IRC log of aria on 2016-03-03

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:32:39 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #aria
17:32:39 [RRSAgent]
logging to
17:32:44 [janina]
pesent+ Janina
17:32:49 [janina]
present+ Janina
17:32:59 [MichielBijl]
present+ MichielBijl fesch
17:33:18 [joanie]
present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
17:33:23 [MichielBijl]
present+ AmeliaBR Rich_Schwerdtfeger
17:33:30 [Rich]
17:34:12 [clown]
present+ Joseph_Scheuhammer
17:34:22 [Rich]
17:34:44 [MichielBijl]
present+ Michael_Cooper
17:35:10 [MichielBijl]
scribe: MichielBijl
17:35:30 [MichielBijl]
topic: Combobox
17:35:41 [Stefan]
Stefan has joined #aria
17:35:48 [MichielBijl]
topic: not combobox
17:36:16 [Rich]
17:36:35 [MichielBijl]
17:36:35 [trackbot]
action-2021 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Draft text for default max and min spinbutton values -- due 2016-02-18 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:36:35 [trackbot]
17:36:46 [MichielBijl]
topic: Action 2021
17:36:56 [MichielBijl]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:36:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MichielBijl
17:36:57 [Rich]
17:38:05 [MichielBijl]
RS: min/max negative values?
17:38:11 [MichielBijl]
RS: What is changed?
17:38:28 [MichielBijl]
JD: min/max size maybe
17:38:39 [MichielBijl]
JD: Exposure does not belong in spec
17:39:13 [MichielBijl]
RS: Does the author know different values based on platform?
17:39:17 [MichielBijl]
JD: Author doesn't know
17:39:20 [joanie]
Authors must set the aria-valuenow attribute. Authors should set the aria-valuemin attribute when its value is greater than negative infinity, and the aria-valuemax attribute when its value is less than positive infinity. If missing or not a number, the implicit values of these attributes are as follows:
17:39:25 [joanie]
The implicit value of aria-valuemin is negative infinity.
17:39:28 [joanie]
The implicit value of aria-valuemax is positive infinity.
17:39:30 [joanie]
The implicit value of aria-valuenow is 0.
17:39:59 [bgaraventa1979]
bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria
17:40:24 [bgaraventa1979]
present+ Bryan_Garaventa
17:40:51 [MichielBijl]
RS: Have some text “if you leave them out, UA will set them”
17:41:13 [jamesn]
jamesn has joined #aria
17:41:26 [jamesn]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:41:26 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jamesn
17:41:33 [MichielBijl]
AB: Have not setting values default to infinity sounds logical to me
17:41:51 [MichielBijl]
present+ James_Nurthen
17:42:28 [MichielBijl]
JD: I've had two shots at this and have not maybe everyone happy
17:42:30 [clown]
+1 to joanie's proposal
17:42:35 [MichielBijl]
RS: I'm happy
17:42:35 [Rich]
17:43:20 [joanie]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:43:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate joanie
17:43:20 [MichielBijl]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:43:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MichielBijl
17:43:30 [Rich]
RRSAgent, make log public
17:43:35 [jamesn]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:43:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jamesn
17:44:08 [MichielBijl]
RS: joanie you said the HTML spec doesn't mention it?
17:44:26 [MichielBijl]
JS: they use undefined
17:44:39 [MichielBijl]
AB: Whether you want to require a numeric range
17:44:54 [MichielBijl]
AB: It will always be limited by how the implementation is storing the number
17:45:27 [MichielBijl]
AB: Can you asure authors that you can store
17:45:47 [MichielBijl]
JD: My spec says that if it's less than infinite the author needs to specify it.
17:45:55 [janina]
suggest "value is infinite, whether positive or negative."
17:45:56 [jamesn]
how about this? "Authors must set the aria-valuenow attribute. Authors should set the aria-valuemin attribute when there is a minimum value, and the aria-valuemax attribute when there is a maximum value. If missing or not a number, the implicit values of these attributes are as follows:"
17:46:23 [jamesn]
"The implicit value of aria-valuemin is that there is no minimum value"
17:46:31 [MichielBijl]
all: that's fine
17:47:00 [MichielBijl]
JD: Does that mean there is no implicit value?
17:47:13 [MichielBijl]
JN: In reality it's the same, no?
17:47:26 [MichielBijl]
JN: You're not going to write infinite numbers into the API
17:47:29 [MichielBijl]
JN: Hope not
17:47:32 [jongund]
jongund has joined #aria
17:47:43 [MichielBijl]
JS: Math libraries have done this
17:48:09 [MichielBijl]
*infinite discussion about infinity*
17:48:47 [MichielBijl]
RS: I don't have a problem with James' text
17:48:56 [janina]
17:49:18 [Rich]
17:49:20 [MichielBijl]
JD: So are we using James' text?
