– DRAFT –
WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference

Announcements

<bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Work-for-the-week#6-june-meeting

Did talk to AG WG on current status (working on 5 things in survey). Plan still is to update the PR, send to AG WG, then they can review the changes.

That agreement could happen on Tuesday

Then doc can go to call for consensus to publish (CfC). Would be by end of Friday. So document could publish the following week (Tuesday 18th, or Thursday 20th).

Horizontal review will happen at the same time (as soon as it publishes). Ask for them to complete within 30 days as well (same length of time as public review comment period).

Then we can publish the final version if we do not get substantive changes from public review or horizontal review.

After that the meeting cadence can reduce

Survey results: Updated proposals developed on 30-31 May

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-last-updates/results

We got 10 responses which is good.

Question 1 – Update definition of “closed functionality”

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-last-updates/results#xq1

All 10 preferred option 1, as is

<maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Do not change the definition of “closed functionality”; leave as it is in the current editor’s draft.

+1

<Sam> +1

<loicmn> +1

<Mike_Pluke> +1

<shadi> +1

<bruce_bailey> +1

<LauraMiller> +1

<Devanshu> +1

<ChrisLoiselle> +1

RESOLUTION: Do not change the definition of “closed functionality”; leave as it is in the current editor’s draft.

<GreggVan> +1

Question 2 - (1 of 2) SC Problematic for Closed – 1.4.10 Reflow

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-last-updates/results#xq2

7 incorporate option 4 as is, 3 incorporate with edits

Option 4: Updated 30 May survey proposal due to survey responses

1.4.10 Reflow - Some software on ICT with closed functionality does not support scrolling content, or zooming or changing the viewport (examples include software for self-service transaction machines or kiosks). Therefore, some other non-WCAG requirements would be needed for products with closed functionality to ensure that content is readable

without scrolling in two directions.

Google doc for proposals: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit#heading=h.a8x1l16o921i

Chris suggested modifying the use of "some".

Bruce had some further minor changes

Fernanda agreed to these edits, concerned with last part of last sentence.

<maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit#heading=h.a8x1l16o921i

Mary Jo drafted a proposal that incorporates all these

<bruce_bailey> 1.4.10 Reflow – Some software on ICT with closed functionality does not support scrolling content, or zooming, or changing the viewport (examples include, but are not limited to, software for self-service transaction machines or kiosks). Therefore, some other non-WCAG requirements would be needed for products with closed functionality to ensure

<bruce_bailey> that content is readable by persons with low vision without scrolling in two dimensions.

<bruce_bailey> ^^ current option 5 in google doc

Option 5: Edits due to survey comments (Chris, Bruce, and Fernanda)

1.4.10 Reflow – Some software on ICT with closed functionality does not support scrolling content, or zooming, or changing the viewport (examples include, but are not limited to, software for self-service transaction machines or kiosks). Therefore, some other non-WCAG requirements would be needed for products with closed functionality to ensure

that content is readable by persons with low vision without scrolling in two dimensions.

GreggVan: dimensions is less plain English than direction. Also direction is closer to the meaning.

maryjom: Because SC says dimensions

GreggVan: Then it should stay with dimensions

<bruce_bailey> For reference, https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#reflow

<GreggVan> +11

<bruce_bailey> +11

Any concerns with this proposed option 5?

<maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate proposal 5 for 1.4.10 Reflow into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as-is

<loicmn> +1

+1

<Devanshu> +1

<mitch11> +1

<GreggVan> +1

<bruce_bailey> +1

<shadi> +1

<ChrisLoiselle> +1

<Chuck> (Gregg's + Bruces)/22

RESOLUTION: Incorporate proposal 5 for 1.4.10 Reflow into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as-is

<Sam> +1

<FernandaBonnin> +1

Question 3 - (2 of 2) SC Problematic for Closed – 2.1.1 Keyboard

<maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-last-updates/results#xq3

<LauraMiller> +1

Google doc link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit#heading=h.78cegr3ndndm

Responses. 1 said option 9c as is, 1 said 9c with edits, 4 said option 10 as is, 4 said option 10 with edits

Shadi suggested slight edit to option 10

Shadi's edit: Slight edit from Option #10, to replace "provides, or allows installation or connection of," with "supports" -- the reason is that basically any ICT with a USB or Bluetooth port allows connection with a keyboard but that does not necessarily mean that it was designed to work with a keyboard.

Bruce preferred option 9c. If we go with option 10, suggest we lose the last sentence.

Gregg suggested 9c, with the last sentence from option 10

bruce_bailey: 10 is trying to be in the affirmative, but thought that it made it more difficult to read.

bruce_bailey: Another concern: yes, we should mention keypads, but didn't think that 10 phrased it well.

