Wilco: Comment from Detlev duplicate ids always do not cause problems
... wrong survey
... comments on assumptions
Mary Jo: missing lang in nested iframe
Wilco: usually is not a problem if the iframe has the same language
... Page is not an embedded resource and iframe is
Kathy: does iframe inherit the language?
Wilco: not always, depends on the browser
... it can cause a security issue of leaking info
Mary Jo: should not stop it from being publish
Wilco: Comment from Charu, point to spec
Mary Jo: it is there, we are ok on that
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1172
Mary Jo: we should point to WHATWG version and we have that
Wilco: from Jonathan, Most browsers don't use XML lang anymore
... don't agree
Mary Jo: there might be older pages
Wilco: We still have 2 to not publish
MJ: i have a no, i can be swayed
Wilco: we can remove inapplicable example 4 and 5 are inconsistent with the SC, i can open an issue with the CG for that
... I think we can move this forward with comment
Wilco: Comment from Detlev, duplicate ids are problematic always, i am ok with that
MJ: should not affect publication but we should put the comment to let them know
Wilco: What if we put examples of know issues with duplicate ids
MJ: not clear from the comment what he is asking to do
Kathy: i like Wilco's suggestion of adding examples of known failures
Wilco: will create an issue
... should not stop publication
MJ: agree
Wilco: we have examples with display:none and one with role of presentation and tabindex=-1
... tabindex=-1 removes it from tab ring
Kathy: Ok we can strike my comment
Wilco: agree with Trevor to remove example 4
... should that hold publish?
Trevor: are we publishing any rules with ":-)"
Wilco: no
... moving on issue 1170
... Browser usually moves focus to the first element
... iframes are not always focusable and difficult to define what makes it focusable so we need to tweak the language
... Is this a blocker?
MJ: not sure
Trevor: we have enough issues, i think it might be a blocker
Wilco: issues have not been resolved
MJ: Failed ex 2 becomes pass
MJ: once pull request is merged
Wilco: ok then that will happen and the rule can publish
Wilco: Results have no from Kathy and MJ
... stuck on summary, close, should it be?
... conflicting info in specs, spec that says no has priority
MJ: so which one is right?
Wilco: HTML to API should be correct and has priority then HTML in ARIA
... so blocker or not?
MJ: so what is right?
Wilco: our rule is inconsistent with the spec
... so no to publish, we will fix the issue
Wilco: from Kathy, not enough implementers
... i think this is ready to go
... So we have 4 that we can publish
MJ: we have one more ready to go
... so we have 5 to go to CFC