16:28:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:28:30 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-irc
16:28:32 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
16:28:32 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #aria
16:28:32 <Rich> chair: Rich
16:28:34 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
16:28:34 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
16:28:35 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference
16:28:35 <trackbot> Date: 26 May 2016
16:28:41 <Rich> RRSAgent, make log public
16:29:38 <fesch> fesch has joined #aria
16:30:47 <LJWatson> LJWatson has joined #aria
16:31:07 <Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016May/0157.html
16:31:25 <mck> mck has joined #aria
16:31:56 <cyns> cyns has joined #aria
16:32:42 <mck_> mck_ has joined #aria
16:32:59 <MichielBijl> MichielBijl has changed the topic to: WebEx URL: https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=ma5b6b7c8d8f4e4022447081c9842e784
16:33:01 <janina> present+ Janina
16:33:11 <Rich> present+ Rich_Schwerdtfeger
16:33:13 <MichielBijl> present+ Michiel_Bijl
16:33:47 <LJWatson> present+ LJWatson
16:33:49 <clown> clown has joined #aria
16:34:10 <MichaelC> present+ MichaelC
16:34:15 <fesch> scribe: fesch
16:34:24 <Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016May/0157.html
16:34:28 <cyns> Automated accessibility testing with webdriver, open source from Microsoft https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2016/05/25/accessibility-test-automation/
16:34:34 <mck_> present+matt_king
16:34:55 <fesch> rs: ARIA & HTML synchronization
16:35:07 <fesch> TOPIC: ARIA & HTML synchronization
16:35:42 <fesch> rs: we have dependencies on ARIA 1.1, we need to get it out the door
16:35:43 <clown> present+ Joseph_Scheuhammer
16:35:59 <fesch> rs: SVG 2 may go to CR end of June
16:36:11 <fesch> HTML may go to CR in June
16:36:41 <fesch> rs: if there are really pressing issues... or something we need now, then we should consider ARIA 1.2
16:36:53 <fesch> rs: and do that in parallel with ARIA 2
16:36:59 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria
16:37:20 <fesch> mk: what about strictly editorial stuff?
16:37:23 <jamesn> rrsagent, make minutes
16:37:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html jamesn
16:37:30 <JF> JF has joined #aria
16:37:39 <JF> Present+ JF
16:37:57 <fesch> rs: I don't want to revisit stuff like presentational at this point
16:38:20 <jamesn> present+ JamesNurthen
16:38:37 <MichaelC> q+
16:38:37 <fesch> rs: that is a big editorial change
16:39:04 <fesch> mk: concern is on taking resources away from testing...
16:39:39 <bgaraventa1979> bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria
16:40:01 <MichaelC> rs: yesterday met with TAG
16:40:10 <MichaelC> need to look at Web Components in ARIA 2.0 context
16:40:17 <MichaelC> we have the skills to make something pervasive
16:40:21 <MichaelC> will need all hands on deck for it
16:40:27 <MichaelC> want to get 1.1 out soon soon soon
16:40:28 <joanie> regrets+ Joanmarie_Diggs
16:40:31 <bgaraventa1979> present+ Bryan_Garaventa
16:40:31 <MichaelC> so we can focus on that
16:41:30 <fesch> scribe: fesch
16:42:00 <fesch> mc: I would only like to do something with clear requirements and no scope creep
16:42:17 <jamesn> +1 to no 1.2
16:42:26 <fesch> cs: ARIA 1.1 was a distraction to 2.0 lets not do it again
16:42:51 <MichaelC> ack me
16:43:01 <fesch> rs: I think James Craig valuestep thing is really for 2.0
16:43:37 <fesch> mk: If you map out a plan for 2.0, and we have low hanging fruit, can be branch and publish a 1.2?
16:44:01 <fesch> mk: that way the ATs are not afraid to implement it
16:44:18 <fesch> cs: folks have been implementing before it comes out.
16:44:36 <fesch> rs: would need adequate consensus
16:45:02 <fesch> jn: can get everything in 2.0 if we do it in a reasonable timeframe
16:45:02 <cyns> +1 to jamesn on keeping the scope of 2.0 realistic
16:45:13 <MichaelC> q+
16:45:48 <fesch> rs: need to work with lots of groups... working with TAG...
