See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 14 October 2013
<richardschwerdtfeger> meeting: make log public
<richardschwerdtfeger> RRSAgent: make log public
<richardschwerdtfeger> meeting: W3C WAI-PF ARIA Caucus
<MichaelC> Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
<richardschwerdtfeger> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2013Oct/0015.html
<scribe> scribe: janina
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testreport?testsuite_id=2
rich: Saw event sequencing
problems with tests 85, 86 & 87
... Suggest we move these to "should"
michael: Were these tests where James wanted Safari excluded?
rich: State change follows
selection change on these
... And on 69 we have owns of an owns, etc
... Not real world
... 69 & 71
... 70 passes
michael: 71 seems contrived; 69
is similar conceptual to another
... Does seem to reflect how we expected ARIA-Owns to
work
... A strange abstraction ...
... So, we're testing posinset ...
<richardschwerdtfeger> If all items in a set are present in the document structure, it is not necessary to set this attribute, as the user agent can automatically calculate the set size and position for each item. However, if only a portion of the set is present in the document structure at a given moment, this property is needed to provide an explicit indication of an element's position.
michael: So, if in doc only via ARIA-Owns, its not part of the structure?
rich: yes
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/612
<MichaelC> http://www.w3.org/2013/10/08-aapi-minutes#item01
<richardschwerdtfeger> EVENT_OBJECT_STATECHANGE on newly focused item, but arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcements
rich: Instead, say:
<richardschwerdtfeger> EVENT_OBJECT_STATECHANGE on newly focused item. User agents SHOULD arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcements
rich: Above msaa, here's at-spi
<richardschwerdtfeger> ATK/ATSPI currently:
<richardschwerdtfeger> object::selection_changed but arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcement
rich: could be
<richardschwerdtfeger> object::selection_changed. User agents SHOULD arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcement
michael: I'm OK
<MichaelC> ACTION: clown to Add RFC2119 SHOULD statements to UAIG #mapping_events_selection regard event arrangement [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/14-pf-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1273 - Add rfc2119 should statements to uaig #mapping_events_selection regard event arrangement [on Joseph Scheuhammer - due 2013-10-21].
<MichaelC> action-1273: For example, ¨EVENT_OBJECT_STATECHANGE on newly focused item, but arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcements¨ becomes ¨EVENT_OBJECT_STATECHANGE on newly focused item. User agents SHOULD arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcements¨
<trackbot> Notes added to action-1273 Add rfc2119 should statements to uaig #mapping_events_selection regard event arrangement.
<MichaelC> action-1273: For example, ¨object::selection_changed but arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcement¨ becomes ¨object::selection_changed. User agents SHOULD arrange events so state change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change announcement¨
<trackbot> Notes added to action-1273 Add rfc2119 should statements to uaig #mapping_events_selection regard event arrangement.
<MichaelC> action-1273: note that the wording is confusing because conditions against the action are explained after the action rather than before
<trackbot> Error adding a comment to: could not connect to Tracker. Please mail <sysreq@w3.org> with details about what happened.
<MichaelC> action-1273: note that the wording is confusing because conditions against the action are explained after the action rather than before
<trackbot> Error adding a comment to: could not connect to Tracker. Please mail <sysreq@w3.org> with details about what happened.
<richardschwerdtfeger> EVENT_OBJECT_SELECTION then EVENT_OBJECT_STATECHANGE on newly focused item.
<MichaelC> action-1273: note that the wording is confusing because conditions against the action are explained after the action rather than before
<trackbot> Error adding a comment to: could not connect to Tracker. Please mail <sysreq@w3.org> with details about what happened.
<MichaelC> action-1273: note that the wording is confusing because conditions against the action are explained after the action rather than before
<trackbot> Error adding a comment to: could not connect to Tracker. Please mail <sysreq@w3.org> with details about what happened.
<richardschwerdtfeger> object::selection_changed then object:state-changed
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Accessibility/AT-APIs/AT-SPI/Events
<richardschwerdtfeger> object:selection-changed
<richardschwerdtfeger> object:selection-changed then object:state-changed
<richardschwerdtfeger> http://accessibility.linuxfoundation.org/a11yspecs/atspi/adoc/atspi-events.html
<MichaelC> action-1273: note that the wording is confusing because conditions against the action are explained after the action rather than before
<trackbot> Error adding a comment to: could not connect to Tracker. Please mail <sysreq@w3.org> with details about what happened.
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testreport?testsuite_id=2
michael: still 19 cases without
test files
... jg was to fill in additional testable statements
... jg's unable to do soon, i looked at these friday
... see fewer gaps than i thought
michael Suggest we walk this through UAIG call Tuesday
michael: 40 & 41 are ones I didn't know what to do re test files
rich: just to tab-index = 0, -1, etc
michael: test case creation we
should move to uaig call group ...
... starting email to clown
<MichaelC> Testable statements still needed for UAIG: look for @@ in http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/ARIA/Tests/Testable_Statements#User_Agent_Implementation_Guide_Testable_Statements
<MichaelC> some of the @@ are information we need to fill in based on work done in UAIG since these were written
<MichaelC> some are cross references to existing tests that just need to be linked
<MichaelC> MC to change those to ## so they´re not confused with the ones that need to be examined
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/changes/change/ Succeeded: s/pos and set/posinset/ Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina Default Present: janina, Michael_Cooper, Rich_Schwerdtfeger Present: janina Michael_Cooper Rich_Schwerdtfeger Regrets: Jon_Gunderson Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2013Oct/0015.html Found Date: 14 Oct 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/10/14-pf-minutes.html People with action items: clown WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]