<MarkMccarthy> scribe: MarkMccarthy
<Matt_King> I have that link, was trying to dial in and it does not work
jamesn: 8 new issues. first:
someone on slack trying to ref the UML diagram
... generally, we got praise for the diagram, but it's not up
to date. either we need to remove it or fix it
sina: how is the diagram made?
MichaelC: it's made manually in a free software tool, which is why it's hard to update
jamesn: is it accurate?
MichaelC: no
... they changed the license of the tool and it got harder to
edit. if this is helpful and a priority, i'll look into
updating it
jamesn: apparently ther are some people who say it's really useful
MichaelC: it can help to see where things are weird. can put an action item on me, but it might take a little while
sina: i'd suggest graphvis or a few other tools - there are things that can autocluster etc. and then edit after that. i'll send offline
MichaelC: that'd be helpful
<Jemma> This diagram was the first thing I used to learn about ARIA . I think this will be useful.
sina: great, i'll send stuff on!
jamesn: i'll assign you both,
sina and MichaelC
... so i think we need to do something in 1.2 for this, put a
note by it or update it -- something
pkra: i'm also happy to help if needed
<scribe> scribe: this was issue 1222
jamesn: issue 80 - bryan isn't here today. might just be editorial...
sina: i'm happy to comment on any accessibility issues on this if it's needed
jamesn: dunno exactly what this
is, but i'll mark it 1.2. it's accname for sure at least
... issue 1221 - i think this is a duplicate
carmacleod: i asked if it was about 2 hours ago
Matt_King: i was about to comment on this... i think we could move to 1.3?
jamesn: yes definitely. but i dont see why we'd want valuenow
carmacleod: redirecting to 711 should be enough
Matt_King: it is weird but I started looking at HTML button and thought that was interesting
jamesn: are we okay with closing this and referring to 711? he can reopen if he's not happy?
group: seems fair
jamesn: issue 1219 - can we put 1.3 on this?
carmacleod: seems good. we'll have to talk it about it though
jamesn: definitely.
... issue 1217 has a PR so let's skip
... 1216 --
carmacleod: i think this has been triaged
jamesn: let's postpone til later
in agenda
... 1214... MichaelC where does this come from?
MichaelC: respec
jamesn: so where's the issue then? if it's in a normative section it's listed as a normative reference?
MichaelC: no. if you do reference shorthand (using an exclamation point) it's called normative, otherwise informative
carmacleod: i'm happy to leave this to me
Matt_King: when i was working on combobox, a citation has a version number rendered wrong and is going to the wrong place. is this related?
jamesn: yes, if it's a versioned number it'll go to that reference
Matt_King: so should those references, inside of the roles going to APG, be versioned?
jamesn: probably not. we should only version stuff if there's a good reason to
carmacleod: i'll double check all the numbers etc.
Matt_King: so there's one, right away!
jamesn: we can do search/find/replace to solve many of these I think. thanks carmacleod
carmacleod: no worries
jamesn: some general thoughts ive
been having.
... the work on annotations has been great, getting a lot done
quickly
... working on a lot, getting it solved by small amount of
people, bringing it back to group, then remediating
... to me this seems pretty effective. i wonder if it'd be good
to have small task groups go out and work on things, then come
back with changes or results
... something like a tables/grids/trees group; solving some of
these might solve many other issues or speed them along
... like once you have child elements in a treegrid, things get
complicated. so if we had a focused group of people to look at
one area, come up with proposals, talk to AT vendors/browsers,
THEN bring to group... that could speed along our process and
give more consitency
<tzviya> +1
jamesn: thoughts?
carmacleod: makes sense!
<harris> +1
Matt_King: i think that'll work
for big areas
... thinking about trees though, we've thought about boxing it
up before but it doesn't seem to fit. instead going into
control patterns in 2.0
... maybe this group idea is an answer, even if a solution
waits.
... it seems like we've been leaning more towards knocking out
many smaller issues and having a point release - i don't really
mind a point vs major release
jamesn: this is part of why i'd like people to look at certain areas and see if there's a way to make things better faster
Matt_King: i wonder why we're picking on treegrid
jamesn: browsers and AT don't
really seem to know how to implement or use them
... the fact that people have to go to the treegrid pattern
adds a lot of complexity to someone trying to get a basic
product out
... something like accomplishing 95% of people's uses
Matt_King: still might have the same end user issues
sina: +1
Matt_King: we either change the APIs or use the pattern, OR force screen readers to do weird things
jamesn: which is part of why
groups that are experts and can talk to the right people seem
important
... there's a lot of real world problems that aren't solved
well or easily and we need to do better
Matt_King: which is ALSO part of why i'm pushing hard with ARIA-AT. not that this isn't a good idea.
