See also: IRC log
<AnnM> hey
<AnnM> did i screw up the times and miss the meeting?
<AnnM> i can't seem to get on
<AnnM> it's not parsing the conference code
<AnnM> i've tried skype as well as my iphone
<AnnM> and it just keeps asking me to enter the code before hanging up on me
<AnnM> that's what i've been putting in
<jeanne> there were problems with Zakim UK and FR numbers to day.
<jeanne> let me see if they are fixed yet...
<AnnM> oh, ok
<AnnM> ok, back on skype now
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010AprJun/0068.html
JT: Skip editorial andgo to "Minor"
Resolution: Approve change to "(2) Adding "Any": "A.3.1.6 Present Keyboard Commands: Authoring tool user interface controls can be presented with any associated keyboard commands. (Level AAA)""
<jeanne> +1
Resolution: Approve change to "(1) Adding "Any": A.3.6.1 Save Settings: Any authoring tool display settings and control settings are saved between authoring sessions."
<jeanne> +1
Resolution: Approve PROPOSAL: Split "content (web content)" and "Web content properties". Without any other substantive change. Both are already defined terms.
JS: Has a concern...
... I don't think it is sufficiently covered.
... Providing shortcuts for appliucations is not typically part
of conventions
... I've read Microsoft's - they don't require them
AM: Not sure that all keyboard shortcuts would be included
JR: AC says he would like to keep something about mechanisms to get to edit areas and menus
JT: Maybe we can put some wording around it re: authoring functions.
JR: Maybe its a level AA to make keyboard navigation more efficent and edffective but need be careful to make wording objective
JT: Efficiency and effectiveness should be measurable
GP: Efficiency not always
JT: But can measure by actions
GP: Can't always - often tab order is up to do developer judgement
JR: Maybe use structure of UI?
JT: Irrespective of structure...key point is what functions are needed for editing
JR: Authoring might not be even the primary purpose
GP: Maybe regardles of what I want to do is there an effective way of doing it
JR: What about any ability to navigate functions by keyboard access that is not simply linear
GP: There isn't one testable criteria
JT: Yes when create acces systems
for keyboard users we do this
... The question is how do we apply this during dev of
tool.
... One way is to allow user to analyze their own use
... But that's not practical for every developer
JR: That's what I was trying to do.
JT: But that makes it too complex and hard to explain.
JR: It's "Bybpass Blocks" from
WCAG
... Because accesskey is broken on the web.
JT: OK but in content many more links than iun authoring
JR: Not sure about that DW has many functions
JT: Right but commonly used is much smaller set
JR: But unfortunately on a web
abased tool you couldn't do this
... What about rewording bypass slightly
JS: What's wrong with what we have?
JR: I agree.
JT: I'm worried about adding a new UI convention
JR: But its not - it;s like toolbar bypass in TinyMCE
Resolution: Keep A3.1.3 as it is and instead add some support text to the Implementing document that addresses show bypass link blocks might be used to do this in web-based tools
B.2.2.1 Check Accessibility (WCAG Level A): If the
authoring tool provides authors with the ability to add or modify web
content so that any WCAG 2.0 Level A Success Criteria are violated, then
accessibility checking for those success criteria is provided. (Level A)
JT: Likes new wording...easier to understand conditions
GP: Yes
<jeanne> +1
Resolution: B.2.2.1 Check
Accessibility (WCAG Level A): If the authoring tool provides
authors with the ability to add or modify web content so that
any WCAG 2.0 Level A Success Criteria are violated, then
accessibility checking for those success criteria is provided.
(Level A)
... B.2.2.1 Check Accessibility (WCAG Level A): If the
authoring tool provides authors with the ability to add or
modify web content so that any WCAG 2.0 Level A Success
Criteria can be violated, then accessibility checking for those
success criteria is provided. (Level A)
<jeanne> +1
<gpisocky> +1
JT: Let's get everyone's vote here...then others later.
JR: Agrees.
<gpisocky> I agree to last call
JS: Yes
AM: I agree to Last Call
JT: Yes
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: Jan Inferring Scribes: Jan Default Present: Jeanne, Jan, Jutta, +3aaaa, GregP, [IPcaller] Present: Jeanne Jan Jutta +3aaaa GregP [IPcaller] Ann Regrets: Andrew_R. Tim_B. Alastair_C. Sueann_N. Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010AprJun/0069.html Got date from IRC log name: 14 Jun 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/06/14-au-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]