See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 29 July 2014
<AWK> Scribe: Mike_Elledge
J: Feel free to interrupt and ask questions.
Mobile TF UPDATE:
<AWK> s/updaet/update
<AWK> Kathy W providing update
K: The Mobile A11y TF, not much participation. Trying to get more involved. Progess slower than like. Have id' tasks, like mobile example, language changes, techniques to add to mobile either apps or mobile. Sufficient or advisory techniques. Hvave 5 left in list. Almost ready to discuss Kim and I putting together list of techiaues, so can farm out. Both new techniques and ones adding mobiel lang to. So we can make good progress. Will set up s[CUT]
view.
K: That's where we are. Focus will be adding techniques. Have a good def of mobile techs as well as add as mobile examples. 5 to go. Will send out link.
So people can review. Everhting is on the wiki.
<Kathy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Main_Page
<AWK> s/everhting/everything
K: Item working group wanted
discussion on. Alternate version action item. Last week TF met
and discussed. We have on our meeting minutes.
... Last week's minutes have summary of discussion. Some
concerns w/ aren't we going backwards if stripping out a11y
questions > text only page. Procedure seemed limited.
<AWK> Meeting minutes from Mobile discussion: http://www.w3.org/2014/07/25-mobile-a11y-minutes.html
Although if look into it clearly otehr links say preserve functionality. Concerns that devs would say equivialent even if not. From RWD standpoint, duplicated content and images.
K: Concern that images and size work still being done.
<Joshue108> Also if sprites are used..
K: Jean mentioned taht responsive images may get very large bec of how they're being structured and duplication. Group working on specs, concerned that if all CSS disabled that images would get too large.
<Kathy> http://www.w3.org/2014/07/25-mobile-a11y-minutes
A: Is that an a11y issue. Group had some concerns about the technique, but should/not go forward?
K: Would like to see addressed. No conclusion of whether/not move forward. Would like procedure to be updated and more research needed to be done wrt RWD.
J: Around next week Kathy?
K: Am on flight at 12:50, may be at beginning of meeting.
J: Due to discuss with Alistar
next week.
... Good to give him direct feedback.
K: Link to minutes added (see above). Will try to be there.
J: Will ping him.
A: Jean and JS the same?
K: Yes.
A: What Mobile TF needs most is people.
K: Yes. Would love to have feedback. Take a glance at list. Our plan for moving forward. Add questions or concerns.
J: That's super.
DM: What is the deliverable?
K: Primary focus WCAG 2.o for Mobile and Mobile Techs. Were going to do best practices, but told priority is techniques.
D: Makes sense.
K: Says goodbye to teach webinar.
A: Other questions?
J: Issue of getting more people to look at space and contribute. Should do something about that.
A: Would love to make people materialize and get people to work productively.
D: Still trying to multiply hours.
A: J explain what proposed resolution is about.
A: 2905 issue from survey?
J: Half completed work. Use map. and test procedure. One of steps was use of access on table values. Access attribute?
A: DK
<Joshue108> http://www.w3.org/2014/07/22-wai-wcag-minutes.html
J: Had started talking about it. See mnutes above for reference. Need Loretta for 2904 to redo resolution.
<Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Comments_22May2014/
L: Let's reopen it.
<Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/35422/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20140107/2905
J: let's look at 2905.
... It's blank at moment. Thanks, L, for work last week.
A: 2904?
<Joshue108> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-TECHS/F17.html
J: Is there a uri for Technique
F17? Yes this is the one.
... Image maps fine. Have resolution. Use of Access attribute
for image map. have never seen it or test cases. Also removing
reference to accesskeys.
Have lost connection will dial back.
Back
A: Client side image maps. Accept as amended. Are we happy w it? or still talking.
L: Still particular aspect. 2905 opens larger discussion on test procedure. Never ocmpletely converged.
<AWK> RESOLUTION: 2904 is still closed
J: Related. why a bit sticky.
L: Looks like 2905 moved into
working group.
... A lot has been copied up into working group.
J: Try to put 2905 to bed.
A: Raises issues around checking for IDs that are unique.
A: Checking for duplicate values, but now in keeping with original comment, or expanded.
J: Expanded. Problem is there is
very little info about what comment is saying. Cannot really
glean about the point being made. Inferring that there is
incorrect logic or how its phrased.
... Not clear. Should send back a simple response saying not
enough info to parse comment, but that it sounds like logic
issue in test procedure.
... WG responses reflect that.
A: Comparable item, but check back with commenter.
+1
A: Will send back comment reflecting that.
RESOLUTION: Leave open.
J: Issues of test procedure something we should address. Now, or leave til new published specs?
