IRC log of pf on 2013-10-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:00:05 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #pf

14:00:05 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-irc

14:00:07 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs member

14:00:07 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #pf

14:00:09 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be WAI_PF

14:00:09 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot, I see WAI_PFWG(ARIA)10:00AM already started

14:00:10 [trackbot]

Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference

14:00:10 [trackbot]

Date: 21 October 2013

14:00:50 [Zakim]

+??P7

14:00:51 [Zakim]

-??P7

14:00:51 [Zakim]

+??P7

14:00:59 [MichaelC]

zakim, ??P7 is Michael_Cooper

14:00:59 [Zakim]

+Michael_Cooper; got it

14:01:01 [MichaelC]

zakim, who is on the phone?

14:01:02 [Zakim]

On the phone I see ??P0, Michael_Cooper

14:01:07 [MichaelC]

zakim, ??P0 is Janina_Sajka

14:01:08 [Zakim]

+Janina_Sajka; got it

14:02:33 [clown]

clown has joined #pf

14:02:50 [MichaelC]

regrets: Rich_Schwerdtfeger

14:03:36 [Zakim]

+[GVoice]

14:03:49 [clown]

zakim, GVoice is Joseph_Scheuhammer

14:03:49 [Zakim]

+Joseph_Scheuhammer; got it

14:03:56 [clown]

zakim I am Joseph_Scheuhammer

14:07:23 [jongund]

jongund has joined #pf

14:07:26 [Zakim]

+Jon_Gunderson

14:08:30 [clown]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2013Oct/0015.html

14:09:26 [MichaelC]

agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2013Oct/0015.html

14:10:15 [MichaelC]

scribe: jongund

14:10:19 [jongund]

MC: User agent stuff first

14:10:21 [MichaelC]

topic: UAIG issues

14:10:39 [jongund]

JS: We need JC, I want to make sure the changes were sufficient

14:10:47 [jongund]

JS: I can e-mail him I guess

14:11:01 [jongund]

JS: I have a question for RS, but he is not here

14:11:18 [jongund]

Janina: RS is gone all week

14:11:37 [jongund]

MC: The latest time line, next week is the finailization next week

14:12:00 [jongund]

JS: It puts pressure on the UAIG group if it has to be done next week

14:12:13 [jongund]

Janina: Stack up the best understanding and seek approval

14:12:25 [jongund]

JS: There is a debate with SF

14:12:57 [jongund]

JS: RS is telling SF no, the consensus is not to change anything

14:13:16 [jongund]

Janina: The change bar is high

14:13:27 [jongund]

JS: There is another JC issue

14:13:32 [clown]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#keyboard-focus_tabindex

14:13:52 [clown]

When the user triggers an element with a defined activation behavior in a manner other than clicking it, such as by pressing Enter, simulate a click on the element.

14:14:39 [jongund]

JS: JC this should be at risk, since only Opera implements, but the text is in HTML 5, it is at risk there then too

14:14:58 [jongund]

Janina: They have marked the parts that are at risk

14:15:03 [jongund]

JS: Is that the TR?

14:15:16 [jongund]

JS: That is 5.0

14:15:26 [jongund]

MC: Activate the element as it is clicked

14:15:59 [jongund]

JS: Steps to simulate the click,... creating a click event simulation

14:16:20 [jongund]

MC: This text is a hold over from DOM activate

14:16:51 [jongund]

MC: We were saying that if you send an activate, also send a click

14:17:30 [jongund]

MC: DOM has deprecated activate, so should be no need to simulate a click event, since "click" is the new activate event

14:17:36 [clown]

www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-html51-20130528/dom.html#interactive-content

14:17:43 [jcraig]

jcraig has joined #pf

14:17:48 [jongund]

MC: I think we could remove from the guide, and talk tot he HTML5 group

14:18:19 [jongund]

Janina: There is a color coded view of the at risk view

14:18:36 [jongund]

JS: They go into much greater detail about simulating a click

14:18:54 [jongund]

Janina: I will find you the right draft

14:19:11 [jongund]

MC: Sounds like a formulation of what we just talked about

14:19:21 [Zakim]

+James_Craig

14:19:27 [jongund]

MC: Are we sure only Opera implements it

14:19:49 [jongund]

