Meeting minutes
New Issue Triage
spectranaut_: there's a PR for for 471 - we'll get there
spectranaut_: how should we label 1915?
scotto: we can agenda it, it probably wouldn't be great for triage
spectranaut_: if we have time we'll chat about it later today
spectranaut_: next, 1914, discussion ARIA relational terms, probably an F2F topic
spectranaut_: ARIA 1912, minor clarification for aria-expanded
scotto: got brought up that there's a passage in spec talking about the grouping owning an element's expanded/collapsed content, feels relevant to tree item, but in the example in 1912, I *wouldn't* expect a button like that to be owned by that group
spectranaut_: would this need larger discussion?
scotto: i don't think it needs to be agenda'd, but some reviews by those interested would be helpful
jamesn: probably not a big deal, just needs a fairly simple PR
Adam_Page: i can take a look at it
spectranaut_: next is html-aam 467 - thoughts?
scotto: i think this could be a good agenda topic. there's a lot of work that went into revising comboboxes. the select element IS different between Windows and macOS, and that means it's functionally impossible to create a consistent combobox. I'd love to get jcraig's help in that discussion
MarioB: yes, there's a lot that can be done to clarify that
spectranaut_: next is ARIA 1910, this seems reasonable, we can add it to 1.4 (unless there are objections)
spectranaut_: maybe a Good First Issue for someone?
jamesn: I don't think it's necessarily simple - keyboard shortcuts can't be automatically translated. I wonder if this is a wontfix, but could be listed somewhere else
jamesn: i'll add a comment witht those thoughts
spectranaut_: core-aam 169 - that's editorial and I can take it
spectranaut_: ARIA 1907 ... is this just missing some information? seems like it to me, any disagreement?
jamesn: i think this should be pretty straightforward
scotto: there IS mention of this in 9.2 States and Properties
jamesn: -valuemax and -valuemin don't have implicit values so shouldn't be there anyway
jamesn: this SHOULD be a Good First Issue if someone would like it
BenBeaudry: I can take care of that
spectranaut_: ARIA 1904 ... BenBeaudry did you want this too?
BenBeaudry: sure!
spectranaut_: ARIA 1903 - there's already a PR open so we'll get to that in a sec
New PR Triage
spectranaut_: scotto did you want to talk about PR 472?
scotto: it was mentioned to me that I didn't update text referring to Steps 1 and 2, but there's now a third step. Got that revised. When looking at it again though, it didn't make a whole lot of sense, so I even further clarified it to better match reality. No normative changes or anything, just specific info
spectranaut_: bryanG did you want to look at it?
BryanG: Sure thing
jamesn: i'll approve it right now
jamesn: reads like an improvement to me
spectranaut_: I'll add BenBeaudry too
spectranaut_: Next is PR 1913. Peter and daniel-montalvo already took a look, i'll take a look too
arigilmore_: we added a github workflow that checks incoming PRs for mistaken lowercase versions of MAY, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, etc.
jamesn: is this a warning or does it block merging?
arigilmore_: it'll come up as a failed check
jamesn: is it possible to ignore it? something like REQUIRED could be difficult to work around (like when using the HTML attribute)
arigilmore_: it only checks incoming PRs right now, anything already there it won't fail. if it's not REQUIRED as a check it shouldn't block merging
mattKing: There's a github setting for what checks can block a merge, that's what we do in APG, and it's more of a managerial setting for us
jamesn: as long as there's an option to override etc. then it should be fine
spectranaut_: so then maybe for now we just remove required, optional, recommended?
arigilmore_: I DID add spacing aroud them, so it should only look for them in sentences, but I can do that for sure
jamesn: I'm just worried about it causing issues where we use those words in non-normative settings
spectranaut_: what if we make a followup issue to discuss removing those words in RFC-2119 from the spec where not used in normative settings?
jamesn: sure
arigilmore_: yep
spectranaut_: PR 470 and 469 - both in HTML AAM... any reviewers?
