19:55:10 RRSAgent has joined #au 19:55:10 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/24-au-irc 19:55:16 Zakim, this will be AUWG 19:55:16 ok, Jan; I see WAI_AUWG()3:00PM scheduled to start 55 minutes ago 19:55:22 Meeting: WAI AU 19:55:37 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JulSep/0034.html 19:58:02 WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has now started 19:58:09 +Jeanne 19:59:13 zakim, code? 19:59:13 the conference code is 2894 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Jan 19:59:22 +??P3 19:59:41 zakim, ??P3 is really Jan 19:59:41 +Jan; got it 20:03:51 +Tim_Boland 20:04:03 jeanne has joined #au 20:05:42 + +1.416.946.aaaa 20:06:15 zakim,aaaa is really Jutta 20:06:16 +Jutta; got it 20:07:10 regrets: SueAnn N. 20:10:14 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JulSep/0034.html 20:11:51 Topic: 1- Any early results/questions about Techniques review? 20:12:01 +??P17 20:12:23 -??P17 20:12:34 Techniques Draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2009/ED-ATAG20-TECHS-20090814/ 20:12:57 Scribe: JR 20:12:59 Andrew has joined #au 20:13:01 AndrewR has joined #au 20:13:02 Scribe: Jan 20:13:49 TB,JT: Clarify the work items from last week....re: review the techniques draft - assigned pieces 20:14:52 Topic: B.2.4.3 20:15:06 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JulSep/0035.html 20:15:34 +??P17 20:15:50 zakim, ??P17 is really Andrew 20:15:50 +Andrew; got it 20:17:30 jtrevir has joined #au 20:17:51 The intent of this success criterion is to address situations in which 20:17:52 an author has either not noticed or ignored opportunities for adding 20:17:54 alternative content and has closed their "authoring session". ATAG 2.0 20:17:55 does *not* require authoring tools to attempt automated repairs in this 20:17:57 situation because doing so risks misleading accessibility checking tools 20:17:59 and end users into the assumption that the alternative content was 20:18:00 provide or approved by a human author. However, if developers are 20:18:02 interested in providing automation to assist end users, this success 20:18:03 criterion acts as a guide. Basically, the success criterion assumes that 20:18:05 basic repairs (e.g., using text content that is readily available to 20:18:06 user agents, such as the file name, text metadata within non-text 20:18:08 objects, the tile of a linked resource, etc.) are best left to user 20:18:09 agents and assistive technologies, since they can more clear about the 20:18:11 fact that the alternative content results from an automatic repair, 20:18:12 rather from a human author. However, in some cases the authoring tool 20:18:14 will have text information, such as contextual information (e.g., the 20:18:15 image is the author's profile picture) that the user agent does not have 20:18:17 equal access to, in which case, the repair can be made by the authoring 20:18:18 tool. In addition, the success criterion does not limit more technically 20:18:20 sophisticated repairs that go beyond simple text processing to 20:18:22 processing images, audio or video. The intent here is encourage, rather 20:18:24 discourage progress in these rapidly advancing areas. 20:18:26 Note: When web content technologies include a mechanism for marking text 20:18:28 alternatives as automatically generated, these mechanisms should be 20:18:30 employed. Also, because these automatic repairs are, by their nature, 20:18:32 second-best measures taken only when authors are no longer available, it 20:18:34 would be preferable for the instances of automated repairs to be flagged 20:18:36 for author attention in any subsequent authoring sessions. 20:19:05 SUCCESS CRITERION: 20:19:07 B.2.4.3 Let user agents repair: After the end of an *authoring session*, 20:19:09 the *authoring tool* does not attempt to *repair* *alternative content* 20:19:10 for non-text content using any text values that are equally available to 20:19:12 *user agents* (e.g., the filename is not used). (Level A) 20:20:08 Andrew has joined #au 20:20:13 AndrewR has joined #au 20:21:46 -Andrew 20:22:54 +??P6 20:23:58 JT: Some way to segment this better? 20:24:46 JT: THis is what authorin tool should do...this what should be left to the user agent any why...and we want to leave open innovation in the future 20:25:22 -??P6 20:27:34 Action: Segment B2.4.3 proposal with clarifications on the each paragraph 20:27:34 Sorry, couldn't find user - Segment 20:27:44 Action JR: Segment B2.4.3 proposal with clarifications on the each paragraph 20:27:45 Created ACTION-184 - Segment B2.4.3 proposal with clarifications on the each paragraph [on Jan Richards - due 2009-08-31]. 20:29:44 Jutta asks Andrew for any comments on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JulSep/0035.html 20:30:59 jeanne2 has joined #au 20:36:34 I agree with the comments on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JulSep/0035.html. I think we should urge caution for tools developers choosing some arbitrary information to use in place of information that the author omitted. 20:37:07 JT: Great thanks 20:37:25 Topic: 4-Clearing up the ACTIONS list: 20:37:48 Topic: 3-Clear up the ISSUES list: (http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/tracker/issues/open) 20:38:33 4-Clearing up the ACTIONS list: 20:38:35 http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/tracker/actions/open 20:40:21 Topic: 5- Proposed SC B.2.1.X 20:40:39 JT's original: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JulSep/0006.html 20:41:03 JR's message: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JulSep/0036.html 20:41:20 JT: I still believe it fairly critical...educational 20:41:44 JT: Need to educate authors , guidance because most people don't read documentation 20:41:57 JT: Lot's of our supports are after mistakes are made 20:42:21 JT: Can be light-weight and in-line with UI... 20:42:36 JT: An accesasibility advisor giving variety of choices open to people. 20:42:57 JT: What are accessibility implications of various things to embark upon 20:43:24 TB: How expressed? 20:43:39 JT: Depends on UI...if you do this...you'll need to do X 20:44:14 JT: Might be "it's easier to be accessible to be with this than this" 20:44:49 JT: Looking at different CMS and HTML tools, this is very much in line with general fuidance on other things 20:46:30 JR: Agress but I think we need to focus a bit more 20:46:47 JT: But might not be HTML, could be flash etc 20:48:32 -Tim_Boland 20:48:33 JT: Maybe I could try to draft some techniques and success criteria for this 20:49:42 Action JT: Re-formulate guideline and scuccess criteria for decision support (B.2.1.X) 20:49:42 Created ACTION-185 - Re-formulate guideline and scuccess criteria for decision support (B.2.1.X) [on Jutta Treviranus - due 2009-08-31]. 20:50:30 -Jeanne 20:50:32 -Jan 20:50:32 -Jutta 20:50:33 WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has ended 20:50:34 Attendees were Jeanne, Jan, Tim_Boland, +1.416.946.aaaa, Jutta, Andrew 20:50:42 Next Meeting AUg 31 20:51:18 Chair: Jutta Treviranus 20:51:24 RRSAgent, make minutes 20:51:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/24-au-minutes.html Jan 20:51:30 RRSAgent, set logs public 20:51:36 Zakim, bye 20:51:36 Zakim has left #au 20:51:45 RRSAgent, bye 20:51:45 I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/24-au-actions.rdf : 20:51:45 ACTION: Segment B2.4.3 proposal with clarifications on the each paragraph [1] 20:51:45 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/24-au-irc#T20-27-34 20:51:45 ACTION: JR to Segment B2.4.3 proposal with clarifications on the each paragraph [2] 20:51:45 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/24-au-irc#T20-27-44 20:51:45 ACTION: JT to Re-formulate guideline and scuccess criteria for decision support (B.2.1.X) [3] 20:51:45 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/08/24-au-irc#T20-49-42