See also: IRC log
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jan/0035.html
<MichaelC> if we learn otherwise, we´ll have to stop that practice too
<jamesn> scribe: jamesn
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jan/0035.html
RS: we reached consensus on feed role at TPAC
about a month later someone came in and said they had issues with it
how do we make sure people are aware of resolutions so they can weigh in on them
feed wasn't that big of an issue but I think we need a process
is the resolution process enough
should we take resolutions and put them up for a call for consensus
can't give a month as that is a long time
MC was looking at how we can extract resolutions from minutes
MC: requested enhancements to
tracker for this
... but probably in a bucket which won't get anything done for
a while
would need to look at other ways
maybe will get a tracker feature some day
JF: if we pass a resolution on a call suspect it is in the minutes.... if there are resolutions in a call, perhaps the scribe who sends out the minutes that there are resolutions in the minutes
RS: sounds like an option
MC: APA discussions were that the chair needed to do it
JS: CFC needs to go to the admin list not the public list
<mck> scribe: mck
RS: does that mean we have to author a formal CFC?
JS: We do not want public
weighing on CFCs
... Chair would need to pull the resolutions out of the minutes
and post them
RS: how long do we give?
JS: decision policy says 1 week for cfc
RS: Usually people with an
objection are the ones who didn't attend
... How do we resolve that?
JS: read minutes
RS: Could take a very long time to resolve
MC: W3C is moving to
teleconferences for decisions/discussion
... We have right to request use of a telecon
MB: Not sure traveling is always
a valid excuse not to attend
... Difficult with CFC is that is hard to find time to read all
the specs that come through.
MC: Most cfcs are very
granular.
... sometimes they are larger, e.g., pub a doc
Joseph: sometimes multiple resolutions per call
separate cfc for each one?
JS: easy to do if we had a bot but may too much for a manual process
Joseph: often the resolution precedes the edits to the doc
RS: Can the cfc refer to the minutes
MC: Sometime pushback from people about having to read minutes
JS: If minutes are not clear, probably better to capture that early.
rs: they should have to read the minutes
js: if minutes are not clear, then it is something the group will stumble on
rs: what if I write up the cfc and get 2nd set of eyes on it?
jmc: can do that
js: not sure you have to write it up, just paste in that part of minutes
<JF> +1
MK: can we use the public objection process for late-raised objections?
JS: This approach may be worth
considering
... explained the issue process
... what I like about the admin list approach and posting
resolutions for cfc, is it gives a way to serve people who are
not in a postion to participate in calls, perhaps b/c tz
... it gives something defined, written, and creates a good
trail.
RS: Cynthia, if you can't make a call, and group makes a resolution on a decision, would appropriate thing be to post these decisions to the admin list?
cs: I like the approach where each cfc is in a separate e-mail, but a weekly mail with all the resolutions would be acceptable.
js: if the bots can do it, then they could be individual e-mails.
mc: discussion in apa, concern about people having to read the minutes.
but, I think reading min if you can not attend call, is important.
if you can't do at least that, then perhaps not a member in good standing.
rs: so put out in a resoutions in
a cfc to admin list, the cfcs can refer back to the
minutes.
... and there is a 1 week review period for each cfc.
... can we get that decision policy out for another review.
js: Michael, can we get that uri?
<MichaelC> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/decision-policy
mc: may need some modest updates based on this discussion.
rs: will need to vote on decision policy, Michael, do you need time to update the policy?
mc: there is at least one sentence that needs to be reworded; not sure there is more than that.
rs: can we have something to vote on in the next week?
mc: yes
<JF> +1 to Michael, and further I think Michiel's draft resolution works for me
Joseph: if we have a draft spec text related to a resolution, make sure the resolution includes the link.
RESOLUTION: The group resolved that we will post the resolutions for each individual meeting to the aria admin list with a brief summary and a link to the minutes of the meeting. Members have a week to respond to CfC's as per the decision policy.
RS: the decision policy draft will be available for review on the admin list prior to the next meting.
rs: I will write an approach to
managing scope and hsare with the group.
... There are some issues that we know aria 1.1 must address
b/c how long it will be until aria 2.0.
<clown> action-2004?
action-2004?