spectranaut_: the mapping tables are how we translate ARIA from HTML to the accessibility APIs
arigilmore_: i can take a look
DougG: I can take a look too
jamesn: if you're new to the W3C org on Github, and new to the WG, send your Github IDs to daniel-montalvo so he can add you to the org
spectranaut_: ARIA 1909 - I can take a look at this, jamesn is on it
MarkMcCarthy: i can too
spectranaut_: next is ARIA 1908
jamesn: i can probably merge this, I reviewed it already, probably doesn't need another check
spectranaut_: next is ARIA 1906
Adam_Page: not a ton to say, some editorial cleanup. we wanted to be more consistent when linking out to other specs when using terms, particularly the HTML spec, XRef gives us a way to do that consistently. just swapped that syntax in.
Adam_Page: may be a way to do this for other specs, but HTML is a good start
jamesn: i can merge this without problem
jamesn: we need to revise the whole "how we do ARIA references" section, it's a little complicated but does need updating
mattKing: is XRef a respec thing or something different?
jamesn: it uses WebRef. XRef is a respec implementation of WebRef
spectranaut_: Adam_Page could you document this somewhere for us? Maybe in the documentation folder?
jamesn: we should probably start with the contributing document--
spectranaut_: the README is what needs the updating, actually
jamesn: either way, we need to point to some examples of spec specific implementations and all
Adam_Page: i can take a look at this
spectranaut_: last PR is ARIA 1905 - BenBeaudry can you check, since you're assigned that issue?
BenBeaudry: no problem
May F2F
spectranaut_: the link in the agendum has all information you'll need for attending the F2F
spectranaut_: if you can't attend in person but there's a topic you're interested in, let chairs know as the schedule can be moved around a bit
jamesn: i need to make sure we've got the right numbers, so if anyone is planning on attending let me know ASAP so we can work out the room size
Rashmi: is there remote attendance available?
jamesn: there's no link yet but there will be
jamesn: again, if you are interested in attending anything specifically but the time isn't good for timezones etc. let me or spectranaut_ know and we can try to move things around
mattKing: is there a way to see if we've registered?
spectranaut_: you're good Matt
jamesn: responses are available to see by the group,
cyns: is lunch in Adobe's building or outside somewhere?
jamesn: should be in the Adobe cafe
MarkMcCarthy: if you're virtual do you need to register?
jamesn: no we only need for physical counts, but if you're incredibly interested register anyway so we know to expect you
spectranaut_: well..... if you're plannign to attend remotely it might be good for us to know and keep track anyway. if you hope to attend, edit the wiki with that info (your name and what you're attending)
TPAC 2023
jamesn: TPAC is Sept 11-15 this year, in Seville, Spain
jamesn: the group IS planning to meet, unless no one is planning to attend physically
jamesn: we've got the option to meet on different days, whatever works. several timeslots open
jamesn: poll had gone out recently, particularly if there are issues with meeting on Thurs or Fri (taking into account Jewish Holidays)
jamesn: barring conflicts with something like that, it's looking like we'll meet that Thurs or Fri
jamesn: the website is there with all the pertinent details (facilities, hotels, etc.)
mattKing: at this time, do you have a sense of any specific important things to meet with other groups about?
jamesn: no one has come to US with anything yet, so... I think lots of groups are talking about the same thing. If anyone has anything they'd like to discuss with other groups, let me or spectranaut_ know
mattKing: I think live region discussions might be one of those things that's needing to go beyond ARIA, but we'll know more after F2F @ Seattle
1.3 blocking issues agendabot]
spectranaut_: ARIA 1150, 1163 - I think I want to discuss those at F2F
spectranaut_: ARIA 1177, mattKing...
mattKing: yep, working on it
spectranaut_: 1487 jamesn and I are working on it, 1824 I'm looking into
jamesn: sarah_higley just updated 1464!
spectranaut_: woohoo!
jamesn: blocking issues aside, maybe it'll be good to discuss making ARIA evergreen at TPAC
mattKing: yeah I think so!