17:29:18 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
17:29:18 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-irc
17:29:20 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs member
17:29:20 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #aria
17:29:22 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_PF
17:29:22 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_PFWG(ARIA)1:00PM scheduled to start in 31 minutes
17:29:23 <trackbot> Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
17:29:23 <trackbot> Date: 17 November 2014
17:29:39 <MichaelC> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2014Nov/0187.html
17:30:42 <MichaelC> agenda+ Meet 24 November 2014?
17:31:10 <MichaelC> agenda+ Timelines to Rec
17:32:08 <MichaelC> agenda+ ISSUE-681, adding entries for "Node" and "Text node" in the comment terms document
17:32:13 <MichaelC> agenda+ Check in on heartbeat / FPWD publication
17:32:29 <MichaelC> agenda+ Resolution on aria-current
17:32:43 <MichaelC> agenda+ Check in on getComputedRole
17:33:00 <MichaelC> agenda+ Action 1346 Propose edit to dialog role
17:33:40 <MichaelC> agenda+ inert and modal
17:33:56 <MichaelC> agendum 7 = dialog role
17:34:14 <MichaelC> agenda+ application role
17:34:21 <MichaelC> agenda+ secondary information
17:34:36 <MichaelC> agenda+ group, none, and generic roles
17:35:27 <MichaelC> agenda+ term role
17:35:33 <MichaelC> agenda+ definition of value
17:51:06 <Zakim> WAI_PFWG(ARIA)1:00PM has now started
17:51:13 <Zakim> +??P2
17:51:19 <janina> zakim, ??P2 is me
17:51:19 <Zakim> +janina; got it
17:56:45 <LJWatson> LJWatson has joined #aria
18:00:13 <Zakim> +??P3
18:00:49 <fesch> fesch has joined #aria
18:01:09 <Zakim> +Joanmarie_Diggs
18:01:14 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
18:01:15 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
18:01:23 <joanie> Zakim, I am Joanmarie_Diggs
18:01:23 <Zakim> ok, joanie, I now associate you with Joanmarie_Diggs
18:01:27 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria
18:01:38 <Zakim> + +1.703.978.aaaa
18:01:40 <Zakim> +James_Nurthen
18:01:50 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
18:01:57 <jamesn> zakim, who is on the call?
18:01:57 <Zakim> On the phone I see janina, Michael_Cooper, Joanmarie_Diggs, +1.703.978.aaaa, James_Nurthen, [IPcaller]
18:02:18 <jamesn> zakim, I am James_Nurthen
18:02:18 <Zakim> ok, jamesn, I now associate you with James_Nurthen
18:02:21 <LJWatson> zakim, [IPcaller] is LJWatson
18:02:21 <Zakim> +LJWatson; got it
18:02:29 <MichaelC> zakim, aaaa is Fred_Esch
18:02:29 <Zakim> +Fred_Esch; got it
18:03:07 <MichaelC> zakim, who is on the phone?
18:03:07 <Zakim> On the phone I see janina, Michael_Cooper, Joanmarie_Diggs, Fred_Esch, James_Nurthen, LJWatson
18:04:12 <LJWatson> Zakim: scribenick LJWatson
18:04:59 <Stefan> Stefan has joined #aria
18:05:12 <LJWatson> JS: Reminder that we should be talking about mappings documentation.
18:05:42 <Zakim> + +49.322.110.8.aabb
18:05:53 <MichaelC> zakim, aabb is Stefan_Schnabel
18:05:54 <Zakim> +Stefan_Schnabel; got it
18:06:00 <LJWatson> JS: Guides are usually associated with non-normative documents, whereas mappings are normative. We need to be careful to use the right terminology/shorthand.
18:06:30 <clown> clown has joined #aria
18:06:55 <MichaelC> s/zakim, who is on the phone?/topic: Normative naming of mappings specifications/
18:07:10 <Zakim> +[GVoice]
18:07:19 <clown> zakim, GVoice is Joseph_Scheuhammer
18:07:19 <Zakim> +Joseph_Scheuhammer; got it
18:07:28 <LJWatson> JD: Believe mappings in HTML AAM are incorrect.
