W3C

- DRAFT -

Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
21 Oct 2013

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Michael_Cooper, Janina_Sajka, Joseph_Scheuhammer, Jon_Gunderson, James_Craig
Regrets
Rich_Schwerdtfeger
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
jongund

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 21 October 2013

<clown> zakim I am Joseph_Scheuhammer

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

<MichaelC> scribe: jongund

MC: User agent stuff first

UAIG issues

JS: We need JC, I want to make sure the changes were sufficient
... I can e-mail him I guess
... I have a question for RS, but he is not here

Janina: RS is gone all week

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

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

Janina: Stack up the best understanding and seek approval

JS: There is a debate with SF
... RS is telling SF no, the consensus is not to change anything

Janina: The change bar is high

JS: There is another JC issue

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

<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.

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

Janina: They have marked the parts that are at risk

JS: Is that the TR?
... That is 5.0

MC: Activate the element as it is clicked

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

MC: This text is a hold over from DOM activate
... We were saying that if you send an activate, also send a click
... DOM has deprecated activate, so should be no need to simulate a click event, since "click" is the new activate event

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

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

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

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

Janina: I will find you the right draft

MC: Sounds like a formulation of what we just talked about
... Are we sure only Opera implements it
... If you press on return on link it follows it on other browsers
... I am not even sure we do need to remove this

JS: Just run the tests and see what happens
... Key is finding a activation behavior

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

JS: I thought I saw it on chrome

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

JS: I know DB I discussed it in FF development version
... The green are accepted as passing

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

<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.

<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.

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

JS: Why is it green

Janina: It means it has been accepted as interoperable

JC: There may have been implementation in the last month

Janina: I saw we close this

<clown> issue-616?

<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

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

JC: Say it is an HTML 5 requirement

MC: Then we don't have to test

JC: Try a div with an onclick event handler
... Things that don't have, just have been defined as ARIA controls

JS: Like role=link?

MC: it does not work role=link or role=button
... This is necessary to get ARIA feature to behave as native features

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

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

JS: It is not very aluminating

MC: Defined activation behavior ....
... 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

JC: AT is not the problem here
... the problem is the full keyboard activation
... For ARIA 1.0 authors need to capture those keys
... Otherwise we would be changing the default behavior of the elements

MC: I am convinced by that, we need to reopen the question in ARIA 1.1
... We should remove from 1.0 and put an issue in for ARIA 1.1

JS: CS will say let it stay there

MC: So it does look like we can get test able statements
... It is an easy enough test case, we are pretty sure it will not pass

JC: My concern, even if wedo get implementation, some authors will not expect this behavior
... We could add an add activation behavior

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

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

JS: I will try to come to UAIG tomorrow

MC: I will be there tooo

JS: She said this should have done alone time ago

Janina: One person objecting does not break consensus

MC: Groups can proceed over the objects of a single person
... The benefit does not justify the cost, we will have more time in 1.1, we only recently identified this problem

JS: COllectively remember these discussions

MC: Any other UAIG issues?

<clown> action-1262?

<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

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

JS: Action 1262

JC: Sorry for being late, I am still ill

JS: You should be in bed

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

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

JC: Give me a second to read them
... I think it is OK
... Second bullet is a little confusing
... In recent discussions with hixie about DOM focus and activation focus are different..
... need more explanation, like for example .....
... I am not adverse to putting in a note

JS: I am not adverse to putting in a note

JC: I am not sure a note is strictly necessary

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

JS: I can do it

JC: Since it is a note it is editorial

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

<clown> action-1269?

<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

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

JS: Next pending review, action 1269

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

JS: JS: Bullet 2 of the active descendent section
... Everything else is identical

JC: I missing the different part
... Ok item 2
... It seems right to me
... Thank you

JSL Your welcome, closing 1269

JS: That's all I have
... For UAIG stuff

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

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

Janina: We need to get this second last call out the door
... Want to make sure that there are no supprises

UAIG Testing

MC: I was on mute, i was talking alot
... RS wants to be present for 1.1 discussions

<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

MC: Let's move on to UAIG testing

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

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

JS: We have an example that does not work anymore
... Input type text in HTML 5 always has autocomplete is true

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

JS: I tested on ATK-SPI

MC: this is one of the test files that are shared
... We have our passes, we shoudl add it to the ARIA 1.1 issue list about the auto complete conflict with aria attribute

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

<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. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html#action01]

<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].

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

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

<jcraig> ACTION: jcraig to file HTML-AAPI bug related to mapping native @autocomplete to @aria-autocomplete in strict vs weak semantics tables. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html#action02]

<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].

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

JC: A 1.1 issues are you talking about UAIG?

MC: I am not sure, but probably starts in the 1.1 spec
... We may want to bring up witht he HTML working group

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

MC: make default that auto complete is by default false

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

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

Janina: Way to start
... We are part owners

MC: We need to sign off before publication

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

MC: I don't see it now

JS: OK
... That's why I did not find it

MC: We are removing the activate simulate click requirement, removing the tests
... We have less test cases

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

MC: We need someone who can test

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

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

JS: David said can he do this through e-mail or other channels
... has anyone heard from him?

Janina: Do it on the call?

JS: We did that last week
... CS thought her actions were done

Janina: Expected results would not get us there

JS: they should do it on a call
... Go through the wiki page and clarify what they mean and write the test case

MC: I thik we should try to make that happen tomorrow
... If we can get it done in one call, then we do not need to bug them

JS: How many for OS X?

MC: There is one specific for OS X
... Live region tests, with a table...

JC: What is the test case number?

MC: There is no test case yet

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

MC: There are requirements in a table for the behavior

JC: That is under 5.8.2

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

MC: the closest header is here
... A test case and file if it is needed

JC: I don't see the @@

MC: the second link

<MichaelC> tests 72 to 84

JC: If you should a DOM node, and change the CSS to display: block
... So it is not necessarily part of ARIA 1.0

MC: The tests are 72-84,

Janina: Does that take our list from 7 to 6

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

<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 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html#action03]

<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].

JS: Table talks about the accessibility sub tree

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

JS: So you have added a new action

MC: I think the question there, those tests are working, I think we can remove that, so i am doting that now
... One of the @@ is on....
... I am going to remove that @@

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

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

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

Janina: Another one we do not have to worry about

JC: Can someone read the requirement, i am outside

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

Janina: What is the verb for apple

JS: It is an implied must

Janina: We need some TLC from JC on that one

MC: the test case is written
... There will be a test case in a little while

JC: I can write it

MC: i will try finishing it, but if I have a problem I willsend t to you
... there are six @@ now

JC: I am going to have to leave soon

Janina: Get well

MC: 5.1.2 including elements in the accessibility tree
... reviewing spec requirements, looking at coverage from other specs and test suites

JS: there are only 6

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

<janina> rrsagent make minutes

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] 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 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: jcraig to file HTML-AAPI bug related to mapping native @autocomplete to @aria-autocomplete in strict vs weak semantics tables. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] 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. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html#action01]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013/10/21 15:40:54 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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/OS X FF, Chrome, Safari and Opera/OS X FF, Chrome, Safari, and Opera, and out of those, only Opera/
Found Scribe: jongund
Inferring ScribeNick: jongund
Default Present: Michael_Cooper, Janina_Sajka, Joseph_Scheuhammer, Jon_Gunderson, James_Craig
Present: Michael_Cooper Janina_Sajka Joseph_Scheuhammer Jon_Gunderson James_Craig
Regrets: Rich_Schwerdtfeger
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2013Oct/0015.html

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 21 Oct 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/10/21-pf-minutes.html
People with action items: jcraig

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]