15:22:31 [wendy]
- tricky for wcag to have tests that are different from techniques.
- 15:22:43 [wendy]
- be in the middle of automatic and non-auto tests.
- 15:23:32 [wendy]
- 80 char hard limit (in a success criterion) would be wrong due to language constraints
- 15:23:54 [wendy]
- need to build tests so that "here are tests you can do" - "this test is diagnostic aid rather than clear test"
- 15:24:02 [wendy]
- "this test useful if trying to flag things to look at"
- 15:24:12 [wendy]
- however, not using to say "this alt-text is appropriate or not"
- 15:24:45 [wendy]
- checks have confidence level. e.g., title length = 150 chars is medium. i.e, likely a problem but not necessarily.
- 15:24:55 [wendy]
- so 200 chars could be appropriate for an image.
- 15:25:16 [wendy]
- confidence, not a good measure. it's a short-hand for something that should be more descriptive.
- 15:26:49 [chaalsBRS]
- rather than just confidence, there should be a "what to do with the result" - maybe a consequential test, ask for user decision, etc.
- 15:26:57 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 15:28:02 [chaalsBRS]
- wendy: Focus on auto-testing is a concern
- 15:28:38 [chaalsBRS]
- ... would like to clearly state assumptions for how to meet a technique, why it is there, separate from what auto tools can test.
- 15:29:23 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 15:29:30 [chaalsBRS]
- ... Don't want to see a hard limit set in documents just so it is easy to make tools. We also don't want to tie tests to specific technoologies
- 15:29:31 [ChrisR]
- q+
- 15:29:56 [sh1mmer]
- am i on?
- 15:30:00 [sh1mmer]
- i was talking
- 15:30:01 [wendy]
- don't hear you
- 15:30:03 [sh1mmer]
- ack\
- 15:30:05 [wendy]
- zakim, who's muted?
- 15:30:05 [Zakim]
- I see Ben muted
- 15:30:09 [wendy]
- zakim, unmute Ben
- 15:30:09 [Zakim]
- Ben should no longer be muted
- 15:30:35 [Zakim]
- +??P29
- 15:30:45 [wendy]
- rather than defining values, but thinking behind it is important.
- 15:31:17 [wendy]
- we'll ask when tom takes a breathe
- 15:32:17 [wendy]
- zakim, ++P29 is Lisa_Seeman
- 15:32:18 [Zakim]
- sorry, wendy, I do not recognize a party named '++P29'
- 15:32:36 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P29 is Lisa_Seeman
- 15:32:36 [Zakim]
- +Lisa_Seeman; got it
- 15:32:45 [wendy]
- ack David
- 15:33:09 [wendy]
- title element: describes document, not site structure. should be name of the resource.
- 15:34:35 [wendy]
- http://tile-cridpath.atrc.utoronto.ca/acheck/guidelines/checks.html#check52
- 15:35:14 [wendy]
- regardless of length, title of document is title element.
- 15:35:36 [wendy]
- what is the restriction based on?
- 15:35:53 [wendy]
- is it an accessibility issue?
- 15:35:59 [wendy]
- zakim, who's muted?
- 15:35:59 [Zakim]
- I see ben, Lisa_Seeman muted
- 15:36:30 [Zakim]
- -Jonathan
- 15:36:33 [ben]
- can you hear me?
- 15:36:35 [sh1mmer]
- unmute ben
- 15:36:44 [ben]
- still talking
- 15:36:46 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, unmute tom
- 15:36:46 [Zakim]
- tom was not muted, sh1mmer
- 15:36:46 [wendy]
- ack ben
- 15:36:49 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, unmute ben
- 15:36:50 [Zakim]
- ben was not muted, sh1mmer
- 15:37:08 [sh1mmer]
- Zakim, I am tom
- 15:37:08 [Zakim]
- ok, sh1mmer, I now associate you with tom
- 15:37:10 [wendy]
- in looking at checks, need a better job of differentiating them. confidence is an interesting method.
- 15:37:32 [wendy]
- some checks will be sufficient for meeting a technique. others are good ideas or optional or helpful in automated testing, but need clear lines between them.
- 15:37:48 [wendy]
- while they could all be part of test suite, we should be most concerned with those that are sufficient for techniques.
- 15:38:06 [wendy]
- e.g., technique that says "use title element" minimum test is to determine if it is there.
- 15:38:13 [wendy]
- other checks are optional.
- 15:38:28 [wendy]
- up to the author to decide if want to use in their development scenario
- 15:38:44 [wendy]
- include rationale about why excessively long title might cause issues, but why it is not a problem.
- 15:38:50 [wendy]
- ack ChrisR
- 15:39:04 [wendy]
- these tests are not just automatic tests, some can not be automated (like longdesc).
