16:29:51 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:29:51 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/06/18-aria-irc
16:29:53 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:29:53 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #aria
16:29:55 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_PF
16:29:55 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_PFWG()12:30PM scheduled to start in 1 minute
16:29:56 <trackbot> Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
16:29:56 <trackbot> Date: 18 June 2015
16:30:12 <LJWatson> LJWatson has joined #aria
16:30:21 <MichaelC> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Jun/0073.html
16:30:24 <MichaelC> regrets: Cynthia
16:30:27 <MichaelC> chair: Rich
16:30:28 <LJWatson> present+ LJWatson
16:31:01 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
16:33:42 <janina_> present+ Janina
16:35:12 <richardschwerdtfeger> present+ Rich
16:35:18 <richardschwerdtfeger> chair: Rich
16:35:19 <fesch> present+ Fred
16:35:33 <JF> JF has joined #aria
16:35:33 <richardschwerdtfeger> Meeting: W3C WAI-PF ARIA Caucus
16:35:51 <janina_> I will need to leave about 15 minutes early
16:36:43 <fesch> scribe: fesch
16:36:54 <clown> clown has joined #aria
16:37:01 <fesch> Topic: describedat
16:37:46 <clown> present+ Joseph_Scheuhammer
16:37:50 <fesch> rs: need to hear from several publishers by August, otherwise we will remove describedat
16:38:19 <fesch> rs: dpub is looking at alternatives, and have longdesc, may not be an issue
16:39:27 <fesch> rs: it is mid year, lets get stuff knocked out... if we don't get stuff finalized in ARIA 1.1 may be moved to ARIA 2.0
16:39:33 <JF> Just want to note there is discussion about aria-describedat as an HTML5 bug: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18385
16:40:14 <fesch> rs: already done a great job, on getting misconnects with HTML in ARIA 1.1, group has done a heck of a good job
16:40:49 <fesch> Topic: Actions and Issues
16:40:54 <clown> issue-691?
16:40:54 <trackbot> issue-691 -- Proposal to extend the support of aria-orientation -- open
16:40:54 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/691
16:41:10 <richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/691
16:41:40 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria
16:42:02 <fesch> rs: Bryan gave a list of roles he would like, all roles are there, action should be complete
16:42:05 <jamesn> rrsagent, make minutes
16:42:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/18-aria-minutes.html jamesn
16:42:23 <fesch> RESOLUTION: Close issue 691 as complete
16:42:59 <MichaelC> close issue-691
16:42:59 <trackbot> Closed issue-691.
16:43:15 <clown> http://w3c.github.io/aria/aria/aria.html#aria-orientation
16:43:17 <clown> ?
16:43:20 <fesch> jn: which version of the spec are you looking at?
16:43:31 <fesch> rs: looking at rawgit version.
16:43:43 <fesch> issue-683?
16:43:43 <trackbot> issue-683 -- The aria-level attribute is not required for role=heading within the spec, but should be. -- open
16:43:43 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/683
16:43:50 <fesch> issue-698
16:43:50 <trackbot> issue-698 -- Elements with "None" Instrinsic Host Language Semantics with ARIA relationship and/or tabidex applied -- open
16:43:50 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/698
16:44:26 <fesch> rs: how can you have a heading without a level?  We can make this a required attribute.
16:44:54 <fesch> lw: if you have a heading without a level something bizarre happens - not good
16:45:05 <fesch> jn: it might be a valid thing, right?
16:45:10 <fesch> jf: not
16:45:53 <JF> Q+ to ask if adding a level should be a SHOULD or MUST?
16:46:03 <fesch> issue 698 closed as a duplicate of 683.
16:46:20 <bgaraventa1979> bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria
16:46:29 <fesch> jf: does that map to a MUST?
16:46:33 <fesch> rs: yes
16:46:40 <JF> ack JF
16:46:40 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask if adding a level should be a SHOULD or MUST?
16:46:41 <bgaraventa1979> present+ Bryan_Garaventa
16:46:48 <richardschwerdtfeger> Action: Joanie make aria-level a required attribute for role=“heading”
16:46:48 <trackbot> Created ACTION-1657 - Make aria-level a required attribute for role=“heading” [on Joanmarie Diggs - due 2015-06-25].
