IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-11-10
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:00:36 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:00:39 [Zakim]
- +??P8
- 15:00:41 [Michael]
- rrsagent, make logs world
- 15:00:51 [Zakim]
- +??P6
- 15:01:22 [Zakim]
- + +46.8.44.6.aaaa
- 15:01:36 [Becky]
- Becky has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:01:45 [Zakim]
- +Tim_Boland
- 15:02:05 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 15:02:16 [Zakim]
- +Matt
- 15:02:24 [ken]
- ken has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:02:58 [Zakim]
- +??P11
- 15:03:02 [ben]
- zakim, ??P11 is Ben
- 15:03:02 [Zakim]
- +Ben; got it
- 15:03:23 [Zakim]
- +Michael_Cooper
- 15:05:39 [David_MacDonald]
- David_MacDonald has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:05:40 [Michael]
- zakim, +46 is Alistair_Garrison
- 15:05:40 [Zakim]
- +Alistair_Garrison; got it
- 15:05:51 [ChrisR]
- ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:05:52 [David_MacDonald]
- Test
- 15:08:17 [Zakim]
- +Wendy
- 15:08:53 [wendy]
- wendy has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:09:38 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:09:38 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see [Microsoft], ??P5, ??P7, ??P8, ??P6, Alistair_Garrison, Tim_Boland, Becky_Gibson, Matt, Ben, Michael_Cooper, Wendy
- 15:11:04 [wendy]
- fyi michael: looks like we ended with 9.1 and 9.2 last time: http://w3.org/2004/11/03-wai-wcag-irc.html
- 15:11:53 [wendy]
- Topic: test suite. Chris added files to the test suite from the Oracle tests after discussion with Ken
- 15:12:04 [Michael]
- Other participants are David MacDonald, Ken Kipness, Chris Ridpath, Lisa Seeman - but don't know the order they joined
- 15:12:27 [David_MacDonald]
- ken was before me, lisa was after me.
- 15:13:01 [wendy]
- bc part of the baseline discussion is assuming that uaag 1.0 is met and what is the author responsibility? where uaag 1.0 not met (deficiencies in user agents) then author's have repair techniques.
- 15:13:21 [wendy]
- zakim, who's talking?
- 15:13:32 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
- 15:13:43 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P5 may be Chris
- 15:13:43 [Zakim]
- +Chris?; got it
- 15:13:54 [AliG]
- AliG has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:13:55 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P7 may be Ken
- 15:13:55 [Zakim]
- +Ken?; got it
- 15:14:07 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P8 may be David
- 15:14:07 [Zakim]
- +David?; got it
- 15:14:12 [wendy]
- zakim, ??P6 may be Lisa
- 15:14:12 [Zakim]
- +Lisa?; got it
- 15:14:22 [wendy]
- zakim, [Microsoft] is Jenae
- 15:14:22 [Zakim]
- +Jenae; got it
- 15:14:28 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:14:28 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Jenae, Chris?, Ken?, David?, Lisa?, Alistair_Garrison, Tim_Boland, Becky_Gibson, Matt, Ben, Michael_Cooper, Wendy
- 15:14:29 [David_MacDonald]
- I tink I'm p6
- 15:14:40 [wendy]
- zakim, who's talking?
- 15:14:51 [Zakim]
- wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Lisa? (13%), David? (95%)
- 15:15:04 [wendy]
- zakim, David is Lisa_Seeman
- 15:15:04 [Zakim]
- +Lisa_Seeman; got it
- 15:15:20 [wendy]
- zakim, Lisa is Chris_Ridpath
- 15:15:20 [Zakim]
- +Chris_Ridpath; got it
- 15:15:34 [wendy]
- zakim, Ken? is David_MacDonald
- 15:15:34 [Zakim]
- +David_MacDonald; got it
- 15:15:49 [wendy]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:15:49 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Jenae, Chris?, David_MacDonald, Lisa_Seeman, Chris_Ridpath, Alistair_Garrison, Tim_Boland, Becky_Gibson, Matt, Ben, Michael_Cooper, Wendy
- 15:16:01 [wendy]
- zakim, Chris is Ken_Kipnes
- 15:16:01 [Zakim]
- +Ken_Kipnes; got it
- 15:16:30 [wendy]
- zakim's early morning brain teasers
- 15:20:16 [wendy]
- discussion about test file for labeling forms
- 15:21:33 [wendy]
- mc proposes putting a summary of this discsussion either in the test or in bugzilla.
