W3C

– DRAFT –
Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference

09 November 2023

Attendees

Present
Daniel, Helen, thbrunet, Todd, trevor, Wilco
Regrets
-
Chair
Wilco
Scribe
thbrunet

Meeting minutes

ACT Standup

Wilco: Did surveys for this week. Some rules in to the CFC, hopefully after today can send them to AG and ARIAWG

Trevor: Just the surveys for me. Some changes for the implementations.

Todd: No report.

Trevor: Testing symposium went well. Those that were aware were nodding their heads and those that weren't familiar with ACT seemed lost.
… Feels like still somewhat a niche topic.

Daniel: Some permission issues with AGWG, reviewed a PR. Acceptance from CSUN on ACT presentation.

Helen: No report. Aim to work on user testing for label in name scenarios.

Tom: Headings issue - NVDA and VoiceOver don't seem to handle it well, so, not clear the rule has value.
… Issue with one of the CFCs and definitions resolving. I'll also have some work conflicts in the future.

CFCs from last week

Wilco: Three more CFCs. Anyone else have comments?
… otherwise I'll put in a resolution of accepted.

RESOLUTION: Accept CFC'ed rules as ready for the working groups

Wilco: I'll open discussions with other groups

Next week WAI-Coop Symposium

Wilco: Checking availability for next week. W3C has a symposium that overlaps with this meeting.
… Will be skipping in two weeks for Thanksgiving, so, I think we'll try to run the meeting next week anyway

Todd: I'll be out next two weeks.

Trevor: I'm out 23rd

Tom: Same

Wilco: Meeting next week, not 23rd.

Audio element content is media alternative for text

Defining implementations

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/541/files

Wilco: Editorial stuff from last time, that was resolved.

Helen: Could we have a checklist? Hard to read

Wilco: We'll later have an HTML version to review

Tom: Tripped me up the first time why inapplicable would be satisfied, but it's accurate

Daniel: Maybe a note with a better explanation?

Wilco: Can we leave it as a comment to pick up later?

Daniel: What's the relation between between 480 and this PR? not related?

Wilco: Just syntax typo

Tom: Would be nice to have the tool version pull from the report

Wilco: It's on my todo list, would love to find help
… I want to say that this is ready then. Is that okay with everyone?

+1

<trevor> +1

<Helen> +1

<dmontalvo> +1

RESOLUTION: Accept PR 541

Wilco: I'll talk to Kathy about her PR

Audio element content is media alternative for text

Wilco: We need at least 5, but we'll go over what we have.
… First comment from Kathy pointing to open issue 1446
… There's a definition of streaming, but no test cases for streaming. We need an audio or live video stream that can be embedded in test cases, and we just don't have one.
… Anyone think that needs further discussion?
… Next, Q7 of survey.
… Proposes moving 1.2.1 to a secondary requirement.
… What do people think about removing the parenthetical about text alternative?

Tom: If it's visible, why would it be a text alternative?

Wilco: That is a little weird. What are we saying about images?

Helen: Are we talking about link to a secondary file transcript?
… This is the kind of thing that can be confusing depending on context.
… Often issues are fixed via transcript, but that's not what we're looking for here.
… Often people are splitting content to a separate page because having it all in one place gets too cluttered. So, not necessarily wrong, but not what was intended when rule was first written.

Wilco: Adding some notes in the conclusions.
… Need a liason.

Helen: I'm doing something similar, so maybe I should

Wilco: We need 1.2.1 added as a secondary requirement
… Need to adjust when alternative is in a different page or different page state

Helen: Would that be a second rule?

Wilco: I don't think so. I think we've done that as one rule before.
… In Audio element content has transcript, there's a reference to "through a link", but I think we've done this better on other rules.
… Back to the other comment from Kathy, regarding the parenthetical, does this need to be in the expectation?
… The question that arose for me was is this #text nodes, or could it be in an image with a text alternative?
… We really need to be clearer here about what we mean by text.

Wilco: Moving to Trevor's Q7 comment

Trevor: Kathy has a related comment below

Wilco: e7aa44 is the composing rule. I have an open PR to open composing rules to the top of the rules page, but stuck waiting for me to have time
… I think we want to connect those up more directly and automatically

Trevor: I put it as possible related because applicability had conditions on how the audio played, so felt related to me.

Wilco: I don't mind having them, but just tangentially related.
… I wouldn't tie them, but if someone feels we should that's fine

Trevor: I'm fine with not including them

Wilco: Let's not then

Wilco: Q8. I'd like to talk about whether we need this rule at all, but not sure that's a 4 minute conversation

Helen: The 1.2 checkpoints seem straight forward, until you try to teach them

Wilco: But, for 1.2.1 what's the difference between media alternative needs to have no additional information vs the text alternative needs to have all of the information. They seem like the same requirement to me
… Please have a look at this in particular for next week's meeting

Summary of resolutions

  1. Accept CFC'ed rules as ready for the working groups
  2. Accept PR 541
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 221 (Fri Jul 21 14:01:30 2023 UTC).

Diagnostics

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: thbrunet

Maybe present: Tom

All speakers: Daniel, Helen, Todd, Tom, Trevor, Wilco

Active on IRC: dmontalvo, Helen, thbrunet, Todd, trevor, Wilco