<becky> regrets, Matthew Atkinson, Amy Carney, Gottfried Zimmermam
<jasonjgw> scribe: jasonjgw
Becky: No meetings on 25
November, 23 December or 30 December.
... no other updates.
Becky: rechartering begins.
No additional comments from Michael.
Becky encourages participants to review the draft.
Neil and Becky address the rendering issues with the charter linked above.
Michael will update the deliverables, as well as editorial revision.
Michael: realistically, we should have a complete charter by February to account for issues that may be raised in the process subsequently.
Janina: notes that Michael condensed the items in the Scope section.
Janina notes that some of the deliverables were already delivered in the current Charter period.
Becky notes that MAUR is also listed.
Janina notes that RQTF has found valuable synchronization research that could lead to MAUR updates as well as colaboration with Silver.
<janina> scribe: janina
jgw: RQTF is reporting out the RAUR and requests publication as a W3C Note:
https://www.w3.org/2020/11/18-rqtf-minutes.html#resolution01
jgw: So, we request an APA CfC on
this.
... Josh created a publication draft
<jasonjgw> Janina: requests a snapshot link ready for the CfC.
<jasonjgw> Michael will take care of it.
<jasonjgw> Janina: the CfC will run through 30 November.
<jasonjgw> Josh notes the updated Status section and the change log.
<jasonjgw> Michael will check the Status section.
jgw: Further in RQTF an active
agenda including new look at mini apps
... No shortage of topics
... XAUR currently in review by Immersive Web into January, at
which point we will review any comments and move to Note for
XAUR
<jasonjgw> Becky: inquires about Pronunciation.
<jasonjgw> Janina: Pronunciation will add some valuable examples to the Explainer. The Task Force also decided to start development of a Recommendation-track document.
<jasonjgw> This document would initially be agnostic between different technological approaches, and would stimulate wider review. Actions have been assigned; quick results are expected.
<jasonjgw> Neil: inquires whether it's preferable to propose a solution and then respond to positive/negative commentary.
<jasonjgw> Janina: the discusison has moved toward the approach outlined earlier. Janina notes the importance of bringing proposed solutions to the voice interaction workshop expected to take place next year.
<jasonjgw> Janina also notes Pronunciation Task Force participation in organizing the workshop.
<jasonjgw> Becky: Personalization - working on open issues preparatory to a CfC.
<jasonjgw> The explainer is being fine-tuned.
<jasonjgw> Janina: COGA is a joint Task Force with APA and AGWG.
<jasonjgw> Janina: there isn't much APA interaction with COGA; APA chairs have noted taht there is little COGA interaction with APA. The Personalization Task Force continues the engagement with APA.
<jasonjgw> Janina: APA chairs hve suggested that if COGA wishes to retain its affiliation with APA, they should participate more directly in APA activities. Example: review of XAUR. The alternative is for COGA to be purely an AGWG Task Force - no longer jointly with APA.
<jasonjgw> APA thinks COGA should participate more in APA WG meetings if it is to remain as an APA WG Task Force.
jgw: Makes sense, esp as COGA concerns have been taken up in Personalization
<jasonjgw> Janina: notes this will lead to a CfC.
<jasonjgw> Michael: Rechartering of the Automotive Working Group.
<MichaelC> https://w3c.github.io/automotive/planning/charter-2020.html
<jasonjgw> Michael notes the liaison statement with APA, but no other mention of accessibility (even where security/privacy are mentioned). he queries whether this is desirable.
<jasonjgw> He notes the specifications proposed for development under the Charter.
<jasonjgw> Michael: if we don't expect significant accessibility interest then their Charter is fine.
<jasonjgw> Janina suggests at least an accessibility impact statement would be desirable.
<jasonjgw> Becky notes that there may be accessibility issues.
<jasonjgw> Becky: if the applications are for servicing of vehicles, then there should be a statement.
<jasonjgw> Michael: considers it extends beyond vehicle service.
<jasonjgw> Janina: people with diabilities may need to handle the technical data.
<jasonjgw> Michael proposes asking them to add a sentence acknoweldging the relaitonship with APA/horizontal connection.
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/
<jasonjgw> Michael: CSS Color Module level 4 - reviewed by APA in 2016, leading to a dialogue - no record that APA has signed off.
<jasonjgw> Michael proposes re-review.
<becky> from Amy via email: I've found no accessibility issues with CSS Box Sizing Module Level 4 (https://www.w3.org/TR/css-sizing-4/). Essentially, it adds additional values for box sizing.
<jasonjgw> Janina suggests clarifying with CSS how they wish to be informed of our dispositions.
<jasonjgw> Janina: this review can't be closed until we find out where to close it.
<jasonjgw> Becky isn't sure where it came form.
<jasonjgw> It is agreed to return to this issue at the next APA meeting in two weeks.
<jasonjgw> Becky: notes the open issue to review CSS Transforms Module Level 2.
<jasonjgw> Becky: we also still need to review Level 1 of the same spec.
<becky> from Amy via email: Since we have a ticket open to review CSS Transforms Module Level 2 (https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues/40), do we still need to review CSS Transforms Module Level 1 (https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues/19), which has been CR since 14 Feb 2019? Looks like Ian left a comment on the latter, but I imagine that's where prefers-reduced-motion has come into play to fill that need.
<jasonjgw> Janina proposes to close those issues.
<jasonjgw> Neil: suggests that it's all probably well implmented by now.
<jasonjgw> Janina acknoweldges this is a reason to close the issues.
<jasonjgw> Janina also notes the animation-related issues are addressed in media Queries level 5, so the former discussion is now no longer applicable.
<jasonjgw> Janina: if you wait a decade or two, things are sometimes worked out.
<jasonjgw> Janina mentions the valuable work emerging from Silver on visual contrast.
<jasonjgw> This is important material that will be included in the public working draft of Silver.
<jasonjgw> Becky: we'll close those issues as overcome by events.
<jasonjgw> Becky: closing issue 19, still leaving open review on level 2.
<jasonjgw> Janina: still has a pending action from last week.
<jasonjgw> Josh: posted comments on WebXR.
<jasonjgw> Josh notes valuable comments on the XR list regarding architectural issues relevant to accessibility.
<jasonjgw> Josh: commented on GitHub threads related to the immersive web work.
<jasonjgw> Josh will update the issue tracker.
<jasonjgw> Michael: nothing new this week.
<jasonjgw> Becky reviewed the recently added community groups, but they haven't had much time to do work since May-August.
<jasonjgw> No other business.
This is scribe.perl Revision of Date 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: paul_grenier, MichaelC, Irfan, Matthew_Atkinson, becky, amy_c, NeilS, janina, Joshue, Gottfried, JPaton_, jasonjgw, JPaton Present: paul_grenier MichaelC Irfan Matthew_Atkinson becky amy_c NeilS janina Joshue Gottfried JPaton_ jasonjgw JPaton Found Scribe: jasonjgw Inferring ScribeNick: jasonjgw Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Scribes: jasonjgw, janina ScribeNicks: jasonjgw, janina Found Date: 18 Nov 2020 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]