See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 29 June 2012
<Andi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN292012/results
AS: 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value
<Andi> Most platform accessibility services go beyond programmatic exposure of name and role, and programmatic setting of states, properties and values (and notification of same), and specify additional information that could or should be exposed and/or set (for example a list of the available actions for a given user interface component, and a means to programmatically execute one of the listed
<Andi> actions).
<Andi> Most platform accessibility services go beyond programmatic exposure of name and role, and programmatic setting of states, properties and values (and notification of same), and specify additional information that could or should be exposed and/or set (for instance, a list of the available actions for a given user interface component, and a means to programmatically execute one of the listed
<Andi> actions).
RESOLUTION: Accept 4.1.2 proposal #4 as amended.
AS: 1.3.1 Info and Relationships
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN292012/results#xq2
<Andi> There may also be cases where it may be a judgment call as to whether the relationships should be programmatically determined or be presented in text. However, when ***technologies support programmatic relationships***, **it is preferable that** information and relationships **are** programmatically determined rather than described in text.
<greggvanderheiden> There may also be cases where it may be a judgment call as to whether the relationships should be programmatically determined or be presented in text. However, when technologies support programmatic relationships, it is preferable that information and relationships are programmatically determined rather than described in text.
<Zakim> BBailey, you wanted to ask about tense agreement
<Andi> There may also be cases where it may be a judgment call as to whether the relationships should be programmatically determined or be presented in text. However, when technologies support programmatic relationships, it is strongly encouraged that information and relationships be programmatically determined rather than described in text.
RESOLUTION: Accept 1.3.1 proposal 2 as amended.
<Andi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN052012/results#xq5
AS: 2.4.2 Page Titled
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN052012/results#xq5
David: We can list what 'page title' equates to in documents: a document title and where technology doesn't support that the file name will suffice.
PK: The problematic area is how this applies to software.
<Kiran> +q
GV: Purpose of SC - users who
can't see the whole page at a time have trouble navigating
between windows.
... In Web, title of page shows up as a 'handle' and isn't
always visible. Each dialog or application needs to have a text
name or 'handle' associated with it so when you bring up the
active things you can jump to that they each have a name.
... If the technology doesn't support it, then the first text
can typically give you enough context.
<Kiran> -q
Al: File names aren't a good naming system and doesn't think this is a good equivalent - you're limited by the file system to give a meaningful name.
PK: Leverage 1.3.1 and 4.1.2 that
concrete things in the UI need a name, role, state.
... If every context of interaction had a name, we could meet
this provision without worrying too much about the mapping of
the terms to the right level of UI for 4.1.2.
Alex: Single purpose devices with built-in AT may have no real need for titles.
GV: Even single-purpose devices
may have a purpose for titles. Different contexts of
interaction have some title or text at the beginning that
describes what the context is about.
... Contexts will have a container of some sort and some text
or name associated with them.
... 4.1.2 doesn't require that the name make sense.
David: Today in acrobat, the file name gets more exposure than the document title and it's difficult to get to the title with a screen reader.
Alex: Antivirus program title, for example, is the application name. We don't want to constrain to using file names, so must be careful in crafting the words.
Mike: The title should descibe the purpose of the task.
<Andi> ACTION: Peter to draft a new proposal for 2.4.2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/29-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Draft a new proposal for 2.4.2 [on Peter Korn - due 2012-07-06].
AS: 2.4.5 Multiple ways
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/JUN052012/results#xq6
<Kiran> +q
Kiran: If you have a simple
document, this may not really apply. However, if it is a
collection of documents it is more needed.
... For software, not all functions need multiple ways, such as
the About dialog.
AS: Someone suggested help as one of the multiple ways, but help doesn't typically have a direct linkage to the actual function but instead tells you how to get to the function.
PK: We shouldn't have to say this directly applies to software. Perhaps we should ask WCAG if we can say this doesn't apply, even though our charter says we can't state applicability.
GV: Process exception means that
there is a certain sequence that must be followed to complete
the task.
... We can't say this doesn't apply. We have to say what it
would mean to apply this to software.
Loïc: EU M376 discussions were looking at this to be dialog boxes inside of an application are an interaction context. So this SC doesn't make sense to apply to software based on that definition.
AS: Not all software functions really need to have multiple ways to get to the function. We don't want to have to have an accelerator key for every menu item. Example: Word count function doesn't have an accelerator key.
GV: We would have to change our charter to be able to say this SC doesn't apply.
shadi: Need to differentiate between functions and dialogs that are part of a process. There may be use cases where this SC could apply.
GV: This SC doesn't mean multiple ways to 'operate', but 'finding' the function. Need to have more discussions on the use of 'interaction context'.
<Andi> ACTION: Gregg to work with Pierce, Al, David, Loïc to draft proposal for 2.4.5 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/29-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Work with Pierce, Al, David, Loïc, Alex to draft proposal for 2.4.5 [on Gregg Vanderheiden - due 2012-07-06].
GV: Likes the use of 'context of
interaction' as a substitute for 'Web page'. A context of
interaction would include any element a user can do simple
navigation to without activating anything to get to it.
... In an application environment, modal dialogs are a context
of interaction, as is the entire application window.
AS: Set of interaction contexts - would that be a set of applications?
GV: No, that would only apply for applications that are meant to be in a set.
AS: We also need to discuss interaction context in the mobile environment.
David: Keep the 'set of interaction contexts' within the context of the application.
<Andi> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/project-plan
MP: Next EU Mandate 376 draft is the end of July, after our WG target of 25 July.
<Andi> ACTION: Gregg to ask WCAG WG to modify intent for 1.3.1 per proposal #2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/29-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Ask WCAG WG to modify intent for 1.3.1 per proposal #2 [on Gregg Vanderheiden - due 2012-07-06].
<Andi> add Alex to Action 22
<Andi> ACTION: Gregg to work Loïc, Mike, David, Andi to work on definition of "interaction context" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/29-wcag2ict-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-24 - Work Loïc, Mike, David, Andi to work on definition of "interaction context" [on Gregg Vanderheiden - due 2012-07-06].
RESOLUTION: Chairs to send to WCAG for approval SC on which we have reached consensus and continue to send additional SC for approval as we reach consensus on them.
<shadi> trackbot, end meeting
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/2.4.2/4.1.2/ Succeeded: s/I can take the AI// Succeeded: s/4.1.1 Name, Role, Value/4.1.2 Name, Role, Value/ Succeeded: s/accellerator/accelerator/ Succeeded: s/Work with Pierce, Al, David, Loïc to draft proposal for 2.4.5/Work with Pierce, Al, David, Loïc, Alex to draft proposal for 2.4.5/ Succeeded: s/Return to June 22nd Meeting Prep Survey, to finish 3.1.2 Language of Parts// No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: MaryJo Inferring Scribes: MaryJo Default Present: Kiran_Keja, Gregg_Vanderheiden, [Microsoft], Shadi, Al_Hoffman, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Peter_Korn, Mike_Pluke, Bruce_Bailey, Loïc_Martínez_Normand, David_MacDonald, Janina, +1.703.622.aaaa, Pierce, Michael_Cooper, Janina_Sajka Present: Kiran_Keja Gregg_Vanderheiden [Microsoft] Shadi Al_Hoffman Andi_Snow_Weaver Mary_Jo_Mueller Peter_Korn Mike_Pluke Bruce_Bailey Loïc_Martínez_Normand David_MacDonald Janina +1.703.622.aaaa Pierce Michael_Cooper Janina_Sajka Found Date: 29 Jun 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/06/29-wcag2ict-minutes.html People with action items: gregg peter WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]