Accessibility Minutes 2009 03 04
From MemberWiki
Participants
- Jon Ferriaolo (IBM) - OAA Director
- Ken Jacobi (IBM-Rational/Watchfire)
- Nathan Jakubiak (ParaSoft)
- Preety Kumar (Deque)
- Sueann Nichols (IBM)
- Vio Onut (IBM)
- Tony Salcedo (ParaSoft)
- Rich Schwerdtfeger (IBM - chair)
- Derk Stegemann (FIT)
- Michael Squillace (IBM)
- David Todd (IBM)
Minutes
Topic: Review David Todd's requirements for WCAG 2
Issue: what does mean by visa versa related to alternative text
Nathan: At first the difference between an error and a warning is how certain the tool is about the warning
Nathan: In webelo you could have two different levels in the error category
Group: Agreed that most Wiki changes would be sufficient and that resolutions do not have to appear in minutes. If necessary we can go back and review our decisions.
Vio: If not following recommended techniques it should be a warning vs. a error
Rich: thinking need level 1 warnings for best practices
Preety: we have been using violations and errors interchangeably
Preety: should recommend a common vocabulary
Preety: Proposal:
Preety: I would like to use the terminology, violation, potential violation, and recommendation
Preety: recommendation would be equivalent to a warning
Nathan: recommendation would be similar to violating a best practice
Preety: such as an AT interoperability issue
Vio: On the same note for the recommendation, it is like a warning. What happens when we need human interpretation?
Vio: a potential recommendation when need further review
Preety: I think we should incorporate that in
ACTION: Group review better terminology for potential recommendation