wilco: have gone through this partially before
... comment 3 from detlev, shadow dom examples
trevor: is it that he's confused about shadow dom?
wilco: this is how shadow dom is coded
... question 5 - should aria spec be cited
levon: it references wai-aria 1.1
wilco: in background, wai-aria is less strict. wai-aria has a broken owned elements model. issue was raised over a year ago and think it will be a requirement in 1.3
... Q5 mary jo's comment
maryjo: difference in owned definition
wilco: owned element definition in wai-aria has known problems. aria wg is working on solution. we didn't want to wait
maryjo: this is in advance of a spec change?
wilco: it's consistent with wcag
... agree it's not ideal. when updated, can update rule.
... issue is open with cg
... Q6, detlev's comment for aria-owns. this rule doesn't require aria-owns but takes it into account
... Q7, comment from Kathy to explain custom aria-owned definition for rule
... explain how the 2 definitions are different, not reference issues in aria specs?
trevor: sounds good
kathy: if the definitions will explain why the original will not work for the rule, yes
wilco: ready to publish - need an editorial update in background for definition
... propose take rule as soon as editorial change is made?
<trevor> +1
<Levon_> +1
<Wilco> +1
+1
<shadi> +1
RESOLUTION: ARIA required context role rule, ready for CFC after editorial change in background
wilco: 6 responses
... Q3 comment from wilco - AT ignores empty headings. maryjo - maybe some AT do not ignore empty headings
... empty headings not ignored by AT. whitespace chars are ignored inconsistently. Rule states all headings with empty accname are a failure
shadi: why 1.3.1
maryjo: programmatic structure
wilco: is it a failure if screen readers ignore empty headings?
shadi: to fail 1.3.1, need to confirm structure relationship in presentation
... probably a problem but not always
kathy: ignored by a headings list in sr?
wilco: yes, even with whitespace it is consistently ignored
... cg moved forward with this rule even with my concerns raised
... headings consistently ignored by AT should not fail 1.3.1, which is this rule
shadi: to what degree does this happen?
wilco: frequently
shadi: is empty heading in acc tree?
wilco: yes, sr will ignore bc it's empty
... all major screen readers can ignore empty headings
maryjo: we try not to program to what sr do
wilco: navigating by headings also ignores empty headings
trevor: background describes issue for sighted users
maryjo: but not a 1.3.1 failure
shadi: would want to look at 2.4.6 or 2.4.10 for empty headings
wilco: in favor of going ahead with this rule with some updates?
trevor: any ideas to account for sr?
wilco: no, I don't think this is a good rule.
<maryjom> -1
<trevor> -1
-1
<Levon_> -1
<shadi> -1
shadi: if false positives result from this rule, people will spend time fixing.
wilco: Q4 comment, passed ex 3
trevor: ex is repetitive of passed ex 1, not relevant
wilco: Q5 comment, 2.4.6 doesn't apply to empty heading
shadi: if SR indicates empty heading
wilco: label is defined based on page not markup
... if there's no text, it's not a heading
maryjo: rule publication tracking needs updates
... and reassign charu's
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1525
wilco: Q6 open issues - 3 open
... don't think issue 1525 is a blocker
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1520
wilco: needs to be addressed, not a blocker
... this is why it was sent back in previous review: asked not to fail empty tags, but not fixed properly
... I would like to see these fixed.
trevor: this will be a pretty large change for accname. need survey
wilco: this will go back