16:46:49 <JF> present+ JF
16:47:05 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
16:47:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/18-aria-minutes.html MichaelC
16:47:14 <clown> action-1657
16:47:14 <trackbot> action-1657 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Make aria-level a required attribute for role=“heading” -- due 2015-06-25 -- OPEN
16:47:14 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1657
16:47:27 <jamesn> present+ James_Nurthen
16:48:09 <fesch> js: what happens when it doesn't have a level? right now it defaults to 1
16:48:36 <MichaelC> present+ MichaelC, JF, James_Nurthen
16:48:39 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
16:48:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/18-aria-minutes.html MichaelC
16:48:51 <fesch> jf: even if you don't know what the level is, knowing it is a heading is still useful, even though incomplete
16:49:22 <fesch> jn: you will make existing things - non conforming,
16:49:41 <fesch> jn: it could be you don't know the level and it could be really hard....
16:49:49 <fesch> rs: what do you do?
16:50:31 <fesch> jn:  we take a best guess, better to mark as a heading and get the level wrong than not marking as a heading at all
16:50:42 <JF> +1 to the idea that knowing it is a heading is important, whether or not the level is declared
16:51:01 <fesch> lw: can't find the bug, but testing a heading without a level defaulted to level 2.
16:51:17 <fesch> bg: what I hear is heading, (without a level)
16:51:44 <fesch> bg: the problem is it ruins the document structure - if you are trying to build out a tree, it is broken
16:52:05 <fesch> rs: we should require the level, even if it is out of sync...
16:52:23 <fesch> jn: if there is only one heading on a page, then does it matter?
16:52:41 <fesch> lw: but if it is a level 3 it may not make any sense
16:53:10 <fesch> jf: true, but if you know it is a heading, you know you have a heading rather than nothing
16:53:53 <fesch> lw: in FireFox no level appears to default to level 2.  And you hear heading with no level information
16:54:20 <fesch> rs: in HTML can you have a heading without a level?  Lets be consistent with HTML
16:54:58 <fesch> jn: There may be a reason why they aren't putting level information...
16:55:25 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
16:55:37 <fesch> jn: I think requiring a level in HTML is stupid... And that was why they were trying to calculate it for you
16:56:03 <MichaelC> present+ Jon_Gunderson
16:56:11 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
16:56:34 <JF> Q+
16:56:38 <fesch> jn: I have people come to me and ask, I don't know what the level is... I don't think we should force people to put in the wrong information rather than no information
16:57:35 <fesch> rs: I think you are better off putting them in regional landmarks, rather than try to bring in heading levels when pulling in parts from external parts
16:58:08 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
16:58:28 <fesch> jf: Rich, you made the argument for not trying to keep the level, it makes more sense to provide the level if you know it, but not if you don't
16:58:34 <richardschwerdtfeger> q+
16:58:43 <JF> ack JF
16:59:19 <fesch> bg: if the argument is don't put a level if it is wrong, then you will get a (default) which will be wrong anyway
17:00:17 <fesch> rs: the person that wrote the app- you pull in needs to keep a consistent heading levels,  I don't think it makes sense to try and keep the whole page in sync...
17:01:06 <fesch> jf:  ... more arguments for not wanting to require a level...
17:01:19 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
17:01:41 <fesch> jf: a missing level is not wrong, it is incomplete
17:02:24 <fesch> rs: so you can put heading without a level, on every heading... and that would be OK
17:03:19 <fesch> jf: If you can provide the level, you should, but there are times when you can't or you would provide wrong information - about how important it is - SHOULD vs MUST
17:03:22 <jamesn> q+
17:03:57 <newtron> newtron has joined #aria
17:04:17 <fesch> rs: If we don't mandate a level, a tool won't flag it.  Then when we sell to a government agency then they will be unhappy
17:04:49 <fesch> lw: the two screen reader users think a level is important
17:05:06 <fesch> bg: A screen reader will add a level to create the tree
17:05:19 <fesch> jn: then it is a bug in the screen reader
17:05:37 <JF> Q+ to ask about the perennial question - can a web page have more than one H1?
17:05:58 <fesch> jn: is there a big problem where if we don't require it, they won't do it?  Do we see headings without levels in the wild?
17:07:03 <fesch> jn: uncomfortable to tell to put in a heading with a unknown level, it is more important to have the heading...
17:08:10 <fesch> jn: I tell developers - take you best guess at level...  so if it is not required, then they can use a heading...
17:08:47 <fesch> js: when you imbed it in something else, then within the widget itself, it needs to be consistent...
17:09:07 <fesch> js: then the user agent should transform it to be consistent in the tree
17:09:22 <fesch> jf: how many H1 can you have on a page?
