See also: IRC log
<janina> pesent+ Janina
<Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Feb/0466.html
<Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Feb/0466.html
<MichielBijl> scribe: MichielBijl
<Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Feb/0466.html
action-2021
<trackbot> action-2021 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Draft text for default max and min spinbutton values -- due 2016-02-18 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2021
<Rich> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2021/aria/aria.html#spinbutton
RS: min/max negative
values?
... What is changed?
JD: min/max size maybe
... Exposure does not belong in spec
RS: Does the author know different values based on platform?
JD: Author doesn't know
<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:
<joanie> The implicit value of aria-valuemin is negative infinity.
<joanie> The implicit value of aria-valuemax is positive infinity.
<joanie> The implicit value of aria-valuenow is 0.
RS: Have some text “if you leave them out, UA will set them”
AB: Have not setting values default to infinity sounds logical to me
JD: I've had two shots at this and have not maybe everyone happy
<clown> +1 to joanie's proposal
RS: I'm happy
... joanie you said the HTML spec doesn't mention it?
JS: they use undefined
AB: Whether you want to require a
numeric range
... It will always be limited by how the implementation is
storing the number
... Can you asure authors that you can store 5.124.131.123?
JD: My spec says that if it's less than infinite the author needs to specify it.
<janina> suggest "value is infinite, whether positive or negative."
<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:"
<jamesn> "The implicit value of aria-valuemin is that there is no minimum value"
all: that's fine
JD: Does that mean there is no implicit value?
JN: In reality it's the same,
no?
... You're not going to write infinite numbers into the
API
... Hope not
JS: Math libraries have done this
*infinite discussion about infinity*
RS: I don't have a problem with James' text
<janina> +1
<Rich> +1
JD: So are we using James' text?
<jamesn> +1
+1
<fesch> +1
RESOLUTION: Take James' proposal to modify Joanies proposal.
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 2016-02-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1489
topic Action 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 2016-02-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1489
JS: Host language can do preemptive changes
<Rich> https://github.com/w3c/aria/commit/0b9ebc94afa85fcfb281bab88b9dacd2a88111c7
MC: Just added note to end of section
RS: If it's non-normative it can just go in
JS: Looked at original
issue
... From James Craig, wants to create a whitelist
... That can't be overwritten
<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."
RS: Get back to it next week Michael?
MC: We'll see next week
action-1730
<trackbot> action-1730 -- Michael Cooper to Draft ¨deprecated¨ section for conformance section of spec -- due 2015-10-14 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1730
<Rich> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/ACTION-1730/aria/aria.html#deprecated
MC: not needed? there is nothing that says it's deprecated.
RS: Do you think we have to put that in the list of terms?
MC: Maybe we don't need both
JD: We already have this in the list
RS: I don't think we need the text Michael
MC: I think it's useful to have
it in the text
... Still something you need to support
... Can be removed down the road
JD: Other specs have that in the conformance part
MC: I think it's useful to keep
it in the conformance part
... Let's keep both
<joanie> +1 to keeping both
<ShaneM> +1 but I would have 3.5 point to the definition
<ShaneM> remember that the ID for a definition is dfn-<term>
<joanie> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/aria.html#aria-grabbed links to the term
RS: Any objections?
<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.
PROPOSAL: Accept Michael's enhancement to the specification and add text to the term for definition to reference the normative text for…
<ShaneM> Rawgit is showing it now. You might also put <a>deprecated</a> in the conformance section - so they link both ways
AB: Shows up in every spec?
MC: Only those that link to it
PROPOSAL: Accept Michael's
enhancement to the specification and add text to the term for
definition to reference the normative text for
deprecated.
... Accept Michael's enhancement to the specification and add
text to the term for deprecated to reference the normative text
for deprecated.
RESOLUTION: Accept Michael's enhancement to the specification and add text to the term for deprecated to reference the conformance subsection on deprecated.
action-1723
<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
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1723
action-1743
<trackbot> action-1743 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Put aria-activedescendant on application and request wg review -- due 2016-02-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1743
JD: That's done
RS: Addition of attr
... Any text added?
<fesch> https://github.com/w3c/aria/commit/f7220c213
*crickets*
<ShaneM> 3.2.97 works
*discussion about ReSpec breaking the web*
JD: Before under
application
... It had a list of three different things you can do
... *reading diff out loud*
... We have to tell them what to do, and they have to manage
focus
... Questions about that?
<joanie> Manage focus of descendants as described in Managing Focus, updating the value of aria-activedescendant to reference the element containing the focused content.
<Rich> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/ACTION-1730/aria/aria.html#deprecated
<ShaneM> old versions of ReSpec are NOT on the W3C Tools server. I just checked. UGGH
<MichaelC> Reachable from rawgit URI: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/respec/develop/builds/respec-w3c-common-3.2.97.js
<MichaelC> We could make a global change in our repository, and revert it when respec is fixed
RS: You want to have one active descendant within the container
<MichaelC> with lots of colorful language in the commit message of course
RS: You can have it on a listbox
JS: Where is the real focus?