18:07:34 <LJWatson> JS: File bugs.
18:07:43 <clown> zakim, I am Joseph_Scheuhammer
18:07:43 <Zakim> ok, clown, I now associate you with Joseph_Scheuhammer
18:07:51 <LJWatson> zakim, next item
18:07:51 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Meet 24 November 2014?" taken up [from MichaelC]
18:08:25 <LJWatson> MC: Should we meet?
18:09:01 <LJWatson> MC: Looks like three regrets. We should probably go ahead. Rich will be back too.
18:09:08 <LJWatson> zakim, close item 1
18:09:08 <Zakim> agendum 1, Meet 24 November 2014?, closed
18:09:09 <Zakim> I see 12 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:09:09 <Zakim> 2. Timelines to Rec [from MichaelC]
18:09:13 <LJWatson> zakim, next item
18:09:13 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Timelines to Rec" taken up [from MichaelC]
18:09:28 <Zakim> +Cynthia_Shelly
18:10:15 <LJWatson> MC: PF charter will be sent to AC reps soon. Need to be sure the timelines it references are accurate.
18:11:00 <LJWatson> MC: How long do we need to be in working draft for example?
18:11:29 <LJWatson> JS: Is testing included?
18:11:31 <mattking> mattking has joined #aria
18:11:35 <LJWatson> MC: Yes, we have to factor it in.
18:12:01 <Zakim> +Matt_King
18:12:04 <LJWatson> CS: Core is in decent shape, but HTML is out of dated. Perhaps less than a year for core.
18:12:14 <LJWatson> s/out of dated/out of date/
18:12:32 <LJWatson> JS: There are a couple of new things in the spec that will need to be dealt with.
18:14:15 <LJWatson> JS: We need a round of going through 1.1 issues and culling/postponing until 2.0
18:14:30 <LJWatson> MK: Won't time nautrally cull?
18:14:43 <LJWatson> MK: If deadlines are missed for spec text/testing to be done...
18:14:58 <LJWatson> MC: Depends on how seriously we take the deadlines.
18:15:09 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
18:15:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
18:16:52 <LJWatson> MC: We won't answer this now, but it's good to be thinking about it.
18:17:08 <LJWatson> zakim, next item
18:17:08 <Zakim> agendum 3. "ISSUE-681, adding entries for "Node" and "Text node" in the comment terms document" taken up [from MichaelC]
18:17:20 <clown> issue-681
18:17:20 <trackbot> issue-681 -- Consider adding definitions for "node" and "text node" to the common terms shared document. -- open
18:17:20 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/681
18:17:59 <Zakim> -James_Nurthen
18:18:02 <LJWatson> JS: It uses the terms "node" and "text node", turns out their not defined in the glossary. Raised an issue and proposed definitions.
18:18:08 <clown> Basic type of Object in the DOM tree or Accessibility Tree. DOM nodes are further specified as Element or Text nodes, among other types. The nodes of an Accessibility Tree are Accessible Objects.
18:18:19 <Zakim> +James_Nurthen
18:18:36 <clown> Type of DOM Node that represents the textual content of an Attribute or an Element. A Text node has no child nodes.
18:19:04 <LJWatson> JS: If no objections, I propose adding these definitions to the glossary.
18:19:42 <LJWatson> JD: Is it relevant that all platforms have different accessible nodes in terms of the hierarchy?
18:19:48 <LJWatson> JS: We don't know.
18:20:08 <LJWatson> CS: Don't think it matters for the definitions.
18:20:20 <LJWatson> JS: Both have trees and trees have nodes.
18:20:32 <LJWatson> JD: I'm good with that.
18:21:38 <LJWatson> RESOLUTION: TF agrees the definitions of node and text node, and their addition to the glossary.
18:21:55 <jcraig> jcraig has joined #aria
18:22:18 <clown> action:  Joseph to add the definitions of "node" and "text node" as given in issue-681 to the glossary (common terms doc).
