18:03:29 RRSAgent has joined #svg-a11y 18:03:29 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/08/09-svg-a11y-irc 18:03:31 RRSAgent, make logs ab 18:03:33 Zakim, this will be 18:03:33 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 18:03:34 Meeting: SVG Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 18:03:34 Date: 09 August 2016 18:03:47 LJWatson has joined #svg-a11y 18:04:07 chair: fesch 18:04:10 scribe: Brian 18:04:13 present+ LJWatson 18:04:21 presnet+ Brian 18:04:22 rrsagent, set logs world-visible 18:04:26 present+ fesch 18:04:37 present+ Brian 18:04:42 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-svg-a11y/2016Aug/0007.html 18:04:44 present+ AmeliaBR 18:05:02 TOPIC: SVG-AAM 18:05:15 TOPIC: NEWS 18:05:23 fesch: any news, or changes to the agenda? 18:05:36 AmeliaBR: we now have cross-browser support for tabindex. 18:06:03 AmeliaBR: as of last week update to edge we have support, as of Firefox nightly. There is a 6 week cycle for nightly ot stable 18:06:16 AmeliaBR: Chrome and Webkit already have had tabindex support for a while 18:06:27 fesch: any news from the SVG working group? 18:06:38 AmeliaBR: We're working on getting SVG2 to candidate rec 18:06:50 AmeliaBR: all normative changes are locked now. 18:07:18 AmeliaBR: There is a couple required reviews. The internationalization team needs to review. There also needs to be an accessibility review. 18:07:53 Rich has joined #svg-a11y 18:07:57 AmeliaBR: a request was sent out. Not quite sure the process there, but there will need to be a formal sign off that this doesn't do anything bad for accessibility. We may be the ones asked to confirm 18:08:17 chaals-ordhord: Leonie will have a good idea of what happens next 18:08:41 LJWatson: My guess is that it will show up on tomorrow's agenda (APA) 18:09:13 shepazu: I think it's worth nothing, for whoever who's on that meeting, though we didn't seek explicit accessibiltiy review before, we have been working with accessibility people to address accessibility needs in advacne 18:09:22 shepazu: not only do we have tabindex 18:09:38 LJWatson: Fred and I are usually on the APA call, we'll make sure this gets picked up then 18:09:55 present+ Rich_Schwerdtfeger 18:10:22 fesch: that'll jsut go through the normal channels. Rich, Leonie and I are all on APA. We don't anticipate any problems there 18:12:17 shepazu: During that call, I'd appreciate, Rich as you point out, we waited to get the review. But, we didn't wait to get the review. We've been working with accessibility folks for several years now 18:12:33 shepazu: trying to resolve problems in advance. This isn't so much a review, but a sign off to get to CR 18:13:22 shepazu: the other one that got snet out, by the way. The internationalization, they said they didn't like seeing them put off so late, but we didn't change much, and most of the changes for language is with CSS 18:13:31 fesch: what about lang and titles and description 18:13:42 shepazu: I thouhgt we didn't do those changes 18:14:02 AmeliaBR: those are still in. The two changes are multi-title/desc and switch langauge and allow reorder 18:14:03 q+ 18:14:32 chaals-ordhord: is the multi-lingual title/desc real? Does it work anywhere? 18:14:44 AmeliaBR: No, that's why it's marked at risk 18:14:52 ack ch 18:14:58 shepazu: I don't think it'll make it out of CR because we don't have implementations of it 18:15:13 AmeliaBR: I think we need to present it as an accessiibility feature 18:15:27 chaals-ordhord: I hate to say it, but I'd be pretty surprised if that worked 18:15:38 AmeliaBR: there's more work people catching up on accessibility 18:16:14 AmeliaBR: Microsoft fixed keyboard accessibility, and have been waiting for us to stabilize everything else 18:16:18 fesch: anything else? 18:16:42 TOPIC: Publication Status 18:16:52 these are good to go. They're in the queue, I think behind dpub 18:17:35 TOPIC: Shadow Tree vs Shadow DOM Text 18:17:55 AmeliaBR: For SVG2 I added cross-links for the words for WhatWG spec for shadow dom 18:18:35 q+ 18:18:36 q? 18:18:36 AmeliaBR: the independent shadow dom spec has stalled, they're looking to integrate into the core DOM and not have two specs. The changes are in the WHATWG spec. This is a living standard 18:18:56 AmeliaBR: If you're ok with using that as the definitive reference for terms, that seems to be the most up to date place 18:19:30 AmeliaBR: I haven't pushed the clarifications to the AAM. I need to check with Michael if I can push changes, now that he's adjusted changes permissions to github 18:20:00 q- 18:20:21 AmeliaBR: It'll either be apull request from the repo, or a fork of the repo. I can let you know the changes I have marked as todo are to avoid the use of the term "shadow dom content", use more precise language 18:20:59 AmeliaBR: There's another paragraph I need to clean up, Brad was saying it's a little confusing 18:21:07 AmeliaBR: The main change is being precise in terminology 18:21:22 fesch: Rich, did you have questions baout shadow dom shadowtree based on interactivity concerns 18:21:47 Rich: I think in the last meeting that the events were the same, I don't think we need to differentiate 18:22:27 AmeliaBR: dealing with IDrefs, due to the nature of the use element, and how users don't have control over the stuff inside it I don't see it to be an issue. It's more a problem using the shadowdom and custom widgets. 18:22:45 Rich: When you have a click element inside a tree does it flow up to the parent element? 18:24:04 AmeliaBR: It does. If you have a mousein mouseout type event where it's going in and out of two parts inside the shadow tree, and with the use element you'd be going in and out of the same element it stops bubbling. 