W3C

- DRAFT -

Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference

31 Oct 2019

Attendees

Present
pkra, jamesn, MarkMccarthy, Joanmarie_Diggs, jongund, MichaelC, harris, CurtBellew, Bryan_Garaventa, Matt_King, Jemma_, Scott_OHara, carmacleod, janina, Irfan
Regrets
Harris, CurtBellew
Chair
JamesNurthen
Scribe
carmacleod

Contents


<scribe> scribe: carmacleod

<MarkMccarthy> Happy Halloween!

new Issue triage

<jamesn> https://github.com/search?l=&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+repo%3Aw3c%2Faria+created%3A%3E%3D2019-10-10+repo%3Aw3c%2Faria+repo%3Aw3c%2Faccname+repo%3Aw3c%2Fcore-aam&type=Issues

<jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1108

jamesn: very quick triage

joanie: keep as 1.2

<jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues

https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/65

jamesn: we should fix in 1.2

https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/64

jamesn: mark as 1.2, accname 1.2 is still open

https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1106

jamesn: 1.3

https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1105

jamesn: closed

https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1104

jamesn: talk about it in 1.3 time frame, maybe move to 1.4

https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1103

https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/issues/57

joanie: this week, 1.2

<MarkMccarthy> jamesn: issue 1103 going in editorial

<jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1101

mck: can we put this in 1.2?

jamesn: we have too much to do for 1.2 and no time left

joanie: add a note: "we were planning on doing this in 1.2 but will do it soon"

michael: rec shouldn't have editorial notes - so please make it an ordinary note

https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/issues/56

1.2 Status Update

Future Meeting Schedule

jamesn: no meeting next week
... Nov 14 is 1.3 planning meeting, work out what we will tackle in 1.3

1.2 Status Update

jamesn: 1.2 will be frozen on Friday
... need to make decision on whether we put in the combobox changes

<jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1051/commits/eb682db798079baa1ac60a1ce88328290faf8a34

jamesn: mck changed aria-autocomplete description
... wording changes autocomplete to 1.2 combobox, so 1.1 combobox would no longer be valid

mck: existing 1.1 out there doesn't work very well with most browsers and ATs
... validator would flag that you've misplaced aria-autocomplete

jamesn: my concern about this change at this stage is that when people objected to us making 1.1 combo invalid, we said they could keep using that pattern

mck: we actually don't want them to keep using that pattern, because it has real problems and poor support

jamesn: they are in libraries

mck: it would be better for consumers and users to have a working pattern

jon: call out that the 1.1 pattern will be invalid

jamesn: will add a note to the wide review of 1.2 to that effect
... ok, will get this in by Friday

mck: procedural question: should we wait until CR before closing all those combobox issues?

jamesn: I think we should close them. Don't want a whole bunch of issues hanging open. Can reopen if necessary.

Accname - 1.2 Status

jamesn: don't currently have a plan to publish accname, but we should publish it, need to decide when

joanie: only real change it to make it possible to prohibit names on certain items
... should publish an updated working draft for accname

jamesn: need implementations and tests before publishing working draft

joanie: right, need those before publishing

jamesn: after we get the other specs out the door, we can focus on publishing accname

bryan: what about label and encapsulation - the new labelling mechanisms. Will they be in 1.2 or 1.3?

authoring guidance warnings

<jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/1228

jamesn: I thought we should discuss this with the main group

mck: position of APG TF is that people need to test to ensure it meets their product requirements and level of support
... we also have limited the scope to essentially desktop browsers. have done work to ensure they work in mobile, but haven't made sure they work in all mobile
... APG is essentially regarded by many users as "equivalent to normative" even though it's not
... difficult for people outside of W3C to determine where they have discretion - have sympathy for that
... long term goal, want to integrate support tables into every single pattern, that will describe how well the pattern supports technologies
... so it will be obvious, when something new goes in, that it is not yet well supported

<jamesn> "2.2 Browser and Assistive Technology Support

<jamesn> Testing assistive technology interoperability is essential before using code from this guide in production. Because the purpose of this guide is to illustrate appropriate use of ARIA 1.1 as defined in the ARIA specification, the design patterns, reference examples, and sample code intentionally do not describe and implement coding techniques for working around problems caused by gaps in support for ARIA 1.1 in browsers and assistive technologies. It

<jamesn> is thus advisable to test implementations thoroughly with each browser and assistive technology combination that is relevant within a target audience."

mck: since we have language in the read me first section, we should borrow a subset of that language and put it in the examples, plus link to the sections

<MarkMccarthy> +1 mck

<Scott_O> +1 please and thanks

car: I think it should be a note and not a warning? don't want to scare people away

scottohara: prefer warning - need to bring it to people's attention

mck: middle ground of a note might be more appropriate - some things are rock-solid - don't want people to go away and come up with their own solutions

Aria Annotations

<Jemma_> +1 mck

<jamesn> https://github.com/aleventhal/aria-annotations/blob/master/README.md

aaronlev: reopened https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/749 to put annotations into ARIA
... explainer: https://github.com/aleventhal/aria-annotations/blob/master/README.md
... would like people to review

jamesn: this should be discussed early in the 1.3 cycle
... we will talk in 2 weeks. Happy Halloween!

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
$Date: 2019/10/31 18:01:31 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: pkra, jamesn, MarkMccarthy, Joanmarie_Diggs, jongund, MichaelC, harris, CurtBellew, Bryan_Garaventa, Matt_King, Jemma_
Present: pkra jamesn MarkMccarthy Joanmarie_Diggs jongund MichaelC harris CurtBellew Bryan_Garaventa Matt_King Jemma_ Scott_OHara carmacleod janina Irfan
Regrets: Harris CurtBellew
Found Scribe: carmacleod
Inferring ScribeNick: carmacleod
Found Date: 31 Oct 2019
People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]