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