18:24:45 fesch: If you actually have a click inside a symbol referenced by a use, and you reference document, you're doing this programmatically, and your referencing document will it give you the parent document or the local document it'll refer you to 18:25:22 AmeliaBR: the document is the sort of containing document. I'd need to grab the spec to get all the details. But, yeah, there's a whole set of new additions about what's contained to the local tree or what's related to the document. 18:25:48 the shadow tree is related but not a separate document, like an iframe is a separate document 18:25:54 fesch: can you programmatically find those? 18:26:07 AmeliaBR: yes 18:26:24 fesch: Would JQuery get confused? Can you find things with it inside those shadow trees? 18:26:38 https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/ 18:26:40 AmeliaBR: Not by default, selectors only look inside one tree. 18:27:10 AmeliaBR: This is not naything specific to SVG and use elements. They're part of the DOM standard, which browsers are making their implementations match 18:27:27 AmeliaBR: We're trying to coordinate as much as possible. the distinction being use element shadow trees are read-only 18:27:34 fesch: how would you show focus on them? 18:27:43 AmeliaBR: styles are still independent. That's one important difference 18:28:13 AmeliaBR: SVG using the shaodw tree model is different for SVG 1.1. Things are really messy in browsers in focus and hover styles 18:28:48 AmeliaBR: The shadow tree model requires these are indepdent elements with indepdenent styles. They are mostly identical, but the interactive styles only apply to the element you're interacting with 18:29:29 q? 18:29:34 fesch: The gist of it is, there are still changes to be made in the SVG-aam spec. But the SVG spec is good? 18:30:02 AmeliaBR: Yes, the SG2 spec should be good unless people find problems with it. SVG-AAM has changes. 18:31:07 fesch: any other topics? We can talk about post-aria 1.1 18:31:23 Rich: I can't think of that right now. There's a lot to do still 18:31:43 TOPIC: Testing of SVG A11y Spec 18:32:11 AmeliaBR: you've held up on updating the test suites because of the graphics roles. Do we now have mappings for the main APIs? 18:32:27 Rich: We definitely have those for Mac. We need to review the other platforms. 18:32:53 Rich: we'll get there. Mac is there. 18:33:22 q+ 18:33:22 https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/graphics-aam/graphics-aam.html#mapping_role_table 18:34:07 Rich: if you expand all and look at mac. We don't get to call it a graphics-document it's just a document. All the differentiation we'd asked for is basically gone 18:34:40 q+ 18:36:11 q- 18:36:18 fesch: One question, we have MSAA on the table, should we drop this? 18:36:26 Rich: no, why would be do that? 18:37:14 Rich: Iaccessble2 is an extension of MSAA, object attributes are IA2. Oh, there's a typo there 18:39:02 AmeliaBR: as far as the tests, Fred, are your scripts able to easily update the testing outcomes based on these mappings? 18:39:13 AmeliaBR: if these mappings change in the future, update accordingly 18:39:35 fesch: I need to put these into the wiki. Once they're in the wiki, they can convert them into the form 18:39:47 fesch: What form that is, is an ongoing issue in the ARIA testing subgroup 18:39:48 ack 18:40:37 fesch: I've tweaked the perl script one time. The other thing that's kind of interesting, becasue it's what I heard, we were going to try to have automated tests similar to what Joni did with the webkit layout tests, so they just sort of run when people build. 18:41:05 fesch: I'm not seeing this happening, or what the general test harness will look like either. Once we know the form, it won't be hard to get the tests from the wiki to the proper form 18:42:00 fesch: the people that are building the testable statements for ARIA 1.1 agreed they'll be using a wiki to test their statements as well. It's easier than manually creating JSON. The form is unknown, but the testable statements will be created in wikis 18:42:03 q? 18:42:05 ack 18:42:53 AmeliaBR: that covers a lot. Once I finalize the use elements, there will need to be updates to the testable statements accordingly. Probably some new tests to look at contents inside a use element that needs to be exposed 18:43:29 fesch: I'd suggest everyone look at the wiki. I don't think the wiki is specific to a document. If people think we should break out stuff that should only apply to the graphics document. However we want to handle them that's ok 18:43:45 Root page for testing wiki: https://www.w3.org/wiki/SVG_Accessibility/Testing 18:43:57 fesch: the testable statements are broken out to two pages. One is title/desc with multilingual support. Every other testable statements are on the other one 18:44:08 https://www.w3.org/wiki/SVG_Accessibility/Testing/Test_Assertions_with_Tables 18:45:47 fesch: We've sort of had an informal review as we've went along. Joanie did some review. If you want to look really quick, the last row is NOTE. That's Joanie's notes to herself about what test she's doing. If you're editing, just don't change Joanie's note. 18:45:59 AmeliaBR: it'll only change with respect to use elements 18:46:37 fesch: anyone want to go through them and check that they're up to date? They're broken into little groups. Testable statements, separate ones for role none and presentation 18:47:08 AmeliaBR: I will try to go through them. My first priority is getting these edits done. I will hopefully have more time to work on the a11y side now that I'm done with the main SVG spec 18:47:31 fesch: any changes we can take to the ARIA testing group 18:49:11 trackbot, make minutes public 18:49:11 Sorry, Brian, I don't understand 'trackbot, make minutes public'. Please refer to for help. 18:50:36 RRSAgent: make minutes 18:50:36 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/08/09-svg-a11y-minutes.html Brian 19:04:11 Rich has joined #svg-a11y 20:11:56 shepazu_ has joined #svg-a11y 20:28:23 Rich has joined #svg-a11y 20:52:26 Rich has joined #svg-a11y 21:04:33 chaals-ordhord has joined #svg-a11y 21:45:15 Rich has joined #svg-a11y 22:13:20 Rich has joined #svg-a11y