18:22:18 <trackbot> Created ACTION-1534 - Add the definitions of "node" and "text node" as given in issue-681 to the glossary (common terms doc). [on Joseph Scheuhammer - due 2014-11-24].
18:22:22 <LJWatson> zakim, next item
18:22:22 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Check in on heartbeat / FPWD publication" taken up [from MichaelC]
18:22:30 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
18:22:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
18:22:39 <Zakim> +James_Craig
18:22:57 <LJWatson> MC: Last week we agreed to publish 1.1, acc name and core on 11th December.
18:23:07 <LJWatson> MC: Anything blocking?
18:23:26 <LJWatson> JS: Willdo what's needed to get it ready.
18:23:39 <LJWatson> MC: We need group approval, but we can do that the following week.
18:23:54 <LJWatson> JC: Last of 11 should be done.
18:24:24 <LJWatson> zakim, next item
18:24:24 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Resolution on aria-current" taken up [from MichaelC]
18:24:47 <MichaelC> -> https://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-aria-minutes#item04 aria-current discussion last week
18:25:03 <LJWatson> MK: I have an incomplete action, apologies. Will get it done.
18:25:26 <LJWatson> zakim, close item 5
18:25:26 <Zakim> agendum 5, Resolution on aria-current, closed
18:25:27 <Zakim> I see 8 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:25:27 <Zakim> 6. Check in on getComputedRole [from MichaelC]
18:25:33 <LJWatson> zakim, next item
18:25:34 <Zakim> agendum 6. "Check in on getComputedRole" taken up [from MichaelC]
18:25:59 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
18:25:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
18:26:27 <MichaelC> -> https://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-aria-minutes#item03 getcomputedrole discussion from last week
18:26:30 <LJWatson> JC: Filed an HTML bug.
18:27:22 <jcraig> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27294
18:27:22 <LJWatson> JC: Other issues?
18:28:00 <LJWatson> MC: Actions for Dominic, Cynthia and Joseph.
18:28:00 <MichaelC> close action-1464
18:28:00 <trackbot> Closed action-1464.
18:28:08 <LJWatson> JC: Can close Dominic's.
18:28:13 <LJWatson> MC: Will leave the others.
18:29:04 <jcraig> Cc'ed Dominic (M) on the HTML bug.
18:29:25 <LJWatson> JS: Returning to aria-current... in the core mapping there is a table for events. Is anything wanted by any AT for aria-current in terms of a state change event?
18:29:45 <LJWatson> JC: Depends on how the platforms want to impliment this.
18:29:55 <LJWatson> s/impliment/implement/
18:30:22 <Zakim> +Bryan_Garaventa
18:30:25 <LJWatson> MK: For 1.1 the issue might be that we should make it a "should" or a "may". Possible we'll get two implementations, but that would be surprising.
18:30:43 <LJWatson> JC: Yes, we should make it a "may" until then.
18:31:05 <LJWatson> MC: In principle we should test anything that is "should", "must" or may", but in practice there is flexibility.
18:31:45 <LJWatson> JD: Shouldn't we change it only if it can't be done?
18:32:10 <LJWatson> CS: Would rather be more agreesive.
18:32:16 <LJWatson> JC: Don't agree in a spec.
18:32:17 <bgaraventa1979> bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria
18:32:38 <LJWatson> JS: It's an AT question I think.
18:32:40 <bgaraventa1979> zakim, I am Bryan_Garaventa
18:32:40 <Zakim> ok, bgaraventa1979, I now associate you with Bryan_Garaventa
18:32:50 <LJWatson> JS: If they don't need an event, it's a moot point.
18:33:03 <LJWatson> JC: That's why we should wait to find out if that's the case before we make it nescessary.
18:34:00 <LJWatson> JS: If it does into the events mapping table the assumption is that it's a "must".
18:34:12 <LJWatson> CS: I'd put it in the table with an editorial note.
18:34:23 <LJWatson> JC: There's nothing to put in the table because there are no platform events for this yet.
18:34:44 <LJWatson> JS: ATK has the property change event.
18:34:49 <LJWatson> CS: UIA does too.
