17:02:33 RRSAgent has joined #aria-apg 17:02:33 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/05/04-aria-apg-irc 17:02:35 RRSAgent, make logs member 17:02:37 Zakim, this will be WAI_PF 17:02:37 ok, trackbot, I see WAI_PFWG(ARIA)1:00PM already started 17:02:38 Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference 17:02:38 Date: 04 May 2015 17:02:43 rrsagent, make log world 17:03:04 s/Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference/Meeting: ARIA APG TF 17:03:11 zakim, who is on the call? 17:03:11 On the phone I see James_Nurthen, Ann_Abbott 17:04:09 +Matt_King 17:05:45 jongund has joined #aria-apg 17:06:09 mattking has joined #aria-apg 17:06:41 +Jon_Gunderson 17:08:34 zakim, code? 17:08:34 the conference code is 92473 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), janina 17:08:52 +??P8 17:09:17 zakim, ??P8 is me 17:09:17 +janina; got it 17:09:29 zakim, who is on the call? 17:09:29 On the phone I see James_Nurthen, Ann_Abbott, Matt_King, Jon_Gunderson, janina 17:14:18 +Bryan_Garaventa 17:15:38 Agenda+ Status and review of current master branch https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/practices/aria-practices.html 17:15:38 Agenda+ John's example development questions 17:15:38 Agenda+ Discuss readiness for review 17:15:40 bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria-apg 17:15:46 agenda? 17:15:58 zakim, close item 1 17:15:58 agendum 1, Status and review of current draft https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/practices/aria-practices.html, closed 17:16:01 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 17:16:01 4. Wording of editor notes [from jamesn] 17:16:09 zakim, I am Bryan_Garaventa 17:16:09 ok, bgaraventa1979, I now associate you with Bryan_Garaventa 17:16:17 zakim, clear agenda 17:16:17 agenda cleared 17:16:21 Agenda+ Status and review of current master branch https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/practices/aria-practices.html 17:16:21 Agenda+ John's example development questions 17:16:21 Agenda+ Discuss readiness for review 17:36:34 Reviewed Button design pattern - changes made based on group input. 17:49:21 jongund has joined #aria-apg 17:50:15 -janina 17:51:14 JN: We put in discussion points in check ins 17:51:24 JN: If the button indicates .... 17:51:40 AA: If the button action indicates a context change 17:51:48 JN: I am happy with it later 17:52:13 AA: After 3rd bullet, indicates a context change 17:52:46 MK: If the button action indicates a change of context, e.g. a wizard 17:53:09 JN: Add another search criteria, maybe appropriate to move focus to another place 17:53:30 MK: For the starting point of the "action" 17:54:01 JN: ... reads the proposal ... 17:54:07 AA and MK: WOW 17:54:28 AA: We know have 5 bullets 17:54:37 JN: Any objections? 17:54:41 none .... 17:55:16 MK: As far as button goes, the next one is checkbox, section 2.7 17:55:45 MK: I am happy with dual state and tri-state descriptions 17:56:09 MK: Bikir though he saw some edits.. 17:56:15 JN: I will take care of it 17:57:34 JN: Why is checkbox not a word 17:58:25 JN: Checkbox is one word in Wikipedia 18:00:58 AA: Dual-state and tri-state are hyphenated words 18:01:17 JN: Fixed spelling error on checkbox 18:01:24 JN: Anything else? 18:02:37 MK: I did some substaintial updates to links 18:03:05 AA: For checkboxes we have several things referring to a visible label for a group 18:03:15 AA: Are there cases for no visible label 18:03:43 MK: If there is no visible label that usually no grouping label 18:04:08 JN: Sometimes there is a implied grouping label 18:04:30 MK: Checkbox grouping labels seem to be over used 18:04:53 BG: What about buying paints.... 18:05:23 BG: Depends on how it is arranged, it is not always the case, it sometimes it does add value 18:05:49 MK: In my experience it is over done, grouping of checkboxes is not handled well by AT 18:06:19 JN: WCAG 2.0 requires grouping if it is visible grouping, like a border, even without a border 18:06:36 MK: That is enough for the AT users 18:06:57 JN: If there is a border then it must be conveyed 18:07:23 MK: It can just be styling, when it does it clutters the screen reader 18:08:07 JN: I am not saying you add a label, you can just have a grouping role without a label 18:08:26 JN: It ismore than just visual styling, they are grouped together 18:09:03 BG: A lot of people use CSS to convey grouping, you can make somethings look related but they really not 18:09:30 BG: Grouping can be used to differentiate between grouping and non-grouping 18:09:48 MK: Most real groups need to have a label 18:10:16 BG: The role group does have to be used (e.g. MK OL and UL) 18:10:39 MK: Integrating mobile ...., we could just delete grouping references 18:10:51 JN: I am fine with what it says now 18:11:02 AA: I wanted to know if the group needs a label 18:11:51 JN: 1.3.1 is a catch all for that 18:11:56 MK: Let's move on 18:12:15 MK: The defect helped me to address a number of issues 18:12:24 AA: We are in link now? 18:12:27 MK: Right 18:13:16 MK: The changes were editorial 18:13:32 JN: Space doesn't execute a link 18:13:38 MK: I thought it did 18:13:55 MK: Browsers don't support space, screen reader do 18:14:00 JN: I will change that 18:14:36 MK: The second bullet in the ARIA states and roles, that I was thinking of adding to other roles 18:15:53 JN: I am concerned about tabindex > 0 18:16:18 MK: I agree can we say that here? 18:16:25 JN: Doesn't this apply to all of these widgets? 