17:10:02 <fesch> jf:  If you have a component,  someone suggested they should start at H2, maybe they should start at H3... we don't know
17:10:23 <fesch> lw: better than making them not try at all
17:10:53 <fesch> jf: I'm with James, better to be accurate and incomplete, than provide wrong information...
17:12:04 <fesch> rs: user agent takes content and tries to expose it, that's it.... concerned that it is consistent within the section....
17:12:14 <fesch> jf: what about the 3rd party
17:12:32 <fesch> rs: the 3rd party is responsible for that
17:13:01 <fesch> jn: I think you are forcing the developer to provide bad information, will defer to group
17:13:17 <fesch> rs: we can vote....
17:13:26 <janina_> +1
17:13:28 <jongund> 1+
17:13:32 <jamesn> -1
17:13:35 <JF> -1
17:13:37 <newtron> newtron has joined #aria
17:13:38 <richardschwerdtfeger> +1
17:13:42 <LJWatson> +1
17:14:33 <richardschwerdtfeger> Who wants to have aria-level required property for role=“heading”
17:14:34 <bgaraventa1979> +1 for consistency
17:14:37 <richardschwerdtfeger> +1
17:14:39 <janina_> +1
17:14:41 <LJWatson> +1
17:14:46 <JF> -1
17:14:50 <jamesn> -1
17:14:59 <jongund> +1
17:15:12 <richardschwerdtfeger> Who Wants aria-level to not be required for role=“heading”?
17:15:31 <janina_> -1
17:15:51 <LJWatson> -1
17:16:23 <newtron_> newtron_ has joined #aria
17:16:27 <richardschwerdtfeger> -1
17:16:30 <fesch> jf: I think the topic needs more discussion, then later use a survey
17:17:00 <fesch> mc: I think we are not ready for decision making
17:17:29 <asurkov> asurkov has joined #aria
17:17:43 <fesch> rs: you get a SHOULD by having a supported property..
17:17:54 <fesch> jf & jn: NO
17:18:37 <fesch> jn:  We should have SHOULD not REQUIRED...
17:18:56 <fesch> s/REQUIRED/MUST/
17:20:36 <JF> Related: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-structural.html#sec_8.5.
17:20:39 <fesch> rs: made a topic, sending email for feedback on list...
17:20:57 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
17:20:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/18-aria-minutes.html MichaelC
17:21:01 <richardschwerdtfeger> RRSAgent, make log public
17:22:43 <fesch> jf: this goes back to HTML 2... with an H element...
17:23:41 <JF> s/this goes back to HTML 2/ this goes back to XHTML2/
17:24:29 <fesch> rs: I think this should be computed, but you can't...
17:24:43 <fesch> js: lets take a poll
17:26:50 <fesch> issue-702
17:26:50 <trackbot> issue-702 -- The ARIA Roles Model spec states that keyboard support for interactive widgets is optional, not required, which it should be. -- open
17:26:50 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/702
17:26:59 <fesch> Topic issue 702
17:27:06 <richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/702
17:28:38 <jamesn> q+
17:28:48 <richardschwerdtfeger> http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#managingfocus
17:28:58 <fesch> rs: do we want to change this or not?
17:29:21 <fesch> jn: If I am doing a different version for iOS then I should not have to support a keyboard
17:29:40 <fesch> rs: so you are providing alternate support
17:30:04 <fesch> jn: if no one is going to use it, why should we have to do it?
17:30:46 <fesch> rs: we require it, because some people use keyboards, and you are seeing more support for keyboards
17:31:31 <fesch> rs: maybe we deal with this in ARIA 2.0, when you have gaps, then we have to provide alternate mechanism,
17:31:44 <fesch> rs: we can move this to ARIA 2.0 issue
17:31:58 <fesch> RESOLUTION: move to ARIA 2.0 issue
17:32:26 <fesch> rs: waiting for mobile infrastructure
17:32:44 <JF> agenda?
17:33:17 <clown> agenda:  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Jun/0073.html
17:33:29 <clown> issue-697
17:33:29 <trackbot> issue-697 -- Remove "frameset" reference from the definition of Root WAI-ARIA node -- open
17:33:29 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/697
17:33:31 <fesch> issue-697
17:33:31 <trackbot> issue-697 -- Remove "frameset" reference from the definition of Root WAI-ARIA node -- open
17:33:31 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/697
17:33:44 <fesch> Topic issue 697
17:34:10 <fesch> rs: I think frameset should be removed the glossary
17:34:17 <clown> http://w3c.github.io/aria/aria/aria.html#dfn-role
17:35:54 <fesch> rs: have you put roles on a frame set <frame> <iframe>?