18:35:05 <LJWatson> JC: It's ok to put an aria-current specific event in there I think.
18:35:12 <LJWatson> CS: Right, plus a note.
18:36:21 <jcraig> s/It's ok to put an aria-current specific event in there I think./It's state a generic attr change event SHOULD be fired. It's NOT ok to require an aria-current specific event./
18:36:26 <clown> http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#mapping_events_state-change
18:36:58 <jcraig> s/It's state a generic attr change event SHOULD be fired/It's okay to state UAs SHOULD fire a generic attr change event/
18:37:02 <LJWatson> CS: The events table was intentionally limited in 1.0. There is a lot of stuff that could go in, that isn't.
18:37:07 <LJWatson> zakim, next item
18:37:07 <Zakim> agendum 7. "dialog role" taken up
18:37:14 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
18:37:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
18:37:42 <clown> action-1346
18:37:42 <trackbot> action-1346 -- Matthew King to Propose edit to dialog role to clarify issue that leads to bad implementation -- due 2014-10-06 -- OPEN
18:37:42 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1346
18:37:57 <mattking> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1346
18:42:10 <mattking> dialog (role)
18:42:12 <mattking> A dialog is a descendant window of the primary window of a web application. For HTML pages, the primary application window is the entire web document,
18:42:13 <mattking> i.e., the body element.
18:42:15 <mattking> Dialogs are most often used to prompt the user to enter or respond to information. A dialog that is designed to interrupt workflow is usually modal (see
18:42:16 <mattking> related alertdialog).
18:42:18 <mattking> Authors SHOULD provide a dialog label, which can be done with the aria-label or aria-labelledby attribute.
18:42:19 <mattking> Authors SHOULD ensure that each active dialog has a focusable descendant element with focus and that focus is trapped inside the dialog. If a dialog is
18:42:21 <mattking> modeless, authors SHOULD ensure there is a keyboard mechanism for moving focus between the modeless dialog and other windows within the web application
18:42:22 <mattking> that contains it.
18:42:24 <mattking> Note: In the description of this role, the term "web application" does not refer to the application role, which specifies specific assistive technology
18:42:25 <mattking> behaviors.
18:42:27 <mattking> --------------------------------------------------
18:42:28 <mattking> In addition, add the following note to the window role:
18:42:30 <mattking> Note: In the description of this role, the term "application" does not refer to the application role, which specifies specific assistive technology behaviors.
18:42:31 <mattking> --------------------------------------------------
18:44:03 <LJWatson> MC: Does this have dependencies on inert etc.?
18:44:30 <jcraig> what does modeless mean?
18:44:52 <LJWatson> MK: We have "modal", "non-modal" and "modeless".
18:44:59 <LJWatson> JC: What is "modeless"?
18:45:25 <LJWatson> JC: Would prefer we not use that term. "Modal" and "Non-modal" are well known.
18:45:40 <LJWatson> MK: Yes, it means "non-modal", so we should change it.
18:45:48 <LJWatson> JN: What about "not modal"?
18:46:04 <LJWatson> JC: Would say a dialoge is "not modal", but not that is a "not modal dialogue".
18:46:28 <LJWatson> JS: Wikipedia makes a distinction between modal and modeless.
18:46:33 <jcraig> s/but not that is a "not modal dialogue"./but not that is a "not modal dialogue". (should be "non-modal")/
18:46:39 <LJWatson> MC: Would argue that modeless is not the opposite of modal...
18:47:26 <LJWatson> JC: Have concern about the text.
18:47:26 <jcraig> authors should ensure "that focus is trapped inside the dialog."
18:48:25 <LJWatson> JC: It's tricky for browsers to implement.
18:48:58 <LJWatson> MK: There are browser keys if you want to get away from that bit of the application.
18:49:11 <LJWatson> JC: You're assuming users know all their browser hotkeys?
18:49:22 <LJWatson> MK: No, just basic keys.
18:49:51 <LJWatson> JC: Think non-modal dialogues should only impact the page, not the browser.
18:49:54 <LJWatson> CN: Agreed.
