Meeting minutes
<janina> /me I'm on my way. Another minute or so
Agenda Review & Announcements
janina: I trimmed a few items from the agenda to get to our draft charter
janina: any additions or changes or items of news?
becky: I've accepted another position outside of Knowbility. Hopefully, I'll stay as co-chair.
Matthew_Atkinson: quick update, I had a look at the personalization repo and I'll get in touch with Joshua as needed
Open CfC
<becky> https://
janina: we send to apa-admin so it's readable by everyone but only writable by apa members
janina: we only use it for things like voting
janina: I have a question about the first item
paul_grenier: the goal was to not allow for people to be excluded by their differences, I can take a compromise to not require only 1 biometric facet
janina: there's emerging wcag guidance we should sync with that
MichaelC: their guidance is generic
JF: (reading 3.3.7 strictly about coga)
janina: since this is a point release and it's not new major features, I propose we recast this and turn the biometrics into "must support multiple" and note that additional requirements are emerging
janina: they should plan on supporting any new guidance
JF: i don't think there's anything specific about biometrics
janina: CAPTCHA does
JF: we should point to that then
JF: "should not" instead of "must not" makes this a recommendation and doesn't sound normative
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask about WAI resources regarding biometrics
becky: so it needs reworded as "single biometric factor"
janina: note the 2019 CAPTCHA note
becky: do we include COGA notes or not?
janina: I think we give them a heads up, John can you drop the pointer?
<JF> Link to emergent WCAG 2.2 SC: https://
<becky> WCAG 2.2 SC 3.3.7: https://
janina: when we send out the decision we cc the main list and we track it in the wiki
JF: becky and I pointed to different versions, I wouldn't point to the TR yet (use the editors draft)
JF: since there's nothing in wcag speaking to biometrics now can we pass that suggestion along to agwag?
MichaelC: we're not taking new guidelines for 2.x only for 3 right now. I don't think we need a formal request, someone can just bring it up.
JF: where would one bring it up?
MichaelC: with agwag in context of wcag 3
janina: first working draft released last week
<Matthew_Atkinson> Here's a pointer to WCAG 3 (via W3C's 'blog): https://
Task Force Updates
janina: RQTF met with internet of things today
janina: it was very productive, was everyone able to attend who wanted to?
janina: any other Tf updates?
FAST Progress
MichaelC: Josh and I have been working on FAST separately. Josh is working on content for functional requirements and AURs I'm working on a way to store and output this info. I hope I can demo soon (1-2 weeks).
New Charters Review https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22
MichaelC: only one, from the browser testing and tools WG (recharter)
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: I don't personally have any comments
janina: anyone with a concern?
janina: we can pass on it
new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
MichaelC: two pubs wcag 3.0 and requirements for wcag 3.0
<MichaelC> W3C Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 3.0
<MichaelC> Requirements for WCAG 3.0
MichaelC: I don't have any comments, do we want apa review? We want a wide review but we don't typically review from accessibility groups.
janina: everyone should read and file comments as individuals (end of Feb deadline)
janina: does APA itself want to review?
everyone: silence
janina: there are some radically different things, so please provide your individual feedback
becky: lots of overlap in membership
CSS Update (Amy) https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues
new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
CSS Update (Amy) https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues
amy_c: I have two I'd like us to look at
<amy_c> https://
amy_c: first is a spec review for css timing function which is out of date now (2018) when you go to it it's called css easing functions which is a candidate recommendation
janina: are there other levels of this coming (level 1)
amy_c: last editor's draft was January, it's still active
janina: let's look to see if we have any issues in the latest draft whichever version it's pointing to
amy_c: they may have changed it from timing to easing to convey it's about animations rather than timeouts
IanPouncey: yes it's about mathematics of animation while it has an impact on accessibility it's not specific to this document
janina: so I think we pass on this
IanPouncey: there's no accessibility implications between the different functions
janina: no need to review
<amy_c> https://
amy_c: a suggestion about having a pseudo class for role
amy_c: James closed an ARIA ticket for this so it's moved to CSS WG
JF: we should track it
amy_c: seems like a use case is for EPUB dealing with fallbacks from missing namespace role attributes
amy_c: (reading) there needs to be an api for computed role
IanPouncey: computed role selector would apply to implied semantics as well as role attribute
janina: has CSS agreed to discuss this?
becky: it was sent to us from ARIA
janina: we should open an issue and raise it with CSS
JF: does this blur lines between the classic separation of concerns?
IanPouncey: (example) looking for all headings you'd need to create a selector with role=heading as well as h1-h6 this would allow you to write a selector based on the computed role
IanPouncey: you don't want styles based on arbitrary appearance but on the semantics
janina: we should calendar discussion, so let's open the issue
Actions Checkin (Specs) https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/open
JF: I had an action to look at the template for the minutes, I'm about 65% complete. I've noted a best-practice there is some content that's not inside a landmark.
JF: the new design does a good job for visual structure and I like it, I still need to review it in a screen reader.
janina: I haven't noticed any difference
JF: we should adopt it and encourage others to do so
janina: is the background a concern
JF: it's not an issue, color contrast was good throughout
JF: we can provide feedback that the background should not zoom but otherwise good to go
<MichaelC> w3t-sys@w3.org
MichaelC: the people on that list will either be the maintainers or know who the maintainers are
JF: I'll write up a draft response from APA in the next few days
<JF> Example of new minutes design: https://
Action: Draft a response to Bert Boss and w3t-sys@w3.org
<trackbot> Error finding 'Draft'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://
Horizontal Review Issues Tracker https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3c/a11y-review
Action: JF to Draft a response to Bert Boss and w3t-sys@w3.org
<trackbot> Error creating an ACTION: could not connect to Tracker. Please mail <sysreq@w3.org> with details about what happened.
APA Rechartering https://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/charter-2021/charter.html
becky: (reading scope)
janina: spoken presentation is a better name than pronunciation maybe we should change it
JF: I'm opposed to the change
JF: what about eml emotional markup language
janina: bring it up, if eml can help us all the better
<JF> EML: https://