Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Announcements
matatk: I'll post to the list about my presentation
janina: I did a keynote presentation for Australia that will also be available soon
APA Rechartering - https://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/charter-2023/charter.html
matatk: this is the version of our charter that's going to go to CFC unless there's an objection among you
<janina> https://
matatk: FAST, deliverables, and work with external organizations were updated in the document
janina: you have one week from today to comment and vote
New Charters Review - https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22
Roy: no new charters
Explicit Review Requests - https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues
Web of Things (WoT) Profile
<Roy> - issue: w3c/
<Roy> - tracking: https://
<Roy> https://
Roy: this was already reviewed in September 2 years ago
<Roy> https://
janina: we wanted some expansions in the accessibility considerations but I think we're fine with it
Roy: they want us to finish the review by March
janina: I will check on the comments
matatk: there was also a conversation at TPAC where we gave them some feedbackl
janina: there are new specs (matter and thread) that will come to market soon and help deal with these issues
janina: it's not the API that we will hold up
A11y Review Comment Tracker - https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3c/a11y-review
Roy: no new issues this week
New on TR - http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
Web Animations Level 2
<Roy> - tracker: https://
<Roy> - spec: https://
PaulG: This is fairly low level
… Animations stil an issue for accessibility, but should be covered by WCAG.
… No mention of accessibility in this document specifically.
… If we consider WCAG covers everything web, and they're just adding APIs to control something web related, do they need to explicitly reference WCAG?
… This is about providing more options for devs to do existing things.
matatk: sometimes there's a parent doc to look at. But there's already privacy and security considerations in here.
PaulG: ACK there are other non-functional requirements. Maybe we could provide some boilerplate text for them to include (around things like WCAG applying)?
janina: +1
PaulG: Should we give them the WAI Standards/guidelines link?
… Won't need updating on each iteration of the document.
can we use this for a "pointer" to applicable specs? https://
matatk: the immediate action is that we don't need to review this but we do need to come up with a suggested text for accessibility considerations
Explicit Review Requests - https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues
<janina> https://
janina: this is worth a read and covers parts of matter and thread
matatk: this is long but we should forward it to them and clearly state what we expect as an outcome
janina: should this be elevated to an APA concern and not just comments from an individual?
matatk: we can't cfc this email as is but we probably can with some small edits
Fredrik: should we just ask Gottfried again?
matatk: yes! Janina and I will do that!
CSS Update (Paul) - https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues
PaulG: There are ongoing conversations about color-contrast() (not resolved)
… Propose we come up with the non-functional requirement statement (discussed above) in the next week or so.
New on TR - http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
Actions Checkin (Specs) - https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/open
matatk: the tracker will be retired by the end of next month
matatk: let us know if you have issues about github being its replacement
matatk: I still haven't seen anything in WCAG 2.2 that concerns me so I think we can sign off on it
Fredrik: +1