18:49:58 <LJWatson> +1
18:50:19 <LJWatson> MK: As a user I find it confusing if focus leaves a dialogue and strays into the browser.
18:50:55 <LJWatson> JN: We could write this in a way that doesn't encourage specific behaviour either way?
18:51:01 <LJWatson> JC: Think I'd be ok with that.
18:51:20 <LJWatson> JN: For a simple yes/no type dialogue it might be appropriate not to permit focus to return to the browser chrome.
18:51:29 <LJWatson> CN: Don't think it should be restricted at all.
18:51:53 <LJWatson> JN: You just remove one of the ways of returning to the browser, not all ways.
18:52:03 <LJWatson> MK: This is how it works in other scenarios.
18:52:13 <LJWatson> JC: Not always.
18:53:16 <bgaraventa1979> +q
18:53:49 <jcraig> q+ to propose change "that focus is trapped inside the dialog" to "SHOULD manages focus of the modal dialog."
18:54:07 <LJWatson> q+ to say it would be bad UX to prevent focus returning to the browser chrome.
18:54:51 <jcraig> ack Bry
18:55:20 <LJWatson> BG: Would an overlay be considered a non-modal dialogue?
18:55:33 <LJWatson> JC: If it was focusable, then potentially.
18:55:43 <LJWatson> BG: If it contained more complex content?
18:55:50 <LJWatson> MK: Could be done either way.
18:55:52 <jamesn> q+ to say that i think we actually might need an overlay role in aria 2.0
18:56:41 <LJWatson> JC: If we added the word modal it would be more clear about trapping focus.
18:57:07 <LJWatson> MK: Makes sense to trap focus on a non-modal also so you have a closed tab ring.
18:57:21 <LJWatson> JC: If it's not modal why would you trap focs?
18:57:37 <LJWatson> MK: The point of a dialogue is to allow the user to focus on that particular task.
18:58:03 <LJWatson> MK: Like the thesaurus sidebar in Word for example.
18:58:37 <LJWatson> JC: If you accidentally left it, you just shift tab to reverse direction.
18:59:02 <LJWatson> JC: So how do you get in/out of it without closing it?
18:59:12 <Zakim> -Cynthia_Shelly
18:59:12 <LJWatson> MK: In Word there is a hotkey.
18:59:30 <LJWatson> JN: That isn't supportable cross-platform though.
18:59:58 <LJWatson> MK: Could be a visible indicator.
19:00:08 <LJWatson> JC: You mean a button or something?
19:00:19 <LJWatson> MK: Yes, a "return to editor" or "close" button.
19:00:36 <LJWatson> GB: Sounds like it's getting too complicated.
19:00:51 <LJWatson> s/GB:/BG/
19:00:59 <LJWatson> JN: Agreed.
19:01:22 <LJWatson> MK: So how do we crate the equivalent of something like the Word sidebar?
19:01:29 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
19:01:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
19:02:03 <jcraig> q+ to mention this is too vague to be an authoring requirement: "authors SHOULD ensure there is a keyboard mechanism for moving focus between a non-modal dialog and other windows within the web application"
19:02:15 <LJWatson> LW: Do we need to recreate that experience?
19:02:32 <LJWatson> MK: I think we do.
19:03:09 <jamesn> +1 I think we need it too. I'm not sure I understand why role=dialog and aria-modal=false wouldn't achieve this
19:03:27 <LJWatson> JC: Screen readers have different mechanisms for navigating/moving focus.
19:03:46 <LJWatson> JC: It's about all keyboard users.
19:03:49 <LJWatson> MK: Yes.
19:04:27 <LJWatson> MK: But relying on shift tab to return to the top is hard work for keyboard users.
