See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 10 June 2014
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Post_WCAG_2
<Kenny> W3C WAI, and base on China
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
<Joshue> Wilco: It's a minor thing that I come accross.
<Joshue> Wilco: I'm not too bothered about it, it's worth reporting.
<Joshue> JOC: Ok
<David> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/H51.html
<Joshue> JOC: It seems to really be saying that some small tables don't need headers, but adding table headers is good practice and I'd like to support that.
David: Is it the new version of the specification?
Loretta: Interesting question
Josh: I think to leave it open because we're not sure about Michael C ment with his proposal
RESOLUTION: Leave LC-2869 open
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Grouping_related_links_using_the_nav_element
Loretta: I remember the group said there is accessibility support for the technique
David: Kathy suggested primary,
and secondary refered to by label
... We should probably talk with a bigger group
Loretta: Sending it back may send it to a black hole
Josh: Technique is mostly OK
Loretta: I worry about documenting all the uses of ARIA
David: No ARIA on the first
example, only the second
... There is controversy about the menu role
only for the type of menu like you have in the top of office
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Grouping_related_links_using_the_nav_element
Josh: Should we put it to bed or leave it for discussion next week
Loretta: Leaving it open may mean the comment doesn't reach the right person
<jamesn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Working_Group_Techniques_Development_Assignments
<David> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Techniques/HTML5
Everyone: MrAccess is Jon
Josh: Decide to leave untill Jon is on call
David: Maybe people don't know secondary, and conventions may be different in other places
James: Top menu may often be
primary menu, and secondary may be the drop down menu
... I'm not sold on primary or secondary, but a consistent
thing for people to use is a good idea
Josh: I don't like but don't particularly object to 'primary' and 'secondary'
<jamesn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_ARIA_landmarks_to_identify_regions_of_a_page
Loretta: Makes me wonder if this should be part of WCAG techniques
James: Change the div to nav on example 3
<Joshue> +q
Josh: If you change div to nav, you are doubling the navigation?
Prefer David's example, the primary navigation is important, secondary is not so important
I like the example there
Josh: David, add the example
please
... add ARIA11 as a related technique?
<Joshue> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/ARIA11.html
David: I will add it
Josh: Suggested change by Andrew: Identifying a section of content containing navigation links
nobody in favour, leave it
Loretta: I'm against this change, test procedures are already hard enough not to add accessibility support to the test
we should use a user agent note
Josh: Don't see a massive benefit to changing the test procedure
Keep the current procedure?
<Joshue> I'm not sure about ' represent a section of the page'.
<Joshue> Should it talk about functionality
Loretta: He wants to shift the example content into the description
not clear what is ment
David: Just putting in some text to address Loretta's comment
JosH: Having a little problem parsing the suggestion into what's there
Loretta: All comments are about adding role in place of the nav element
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Grouping_related_links_using_the_nav_element
<AWK> link?
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Grouping_related_links_using_the_nav_element
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20140520/results
Loretta: I think it's better to cross reference HTML5 and ARIA techniques rather then trying to combine them, that's confusing
<David> finished editing https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Grouping_related_links_using_the_nav_element
Building fallbacks into techniques makes them hard to understand
AWK: I don't feel strongly about adding accessibility support to the description
Loretta: We have a separate technique for this
AWK: It looks like the example content is not there anymore, there is no problem
Josh: David, the heading example 1 is the same as example 2
David: I'll fix, and changed the last line of the description
Marc: My comment has been added in.
Josh: I don't see 2.4.1
<Joshue> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-skip.html
Loretta: There was support for jumping over sections
I don't know if marking it up as nav means you can navigate around it
Josh: We won't add 2.4.1
... To address Kathleen's comment, seems a fairly small
change
... suggested text
<Joshue> Suggested text 'Check to see that non-navigation items are not in the nav container'
David: There might be headings
other content too can help persons along
Josh: If people put something useful in there, leave the test step off
<David> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/CR/sections.html#the-nav-element
David: Nav can contain all kinds of elements
in html 5
Loretta: I think the navigation section is a bunch of links, but I was not part of the HTML5 discussion
Josh: I think we leave out the suggestion, so we're not too perscriptive
Loretta: I feel mildly it is a benefit
<Joshue> JOC: If there isn't a lot of misuse in the wild then the test procedure shouldn't be too proscriptive
David: I've not seen this go wrong, and it is a risk if we require only links in nav
Josh: Should be ../ instead of
./
... Michael suggest it should be a new paragraph
suggest moving the last sentense
Josh: I will change it
excellent comment from Michael.
Josh: Detlev's comments are addressed, same for Loretta
RESOLUTION: Technique accepted as amended
<Joshue> Next week start at F76 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20140520/results
Josh: Please continue to review your action items
<Joshue> Josh: Please continue to review your action items
Josh: We want to think critically about the success criteria
gather feedback on the post WCAG 2 wiki
David: JAWS and NVDA did not know what to do with the aside technique
I'll pull out the example
<Joshue> Let's leave this open https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_the_aside_element_to_associate_content_related_to_an_article
<Joshue> We will look at the Pull requests on this survey next week https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/10thJune2014/
Loretta: It does not sound clear what the intended use of the technique is
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Excelent/excellent/ No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: Wilco Inferring Scribes: Wilco WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: AWK Andrew_Kirkpatrick BarryJohnson David David_MacDonald Everyone IPcaller JOC James James_Nurthen Josh Joshue Kenny Loretta Marc Marc_Johlic Wilco aaaa https inserted jamesn joined marcjohlic trackbot wai-wcag You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Regrets: Jon_Avila John_Foliot Kathy_Wahlbin Kathleen_Anderson Sailesh Bruce_B WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 10 Jun 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/06/10-wai-wcag-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]