- 15:23:12 [wendy]
- @@chris will input summary of that discussion
- 15:23:23 [wendy]
- next: at least one printable character in a form
- 15:23:31 [wendy]
- text or img w/alt-tet
- 15:23:57 [wendy]
- issue of "null label"
- 15:24:25 [wendy]
- cr will modify to look for img with alt
- 15:24:32 [wendy]
- label must describe the control
- 15:25:05 [wendy]
- requires more work (describe? best word?)
- 15:25:10 [wendy]
- label must refer to the control
- 15:25:21 [wendy]
- e.g., bad example, "()" is not a good label
- 15:25:47 [wendy]
- provide some indication of function?
- 15:26:13 [wendy]
- Test: autorefresh - may be accessible if you can opt into it
- 15:27:03 [wendy]
- the default of the page is to not autorefresh but there is a mode that says, "i want to reffresh" and it would set an interval
- 15:28:17 [wendy]
- that last one is likely a "repair" technique. UAAG 1.0 checkpoint 2.4 Allow time-independent interaction (P1) should cover
- 15:28:21 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/guidelines.html#tech-time-independent
- 15:28:54 [wendy]
- ls would like to see more info about testing with users
- 15:29:04 [wendy]
- mc need for disclaimer about what the test suite is for
- 15:29:21 [wendy]
- ls many of the proposed tests have exceptions
- 15:29:36 [David_MacDonald]
- chrishey chris can you drop your test case URL in IRQ
- 15:30:34 [David_MacDonald]
- typo :-)
- 15:32:19 [wendy]
- ja anxious to go through test cases. reminds us that we said we'd start in november, but haven't yet.
- 15:33:28 [wendy]
- timing? plan is for internal drafts on tues 16 nov, then blessing on thursday 18 nov for publication on 18 or 19.
- 15:35:45 [wendy]
- ag idea is to look at techniques documents in relation to wcag 1.0 to ensure that they are all there. doing reality checks against best practice today.
- 15:36:04 [wendy]
- ag produce evaluation documentation based on wcag 2.0 but tied with wcag 1.0 (to help transition)
- 15:36:21 [wendy]
- ag looking at all documents, restructuring slightly and discovering where the gaps are.
- 15:36:40 [wendy]
- ag looking at test suites and to bind conditional statements. plan to have ready by 15 december.
- 15:38:41 [wendy]
- ag if someone uses a gif, need to know about contrast.
- 15:38:59 [wendy]
- ag concern about using techs together and that our techs docs are separate
- 15:39:59 [wendy]
- mc we have some people who have looked at mappings and transition (e.g., David's mapping of 1.0 to 2.0 techniques)
- 15:40:51 [wendy]
- next week: spend at least 1/2 the call walking through test files
- 15:41:35 [wendy]
- back to contentious html techniques
- 15:42:40 [wendy]
- voting results: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2004/10/21-priority-voting.html
- 15:43:15 [wendy]
- html techs draft: http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/
- 15:44:09 [wendy]
- http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/#imagetextlinks
- 15:44:29 [wendy]
- mc if point to diff locations, shouldn't be combined
- 15:45:34 [wendy]
- ls may want to go to the same place for different reasons
- 15:46:09 [wendy]
- bg shouldn't have an img next to a duplicate text link
- 15:46:46 [wendy]
- mc not a huge barrier but annoying
- 15:46:56 [wendy]
- dmd annoying in general, or more so for someone with a disability
- 15:47:29 [wendy]
- mc graphicaly the 2 links are perceived as one link
- 15:47:41 [wendy]
- dmd why is it done?
- 15:47:59 [wendy]
- mc it's often an icon that emphasizes "read more"
- 15:48:33 [wendy]
- bg can be diffcult to make it one link. often want a button that has an img on it
- 15:48:44 [wendy]
- dmd annoying enough can call an accessibility issue?