LauraMiller: I missed last week, shouldn't just mention a single brand like EZ Access. Maybe we should just mention alternative input devices. Also concerned that we shouldn't be too prescriptive about hardware

<bruce_bailey> I did included the (R) mark on EZ Access, it is just an example.

LauraMiller: Canadian standard for example is very specific on types of hardware used for input. I think we may not wish to that far.

GreggVan: proposed Option 9d - like 9c, but with last sentence from option 10

Mike_Pluke: Had a call with people within ETSI - so giving some input on whether a keypad is a keyboard would be useful, if this is the consensus.

Mike_Pluke: Would like to retain the last sentence of option 10.

<bruce_bailey> Gregg's Option 9d (Same as 9c - including dropping old last sentence - but add last sentence of opt 10)

<bruce_bailey> 2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. It may not be possible to satisfy this success criterion when a) the ICT does not have a built-in keyboard, and b) it does not provide, or allow installation or connection of, an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides

<bruce_bailey> keyboard-like functionality. A keypad that provides full access to functionality could be considered a keyboard.

mitch11: If we retain the last sentence about keypads, I don't think it should include a simple directional keypad as it is a mouse alternative, not a keyboard alternative

<bruce_bailey> +1 for keypad could be consider a keypad if it provides full functionality

Sam: A keypad that provides X could be considered a keyboard interface ...

<LauraMiller> +1

Mike_Pluke: Agree with Mitch. Keypad can be used as directional, but in combination with onscreen options/keyboard, it does give you keyboard functionality.

<GreggVan> A keypad that provides full access to functionality without requiring directional navigation could be considered a keyboard.

GreggVan: proposal above

LauraMiller: Discussion on directional keyboards, similar to tab / shift / space. If you have this, then you address the user need.

GreggVan: Agree with Laura. Except that gestures are never an equivalent to a keyboard input - they can be an alternative, as not all can swipe/make gestures

mitch11: Agree with others - not always directional on kiosks. Maybe are on TVs and gaming systems. Last sentence has a problem in that it is too positive

maryjom: Chair hat on. Keep this succinct so we can make progress

<Chuck> +1 with MJ

maryjom: Adding more discussion about what is/isn't a keyboard interface can cause issues.

Sam: Can we provide something that says "it could be" rather than being too specific. Keypad can provide some access...

<shadi> +1

GreggVan: Closed, means you cannot connect something. Maybe we should change to "might be considered a keyboard"

Option 9c: Changed 2nd sentence (a or b)

2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. It may not be possible to satisfy this success criterion when a) the ICT does not have a built-in keyboard, and b) it does not provide, or allow installation or connection of, an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides

keyboard-like functionality.

Option 10: Edits to address all concerns from the group (hopefully)

2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. It is possible to satisfy this success criterion if a) the ICT has a built-in keyboard, or b) provides, or allows installation or connection of, an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides keyboard-like functionality. A

keypad that provides full access to functionality could be considered a keyboard.

<GreggVan> 2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. It may not be possible to satisfy this success criterion when a) the ICT does not have a built-in keyboard, and b) it does not provide, or allow installation or connection of, an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides keyboard-like functionality. A keypad that provides full access to functionality without

<GreggVan> requiring directional navigation might be considered a keyboard.

<bruce_bailey> Option 11: Edit of option 10 - Shadi’s proposed change to the 2nd sentence

<bruce_bailey> 2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. It is possible to satisfy this success criterion if a) the ICT has a built-in keyboard, or b) provides, or allows installation or connection of, supports an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides keyboard-like

<bruce_bailey> functionality. A keypad that provides full access to functionality could be considered a keyboard.

<maryjom> POLL: Which proposal are you leaning toward? 1) Option 9c, or 2)10?

<GreggVan> 1

<bruce_bailey> 10 w/ shadi's edit

shadi: Didn't meant to imply another option.

<shadi> 1 or 2

<loicmn> 2

2 or 1

<mitch11> 1 or 2

<Mike_Pluke> 2 or 1

<FernandaBonnin> 2 or 1

<Sam> 1 | 2

<Devanshu> 1 or 2

<ChrisLoiselle> 2 | 1

<GreggVan> 1

Chuck: Looks like it is evenly split.

mitch11: Hard to answer as we haven't quite finished edits

<GreggVan> I can go with 2 with edits

bruce_bailey: Thing that Shadi fixed was to use "supports" instead of allows connection. Liked this

Sam: We are talking about a keyboard interface, rather than talking about supporting all AT

<Zakim> PhilDay, you wanted to say we are trying to encourage closed functionality manufacturers to consider accessibility, rather than saying they all fail

<ChrisLoiselle> Phil : Similar to Sam. We are giving some kind of hints to people designing closed functionality. Rather than can't meet and don't bother.

