See also: IRC log
<Judy> JS: pls update settings for no-host joining
<Judy> JB: It *was*; it re-set itself, as well re-setting several other settings, along with web client update
<Judy> JS: ARIA/TAG topic?
<Judy> ...some progress
<Judy> scribe: Josh
<Joshue108> JB: I hope everyone saw the announcement.
<Judy> https://www.w3.org/
<Joshue108> JB: About the joint exploration between these groups, on potentially combining.
<Joshue108> JB:There has been a11y collobration recently.
<Joshue108> JB: There is discussion on more formal combination.
<Joshue108> JB: This may result in even more opportunities to coordination on a11y and other areas.
<Joshue108> JB: Can we have an overview on what is going on?
<Joshue108> JS: An ARIA module is the biggest thing.
<Joshue108> JS: This has a new set of roles for ARIA 1.1, that relates to books and magazines.
<Joshue108> JS: They also have an interest group in digital publishing.
<Joshue108> JS: They have a doc that looks at the gaps. The APA etc find it interesting.
<Joshue108> JS: Josh, WCAG may want to look at this also.
<Joshue108> JS: This is exciting.
<Joshue108> JB: Questions?
<Joshue108> JOC: Where can we get it?
<Joshue108> JB: There are links on that page.
<Joshue108> JB: What Janina is talking about is from the joint press release.
<Judy> https://www.w3.org/2016/05/digpub.html.en
<janina> Digital Publishing and Accessibility in W3C Documents URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-accessibility/
<Joshue108> JS: I have the gap analysis URI here.
<Joshue108> JB: Weren't there two joint activities?
<Joshue108> JS: I'm aware of two, the ARIA for dPUB work, and then the Digital Publishing interest group which has created the gap analysis.
<Joshue108> JB: They have their own wiki page IIRC
<Joshue108> JB: That would be useful.
<Joshue108> JB: For the interest group piece, what WAI group is co-ordinating with that.
<Joshue108> JB: Isn't Tzviya involved in both??
<Joshue108> MC: Yes
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/dpub-a11y-tf/
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/Task_Forces/Accessibility
<Judy> https://www.w3.org/WAI/grouptf.html
<Joshue108> JS: Do we want the IG Github repo?
<Judy> JB: will clean up some cross-linking
<Joshue108> JB: This is just to double check
<Joshue108> JB: I expect we will be announcing the prospective vids soon.
<Joshue108> JB: Pre-GAAD announcements before next week?
<Joshue108> <crickets>
<Joshue108> JB: I have invited Wilco to join the co-ordination calls. He is interested in joining and the chair of the Automated Monitoring CG.
<Joshue108> JB: They are exploring bringing this into WCAG as a TF.
<Joshue108> JB: The discussion is going well, there is interest from those who have large testing repos.
<Joshue108> JB: Shadi and I are looking for resources to cover staff time.
<Joshue108> JB: We hope to have an update soon, so we can formally watch this work.
<Joshue108> JB: It is in scope of the current charter.
<Joshue108> JB: I will update Josh and AWK on the editors call tomorrow.
<Judy> ...Those interested in the conformance testing work can join https://www.w3.org/community/auto-wcag/ to get notification of discussions
<Joshue108> JB: Any questions?
<Joshue108> JOC: Any ideas for a timeframe for Auto WCAG merge?
<Joshue108> JB: There have been some ideas but we are working it out. Nothing solid.
<Joshue108> JOC: Ok
<Judy> https://www.w3.org/community/auto-wcag/wiki/WCAG_Conformance_Rules_for_W3C
<Joshue108> JB: Do have a look at it before the WCAG editors call.
<Joshue108> JB: Michael has updated me on the WCAG.next discussion.
<Judy> scribe: Judy
JOC: We looked at John F and Jeanne S's summary of input. It wasn't a formal public call for comment, rather outreach to specific people. This was about WCAG.next.
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Main_Page/WCAG_future_proposal
JOC: there were a few options that got more
positive feedback than others
... we spoke about what the Co-Chairs thought might be the most stable
options for evolving WCAG
... there were no objections from among those on the teleconf
... In short, the group is open to doing a 2.1, to contain the work from
the extensions that the various TFs are doing, over the next 9 months
... plus potentially producing the best practices
... mobile more ready than the other TFs. We think the other TFs will
step up.
... WG is in general agreement about what they're hoping
JB: assuming that you're looking for a strong/broad consensus on the proposal
JOC: well there was consensus on the call itself
MNC: this was the first appearance of a proposal that rolls in input from what John and Jeanne had gathered
JOC: think it's likely to end up as a 2.1
JB: just checking, process-wise, how you're handling getting consensus on the proposal that was sent out just yesterday.
<fesch> scribe: fesch
JOC: 2.1 is a likely candidate which will
take the output from the task forces
... the output from the task forces will be 1. candidate success
criteria
... 2. non normative best practices documents
... these will be produced when the task forces think they are ready
... in tandum, we plan to start prep work for WCAG 3.0
... timeline 2.1 work - will take up to 2 years
... may be produced more quickly
... this gives us some scope to potentially produce a 2.2 if we don't
have critical mass for a 3.0
jb: I think there is a lot of good things in
the proposal, but it just came out yesterday, want to help you get
broader, stronger consensus so it doesn't reverse this time
jb: want to briefly make sure that one of
the other task forces under APA, having planning discussions with Jason
White
... looking to refocus it, what would be the best approach for APA, -
what is research worthy?
... will be trying to identify, people interested in research/standards
... for instance, Fred we would be hoping folks from IBM research might
help
... people interested in tooling....
... just wanted to mention that, will bring up on future call
... an FYI for now
jb: will coordinate with Katie, RQTF recruitment questionsthat need to WAI IG
fred: not from SVG A11y TF
js: no
<Judy> scribe: Judy
JB: updates on SVG accessibility how soon?
fred: Ongoing, moving well this week
JB: wondering about implementers
fred: right away -- Joannie, and Webkit.
Core mapping happening fast.
... trying for everybody -- no roadblocks
JB: outreach underway to other implementers?
fred: yes, outreach, Chrome may be on board. Don't know yet about Edge. Firefox may be slower. Linux may be on board.
<scribe> scribe: Fred
JB: any regrets for next meeting?
... should be the 25th
... will send an earlier reminder
... Thanks all.