- 15:48:58 [wendy]
- bg screen reader will hear it twice and keyboard user will hit it twice
- 15:49:43 [wendy]
- mc 4 votes for making level 3, perhaps where it belongs
- 15:50:04 [wendy]
- hide link groups - http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/#linkgroups_hide
- 15:50:12 [wendy]
- all votes were either optional or kill
- 15:50:20 [wendy]
- many people didn't understand it
- 15:51:12 [wendy]
- mc should be just about hiding the skip link
- 15:51:25 [wendy]
- mc right after technique describing providing a skip link
- 15:51:37 [wendy]
- bg for keyboard users, there is no advantage to hiding them
- 15:52:35 [wendy]
- wac combine with providing skip link?
- 15:52:45 [wendy]
- bg some are css
- 15:53:13 [wendy]
- mc try not to hide them, but if need to, here are accessible ways to do it.
- 15:55:26 [wendy]
- summary: keep it separate (checklist reasons), clean it up, mark as optional
- 15:55:42 [wendy]
- 9.9 link separation http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/#separate-links
- 15:56:18 [wendy]
- bg is not technology-specific
- 15:56:33 [wendy]
- m3m the user agent should be responsible for doing this
- 15:57:22 [wendy]
- remove to transitional/fallback or removed completely?
- 15:57:50 [Zakim]
- -Lisa_Seeman
- 15:58:08 [wendy]
- bc only issue is with browsers that are 7-8 years old
- 15:58:20 [wendy]
- bg however, needs to create a bridge from 1.0 (since existed there)
- 15:58:35 [wendy]
- mc recommendation - don't use this anymore
- 15:59:06 [wendy]
- mc perhaps a special category that 1.0 talked about, we ought to talk about. in some cases say "no longer required" or "here's the new requirement"
- 15:59:12 [wendy]
- bc an appendix or transition materials?
- 15:59:22 [wendy]
- dmd appendix of deprecated techniques
- 16:00:31 [wendy]
- action: michael figure out what to do about techniques that exist solely b/c they were mentioned in wcag 1.0
- 16:00:55 [wendy]
- action 1 = michael move techniques that exist b/c they were in 1.0 but are deprecated to an appendix
- 16:01:40 [wendy]
- 9.11 and 9.12
- 16:01:42 [wendy]
- http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/#accesskey-conformant-browsers
- 16:01:48 [wendy]
- http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/#accesskey-poor-implementation
- 16:02:01 [wendy]
- kill both: User agents should handle
- 16:02:28 [wendy]
- bc at the repair level, tabindex and accesskey might end up being repair strategies (but for different reasons that from those mentioned here)
- 16:03:02 [wendy]
- action: michael remove 9.11 and 9.12
- 16:03:21 [wendy]
- 9.13 popups
- 16:03:22 [wendy]
- http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/#contents
- 16:04:06 [wendy]
- 1. if creating new windows, do programmatically identifiable way 2. if creating a new window that is not easily prog. i.d., (script), inform the user
- 16:04:32 [wendy]
- bc informing the user - repair tech?
- 16:05:05 [wendy]
- bc is there a way to cause a pop-up that is not prog. i.d.?
- 16:05:41 [wendy]
- mc if created a javascript function to open a window, asst. tech would not likely parse all the javascript to determine.
- 16:05:47 [wendy]
- bg perhaps script tech to set focus to that window
- 16:06:00 [wendy]
- bc if ua mtg uaag, then user has control over
- 16:06:09 [wendy]
- mc wanring user is still in fallback techs
- 16:06:22 [wendy]
- bc only tech is a repair tech, "inform users when pop-ups are created"
- 16:07:22 [wendy]
- mc problem with wording, "prog i.d.?"
- 16:09:24 [wendy]
- mc issue with guideline "explicit notice is given..."
- 16:09:36 [wendy]
- mc 2 techs, but ednote that have quesitons about guideline and if this should exst
- 16:12:04 [wendy]
- 10.4 http://w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041008/#contents
- 16:12:22 [wendy]
- bg shouldn't outlaw something that's in html. there are valid reasons for using title.
- 16:12:30 [wendy]
- mc didn't want title to be confused with alt
- 16:12:34 [wendy]
- mc particularly img in links
- 16:15:00 [wendy]
- mc if you do use title on img, also use alt
- 16:15:11 [wendy]
- mc if you use title, it is conditional content that doesn't replace alt
- 16:15:44 [wendy]
- mc title could be more extended, that may want in tooltip
- 16:16:08 [wendy]
- bc user agent can query for presence of title. leave it to user to ask for it.