MC: If you press on return on link it follows it on other browsers

14:20:01 [jongund]

MC: I am not even sure we do need to remove this

14:20:21 [jongund]

JS: Just run the tests and see what happens

14:20:38 [jongund]

JS: Key is finding a activation behavior

14:21:16 [jongund]

JC: I did the test on OS X FF, Chrome, Safari and Opera on the mac support the return key

14:21:28 [jongund]

JS: I thought I saw it on chrome

14:21:46 [janina]

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tests-cr-exit.html

14:21:52 [jongund]

JS: I know DB I discussed it in FF development version

14:22:12 [jongund]

JS: The green are accepted as passing

14:22:33 [clown]

http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-html51-20130528/dom.html#interactive-content

14:22:34 [jcraig]

s/OS X FF, Chrome, Safari and Opera/OS X FF, Chrome, Safari, and Opera, and out of those, only Opera/

14:22:53 [clown]

he user agent should allow the user to manually trigger elements that have an http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-html51-20130528/dom.html#activation-behavior, for instance using keyboard or voice input, or through mouse clicks.

14:23:24 [clown]

When the user triggers an element with a defined http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-html51-20130528/dom.html#activation-behavior in a manner other than clicking it, the default action of the interaction event must be to http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-html51-20130528/dom.html#run-synthetic-click-activation-steps on the element.

14:23:45 [jongund]

JC: I think it should be in HTML, THAT IS WHERE IT SHOULD BE

14:24:01 [jongund]

JS: Why is it green

14:24:19 [jongund]

Janina: It means it has been accepted as interoperable

14:24:35 [jongund]

JC: There may have been implementation in the last month

14:24:47 [jongund]

Janina: I saw we close this

14:24:50 [clown]

issue-616?

14:24:50 [trackbot]

issue-616 -- ISSUE: Review potentially at-risk statement "When the user triggers an element with a defined activation behavior in a manner other than clicking it, such as by pressing Enter, simulate a click on the element." -- open

14:24:50 [trackbot]

https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/616

14:25:05 [jongund]

JC: Say it is an HTML 5 requirement

14:25:20 [jongund]

MC: Then we don't have to test

14:26:10 [jongund]

JC: Try a div with an onclick event handler

14:26:45 [jongund]

JC: Things that don't have, just have been defined as ARIA controls

14:26:53 [jongund]

JS: Like role=link?

14:27:11 [jongund]

MC: it does not work role=link or role=button

14:27:40 [jongund]

MC: This is necessary to get ARIA feature to behave as native features

14:28:38 [clown]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#def_activation_behavior

14:28:47 [jongund]

MC: Do we intend this to apply to all ARIA?

14:29:01 [jongund]

JS: It is not very aluminating

14:29:38 [jongund]

MC: Defined activation behavior ....

14:30:19 [jongund]

MC: This does mean that an ARIA role on a DIV, either the AT needs to send to click event, or authors need to know how to respond

14:30:33 [jongund]

JC: AT is not the problem here

14:30:45 [jongund]

JC: the problem is the full keyboard activation

14:32:01 [jongund]

JC: For ARIA 1.0 authors need to capture those keys

14:32:23 [jongund]

JC: Otherwise we would be changing the default behavior of the elements

14:32:41 [jongund]

MC: I am convinced by that, we need to reopen the question in ARIA 1.1

14:32:55 [jongund]

MC: We should remove from 1.0 and put an issue in for ARIA 1.1

14:33:35 [jongund]

JS: CS will say let it stay there

14:33:50 [jongund]

MC: So it does look like we can get test able statements

14:34:07 [jongund]

MC: It is an easy enough test case, we are pretty sure it will not pass

14:34:32 [jongund]

JC: My concern, even if wedo get implementation, some authors will not expect this behavior

14:35:59 [jongund]

JC: We could add an add activation behavior

14:36:09 [jongund]

MC: I like removing this from 1.0 and reopening in 1.1

14:36:34 [jongund]

Janina: Seems to be reasonable approach, if we do something in 1.0 will be more a dance

14:36:48 [jongund]

JS: I will try to come to UAIG tomorrow

14:36:53 [jongund]

MC: I will be there tooo

14:37:21 [jongund]

JS: She said this should have done alone time ago

14:37:41 [jongund]

Janina: One person objecting does not break consensus

14:37:56 [jongund]

MC: Groups can proceed over the objects of a single person

14:38:36 [jongund]

MC: The benefit does not justify the cost, we will have more time in 1.1, we only recently identified this problem

14:38:56 [jongund]

JS: COllectively remember these discussions

14:39:05 [jongund]

MC: Any other UAIG issues?