<trackbot> action-2004 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Create proposal for password role -- due 2016-01-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2004
<trackbot> action-2004 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Create proposal for password role -- due 2016-01-13 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2004
<joanie> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/password-role/aria/aria.html#password
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2004
<MichielBijl> Related GitHub issue: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/166
<MichielBijl> +1
rs: rich liked something joanie wrote ...
mk: do we need to say a "type of"
<Zakim> cyns, you wanted to ask about tracker vs github issues
joanie: i could take an action to clean up that kind of language in the spec
jf: concerned about the wording that suggests a sscreen reader that may be silent when entering a pw
joanie: not saying a screen reader should be silent
jf: I was not reading as normative
is that a useful option, or should it say something different
bg: typically sr says something like * or bullet
jf: not saying we should specify what to do
mk: not sure we say anything about sr behavior
joanie: it is important that the
authors make sure there are actual chars that line up with
what's behind
... tyring to say that an sr should be able to do what it does
in a native pw field
jf: agree
rs: can't specify sr behavior
but people want an idea of what behavior the role enables for AT
jf: Do not have issue with what is happening ... maybe we should say that sr shold mimic what they do in a native pw field
joanie: I will submit to some new text for review
<Zakim> clown, you wanted to ask when would an author not obscure the text?
<Zakim> fesch, you wanted to say amazon lets show your password, I like that option
joseph: i am objecting to the author should ... it should be an author must that authors reveal
Joanie: iw will address that
<JF> +1 to thanking Joannie
<clown> action-1380
<trackbot> action-1380 -- Léonie Watson to #presentation should mention aria-hidden vs presentation role on raster and vector images in relation to ACTION-1379 -- due 2015-09-25 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1380
action-1380?
<trackbot> action-1380 -- Léonie Watson to #presentation should mention aria-hidden vs presentation role on raster and vector images in relation to ACTION-1379 -- due 2015-09-25 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1380
<clown> For role="presentation" and aria-hidden="true" that states that if the host language treats the element as having no owned children in the DOM that it is treated as a single entity such as <img src="foo.svg">
rs: Joanie can you take it up now?
Joanie: No; this is not ready for me .... I do not yet know what to make it say.
<clown> <div role="presentation" aria-hidden-"true"> a whole bunch of other children </div>
<clown> that div becomes a single accessible object in the tree.
rs: have a table with role presentation and aria-hidden true ... what should happen?
Fred: what happened if a child in the table was a link?
joanie: you can't have a focusable element that is not exposed
rs: this has to do with svg and iframe stuff
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/2015/10/22-aria-minutes.html
Joanie: Rich, if you are the one who understands this, can you write the sentence?
joseph: this wording is meant for the presentation role definition
mk: this needs to be in agreement with 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 in AAM
<clown> action-1465?
<trackbot> action-1465 -- Shane McCarron to Or shane to fix default values in 1.1 respec -- due 2014-06-30 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1465
RS: Is the styling of default values currently addressed in the spec?
<clown> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/password-role/aria/aria.html#checkbox
joseph: not bolded now
rs: editorial issue; need to assign to you Joanie.
Joanie: this may be a duplicate action
<clown> action-1567
<trackbot> action-1567 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Fix inconsistencies in linking to glossary items -- due 2015-11-19 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1567
Joanie, look at action 1567
action-1567?
<trackbot> action-1567 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Fix inconsistencies in linking to glossary items -- due 2015-11-19 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1567
Joanie changing title of 1567 and making 1465 a duplicate
<joanie> action-1567
<trackbot> action-1567 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Fix inconsistencies in linking to glossary items -- due 2015-11-19 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1567
action-1489?
<trackbot> action-1489 -- Michael Cooper to Propose spec text to limit what aria attributes can be overridden by strong native semantics (e.g., aria-label and aria-labelledby) -- due 2015-11-12 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1489
<clown> action-1489?
<trackbot> action-1489 -- Michael Cooper to Propose spec text to limit what aria attributes can be overridden by strong native semantics (e.g., aria-label and aria-labelledby) -- due 2015-11-12 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1489
<richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/2014/07/21-aria-minutes#item05
Joseph: the question is whether or not aria should always win? aria-label perhaps, but what about aria-required, aria-autocomplete, etc.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144 of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/gramular/granular/ Succeeded: s/scribe: matt_king/scribe: mck/ Succeeded: s/awyas/always/ Found Scribe: jamesn Inferring ScribeNick: jamesn Found Scribe: mck Inferring ScribeNick: mck Scribes: jamesn, mck ScribeNicks: jamesn, mck Default Present: fesch, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, Joanmarie_Diggs, Joseph_Scheuhammer, JF, MichaelC, Michiel, JamesN, Bryan, Janina, Matt Present: fesch Rich_Schwerdtfeger Joanmarie_Diggs Joseph_Scheuhammer JF MichaelC Michiel JamesN Bryan Janina Matt Found Date: 14 Jan 2016 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/01/14-aria-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]