<scribe> scribe: SuzanneT
JS: perhaps we have quorum to run the call
<janina> we've done that!
Charles is promising work on tests
No bugs filed on longdesc
<MarkS> http://www.w3.org/2013/08/html5-testing-summary.html
summary outlines position & recommended next steps
request for volunteers or more research
no responses so far
MS: system colors - file bug if want
to pursue
media queries - 2 paragraphs - concern that those will be used
for a11y & we wanted to test
Marks-MacBook-Pro:RawLineEdit msadecki$ but there's a separate spec for that, so recommend no
action
RS: agreed
MS: only IE makes title
accessible
spec doesn't say it needs to be keyboard accessible
group: title also important as fallback for AT
JS: 5.1 might be the target for the bug
cynthia: WCAG might want to look at existing & new title techniques
group: title issue will be addressed as a bug
MS: lang interoperability issues - need more info about the issues
group: we need to look at the accessibility APIs
<MarkS> ACTION: for Cynthia_Shelley to investigate what MS products do with lang attribute
<trackbot> Error finding 'for'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/users>.
<MarkS> ACTION: cyns to investigate what MS products do with lang attribute
<trackbot> Created ACTION-189 - Investigate what MS products do with lang attribute [on Cynthia Shelly - due 2013-08-15].
RS: so, reactions to the lang attribute are up to the user agent
PC: good research would be to search
xml:lang
there are open bugs on this
such as make lang and xml:lang synonyms
JS: core question - do we have a pipeline into the apis
janina asked Cynthia to look on Microsoft, she agreed
RS: check forAPI mappings
JS: we need to know that across the APIs
RS: analysis needed for 5.1
MS: don't need to pursue
RS: if there are strong native
semantics, make sure aria attributes does not get mapped
need to check specific items: radio button with role="button"
should not lose checked/unchecked state
table summary is going away, what is the expected behavior
group: most negative thing that happens, is not validate
Cynthia: there should be WCAG
techniques about table summary
folks will want a simple replacement for summary
JS: do we or do we not test what 5.0 spec says about summary
group: spec recommends using detail
within caption, but there are problems with that
caption labels a table
details inside caption let's you expand/collapse and anything
can be in details
group; question is how would that map to an a11y API
JS: we need a separate discussion on whether there should be bugs filed on author guidance
MS: next issue caption element: to
pursue, we need to demo interoperability issues
are there any caption-related bugs?
will search bugzilla
next is button element with a lot of new attributes
need to provide tests and examples to see if there are
interoperability issues - think of what those might be
next is links: need to demo interop issue to pursue
what is a link appears in fallback content, will it be mapped
correctly to ally API
other elements besides canvas?
RS: probably mainly canvas
MS: new link types might cause a11y
issues
would need to demo issues
group: type is a new attribute
MS: next is tag clouds - this would be a bug or a recommendation, not an area for testing
JS: longdesc = HTML extension spec in last call sponsored by this group
RS: is there any way that it might be added to the 5.0 spec?
JS: a month ago, decided we would ask for it to be folded back into the spec, when the time came
RS: main element status: test to see that there's an API mapping
JS: we have general agreement on MS's recommended dispositions
MS: regarding testing, is there something else bug triage group should do, given low activity, can they help with testing
JS: PF & HTML sponsor this and
there are different expectations as to what a teleconference can
do
due to this, the work statement should clarify
can we raise objections in the teleconference?
can we make decisions in teleconference if we document it
propose email discussion on this by next Thursday
PF wants to allow TF to state how they wish to work
canvas 2D testing:
MS: trying to find people to help
JS: priority for this meeting: go to topic 8
JS: think about what we want in 5.1,
that we don't have in 5.0
1. where the perfection points are: revisit aria mappings;
media; etc
2. additional items like a calendar picker should work
2. additional items like a how calendar picker should
work
please think about this type of item and make suggestions to
the list
RS: we need to sync up with aria
1.1
things like dialog being implements, but difficult for web
developers, make use of dialog
JS: meet next week, but following week MS is out & following week is "geek week"