14:39:09 [clown]

action-1262?

14:39:09 [trackbot]

action-1262 -- Joseph Scheuhammer to Update 4.1. focus states and events table to clarify differences between platforms and dom/desktop/at focus. http://www.w3.org/wai/pf/aria-implementation/#focus_state_event_table -- due 2013-09-23 -- PENDINGREVIEW

14:39:10 [trackbot]

https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1262

14:39:12 [jongund]

JS: Action 1262

14:39:22 [jongund]

JC: Sorry for being late, I am still ill

14:39:34 [jongund]

JS: You should be in bed

14:39:37 [clown]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#focus_state_event_table

14:40:09 [jongund]

JS: I added content to address the focus issues you raised, these have been vetted with CS and DB

14:40:21 [jongund]

JC: Give me a second to read them

14:40:55 [jongund]

JC: I think it is OK

14:41:10 [jongund]

JC: Second bullet is a little confusing

14:42:04 [jongund]

JC: In recent discussions with hixie about DOM focus and activation focus are different..

14:42:27 [jongund]

JC: need more explanation, like for example .....

14:43:10 [jongund]

JC: I am not adverse to putting in a note

14:43:18 [jongund]

JS: I am not adverse to putting in a note

14:43:37 [jongund]

JC: I am not sure a note is strictly necessary

14:44:15 [jongund]

JG: Sometimes it is advocates that are reading this document, to help with developers

14:44:20 [jongund]

JS: I can do it

14:44:46 [jongund]

JC: Since it is a note it is editorial

14:45:09 [jongund]

Janina: We need to close stuff this week, it we will meet this pblicatoin date

14:45:47 [clown]

action-1269?

14:45:47 [trackbot]

action-1269 -- Joseph Scheuhammer to Prefix bullet 2 of #keyboard-focus_aria-activedescendant with "for platforms that expose an accessibility focus separately from the keyboard focus," -- due 2013-10-07 -- PENDINGREVIEW

14:45:47 [trackbot]

https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1269

14:45:48 [jongund]

JS: Next pending review, action 1269

14:46:19 [clown]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#keyboard-focus_aria-activedescendant

14:46:32 [jongund]

JS: JS: Bullet 2 of the active descendent section

14:46:53 [jongund]

JS: Everything else is identical

14:47:03 [jongund]

JC: I missing the different part

14:47:18 [jongund]

JC: Ok item 2

14:47:50 [jongund]

JC: It seems right to me

14:47:59 [jongund]

JC: Thank you

14:48:10 [jongund]

JSL Your welcome, closing 1269

14:48:38 [jongund]

JS: That's all I have

14:48:46 [jongund]

JS: For UAIG stuff

14:49:02 [jongund]

Janina: That's the one we are trying to get out the door

14:49:18 [jongund]

JC: There a number of 1.1 issues I would like to start going through

14:49:31 [jongund]

Janina: We need to get this second last call out the door

14:49:52 [jongund]

Janina: Want to make sure that there are no supprises

14:49:55 [MichaelC]

topic: UAIG Testing

14:50:00 [jongund]

MC: I was on mute, i was talking alot

14:50:11 [jongund]

MC: RS wants to be present for 1.1 discussions

14:50:21 [clown]

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pfwg/raw-file/default/ARIA/1.0/tests/test-files/roles-properties-supported/roles-properties-supported-combobox-aria-autocomplete-none.html

14:50:23 [jongund]

MC: Let's move on to UAIG testing

14:51:37 [jongund]

JS: This is problem with FF, a combo box with aria-autocompletion=none, but when I tested on FF it HTML5 text elements autocomplete is always true

14:52:13 [jongund]

JC: in addition we have a host language feature that conflicts

14:52:23 [jongund]

JS: We have an example that does not work anymore

14:53:10 [jongund]

JS: Input type text in HTML 5 always has autocomplete is true

14:54:01 [jongund]

JC: Most browsers render the content independent of the doc type

14:54:16 [jongund]

JS: I tested on ATK-SPI

14:54:25 [jongund]

MC: this is one of the test files that are shared

14:55:07 [jongund]

MC: We have our passes, we shoudl add it to the ARIA 1.1 issue list about the auto complete conflict with aria attribute

14:55:37 [jongund]

JS: You are going to get auto complete on spinners using text boxes

14:55:47 [jcraig]

ACTION: jcraig to note in ARIA 1.1 spec issue to note on aria-activedescendant that HTML5 has a a native autocomplete attr that may be in conflict with this one.