17:49:21 [jamesn]
17:49:21 [MichielBijl]
17:49:56 [fesch]
17:50:36 [MichielBijl]
RESOLUTION: Take James' proposal to modify Joanies proposal.
17:50:44 [MichielBijl]
17:50:44 [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 2016-02-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:50:44 [trackbot]
17:50:46 [MichielBijl]
topic Action 1489
17:50:49 [MichielBijl]
topic: Action 1489
17:51:10 [clown]
17:51:10 [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 2016-02-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:51:10 [trackbot]
17:51:26 [MichielBijl]
JS: Host language can do preemptive changes
17:52:01 [Rich]
17:52:32 [MichielBijl]
MC: Just added note to end of section
17:52:35 [ShaneM]
zakim, agenda?
17:52:35 [Zakim]
I see nothing on the agenda
17:52:50 [jongund_]
jongund_ has joined #aria
17:53:10 [ShaneM]
present+ ShaneM
17:53:32 [MichielBijl]
RS: If it's non-normative it can just go in
17:53:39 [MichielBijl]
JS: Looked at original issue
17:53:50 [MichielBijl]
JS: From James Craig, wants to create a whitelist
17:53:58 [MichielBijl]
JS: That can't be overwritten
17:54:24 [clown]
"Host Conflict Semantics potentially allow host languages to overwrite @aria-label, which could break text alternative computation. ARIA 1.1 should disallow host languages from declaring @aria-label* (and aria-described*?) from being declared in direct semantic conflict with a host language attribute."
17:54:30 [MichielBijl]
chair: Rich
17:55:23 [MichielBijl]
Meeting: ARIA Working Group
17:55:33 [MichielBijl]
RS: Get back to it next week Michael?
17:55:40 [MichielBijl]
MC: We'll see next week
17:57:05 [MichielBijl]
topic: Action 1730
17:57:07 [MichielBijl]
17:57:07 [trackbot]
action-1730 -- Michael Cooper to Draft ¨deprecated¨ section for conformance section of spec -- due 2015-10-14 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:57:07 [trackbot]
17:57:22 [Rich]
17:57:29 [MichielBijl]
MC: not needed? there is nothing that says it's deprecated.
17:57:52 [MichielBijl]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:57:52 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate MichielBijl
17:58:25 [MichielBijl]
RS: Don't think we have to put that in the list of terms?
17:58:41 [MichielBijl]
s/Don't/Do you/
17:58:49 [MichielBijl]
MC: Maybe we don't need both
17:59:00 [MichielBijl]
JD: We already have this in the list
17:59:11 [MichielBijl]
RS: I don't think we need the text Michael
17:59:20 [MichielBijl]
MC: I think it's useful to have it in the text
17:59:27 [MichielBijl]
MC: Still something you need to support
17:59:34 [MichielBijl]
MC: Can be removed down the road
17:59:42 [MichielBijl]
JD: Other specs have that in the conformance part
18:00:06 [MichielBijl]
MC: I think it's useful to keep it in the conformance part
18:00:10 [MichielBijl]
MC: Let's keep both
18:00:11 [joanie]
+1 to keeping both
18:00:32 [ShaneM]
+1 but I would have 3.5 point to the definition
18:01:19 [ShaneM]
remember that the ID for a definition is dfn-<term>
18:02:12 [joanie] links to the term
18:03:02 [MichielBijl]
RS: Any objections?
18:03:08 [ShaneM]
+1 to having the term point to the conformance requirement. It might also be possible to have respec notice if a link is broken.
18:04:16 [MichielBijl]
PROPOSAL: Accept Michael's enhancement to the specification and add text to the term for definition to reference the normative text for…
18:07:16 [ShaneM]
Rawgit is showing it now. You might also put <a>deprecated</a> in the conformance section - so they link both ways
18:07:31 [MichielBijl]
AB: Shows up in every spec?
18:07:36 [MichielBijl]
MC: Only those that link to it
18:08:43 [MichielBijl]
PROPOSAL: Accept Michael's enhancement to the specification and add text to the term for definition to reference the normative text for deprecated.
18:09:07 [MichielBijl]
PROPOSAL: Accept Michael's enhancement to the specification and add text to the term for deprecated to reference the normative text for deprecated.
18:10:47 [MichielBijl]
RESOLUTION: Accept Michael's enhancement to the specification and add text to the term for deprecated to reference the conformance subsection on deprecated.