RS: Would be on the combobox
JS: Does that have active descendant?
BG: Point to role=option
... You're supposed to point at role=option, otherwise it's an
author error
RS: If we have active descendant on role=application, we could have a problem
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
... Where as if you just set focus to it, you get that for
free.
BG so, spec that out.
RS: I have concerns about that.
<jongund> I can
<jongund> JN: Active descendant doesn't apply
<scribe> scribe: jongund
BG: No way to identify the
widget
... There is no reference to another types of widget, when
role=application
JS: When it is a list box you know the role of the active descendant is an option
JN: I am not sure hwy that matters
BG: The SR only know what it is
JN: SR will read the role of what is being pointing to with aria-activedescendant
RS: Would take precedence over
the other one
... If you have it on role application, it can point to
anything
JN: What every has focus will be
what active-descendent
... Nested activedescendant would be wierd
RS: yes
BG: Anywhere in the combo box
JN: Special cases for combobox is special case, we should be consistent
BG: If we allow for combobox they
will start to use it other places
... Having active-descendant work different on combobox
... It will hijack ....
Joanie: I don't get the example, I thought we were talking about AD on application
BG: If you have role=combobox on
ancestor, the input box has focus
... The browser can only pick one
JG: Can we change the definition of combox
BG: I think we are making it much more complicated than it needs to be
RS: It just happens to work on the input box
Joanie: What happens when you
have multiple elements with AD
... What if you have a custom list box with AD
BG: If you press that native ....
would have to be scripted in
... It you used role=application it would not need to go to the
edit field
<janina> +1 to Amelia
ABR: I haven't done alot of building widget, if something has AD but not focus is it is ignored
JS: I believe that too
... Dojo widgets seem to use AD and it used AD to maintain
focus state of complex widgets
Janina: I wanted that feature, AL said it was tough to do
Joanie: Depends on the widget
JS: When you reload a page, unless it sitting in the cache
Joanie: There is some
caching
... What is the next step
Jania: I have to leave early
JS: Let's think about this for
another week
... It would be good if matt were here
RS: This is the other action, ProSpec what strong semantics can be overridden
<Rich> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1489
MC: I was not sure the specific issue
RS: I don't think we should let
the plateform should be able to override
... aria-label, aria-labelledby, may aria-describeby
MC: I am not sure why this is an action to me, is there anything else we want to protect?
JS: aria-checked (tri-state)
RS: We have a desc, in SVG
... Authors have to put these in
JN: They should implement the naming algorithms
Amelia: It is a matter of
priorties
... aria-labelledby takes precedence... makes sure that there
is a reference to the calculation spec
RS: I think we want consistent priorities for SVG
FE: ... mapping
JS: AXAPI mapping of a name property depends on whether the label is visible; for other AAPIs, it's the accessible name property period
RS: Let give you a new date
MC: Let's put next week at the date, but it is lower priority than pub stuff
RS: CS on password role, send a
note to list
... MS doesn't seem to have any issue
Joanie: JF wants edits in the text, longer
RSL We will talk about next week, may not make the date
<clown> action-1513?
<trackbot> action-1513 -- Michael Cooper to Set up ARIA 1.1 Requirements draft -- due 2016-02-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1513
MC: I think I am done
<MichaelC> http://w3c.github.io/aria/requirements/aria-requirements.html
MC: The requirements had existed,
but I populated them with some content
... .... reading updates test ....
... DId I say anything we should not being doing
JS: There are 6 requirements
MC: The longdesc is removed from HTML5, but is in an extension
RS: I think you need to say
something about SVG
... SVG2 is using ARIA 1.1 into their spec
... We are trying to help them support ARIA 1.1
Amelia: It needs to include SVG host language
<clown> "extended to SVG 2.0"?
MC: I am trying to find the branch for this, missed comments
RS: I am calling it a day
<clown> "extended to include SVG2.0"?
RS: SVG is part of what we are doing
MC: Can people repeat that
Amelia: I will draft text
RS: I am calling it a day
rrsgant, draft minutes
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/Don't/Do you/ Succeeded: s/fred/BG/ Succeeded: s/FE/BG/ Succeeded: s/FE/BG/ Succeeded: 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/ Succeeded: s/Nest/Nested/ Succeeded: 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/ Found Scribe: MichielBijl Inferring ScribeNick: MichielBijl Found Scribe: jongund Inferring ScribeNick: jongund Scribes: MichielBijl, jongund ScribeNicks: MichielBijl, jongund Present: Janina MichielBijl fesch Joanmarie_Diggs AmeliaBR Rich_Schwerdtfeger Joseph_Scheuhammer Michael_Cooper Bryan_Garaventa James_Nurthen ShaneM Got date from IRC log name: 03 Mar 2016 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/03/03-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]