14:55:47 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-1281 - Note in aria 1.1 spec issue to note on aria-activedescendant that html5 has a a native autocomplete attr that may be in conflict with this one. [on James Craig - due 2013-10-28].

14:56:25 [jongund]

JS: The cure is to set auto complete equal to false it they do not want autocomplete behavior

14:56:39 [MichaelC]

https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testresults?testsuite_id=1&testcase_id=172

14:57:09 [jcraig]

ACTION: jcraig to file HTML-AAPI bug related to mapping native @autocomplete to @aria-autocomplete in strict vs weak semantics tables.

14:57:09 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-1282 - File html-aapi bug related to mapping native @autocomplete to @aria-autocomplete in strict vs weak semantics tables. [on James Craig - due 2013-10-28].

14:57:20 [jongund]

Janina: If they passed we are done, even if the implementation has changed

14:58:34 [jongund]

JC: A 1.1 issues are you talking about UAIG?

14:58:49 [jongund]

MC: I am not sure, but probably starts in the 1.1 spec

14:59:04 [jongund]

MC: We may want to bring up witht he HTML working group

14:59:33 [jongund]

JC: i am going to file a bug, there is a table identifies strong and weak native semantics

14:59:57 [jongund]

MC: make default that auto complete is by default false

15:00:19 [jongund]

Janina: The document is a shared document, so we are required to approve changes

15:00:53 [jongund]

JC: It works better if we don't make a big deal and to work with SF as more an editorial issue

15:00:59 [jongund]

Janina: Way to start

15:01:14 [jongund]

Janina: We are part owners

15:01:26 [jongund]

MC: We need to sign off before publication

15:01:44 [jongund]

JS: This includes heart beat publications

15:02:50 [jongund]

JS: There are a bunch of tests for UAIG? There was suppose to be one for ATK-SPI, i could not find

15:03:04 [jongund]

MC: I don't see it now

15:03:23 [jongund]

JS: OK

15:03:36 [jongund]

JS: That's why I did not find it

15:04:03 [jongund]

MC: We are removing the activate simulate click requirement, removing the tests

15:04:16 [jongund]

MC: We have less test cases

15:04:39 [jongund]

JS: i don't know what DB and CS are doing, I will bring it up tomorrow

15:06:35 [jongund]

MC: We need someone who can test

15:06:49 [jongund]

JS: We can ask them

15:07:53 [jongund]

JS: We need to create 7 test cases and test them on multiple OS in the next week

15:08:12 [jongund]

Janina: What do we want to try to achieve tomorrow?

15:08:34 [jongund]

JS: David said can he do this through e-mail or other channels

15:08:43 [jongund]

JS: has anyone heard from him?

15:08:59 [jongund]

Janina: Do it on the call?

15:09:05 [jongund]

JS: We did that last week

15:09:15 [jongund]

JS: CS thought her actions were done

15:09:27 [jongund]

Janina: Expected results would not get us there

15:09:47 [jongund]

JS: they should do it on a call

15:10:15 [jongund]

JS: Go through the wiki page and clarify what they mean and write the test case

15:10:25 [jongund]

MC: I thik we should try to make that happen tomorrow

15:10:44 [jongund]

MC: If we can get it done in one call, then we do not need to bug them

15:11:10 [jongund]

JS: How many for OS X?

15:11:21 [jongund]

MC: There is one specific for OS X

15:11:37 [jongund]

MC: Live region tests, with a table...

15:11:48 [jongund]

JC: What is the test case number?