19:04:43 <jcraig> s/It's about all keyboard users./The concern is about mainstream keyboard users./
19:06:02 <jcraig> ack ja
19:06:02 <Zakim> jamesn, you wanted to say that i think we actually might need an overlay role in aria 2.0
19:06:12 <jcraig> ack jcr
19:06:12 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to propose change "that focus is trapped inside the dialog" to "SHOULD manages focus of the modal dialog." and to mention this is too vague to be an authoring
19:06:15 <Zakim> ... requirement: "authors SHOULD ensure there is a keyboard mechanism for moving focus between a non-modal dialog and other windows within the web application"
19:06:16 <LJWatson> ack me
19:06:17 <Zakim> LJWatson, you wanted to say it would be bad UX to prevent focus returning to the browser chrome.
19:08:01 <jcraig> propose change "that focus is trapped inside the dialog" to "SHOULD manages focus of the modal dialog."
19:08:01 <LJWatson> JC: requirement: "authors SHOULD ensure there is a keyboard mechanism for moving focus between a non-modal dialog and other windows within the web application"
19:08:18 <jcraig>  this is too vague to be an authoring requirement: "authors SHOULD ensure there is a keyboard mechanism for moving focus between a non-modal dialog and other windows within the web application"
19:08:47 <LJWatson> MK: Should manage?
19:08:54 <LJWatson> JC: It's an author requirement.
19:09:07 <LJWatson> MK: Within the modal dialogue?
19:09:37 <LJWatson> JC: Depending on what type of dialogue.
19:10:24 <LJWatson> JC: Can we propose something like focus panel for the UI?
19:11:14 <LJWatson> JC: Users have different expectations depending on platform... key press, voice command, gesture etc.
19:11:32 <LJWatson> MK: Window is meant to be literal?
19:11:54 <LJWatson> MK: Introducing the word panel would require a definition?
19:12:18 <LJWatson> JC: Not that we'd use window versus panel, just that we can't be specific.
19:13:03 <LJWatson> JC: There is a section on managing focus, doesn't require platform specifics. Could be a different key on different platforms.
19:13:16 <LJWatson> MK: So say "mechanism" instead of "keyboard mechanism"?
19:14:32 <LJWatson> MK: There's a point where it makes no sense to recommend a dialogue, it may as well be a section of the page with a designated purpose.
19:14:50 <LJWatson> JC: But in a dialogue the AT can announce the change in context, entering and exiting.
19:14:57 <LJWatson> MK: That's what ATs do with regions.
19:15:53 <jcraig> If it's a non-modal dialog, less distinction is needed between this and region.
19:15:57 <LJWatson> MK: Do we need the non-modal attribute then?
19:16:20 <LJWatson> JC: With speech you could say "move to next dialogue".
19:16:26 <LJWatson> MK: Can do that with region.
19:16:38 <LJWatson> JC: A dialogue is visually distinct.
19:16:43 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
19:16:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
19:17:12 <LJWatson> JC: Tool panels are like non-modal dialogues.
19:17:33 <LJWatson> MK: Still wondering what the advantage of being so subtle in the spec is?
19:17:47 <LJWatson> JC: The language right now is too restrictive.
19:18:28 <LJWatson> MK: Still don't understand the difference in AT behaviour for a non-modal.
19:18:31 <LJWatson> JC: Semantics.
19:18:39 <jcraig> s/restrictive/restrictive—prescriptive, rather./
19:19:20 <LJWatson> MK: We say the web application manages focus right?
19:19:58 <LJWatson> JC: Maybe action should be take the draft and massage it, then see if you're ok with the changes?
19:20:34 <LJWatson> JC: James N seems to see both sides of the coin, and has good knowledge of varieties of dialogues...
19:20:45 <LJWatson> JN: Yes, I can take a look at it. Give me two weeks.
19:20:45 <mattking> Authors SHOULD ensure that each active dialog has a focusable descendant element with focus and that the web application manages focus of the dialog.
19:20:47 <mattking> is trapped inside the dialog.
19:21:39 <mattking> Authors SHOULD ensure that an active dialog has a focusable descendant element with focus and that the web application manages focus of the dialog.
19:23:40 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
19:23:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
19:23:45 <jcraig> Authors SHOULD ensure that dialogs have at least one focusable descendant element. Authors SHOULD focus an element in the modal dialog when is is displayed, and authors SHOULD manage focus of modal dialogs.
