Accessibility Minutes 2012 12 03

From MemberWiki

Revision as of 18:56, 3 December 2012 by AnnAbbott (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision→ (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Present

  • Jon Gunderson (University Of Illinois - chair)
  • Prasanna Bale (University Of Illinois)
  • Nick Hoyt (Uinversity Of Illinois)
  • Ann Abbott (IBM) - scribe
  • Marc Johlic (IBM)
  • Rich Schwerdtfeger (IBM)

Minutes Of The Meeting

scribe: Ann Abbott

Jon: /member/wiki/Accessibility_WCAG_2.0_Validation_Rules#Goals_for_Ruleset_Version_1.0

Jon: new version of Cache Inspector published yesterday - rules for aria roles, checks values of states/properties for correct types, required children for parents that must have children, grouping

Jon: this week - aria-ownes, range widgets

Jon: next week - kbd event handlers

Kbd event handler rules

Jon: does IBM have rules for kbd event handlers?

Ann: per IBM rules for RPT: - Ensure that mouse event handlers have a corresponding keyboard handler. - A non-form or non-anchor element having an event handler must have a valid WAI-ARIA role. - Required children must have a keyboard event handler when an element containing a 'role' with required children is present and aria-activedescendant is not specified on the parent element. Changed message text so that it's more understandable: WAI-ARIA widget elements must have a onkeydown or onkeypress event handler in order to be keyboard operable. Changed rule severity from "manual check" to "potential violation". This message no longer triggers on a non-interactive role="list" element.

Meaning of Ruleset 1.0

Jon: what does it mean to be at Ruleset 1.0? What has to be in it?

Jon: consensus = at least one rule for every WCAG success criteria

Nick: first need to determine what our goals/objectives

Nick: most important is to map to WCAG 2.0 Level A and Level AA

Nick: and what are our other goals?

Nick: what do we want to accomplish with Ruleset 1.0

Manual check rules

Nick: if a coding pattern doesn't exist to support automated testing, do we want to cover every possible manual check option?

Ann: lots of WCAG testing can't be automated

Jon: should include important manual checks like audio/video

Nick: don't want to overwhelm users with manual checks that don't apply to page content

Ann: need statement that "automation is unable to test this"so manual check is required and tool must provide a report, for example: manual check necessary for image alt text that includes image

name and existing alt text.

Jon: filter exists for page level vs element level manual checks

Jon: needs to exit call due to traveling today. Next week would like to talk about a triage ruleset and how it would potentially work - like a filter for Priority level

Consensus: Continue discussion next week

Call ended 12:41 Central --AnnAbbott 18:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Personal tools