18:11:15 [MichielBijl]
topic: Action 1723
18:11:20 [MichielBijl]
18:11:20 [trackbot]
action-1723 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Editorial - create sections listing the roles that provide (1) nameFrom:author and (2) nameFrom:contents -- due 2016-02-24 -- OPEN
18:11:20 [trackbot]
18:11:47 [MichielBijl]
topic: Action 1743
18:11:49 [MichielBijl]
18:11:49 [trackbot]
action-1743 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Put aria-activedescendant on application and request wg review -- due 2016-02-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:11:49 [trackbot]
18:12:03 [MichielBijl]
JD: That's done
18:12:17 [MichielBijl]
RS: Addition of attr
18:12:22 [MichielBijl]
RS: Any text added?
18:13:29 [fesch]
18:13:35 [MichielBijl]
18:15:43 [ShaneM]
3.2.97 works
18:15:50 [MichielBijl]
*discussion about ReSpec breaking the web*
18:16:41 [MichielBijl]
JD: Before under application
18:16:53 [MichielBijl]
JD: It had a list of three different things you can do
18:17:31 [MichielBijl]
JD: *reading diff out loud*
18:18:05 [MichielBijl]
JD: We have to tell them what to do, and they have to manage focus
18:18:17 [MichielBijl]
JD: Questions about that?
18:18:32 [joanie]
Manage focus of descendants as described in Managing Focus, updating the value of aria-activedescendant to reference the element containing the focused content.
18:18:59 [Rich]
18:20:15 [ShaneM]
old versions of ReSpec are NOT on the W3C Tools server. I just checked. UGGH
18:20:29 [MichaelC]
Reachable from rawgit URI:
18:20:59 [MichaelC]
We could make a global change in our repository, and revert it when respec is fixed
18:21:17 [MichielBijl]
RS: You want to have one active descendant within the container
18:21:18 [MichaelC]
with lots of colorful language in the commit message of course
18:21:26 [MichielBijl]
RS: You can have it on a listbox
18:21:48 [MichielBijl]
JS: Where is the real focus?
18:21:54 [MichielBijl]
RS: Would be on the combobox
18:22:03 [MichielBijl]
JS: Does that have active descendant?
18:22:17 [MichielBijl]
BG: Point to role=option
18:24:45 [MichielBijl]
BG: You're supposed to point at role=option, otherwise it's an author error
18:25:05 [MichielBijl]
RS: If we have active descendant on role=application, we could have a problem
18:25:35 [MichielBijl]
BG: If you're in role=application, and you're in role=textbox, you'd have to script the whole thing in there. And it wouldn't work on mobile anyway
18:25:47 [MichielBijl]
BG: Where as if you just set focus to it, you get that for free.
18:25:52 [MichielBijl]
BG so, spec that out.
18:26:00 [MichielBijl]
RS: I have concerns about that.
18:28:14 [jongund]
I can
18:28:27 [jongund]
JN: Active descendant doesn't apply
18:28:35 [MichielBijl]
scribe: jongund
18:28:49 [jongund]
fred: No way to identify the widget
18:29:29 [jongund]
FE: There is no reference to another types of widget, when role=application
18:29:36 [MichielBijl]
18:29:43 [MichielBijl]
18:29:52 [jongund]
JS: When it is a list box you know the required role
18:30:01 [jongund]
JN: I am not sure hwy that matters
18:30:15 [jongund]
FE: The SR only know what it is
18:30:19 [MichielBijl]
18:30:34 [jongund]
JN: SR will read the role of what is being pointing to with aria-activedescendant
18:31:00 [clown]
s/When it is a list box you know the required role/When it is a list box you know the role of the active descendant is an option/
18:31:09 [jongund]
RS: Would take precedence over the other one
18:31:26 [jongund]
RS: If you have it on role application, it can point to anything
18:32:03 [jongund]
JN: What every has focus will be what active-descendent
18:32:30 [jongund]
JN: Nest activedescendant would be wierd
18:32:33 [jongund]
RS: yes
18:32:42 [jongund]
BG: Anywhere in the combo box
18:32:47 [joanie]
18:33:13 [jongund]
JN: Special cases for combobox is special case, we should be consistent
18:33:32 [jongund]
BG: If we allow for combobox they will start to use it other places
18:34:33 [jongund]
BG: Having active-descendant work different on combobox
18:34:48 [jongund]
BG: It will hijack ....