19:25:15 <jcraig> Authors SHOULD ensure that modal and non-modal dialogs have at least one focusable descendant element. Authors SHOULD focus an element in the modal dialog when is is displayed, and authors SHOULD manage focus of modal dialogs.
19:25:58 <mattking> dialog (role)
19:25:59 <mattking> A dialog is a descendant window of the primary window of a web application. For HTML pages, the primary application window is the entire web document, i.e., the body element.
19:26:01 <mattking> Dialogs are most often used to prompt the user to enter or respond to information. A dialog that is designed to interrupt workflow is usually modal (see related alertdialog).
19:26:02 <mattking> Authors SHOULD provide a dialog label, which can be done with the aria-label or aria-labelledby attribute.
19:26:04 <mattking> Authors SHOULD ensure that all dialogs (both modal and non-modal) have at least one focusable descendant element. Authors SHOULD focus an element in the modal dialog when is is displayed, and authors SHOULD manage focus of modal dialogs.
19:26:06 <mattking> Note: In the description of this role, the term "web application" does not refer to the application role, which specifies specific assistive technology behaviors.
19:28:04 <LJWatson> MK: Goal was to get rid of the idea that a dialogue had to be treated differently to the application role.
19:28:33 <LJWatson> JC: Can you clarify?
19:29:04 <LJWatson> MK: Some screen readers were taking the "application" bit literally.
19:29:23 <LJWatson> JC: Might be enough to reference the aria-modal attribute.
19:29:41 <LJWatson> MK: We should link the word "modal" to the attribute then?
19:29:58 <LJWatson> MK: That's an editor thing right?
19:29:58 <jcraig> action-1346
19:29:58 <trackbot> action-1346 -- Matthew King to Propose edit to dialog role to clarify issue that leads to bad implementation -- due 2014-10-06 -- OPEN
19:29:58 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1346
19:30:03 <LJWatson> JC: Yes.
19:30:39 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
19:30:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
19:31:20 <LJWatson> rrsagent, set logs world-visible
19:31:27 <Zakim> -James_Nurthen
19:31:28 <Zakim> -Michael_Cooper
19:31:28 <Zakim> -Bryan_Garaventa
19:31:29 <Zakim> -Matt_King
19:31:29 <Zakim> -James_Craig
19:31:31 <Zakim> -Joanmarie_Diggs
19:31:31 <Zakim> -Joseph_Scheuhammer
19:31:32 <Zakim> -janina
19:31:34 <Zakim> -Fred_Esch
19:31:51 <Zakim> -LJWatson
19:32:08 <LJWatson> Chair: Michael Cooper
19:32:14 <janina> janina has changed the topic to: ARIA Teleconference; Monday 24 November at 18:00Z for 90 minutes; Zakim 92473#
19:32:37 <Zakim> -Stefan_Schnabel
19:32:38 <Zakim> WAI_PFWG(ARIA)1:00PM has ended
19:32:38 <Zakim> Attendees were janina, Michael_Cooper, Joanmarie_Diggs, +1.703.978.aaaa, James_Nurthen, LJWatson, Fred_Esch, +49.322.110.8.aabb, Stefan_Schnabel, Joseph_Scheuhammer,
19:32:38 <Zakim> ... Cynthia_Shelly, Matt_King, James_Craig, Bryan_Garaventa
19:33:42 <LJWatson> Present: Michael Cooper, Janina Sajka, Léonie Watson, James Craig, James Nurthen, Joseph Scheuhammer, Joanmarie Diggs, Bryan Garaventa, Fred Esch, Matt King, Cynthia Shelley
19:33:49 <LJWatson> rrsagent, make minutes
19:33:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-minutes.html LJWatson
19:34:41 <LJWatson> zakim, please part
19:34:41 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
19:34:47 <LJWatson> rrsagent, please part
19:34:47 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-actions.rdf :
19:34:47 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Joseph to add the definitions of "node" and "text node" as given in issue-681 to the glossary (common terms doc). [1]
19:34:47 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/11/17-aria-irc#T18-22-18