jamesn: sometimes it's not worth doing the small things if people are still having problems with big things. we need to hear from real world people about problems their having
Matt_King: this is part of why
i've thought that APG might need a supplemental community
group
... and if practices isn't helping to solve problems, then
identifying what and where those gaps are
jamesn: practices is great, but there's always extensions that people need to solve their problem
Matt_King: it feels like in some of these cases, we should use the practices group to find out where our limits are
jamesn: the people i see doing
this are either involved in practices and/or real world
work
... basically we need Task Owners for certain things
Matt_King: by the end of the year, my hope is we have agreement on what grid, tree, etc. is supposed to do with screen reader devs
jamesn: even table has some extensions that don't work super great
sina: i almost see this as a strike team. but the composition requirements of the team will be important - who's on it (AT devs, browser devs, end users etc.)
jamesn: could be hard to get enough people though
Matt_King: that's why i think
some of this has to be done outside the WG so people can feel
like they're involved in helping and working on stuff
... which is why i want to be able to spread more into the
ARIA-AT group, to get some understanding and throw out some
problems to chew on
sina: there's a middle part of
the curve where we can tackle and get some good middle ground,
even if others do thing slightly differently
... and how do we garuntee success?
jamesn: we might not be any more than we are today, but we might be able to pick off more simple problems, faster
Matt_King: i'm so on board with that, and i'm trying to focus in building a scaffold for people
jamesn: so maybe something we work on too is "why haven't you implemented this?" and we can get some better insights into what we're doing
<harris> have to drop off, bye everyone!
<Jemma> What James is suggesting is a sort of gap report for table and grid?
jamesn: i've been wanting to do something like this for a while, seen a lot of pain points come up over the years
sina: seems like there's some
conceptual questions to answer first, depending on the
area
... maybe if its possible, have a larger meeting with many
people to get the right voices to us to see if we're headed in
the right direction
jamesn: totally, makes
sense
... which is hopefully why the smaller groups might be able to
evangelize to those stakeholders
... if anyone has ideas, please send them to the list
jamesn: we're still planning on
meeting during the same time, but doing it virtually. T-R that
week
... thinking a 4 hr meeting with a break between
... would be the beginning of may, May 5 6 7; plan is to do
them 7am-11am PST/10am-2pm EST
... should work out reasonably well for most folks in the
group
sina: well now i can try to join!
sounds great
... what platform?
jamesn: zoom
... W3C now has a Zoom account
Matt_King: I couldn't get the phone option to work, had to come in with the app
sina: they've been having some problems with the phone bridge
tzviya: they're interested in having feedback
MichaelC: and there's some other numbers available
jamesC: is this a consistent meeting ID?
jamesn: yes
MichaelC: at the moment it's set
up for a year
... there will be a different ID for the F2F
sina: i'd advise adding a URL. AT users, add the password to your link on private calendars so you don't have to type it everytime
jamesn: MichaelC let's add a password
MichaelC: i'm on it
Matt_King: will they open the app in iOS?
sina: yes
MichaelC: it also can create cal invites, i just have to figure out how to get that out
<carmacleod> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues?q=is%3Aopen+label%3A%22WR+comments%22+-milestone%3A%22ARIA+1.3%22+
jamesn: concerning the generic role - is the PR ready? enough reviews?
carmacleod: seems ready
jamesn: Matt_King can we merge without your approval?
Matt_King: yep
jamesn: role=none presentation -
we removed that right? 3 approves, merging
... combobox - who wants to review?
carmacleod: i'll review it
JamesC: i can too
jamesn: i just assigned you James
jongund: i can do this too
jamesn: thanks everyone
... 1163 - carmacleod you say its good, but we still need my or
joanie's review. joanie can you?
joanie: yep i'll take a look
jamesn: 1161 - waiting on
me
... 1151 --
jongund: i submitted a PR this morning
jamesn: thanks so much!
<pkra> https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1224?
jongund: well, it was there earlier today
jamesn: ohh okay, i'll link it to
the issue and add a comment
... only two more, so at least we got most of them
<pkra> gotta go. bye.
jamesn: myself, joanie, and Matt_King - a kick to merge and review PR 1100
Matt_King: i'll add it to my
list
... i added a PR that's kind of pressing, related to 711, would
like reviews
jamesn: 1.2 or 1.3?
Matt_King: has to be 1.2. PR 1225
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) Succeeded: s/th eyears/the years/ Succeeded: s/we push/we merge/ Present: Joanmarie_Diggs MichaelC MarkMccarthy harris pkra CurtBellew jongund StefanSchnabel carmacleod Jemma tzviya Matt_King Found Scribe: MarkMccarthy Inferring ScribeNick: MarkMccarthy Found Scribe: this was issue 1222 Scribes: MarkMccarthy, this was issue 1222 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: 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]