<ChrisLoiselle> Phil: Keyboard might be helpful. Hints to help.

<Chuck> Phil: We aren't saying you must satisfy x and y, we are giving hints.

GreggVan: What should we be looking at? Option 9. WCAG support keyboard device - should handle all sorts of AT, not just a physical keyboard or onscreen keyboard

<maryjom> Option 9d: 2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. It may not be possible to satisfy this success criterion when a) the ICT does not have a built-in keyboard, and b) it does not provide, or allow installation or connection of, an alternative input method (hardware or software)

<maryjom> that provides keyboard-like functionality. A keypad that provides full access to functionality without requiring directional navigation might be considered a keyboard.

GreggVan: option 10 and all variations are not correct, in my opinion.

<maryjom> Option 10a: 2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. Other methods may help meet some user needs, such as supporting a built-in keyboard, an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides keyboard-like functionality, or keypad that provides full access to

<maryjom> functionality without requiring directional navigation.

[Mitch is working on new option 10a in the Google doc]

<bruce_bailey> I note that option 10 2nd sentence starts off "It is possible..." so I think it is okay.

bruce_bailey: I voted for 9c, but 10 could be OK, as it starts with "it is possible".

Loic: was concerned over the complexity of not a) and not b). Complex language, but could accept it if needed
… In option 9c

<Sam> Re-poll?

Clean version of option 10a:

2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. Other methods may help meet some user needs, such as supporting a built-in keyboard, an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides keyboard-like functionality, or keypad that provides full access to functionality without

requiring directional navigation.

<maryjom> POLL: Which do you prefer? 1) Option 9d or 2) 10a?

<shadi> 9d

<mitch11> 2

<GreggVan> 2

<bruce_bailey> Clean version of 10a needs work.

MaryJo: 10a needs work?

Bruce: Items come before.

Gregg: It is not a keyboard.

<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to talk about tomorrow, after the votes

MaryJo: I turned it to a bulleted list

Chuck: I've added to list for tomorrow.

Mary Jo: I'm not working tomorrow

<Mike_Pluke> 2

<loicmn> 2 (with bullets)

Bruce: I'm ok with bulleted list version

<bruce_bailey> i am okay with bulleted list version

<olivia> 2

<maryjom> POLL: Which do you prefer? 1) Option 9d or 2) 10a?

<GreggVan> 2

<loicmn> 2

<olivia> 2

<mitch11> 2

<Mike_Pluke> 2

<shadi> 1

<Devanshu> 2

2

<bruce_bailey> 2

<PhilDay> 2, happy with 1 as well

<Sam> 1 | 2

<FernandaBonnin> 2

MaryJo: Shadi, do you oppose ?

<PhilDay> Clean version of option 10a:

<PhilDay> 2.1.1 Keyboard - Assumes operation via a keyboard interface which also allows for alternative input devices. Other methods may help meet some user needs, such as supporting:

<PhilDay> a built-in keyboard

<PhilDay> an alternative input method (hardware or software) that provides keyboard-like functionality, or

<PhilDay> a keypad that provides full access to functionality without requiring directional navigation.

Shadi: It may not be possible in certain circumstances . I'm not sure what the issue is?

Gregg: 9c implies keyboard solves propblem
… may not possible if not supplying a keyboard. If a keyboard would solve it, which isn't true.

Shadi: I don't think this is clear enough.

<Zakim> PhilDay, you wanted to ask Which items are being polled?

Phil: defer to the queue

Gregg: This isn't a provision. This would wouldn't be enough, we are providing comments for group who would solve this.

<PhilDay> Shadi: option 10 doesn't say that it may not be possible to solve this SC if you do not have X or Y.

Mitch: Gregg stated what I was going to say.

Chuck: Rules of consensus don't require unanimous consent FYI.

Sam: I think we are getting in to the hopes vs. what can be supported.
… closed products are closed products for a reason. We need to deal in reality.

Sam: I think we are getting sidetracked on hopes vs. reality.
… closed means there are restrictions.

I can't scribe anymore, need to drop for a call. Sorry!

<bruce_bailey> i am okay with 9d as it appears in doc

GreggVan: We are not writing the reg, we are just giving some input to other standards bodies for closed

maryjom: We will put this to survey again.

<Sam> Thank you Mary Jo!!

Mary Jo will put out a new survey, and will add some of the discussion into the Google Doc as well