<scribe> scribe: carmacleod
jn: 2 issues https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1206
carmacleod: we can leave this until the discussion on meter
jamesn: marking as 1.2
carmacleod: assign to me
jamesn: next, https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/77
aaronlev: confusing to have
sections names "Name", "Description", and "Name &
Description" - need to have a new name
... makes sense to defer to 1.3 and do a good job in 1.3
jamesn: we don't have a 1.3 milestone for accname - should we add one?
MichaelC: we had previously planned to make 1.2 final for accname and not have 1.3, but we could add milestone
joanie: could accname 1.2 depend on aria 1.3?
MichaelC: yes
sina: I find that confusing,
though
... accname will change with 1.3 - even if only editorial or
because we're adding aria-description - would be confusing for
anyone not in the group
joanie: we should do an accname for 1.2 - I will be commit-monkey
aaronlev: brian and I can work on this together
jamesn: look at https://github.com/w3c/accname/pull/69 later in agenda
<jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/accname/pull/69
github: https://github.com/w3c/accname/pull/69
joanie: a bit weird that aria-description is not in Name & Description computation
aaronlev: confusing to have sections names "Name", "Description", and "Name & Description" - need to have a new name, maybe "Primary Text Computation"
<aaronlev> 1. Change third item to be "Primary text computation"
<aaronlev> 2. Change description computation to add all the attributes that might be used
<aaronlev> 3. Change primary text computation to be modeless in terms of what it's being used for
<aaronlev> Item 2 would include add aria-description
<aaronlev> ^ my proposal for 13
<aaronlev> ^ my proposal for 1.3
jamesn: can we add pr-preview to the accname repo?
MichaelC: yes - I'll do that
carmacleod: I think I have a pr for that
<MarkMccarthy> s/
jamesn: need a preview to look at this
mck: how about using the name "Text Content Computation"? instead of "Primary..."
aaronlev: I like that name. "Text
Content Computation"
... how about if I just expand the current pr to add this?
<jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1123
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1123
carmacleod: related to https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1206
joanie: we should do this for 1.2
jamesn: changing to 1.2
mck: still an issue around valuetext - if using that, why do you need min and max at all?
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1183
mck: It is not recommended to use
aria-label on a heading - so example goes against APG
... change the heading content to match APG, saying something
like "when heading content is insufficient..."
... want an example that demonstrates that the semantic is
valid, but role presentation is ignored
carmacleod: ok, I'll fix up the example, will ping james when done
<jamesn> "A generic can provide a limited number of accessible states and properties for its descendants, such as aria-live attributes. In addition, generic containers are exposed to the API so that assistive technologies can gather certain properties such as layout and bounds. This differentiates it from the presentation role. "
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1182
jamesn: nit, should be "accessibility API", not just "API".
mck: do we want to put the statement that we're differentiating from presentation role in front of the new sentence?
carmacleod: yes, that works
mck: I will add that to the pr
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1178
jamesn: need to ping Wilco
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1177
mck: waiting for feedback. think we should close or move to later, but want feedback from reporter
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1173
jamesn: waiting for wilco
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1161
jamesn: waiting on me
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1152
jamesn: waiting on wilco for response
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1151
jamesn: Bryan did analysis, what do we need to do with this?
bryan: mainly editorial
jamesn: bryan can you do a pr?
bryan: don't think I have time
jamesn: I will take it, since you have done the work and put the comments in the issue
github: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1150
jamesn: scott owns - he is the
right person to take this on
... does need to go in 1.2, because DOM 4 and not DOM 3 - our
references have changed
sina: I agree that it's editorial
sina: does anything else need to
be done before aria-braillelabel goes in?
... currently only 2 reviewers, need a third?
jamesn: yes
... volunteers to review aria-braillelabel?
... ok to merge after 3rd reviewer?
+1
jamesn: thanks, everyone!
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) WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/^ my proposal for 13 Succeeded: s/^ my proposal for 13// Default Present: Joanmarie_Diggs, MarkMccarthy, aaronlev, jamesn, pkra, MichaelC, carmacleod, harris, CurtBellew, Matt_King, Sina_Bahram Present: Joanmarie_Diggs MarkMccarthy aaronlev jamesn pkra MichaelC carmacleod harris CurtBellew Matt_King Sina_Bahram Regrets: Scott_O Found Scribe: carmacleod Inferring ScribeNick: carmacleod WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. 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]