- 15:39:39 [wendy]
- these are meant to define what the techniques are. if say something in techniques, it needs to be defined.
- 15:39:46 [wendy]
- if we say "short" then it needs to be defined.
- 15:40:40 [wendy]
- q+ to say shouldn't techniques have testable criteria that are not ambiguous? (part of checklists)
- 15:41:12 [wendy]
- this is just a draft, not carved in stone. beginning point for discussion.
- 15:42:23 [wendy]
- should it be part of technique or not? are there other checks that could be included?
- 15:42:27 [wendy]
- ack don
- 15:43:13 [wendy]
- have 100s of pages to test every day. if don't have specific tests, won't do them.
- 15:43:17 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 15:43:36 [wendy]
- ack Lisa
- 15:44:50 [wendy]
- two kinds of things: some are testable (alt text exists?) others are not (alt text length).
- 15:45:05 [wendy]
- "short" depends on context.
- 15:45:26 [wendy]
- e.g., mission statement in a picture. alt-text should be all of the text.
- 15:45:58 [wendy]
- putting all of that text into the alt attribute doesn't make my site inaccessible (if it is longer than the length specified in some check).
- 15:48:42 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 15:48:42 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say shouldn't techniques have testable criteria that are not ambiguous? (part of checklists)
- 15:52:19 [chaalsBRS]
- wendy: think it is important to have auto tests. Also important that a technique contains everything you need to know if you meet the requirement. These might not be the same.
- 15:52:40 [chaalsBRS]
- ... intersted in types of tests, and where information needs to go.
- 15:52:53 [wendy]
- let's talk about framework rather than specific tests.
- 15:53:08 [wendy]
- ack charles
- 15:53:08 [Zakim]
- charles, you wanted to say that auto tests are important, but we need a layer of indirection between them and the guidelines requirements
- 15:53:40 [wendy]
- automatic tests are good to have, different from techniques (not always one-to-one mapping). ought to have mapping: this tests belongs to this technique.
- 15:53:43 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 15:53:43 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 15:54:07 [chaalsBRS]
- where a test can falg an issue for several techniques, or where one technique implies several different tests.
- 15:54:13 [wendy]
- a framework which helps specify how the tests should be rather than the actual value is important for us to go for.
- 15:54:35 [wendy]
- ack david
- 15:54:54 [wendy]
- developing techniques based on accessibility issue. guideline, technique, test.
- 15:55:09 [wendy]
- whether address in automatic or not, but if can't, it doesn't make the accessibility issue go away.
- 15:55:56 [wendy]
- should manual checks be identified, and here's technique to address it.
- 15:56:12 [wendy]
- guidelines and techniques should be agnostic (as to whether automated test or not).
- 15:56:20 [wendy]
- manual checks are equally as important.
- 15:56:48 [wendy]
- challenge: independent of a lot of assumptions around testing. we need to test guidelines.
- 15:57:07 [wendy]
- are test documents will or have to be used by evaluation tool or authoring tool developers.
- 15:57:17 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 15:57:17 [wendy]
- validate techniques and guidelines.
- 15:57:40 [wendy]
- useful to dive deep, but bring back up to ask, "what will our test suite look like?"
- 15:57:55 [wendy]
- ack tom
- 15:58:09 [wendy]
- personas: have been working on some more.
- 15:58:15 [wendy]
- building use cases.
- 15:58:23 [wendy]
- how does that fit into techniques?
- 15:59:09 [wendy]
- ack Lisa
- 15:59:37 [wendy]
- q+ to say let's take one technique and follow it through (from guideline/success criteria, to task to checks)
- 15:59:51 [wendy]
- (perhaps title, since already had so much discussion about today)
- 16:00:07 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 16:00:10 [wendy]
- (assemble all of the pieces and see how works. think about checklist)
- 16:00:28 [wendy]
- (personas fit in to help us think about different paths and pieces of content that are needed)
- 16:00:57 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 16:02:13 [sh1mmer]
- q+
- 16:02:22 [chaalsBRS]
- ACTION charles: look at the chain from a guideline to a particular test.
- 16:02:51 [sh1mmer]
- ack tom
- 16:02:53 [wendy]
- ack wendy
- 16:02:53 [Zakim]
- wendy, you wanted to say let's take one technique and follow it through (from guideline/success criteria, to task to checks)
- 16:03:00 [wendy]
- group action?
- 16:03:38 [wendy]
- part of agenda for today is to talk about f2f. could also do this exercise at that mtg.
- 16:03:53 [wendy]
- q?
- 16:04:23 [ChrisR]
- q+
- 16:04:34 [wendy]
- charles send something to the list week after next.