A: If tehre's a larger change, need to havfe someone put forward proposal to modify technique. So if ripe for improvement add to list of techniques being tracked in wiki.
A: Someone can grab it.
J: Issue access being conflated with action keys. Other issue is access. Have never come across it. Could make a call that be replaced with better example.
J; Change table example to Header/ID examples would be preferable to Access. Can park if you want. Have someone looking at it.
A: Don't have a problem with Access being there, if someone can't use it okay. Header/ID agree. Accesskey some browsers will respond. Wouldn't be an error.
A: But have to look into it.
J: Accesskey references seem irrelevant, out moded to me. Would suggest removing it.
A: Don't feel too strongly about it. Need someone to review and update F17, may or may not be in response to comment.
J: Let's put comment to bed and have someone take it up. Close loop.
<scribe> ACTION: add F17 to list of techniques taht need look [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/07/29-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Error finding 'add'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/users>.
<AWK> ACTION: akirkpat2 to add F17 to the list of techniques that need review/updating [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/07/29-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-266 - Add f17 to the list of techniques that need review/updating [on Andrew Kirkpatrick - due 2014-08-05].
A: Everything looks accepted as proposed.
L: Was accepted.
A: 2090 also on list
<AWK> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Comments_22May2014/results#xcomm3
A: In minutes see above. Issue is headings to meet FC241. H69 is not required to meet FC241.
<Joshue108> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-TECHS/H69.html
A: Do we need a heading? H69 can be sufficient. Not nec to have heading to meet 241 or can be with a different technique.
A: Comments. Michael: Ok as is, but consider adding explanation. L: Agrees with sentiment of response. ?: Leave as written. Separate technique for headings where needed.Merging is not ok.
<Joshue108> issue-19?
<trackbot> issue-19 -- Should h69 be merged into h42? -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/issues/19
A: Other comments?
D: Lots of misunderstanding of FC 241. Repeated blocks across a number of pages. Really does, headings a good way to do it. Some controversy over that. Have to put in plug, only FF does that.
A: Salisha not hear to respond.
A: Don't feel too strongly about it. Someone will be adding comments. Responder (AWK) needs to provide more detail about test procedure.
A: Not sure what changes to make. Thought we did something about it already.
J: Not sure what to do about it. Technique seems okay. Let's park it until Salisha is here.
A: Feel like not clear what we're saying in technique. Have not indicated in response what we will do.
L: Have discussed it before.
Unless soemthing new don't need to reopen.
... Two techniqus about headings. Semantic markup, and where
they are being used.
AWK: H42 is H1-H6, info. H69 use headings at beginning of content.
J: Also navigation.
L: Meta issue. WCAG tries to tell people they don't have to use headings. Lots of people disagree.
A: H69 is how you use them.
L: Is overkill for 241, good for 2410.
A: Leave this open. Clarify specifics of resolution. Sailesh may be back to discuss.
J: Seems redundant.
L: But you can use them but not have them in beginning of each section.
J: Agree.
... Save our sanity, say no. This is why we're keeping them
separate.
L: But that's not the comment.
A: So shouldn't be part of response.
A: Have a short discussion about Issue 19. Will update my response. Can discuss next week.
D: If headings have to be descriptive (246)?
L: Yes, but we were discussion 241, which is navigation.
D: Wanted to clarify, since it's a hot button issue.
L: Let's move on
RESOLUTION: Leave 2909 open.
<AWK> AWK to update https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/35422/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20140306/2909
L: Can live with that unless we
are going to gate this to writing new technique. Given gap
between what needs to be done and availablity of people to do
it could be long time.
... Since it says we made changes, should show them.
A: I will do that.
A: Done with that survey!
D: Addendum 2871. Should talk
about that. Action to contact original poster for
clarification. Commenter may not have been referring from SC
user.
... Was from a visual perspecter.
A: left open from last week, not fully ready for discussion, let's discuss next week.
D: Will update.
<scribe> Scribe: mea culpa.
A: What would you like to discuss?
<AWK> Zakim: take up item 4
<AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Timelines
J: Keydates for working group publication cycles
A: Need to be done August 26, comments close Aug 12, Call has been made for them. Partway through comment period. Hoping they come in early so we can beat that date.
A: New techniques due date for March update of Tech and Understanding. Will talk about tomorrow.
J: New specification branch. Michael and I discussed to create new branch so poll can be submitted against it. Will need to do. Just a head's up.
<AWK> (specification branch refers to a new branch in GitHub)
M: Have not set up branch. Keep
in mind that edits that are not part of review of new
publication will go in current branch. Will be in parallel for
awhile.
... So have to be careful about where the edits go. So be
careful.