15:11:56 [jongund]

MC: There is no test case yet

15:12:15 [MichaelC]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#mapping_events_visibility

15:12:25 [jongund]

MC: There are requirements in a table for the behavior

15:12:37 [jongund]

JC: That is under 5.8.2

15:12:37 [MichaelC]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/ARIA/Tests/Testable_Statements#mapping_events_visibility

15:12:47 [jongund]

MC: the closest header is here

15:13:03 [jongund]

MC: A test case and file if it is needed

15:13:15 [jongund]

JC: I don't see the @@

15:13:25 [jongund]

MC: the second link

15:16:47 [MichaelC]

tests 72 to 84

15:16:58 [jongund]

JC: If you should a DOM node, and change the CSS to display: block

15:17:11 [jongund]

JC: So it is not necessarily part of ARIA 1.0

15:17:26 [jongund]

MC: The tests are 72-84,

15:18:37 [jongund]

Janina: Does that take our list from 7 to 6

15:18:43 [jongund]

MC: It might have

15:19:06 [jongund]

MC: I need to check if the UL is the right place for events, i am not sure what that means

15:19:08 [jcraig]

action: jcraig to add ARIA spec live region test cases 72-84 to the ARIA Implementation Guide tests, and run those test cases for Mac

15:19:08 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-1283 - Add aria spec live region test cases 72-84 to the aria implementation guide tests, and run those test cases for mac [on James Craig - due 2013-10-28].

15:19:17 [jongund]

JS: Table talks about the accessibility sub tree

15:19:32 [jongund]

MC: If we don't have any problems we can probably delete

15:19:49 [jongund]

JS: So you have added a new action

15:21:23 [jongund]

MC: I think the question there, those tests are working, I think we can remove that, so i am doting that now

15:21:35 [jongund]

MC: One of the @@ is on....

15:23:24 [jongund]

MC: I am going to remove that @@

15:24:27 [jongund]

JS: The whole working in that table has changed, it said like "these events may be trimmed", if you have multiple selections, user agent may trim out some of the events for performance reasons

15:24:42 [jongund]

MC: I wil post, but not sure if the test results are good

15:25:06 [jongund]

JS: that entire row has nothing but "may" in it, there are no "musts"

15:25:45 [jongund]

Janina: Another one we do not have to worry about

15:25:58 [jongund]

JC: Can someone read the requirement, i am outside

15:26:39 [jongund]

JS: The implication is that the user agent is ....

15:26:50 [jongund]

Janina: What is the verb for apple

15:27:00 [jongund]

JS: It is an implied must

15:27:19 [jongund]

Janina: We need some TLC from JC on that one

15:27:28 [jongund]

MC: the test case is written

15:27:59 [jongund]

MC: There will be a test case in a little while

15:28:07 [jongund]

JC: I can write it

15:28:38 [jongund]

MC: i will try finishing it, but if I have a problem I willsend t to you

15:28:54 [jongund]

MC: there are six @@ now

15:29:08 [jongund]

JC: I am going to have to leave soon

15:29:11 [Zakim]

-James_Craig

15:29:14 [jongund]

Janina: Get well

15:29:30 [jongund]

rrsagent, draft minutes

15:29:30 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html jongund

15:30:19 [jongund]

MC: 5.1.2 including elements in the accessibility tree

15:30:52 [jongund]

MC: reviewing spec requirements, looking at coverage from other specs and test suites

15:30:58 [jongund]

JS: there are only 6

15:31:13 [jongund]

MC: I think we need to take a closer look at this section

15:31:42 [Zakim]

-Jon_Gunderson

15:38:58 [Zakim]

-Joseph_Scheuhammer

15:38:59 [Zakim]

-Michael_Cooper

15:39:06 [Zakim]

-Janina_Sajka

15:39:08 [Zakim]

WAI_PFWG(ARIA)10:00AM has ended

15:39:08 [Zakim]

Attendees were Michael_Cooper, Janina_Sajka, Joseph_Scheuhammer, Jon_Gunderson, James_Craig

15:39:15 [janina]

zakim, bye

15:39:15 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #pf

15:39:23 [janina]

rrsagent make minutes

15:40:40 [janina]

rrsagent, make log public

15:40:49 [janina]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:40:49 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html janina

16:55:17 [clown]

clown has joined #pf

16:59:19 [jongund]

jongund has joined #pf

17:12:57 [jongund]

jongund has joined #pf