- 16:05:03 [wendy]
- diff people take diff techniques/tests to get different takes.
- 16:05:43 [wendy]
- action: david - title element
- 16:05:51 [wendy]
- action: charles alternatives for images
- 16:05:56 [wendy]
- ack ChrisR
- 16:08:23 [wendy]
- action: wendy pick guideline and work way from top to bottom
- 16:09:37 [wendy]
- action: tom offer use cases (we're doing this technique because it helps x, y, z)
- 16:09:47 [wendy]
- continuing discussion next week, primary part of agenda.
- 16:10:12 [wendy]
- review one or more than one of analyses (results of action items)
- 16:10:44 [wendy]
- when reviewing QA documents, wondering about QA process.
- 16:10:52 [wendy]
- get someone from QA to walk us through it?
- 16:11:31 [wendy]
- the QA Process. how are the docs interrelated?
- 16:11:36 [wendy]
- are the test files too detailed?
- 16:13:17 [wendy]
- action: chris ask olivier to review tests and ask questions for.
- 16:13:24 [wendy]
- another thing to tech plen
- 16:14:24 [wendy]
- michael, tom, wendy, charles, lisa, ben (will be at t.p.)
- 16:14:46 [wendy]
- agenda for t.p.:
- 16:14:52 [wendy]
- (possibilities)
- 16:15:32 [wendy]
- testing, coord w/euroaccessibility
- 16:15:49 [wendy]
- (cmn student - modeling tests. run tests)
- 16:16:33 [wendy]
- rdf techniques, svg techniques
- 16:17:46 [wendy]
- 20-30 minutes of svg time on friday
- 16:18:10 [wendy]
- user agent imp issues, content writing/authoring tool
- 16:18:32 [wendy]
- QAWG to talk about process, testing
- 16:18:38 [wendy]
- html and css techniques
- 16:18:47 [wendy]
- techniques gateway
- 16:19:17 [wendy]
- plus, meeting 2 weeks after at csun
- 16:19:54 [Zakim]
- +??P4
- 16:20:12 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P4 is Jonathan_Chetwynd
- 16:20:12 [Zakim]
- +Jonathan_Chetwynd; got it
- 16:20:36 [Zakim]
- -David_D
- 16:20:40 [ben]
- q+
- 16:20:54 [wendy]
- ack ben
- 16:21:35 [wendy]
- talking about the chain, what do things look like start to finish - could we spend some time on a draft that helps us figure out what each piece of the chain looks like. snippets as roadmap
- 16:22:23 [wendy]
- guideline, techniques gateway, checklists, test suite. links to each piece look like they should. get an idea of how it work and fits together.
- 16:23:03 [wendy]
- charles, david, and wendy's action items feed into this process.
- 16:25:29 [wendy]
- action: wendy publish latest draft of RDF Techs from lisa.
- 16:26:14 [wendy]
- rdf techniques perhaps next week, more likely week after
- 16:26:45 [ChrisR]
- ChrisR has left #wai-wcag
- 16:26:53 [Zakim]
- -Don_Evans
- 16:26:54 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 16:26:55 [Zakim]
- -Lisa_Seeman
- 16:26:56 [Zakim]
- -Jonathan_Chetwynd
- 16:26:57 [Zakim]
- -Chris_Ridpath
- 16:26:58 [Zakim]
- -Dave_MacDonald
- 16:26:59 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Cooper
- 16:27:00 [Zakim]
- -ben
- 16:28:48 [ben]
- ben has left #wai-wcag
- 16:30:54 [Zakim]
- -tom
- 16:31:03 [Zakim]
- -charles
- 16:31:06 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
- 16:31:07 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Michael_Cooper, +1.703.265.aaaa, Dave_MacDonald, Chris_Ridpath, Jonathan, Wendy, Don_Evans, David_D, charles, ben, tom, Lisa_Seeman, Jonathan_Chetwynd
- 16:37:50 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 16:37:50 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 16:37:53 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- I see 7 open action items:
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: charles to look at the chain from a guideline to a particular test. [1]
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-wai-wcag-irc#T16-02-22
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: david - title element [2]
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-wai-wcag-irc#T16-05-43
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: charles alternatives for images [3]
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-wai-wcag-irc#T16-05-51
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy pick guideline and work way from top to bottom [4]
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-wai-wcag-irc#T16-08-23
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: tom offer use cases (we're doing this technique because it helps x, y, z) [5]
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-wai-wcag-irc#T16-09-37
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: chris ask olivier to review tests and ask questions for. [6]
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-wai-wcag-irc#T16-13-17
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy publish latest draft of RDF Techs from lisa. [7]
- 16:37:53 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/21-wai-wcag-irc#T16-25-29