17:36:01 <fesch> jn: no
17:36:14 <fesch> rs: we only have one app that use frameset
17:36:58 <fesch> jn: it is fine to drop it, since it is valid on a frameset so we are not confusing anyone...
17:37:13 <fesch> rs: this is in the glossary, so it is not normative
17:37:36 <fesch> jn: I don't have a problem changing it, since it will remove confusion
17:37:51 <JF> http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/obsolete.html
17:38:06 <fesch> rs: I think we can take it out of it
17:39:29 <fesch> RESOLUTION: give Joseph an action to remove.
17:40:20 <fesch> s/<frame> <iframe>/<frameset?/
17:40:29 <richardschwerdtfeger> Action: Joseph remove the reference to “or <frameset>” from the role definition in the glossary.
17:40:29 <trackbot> Created ACTION-1658 - Remove the reference to “or <frameset>” from the role definition in the glossary. [on Joseph Scheuhammer - due 2015-06-25].
17:41:12 <fesch> js: contemplates the state definition...
17:43:53 <fesch> issue-651
17:43:53 <trackbot> issue-651 -- Allow aria-invalid to specify more types of errors including custom errors -- raised
17:43:53 <trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/651
17:44:20 <clown> http://w3c.github.io/aria/aria/aria.html#aria-invalid
17:44:35 <richardschwerdtfeger> http://w3c.github.io/aria/aria/aria.html#aria-invalid
17:45:27 <fesch> jn: I want to be able to have a message read out by a screen reader immediately
17:46:04 <fesch> rs: I wonder how to do this effectively....
17:46:22 <fesch> rs: could point to it with describedby
17:47:10 <fesch> jn: we use describedby for lots of things, then if this error has a condition x, then the describedby could provide...
17:47:23 <fesch> rs: aren't these things often popups?
17:47:28 <fesch> jn: yes
17:47:43 <fesch> rs: do you tie them to role=alert
17:47:50 <fesch> rs: that may be a problem
17:48:05 <fesch> jn: some popups may have a role of alert, but that shouldn't matter
17:48:46 <fesch> jn: I want the AT to know that this is an error message associated with this field...
17:49:13 <fesch> rs: if you put a role of alert and you can't use descirbedby
17:49:49 <fesch> jn: you could put multiple things in describedby and you need to tell AT which is information and which is the error message
17:49:58 <fesch> rs: you could
17:50:23 <fesch> jn: shouldn't be required...
17:51:16 <fesch> rs: you can have one descirbedby with multiple ids, then they get concatenated together, then if one was an error message... then ...
17:52:08 <fesch> js: sounds like we need another relation... error message for.... something like that, the mac makes a string
17:52:36 <fesch> js: UIA has a describedby property...
17:53:15 <fesch> rs: I don't know how much work it is for apple to add an error relationship, wouldn't be that bad, have to separate help and error...
17:54:23 <fesch> rs: describedby is usually used for help information, if there was an error, we put role=error on the target...
17:55:14 <fesch> rs: you could put a role=error on the target,  problem is you often put an error inside an alert...
17:55:29 <fesch> jn: not sure I like using a role on that...
17:55:57 <fesch> jn: need people that know accessibility API to explain how that would be exposed
17:56:25 <fesch> rs: I can try to put something out on the list about error messages
17:57:26 <fesch> rs: do we want to overload the description
17:57:42 <fesch> jn: that is the problem, do we have anything else?
17:58:10 <fesch> js: do we have an error or error msg in the accessibility APIs?  They may exist...
17:59:33 <fesch> jn: can you have a property?
17:59:53 <fesch> js: try something like this'''
17:59:57 <clown> <input aria-describedby="tooltip ID" aria-errormessage="errorID">
18:00:27 <fesch> rs: yes, that is what we were talking about before
18:01:29 <fesch> js: that tooltip id will point to some text... it will also contain a describedby... but you can still build the string and stick it in the object
18:01:54 <asurkov> asurkov has joined #aria
18:02:05 <fesch> js: so it is ARIA 2?
18:02:42 <fesch> rrsagent, make minutes
18:02:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/06/18-aria-minutes.html fesch
18:05:07 <clown> clown has left #aria
18:05:23 <clown> clown has joined #aria
19:53:30 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
19:59:21 <jnurthen> jnurthen has joined #aria
20:44:48 <clown> clown has joined #aria