wilco: we missed the CFC.
<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/issues/465
mjm: I sent it out. Daniel responded 9/18
... it went through. no negative responses. CFC passed
wilco: it wasn't on last week's agenda
... ok, it had no objections. I will add to existing rules for AG to review. We're up to 9
... we don't need to do CFC on rules. we need to do a survey
... we rarely get negative responses
mjm: we got a comment once
daniel: check with Shadi if CFC needed
<maryjom> Here's a link to the CfC email: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-act/2020Sep/0006.html
trevor: we've reviewed the rule already so don't need to do another thorough review for CFC
mjm: follow up with Shadi
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/93339/ACTVisibleLabel/results
wilco: 6 reviews
... implementation data - 2 I don't knows.
trevor: my comment addressed
mjm: implementation data needs to be updated
wilco: kathy's comment on symbolic text character
daniel: keep non-text content
wilco: maybe add to background?
mjm: in this case, it isn't non-text content. it's text as a known symbol to mean close
... it explains it ok
trevor: reading 1.1.1 and 2.5.3 Understandings, both have this as example.
kathy: I'm just looking at consistent terminology from 2.5.3 in the rule. The rule doesn't ref SC 1.1.1
wilco: would adding a definition help
kathy: yes
wilco: second comment from Kathy, yes easy to fix
... remaining open issue by Kasper
mjm: it was just opened recently
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1458
mjm: this rule is for speech recognition, if order of words is jumbled, AT won't find it
wilco: can bring this rule back to the group
trevor: I haven't seen this problem
wilco: this is an odd scenario that passes the rule but would fail the SC
... there are things this rule doesn't catch
daniel: add explanation to rule
wilco: moe's comment, yes that's easy to resolve
... mjm editorial comment, I'll take a look
... this one needs more work but fairly minor
mjm: will find liaison
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/93339/ACTImageFileName/results
wilco: mjm comment re language
mjm: this rule documenting automated and manual
... it seems it would be 2 discrete tests
wilco: this rule was formulated to allow filename to be accname. Expectation is filename is descriptive
... that is why you need to be able to understand the language
... extreme edge case of 2 languages having the same words with different meaning
<LevonSpradlin> I am not sure how common cognates would be in technical language, but it could happen.
wilco: last week, we said AG would determine if they want this rule (regarding kathy's comment)
kathy: agreed
wilco: next kathy comment on trusted tester would not implement this rule
... readiness - if you take filename out of applicability, it is still a valid rule
... will take it back to rule group to decide if they want to send it on to AG; AG can decide
RESOLUTION: discuss with author to take the rule to AG
... discuss with author to take the rule to AG
<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/486
wilco: will discuss next week
mjm: TF needs a documented decision making process
... taken from Silver and AG decision process. If no CFCs, more like the Silver process.
<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/blob/master/wcag-ruleset-review-process.md
mjm: will talk with Shadi
... need liaison for scrollable element is kybd acc
wilco: levon
... role attrib has valid value has been updated