18:35:34 [jongund]
Joanie: I don't get the example, I thought we were talking about AD on application
18:36:19 [jongund]
BG: If you have role=combobox on ancestor, the input box has focus
18:36:35 [jongund]
BG: The browser can only pick one
18:37:10 [jongund]
JG: Can we change the definition of combox
18:38:00 [jongund]
BG: I think we are making it much more complicated than it needs to be
18:38:30 [jongund]
RS: It just happens to work on the input box
18:38:46 [jongund]
Joanie: What happens when you have multiple elements with AD
18:39:12 [jongund]
Joanie: What if you have a custom list box with AD
18:39:41 [jongund]
BG: If you press that native .... would have to be scripted in
18:39:47 [clown]
18:40:00 [jongund]
BG: It you used role=application it would not need to go to the edit field
18:40:26 [janina]
+1 to Amelia
18:40:56 [jongund]
ABR: I haven't done alot of building widget, if something has AD but not focus is it is ignored
18:41:04 [jongund]
JS: I believe that too
18:41:46 [jongund]
JS: Dojo widgets seem to use AD and it used AD to maintain focus state of complex widgets
18:42:19 [jongund]
Janina: I wanted that feature, AL said it was tough to do
18:42:36 [jongund]
Joanie: Depends on the widget
18:43:01 [jongund]
JS: When you reload a page, unless it sitting in the cache
18:43:10 [jongund]
Joanie: There is some caching
18:43:21 [jongund]
Joanie: What is the next step
18:43:30 [jongund]
Jania: I have to leave early
18:43:52 [jongund]
JS: Let's think about this for another week
18:44:03 [jongund]
JS: It would be good if matt were here
18:44:28 [jongund]
RS: This is the other action, ProSpec what strong semantics can be overridden
18:44:31 [Rich]
18:44:40 [jongund]
MC: I was not sure the specific issue
18:45:02 [jongund]
RS: I don't think we should let the plateform should be able to override
18:45:22 [jongund]
RS: aria-label, aria-labelledby, may aria-describeby
18:45:51 [jongund]
MC: I am not sure why this is an action to me, is there anything else we want to protect?
18:46:01 [jongund]
JS: aria-checked (tri-state)
18:46:22 [jongund]
RS: We have a desc, in SVG
18:46:32 [jongund]
RS: Authors have to put these in
18:47:01 [jongund]
JN: They should implement the naming algorithms
18:47:18 [jongund]
Amelia: It is a matter of priorties
18:47:59 [jongund]
Amelia: aria-labelledby takes precedence... makes sure that there is a reference to the calculation spec
18:48:18 [jongund]
RS: I think we want consistent priorities for SVG
18:48:50 [jongund]
FE: ... mapping
18:49:05 [jongund]
JS: It is the accessible name property period
18:49:12 [jongund]
RS: Let give you a new date
18:49:35 [jongund]
MC: Let's put next week at the date, but it is lower priority than pub stuff
18:50:00 [jongund]
RS: CS on password role, send a note to list
18:50:19 [jongund]
RS: MS doesn't seem to have any issue
18:50:34 [clown]
s/It is the accessible name property period/AXAPI mapping of a name property depends on whether the label is visible; for other AAPIs, it's the accessible name property period/
18:50:38 [jongund]
Joanie: JF wants edits in the text, longer
18:50:51 [jongund]
RSL We will talk about next week, may not make the date
18:50:58 [clown]
18:50:58 [trackbot]
action-1513 -- Michael Cooper to Set up ARIA 1.1 Requirements draft -- due 2016-02-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:50:58 [trackbot]
18:51:01 [jongund]
MC: I think I am done
18:51:17 [MichaelC]
18:51:31 [jongund]
MC: The requirements had existed, but I populated them with some content
18:51:47 [jongund]
MC: .... reading updates test ....
18:52:03 [jongund]
MC: DId I say anything we should not being doing
18:52:13 [jongund]
JS: There are 6 requirements
18:53:09 [jongund]
MC: The longdesc is removed from HTML5, but is in an extension
18:53:20 [jongund]
RS: I think you need to say something about SVG
18:53:36 [jongund]
RS: SVG2 is using ARIA 1.1 into their spec
18:53:48 [jongund]
RS: We are trying to help them support ARIA 1.1
18:54:28 [jongund]
Amelia: It needs to include SVG host language
18:54:33 [clown]
"extended to SVG 2.0"?
18:54:47 [jongund]
MC: I am trying to find the branch for this, missed comments
18:54:56 [jongund]
RS: I am calling it a day
18:54:58 [clown]
"extended to include SVG2.0"?
18:55:07 [jongund]
RS: SVG is part of what we are doing
18:55:17 [jongund]
MC: Can people repeat that
18:55:24 [jongund]
Amelia: I will draft text
18:55:32 [jongund]
RS: I am calling it a day
18:55:42 [jongund]
rrsgant, draft minutes
18:55:50 [jongund]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:55:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jongund
18:55:58 [AmeliaBR]
18:56:13 [jongund]
I will post them
18:57:14 [jongund]
Michiel are you going to post then?
19:06:12 [MichielBijl]
I see you did, thanks jongund!
19:27:37 [jongund]
jongund has joined #aria
20:02:54 [AmeliaBR]
AmeliaBR has joined #aria
20:42:57 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #aria
23:40:14 [jamesn]
jamesn has joined #aria
23:45:12 [chaals]
chaals has joined #aria