... Different branches. Working branch for Fall 2014 is current
branch. New one will probly be Spring 2015 for new things that
come up.
A: Branch it off Fall and not main branch.
A: Feedback on New Dev's Guide. Not sure if out, or we've been introduced to it.
<AWK> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/29thAugust2014/results
<Ryladog> http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-WAET-20140724/
J: Came from ERT WG as a note, relates to Dev Guide for Eval Tools. Shadi would like WG feedback. let us know what you think.
A: Link is in the survey. Will have as open on survey. Deadline?
J: Will have to keep survey open for another week. Should be sufficient.
A: Take a look at it, people in next week.
A: Last item?
A: Link to open issues?
<Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/actions/
<Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/issues/
J: Last time went through 10. From 38 backwards...
D: Wiki page, Kathy was going to forward. Will remind her.
A: 263: Take proposal to EO group?
M: Was assigned to me...
A: Do we know what proposal is?
MJ: Closed.
A: 260, Kathy not on call. When HP became advisory. Wilco H53 a11y support. J: How AT/IT work together (for group). Codifying test procedures.
J: Ad hoc basis. Part of the problem. Why comments on test procedures logic needing work. Not sure how to do it.
A: Guidance on F77? How to phrase them.
L: Haven't. Context differs. No cross-document quality control. In this case, overlap.
A: Sorry, hoped for easy action!
J: Preformatted logic that L can send my way?
L: Michael wrote pages on how to write a good technique. Off our wiki page.
J: Will have to revisit.
L: Highlights the challenge. Reading or finding also hard, even if written down.
A: Shadi has some. 237: Katie, make sure it is on future guidelines.
Katie: Raise contrast requirement
to A.
... Will go do that.
<AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Post_WCAG_2
A: Now in action for you.
<AWK> That's the page for post WCAG 2 items
A: Won't just find as "This".
All: LOL
A: Alistar has one, grouping controls to identify roles. Don't have example 2.
A: David's. Add example 3 to Saleash.
D: Have to look that up again.
Wrote example having trouble getting help (Action 230).
... Will coordinate with Saleash.
J: will ping Alistar about 236.
A: Get rid of 222.
A: Apparently it's done.
A: Open issues reads like open actions. 237 non-modal dialog.
D: Now on issues? Try to give a
good example, but it's not a modal. Should discuss. When need
to access background can be confusing to screen reader
users.
... Person tabs beyond dialog box goes into background, even if
it's grayed out for sighted users.
... Presenting it as an accessible dialog box.
<Joshue108> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/client-side-script.html#SCR37
D: Might have been in WCAG 1.0. Really seeing dialog boxes using layers last couple of years, like a lightbox using CSS, causes problems.
A: Technique also says nice to make launching link open and close. If we edit the dialog in that way also must be addressed.
<Joshue108> ISSUE-38: The technique needs a reboot, maybe an aria role="modal" property is needed.
<trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-38 SCR37 is a non-modal dialogue.
D: An implicit closing of dialog box.
<Joshue108> ISSUE-38: The technique needs a reboot, maybe an aria role="dialog" property is needed.
<trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-38 SCR37 is a non-modal dialogue.
D: Two issues. Toggle off and ?
A: We can track it. Out of time. Editors will meet tomorrow morning. Let us know by Friday for next week issues.
<Joshue108> Take up from ISSUE-37 next week
<AWK> trackbot, close meeting
<trackbot> Sorry, AWK, I don't understand 'trackbot, close meeting'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
<AWK> trackbot, end meeting
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) FAILED: s/updaet/update/ FAILED: s/everhting/everything/ Succeeded: s/teh/the/ Succeeded: s/D: /DM:/ Succeeded: s/Saleash/Sailesh/ Succeeded: s/n!/n/ Found Scribe: Mike_Elledge Inferring ScribeNick: Mike_Elledge Found Scribe: mea culpa. Scribes: Mike_Elledge, mea culpa. Default Present: +1.415.832.aaaa, AWK, Kathy_Wahlbin, David_MacDonald, Mike_Elledge, Michael_Cooper, Joshue, Bruce_Bailey, Kenny, [IPcaller], Cooper, +1.512.276.aabb, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Marc_Johlic Present: +1.415.832.aaaa AWK Kathy_Wahlbin David_MacDonald Mike_Elledge Michael_Cooper Joshue Bruce_Bailey Kenny [IPcaller] Cooper +1.512.276.aabb Katie_Haritos-Shea Marc_Johlic Regrets: James_Nurthen Wilco_Fiers Sailesh_Panchang Jonathan_Avila Barry_Johnson Found Date: 29 Jul 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/07/29-wai-wcag-minutes.html People with action items: add akirkpat2 f17 WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]