18:16:56 MK: Some we do and some we don't, should we include this bullet or variation ... 18:17:18 JN: I disagree, I want these to be short and sweet 18:17:48 MK: They would vary based on the widgets and widget between widget, getting people to the right place in the document is important 18:18:18 BG: A particular widget needs focus needs ... 18:18:34 JN: I see that all the time, this is general stuff, it is the same on them all 18:18:59 MK: It is not the same, for example ina dialog box you need to put it on something in the dialog box 18:19:13 JN: It depends on how you are doing it 18:20:00 BG: I see this alot, for example radio buttons, and the focus is one a span inside, we need to make it perfectly clear it has to be on the element with the widget role 18:20:29 JN: Repeating it will get in aurhos way 18:20:46 MK: I think the pattern refer .... 18:21:12 JN: I think we should log an issue, I am concerned about consistency 18:21:24 MK: Delete here? 18:21:27 JN: Yes 18:22:35 AA: We are 9 minutes to the end, do we have some house keeping? 18:22:55 MK: I have it hear so you can just delet it and I will copy before I do a pull 18:23:02 JN: Was the note new? 18:23:26 JN: It is not a link unless you have the HREF 18:23:54 JN: The Shoft+F10, why is it repeated here? 18:24:03 MK: I think we need it here 18:24:15 AA: I made it down to listbox 18:24:34 AA: The fifth bulet..., show have a visible label 18:24:49 AA: People are going to jump all over that 18:24:56 JN: I will delete that 18:25:09 AA: That one stuck out 18:25:30 MK: I didn't finish the selection part, I hope it is done enough 18:25:41 MK: It was really confusing.... 18:26:03 MK: It should have been a control+/...., hwy didn't it come through 18:26:25 JN: Where did the entity numbers come from, where they in there before? 18:26:29 MK: no 18:27:06 MK: we do not want to use checked in list, so this ... 18:27:21 MK: These are just normal listbox keys 18:27:29 AA: I have not heard of them (JN me too) 18:28:10 MK: I am having trouble iwtht he tags in here, so there might be some tag problems 18:28:35 JN: my editor is not throwing any problems, it looks right 18:29:13 JN: I will look at these to get them right if you can look ... 18:29:28 MK: we need to name our branch .... 18:29:50 JN: Can we just use "wd"? 18:29:59 MK: I am good with that 18:30:05 JN: We need to include the date 18:30:18 MK: No punctuation? 18:30:22 JN: Good with me 18:30:38 MK: Should I include the actual URL? 18:30:52 JN: I think you forgot the number sign 18:30:55 MK: Opps 18:31:16 -Jon_Gunderson 18:34:15 Proposed RESOLUTION: The APG TF submits the following branch as working draft ready for working review. https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/wd20150504/practices/aria-practices.html 18:35:19 I dunno what you expected, but it ain't here. 18:40:07 Proposed RESOLUTION: The APG TF submits the following branch as working draft ready for PF working group review. https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/wd20150504/practices/aria-practices.html 18:41:12 RESOLUTION: The APG TF submits the following branch as working draft ready for PF working group review. https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/wd20150504/practices/aria-practices.html 18:41:42 rrsagent, make minutes 18:41:42 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/04-aria-apg-minutes.html jamesn 18:41:59 rrsagent, make minutes 18:41:59 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/04-aria-apg-minutes.html mattking 18:42:15 zakim, list attendees 18:42:15 As of this point the attendees have been James_Nurthen, Ann_Abbott, Matt_King, Jon_Gunderson, janina, Bryan_Garaventa 18:42:17 rrsagent, make minutes 18:42:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/04-aria-apg-minutes.html jamesn 18:42:38 -James_Nurthen 18:42:40 -Bryan_Garaventa 18:42:42 -Ann_Abbott 18:43:06 zakim, bye 18:43:06 leaving. As of this point the attendees were James_Nurthen, Ann_Abbott, Matt_King, Jon_Gunderson, janina, Bryan_Garaventa 18:43:06 Zakim has left #aria-apg 18:43:22 rrsagent, make minutes 18:43:22 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/04-aria-apg-minutes.html mattking 19:18:16 jongund has joined #aria-apg