Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Announcements
janina: Matthew, Lionel and I participated in the W3C Workshop on Permissions (virtually). We learnt quite a bit, and have work to follow up on. We'll let you know when the workshop report is out.
… We've made connections for some of the work, particularly edge-related, that we started in TPAC (e.g. verifiable credentials).
matatk: I got insights from the workshop into ways the UA is acting on behalf of the user.
janina: Note: APA _is_ meeting next week.
Advancing Adapt Symbols to CR
janina: We have a resolution from our Adapt TF.
<janina> https://
janina: Adapt TF has asked us to move the Symbols Module forward to CR. We do not believe we need a new CfC, because this module is the result of removing (for now) the non-symbol attributes.
janina: We met with TAG during TPAC and they agreed, as do we, that symbols is the best-architected part. So we have removed the rest for now, and are investigating the other work separately.
<janina> https://
janina: The Symbols Module depends on our new AAC Registry, the FPWD of which was just approved overnight.
janina: Does anyone object, and believe that another CfC is required? We do not believe so, but if you have concerns, questions, please raise them here.
<janina> DRAFT RESOLUTION: APA confirms support for advancing Adapt Symbol Module to CR based on our previous consensus which included symbols logged at https://
janina: Any concerns about this resolution?
RESOLUTION: APA confirms support for advancing Adapt Symbol Module to CR based on our previous consensus which included symbols logged at https://
janina: This truly is groundbreaking work.
+1
New Charters Review https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22
Roy: No new charters, no new issues, and nothing new on TR this week.
Dangling Spec Review Cleanup: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Category:Spec_Review_Assigned
Autoplay Policy Detection
<Roy> - TR: https://
<Roy> - tracking: https://
Verifiable Credential Data Integrity 1.0
<Roy> - TR: https://
<Roy> - tracking: https://
<Roy> - review by Lionel: https://
<Roy> https://
<Roy> https://
CSS Update (Paul) https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues
no-motion
<PaulG> https://
PaulG: One option suggested was an "important" directive to override motion. I think the UA should control this ultimately. A general path forward, involving adding some ability to continue to reduce motion, was agreed.
fragment url()
<PaulG> https://
PaulG: this is about clarifying expectations about how the URL is resolved.
… This is only for IDs.
PaulG: This one didn't seem a11y-related
animate display:none
<PaulG> https://
PaulG: This one is about how some properties can't be animated.
… Trying to make it more intuitive for developers.
… Shouldn't affect animations or anything like that; just a technique for how the animation is executed.
ruby spacing
<PaulG> https://
janina: Are we piggybacking on this with Symbols?
PaulG: This is more about how whitespace is stripped or not, in different cases. i18n is being consulted on it.
PaulG: I mentioned the work on AAC symbols, but in current prototypes e.g. from matatk the symbols have their own spacing, margins.
… Spacing is a little more important with Ruby because the rubies need to line up precisely wiht the charactrs. For Symbols, it is a bit more coarse and the text will need to be re-laid out to accommodate the symbols.
Task Force & Deliverables Updates
Pronunciation
janina: PaulG: Does the new proposed time work for you?
PaulG: Yes; that time looks generally good.
janina: Will check up on having a call next week.
… I have an action to re-write the draft response to WHATWG. We may need to work with the WICG, too.
Adapt
janina: As above - some key work finished, and AAC Registry FPWD will be published next Tuesday we hope.
… Also, we hope, the Symbols Module CR, before the moratorium.
… The Explainer has been, and will be, updated, so we should publish an updated draft of that too.
Maturity Model (?)
janina: We're going to propose making MM a TF, probably in January. We'll run a CfC on this.
… They've started working on a Work Statement, which will be reviewed shortly.
… In the new year, APA is re-chartering, so we'll be asking you about making MM a TF then.
Actions Checkin (Specs) https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/open
matatk: Suggest everyone reads and comments, if needed, on Lionel's review, posted to the list: Action item: Review Verifiable Credential Data Integrity: https://
Web of Things
niklasegger: Have been looking at the spec; have a few questions.
… Gottfried planning to review between Christmas and New Year, and deliver report in the new year. Is that too late?
janina: No, that's fine. We didn't block their CR, but we can put in any comments before the CR closes.
niklasegger: The original question posted by WoT was if the Architecture doc should have an accessibility section. I talked with Gottfried and he had some more ideas, which relate to WoT in general, e.g. including more semantic info in the ThingDescription, (e.g. type of the device; it's location). Should we consider these things too, or is it too late?
janina: No it's not too late. Do you recall they have profiles, and they created an accessibility considerations section for the profiles. I think it needs a little more than what they have. We should decide on those together. Whether it goes into the Architecture spec, or Profiles, I'm not sure.
… Also I want to capture what we called "middleware" accessibilty issues, which we raised with the group earlier, and the importance of making consumers aware of those issues/requirements in advance.
niklasegger: Thanks; we'll keep you updated.
Other Business
be done
janina: Thank you very much everyone for your time and good work, of which there is quite a bit being done!
janina: See you next week!