- 16:16:46 [wendy]
- either 1. remove the technique or 2. say something more concrete about diffs between alt and title
- 16:17:06 [wendy]
- dmd say, "title is not use consistently..."
- 16:17:21 [wendy]
- bg use according to spec
- 16:17:50 [wendy]
- bc could put title on 'a' element
- 16:18:12 [wendy]
- bc what would a stand alone img title?
- 16:18:29 [wendy]
- bg other info about the image
- 16:20:33 [wendy]
- bc need clarification in uaag 1.0
- 16:20:39 [wendy]
- mc would it clarify our technique?
- 16:20:46 [wendy]
- bc would make this tech less necessary
- 16:20:55 [wendy]
- bc ther would be a query model to get at that info
- 16:21:23 [ChrisR]
- (Capturing Lisa's comment) Lisa suggested that not all controls required a label. Some simple forms,
- 16:21:23 [ChrisR]
- such as a login form, with only one control did not require a label.
- 16:21:46 [wendy]
- 1. ednote? 2. bugzilla?
- 16:22:56 [wendy]
- bc uaag 2.3 - "allows conditional content to be rendered in place of..." none of this is implemented well in user agents, but problem where title can be conditional content for other text.
- 16:23:17 [wendy]
- bc could end up replacing text in link with content of title and then sentence wouldn't make sense anymore.
- 16:23:33 [wendy]
- bc unless the user has ability to query for value of conditional content, potential fo rcreating confusion.
- 16:24:37 [wendy]
- wac proposes ben sends to UAWG to discuss
- 16:25:09 [wendy]
- ben expects to have a few questions to send to UAWG after Matt and Ben finish analysis
- 16:25:54 [wendy]
- action: michael remove 10.4 and add issue to bugzilla
- 16:26:45 [wendy]
- ==
- 16:27:14 [Zakim]
- -Jenae
- 16:27:54 [wendy]
- publishing public drafts next week
- 16:28:00 [wendy]
- CSS - lots of things to get caught up on
- 16:28:10 [wendy]
- HTML - many changes to make based on discussions (similar to CSS)
- 16:28:31 [wendy]
- General - will have holes, but ask people to look at and comment about structure
- 16:32:29 [wendy]
- scripting - since uaag baseline issue effects it most and planning to add paragraph to intro of wcag 2.0, add paragraph to intro of scripting and perhaps a more detaile dparagraph about how would effect
- 16:32:47 [wendy]
- action: matt and wendy work on intro for scripting
- 16:33:02 [wendy]
- please review the drafts before next wednesday. will discuss
- 16:33:10 [wendy]
- next week - 2 hour call?
- 16:33:32 [Zakim]
- -Tim_Boland
- 16:33:34 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 16:33:35 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 16:33:35 [ChrisR]
- ChrisR has left #wai-wcag
- 16:33:36 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Cooper
- 16:33:36 [Zakim]
- -Ben
- 16:33:37 [Zakim]
- -David_MacDonald
- 16:33:38 [Zakim]
- -Matt
- 16:33:39 [Zakim]
- -Chris_Ridpath
- 16:33:40 [Zakim]
- -Alistair_Garrison
- 16:33:41 [Zakim]
- -Ken_Kipnes
- 16:33:43 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
- 16:33:45 [Zakim]
- Attendees were +46.8.44.6.aaaa, Tim_Boland, Becky_Gibson, Matt, Ben, Michael_Cooper, Alistair_Garrison, Wendy, Chris?, David?, Lisa?, Jenae, Lisa_Seeman, Chris_Ridpath,
- 16:33:48 [Zakim]
- ... David_MacDonald, Ken_Kipnes
- 16:34:05 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, make log public
- 16:34:10 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, make log world
- 17:01:09 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 17:01:09 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 17:03:27 [Michael]
- rrsagent, bye
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- I see 4 open action items:
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: michael move techniques that exist b/c they were in 1.0 but are deprecated to an appendix [1]
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/11/10-wai-wcag-irc#T16-00-31
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: michael remove 9.11 and 9.12 [2]
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/11/10-wai-wcag-irc#T16-03-02
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: michael remove 10.4 and add issue to bugzilla [3]
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/11/10-wai-wcag-irc#T16-25-54
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: matt and wendy work on intro for scripting [4]
- 17:03:27 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/11/10-wai-wcag-irc#T16-32-47