16:46:25 <ShaneM_> ShaneM_ has joined #aria
16:46:34 <MichaelC> mc: need ARIA 2.0 requirements at the *front* of the process
16:46:56 <fesch> rs: we have consensus that we need to focus on 2.0
16:46:59 <MichaelC> we told TAG yesterday we´d start a draft end of summer 2016
16:47:20 <fesch> TOPIC: TPAC
16:47:28 <fesch> rs: book your rooms now
16:47:43 <fesch> mc: I have heard airfares will go up
16:48:02 <fesch> TOPIC: decisions
16:48:17 <fesch> May 12 CFC  posinset, setsize
16:48:39 <Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016May/0015.html
16:48:42 <fesch> rs: if we accept the modification for link
16:48:53 <fesch> rs: will satisfy SVG folks
16:49:32 <fesch> mk: I didn't understand the last requirement
16:49:52 <fesch> mk: I read it as hiding the last requirement
16:50:15 <fesch> s/last requirement/hiding abstract roles/
16:50:52 <fesch> mc: removing the taxonomy from the spec is editorial action
16:51:00 <fesch> mc: to make it less confusing
16:51:21 <fesch> mc: there are abstract roles that only exist to support the taxonomy
16:51:38 <fesch> mk: that was postponed
16:51:57 <fesch> rs: you can still remove the drawing
16:52:13 <fesch> mc: the taxonomy still exists...
16:52:26 <fesch> rs: and we did some cleanup on the taxonomy
16:53:12 <fesch> rs: we agreed to take menuitem radio... for posinset setsize
16:53:20 <LJWatson> LJWatson has joined #aria
16:53:46 <fesch> mc: I've made the changes -
16:54:42 <fesch> rs: there was a discussion on presentational children, my holdup is treeitem
16:54:57 <fesch> rs: we don't have an alternative for tree
16:55:24 <fesch> bg: I tested this morning in chrome and safari
16:55:42 <fesch> mk: it was written and mapped as presentational
16:56:11 <fesch> mk: people want to use it, but it isn't mapped that way
16:56:35 <fesch> rs: are you suggesting they use treegrid?
16:57:03 <fesch> mk: it would take major content by an AT to make it readable with a reading cursor
16:57:43 <fesch> mk: there are several techniques that provide access from a treeitem - a parallel structure
16:58:03 <fesch> rs: people are creating trees with stuff inside of them
16:59:40 <fesch> fe: folks do not understand that treegrid would be a tree
17:00:08 <fesch> fe: a treegrid is a table with twisties
17:00:25 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
17:00:45 <fesch> mk: a tree item that contains complex stuff is like a one column table
17:01:08 <fesch> mk: the content can be controlled by the tree but not owned by the tree
17:02:48 <fesch> rs: we did the same thing where a grid can have one column
17:03:06 <fesch> gb: I have done treegrid controls
17:03:13 <fesch> rs: with a single column?
17:03:53 <fesch> gb: at present AT present a treegrid like a X
17:04:45 <fesch> mk: that kind of thing that was meant for the us to tell AT's to fix
17:04:49 <jongund> present+ jongund
17:05:08 <fesch> rs: if you have an action item for treegrid
17:05:17 <fesch> mk: it is in our plan
17:05:49 <fesch> mk: we will break grid out into two flavors... to show real world implementations
17:06:34 <fesch> rs: if the APG makes an example can we except it as is?
17:06:43 <fesch> fe: what is the timing?
17:06:53 <fesch> mk:  this year
17:07:46 <fesch> mk: the APG will prioritize and gridtree in the next 6-8 weeks
17:08:16 <fesch> jn: what people want is to put controls in - and the don't have support for it
17:08:44 <fesch> mk: if you expect things to in something, then we need a pattern on it
17:09:24 <fesch> jn: we could have a property on it that says we have complex children on it would be one way to go
17:09:36 <fesch> jn: i don't like it.... (sigh)
17:11:36 <fesch> decision: to accept the CFC from last week on action-2006
17:13:03 <Rich> Action: Joanie implement the presentational children resolution from action-2006 See CFC: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016May/0016.html
17:13:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2071 - Implement the presentational children resolution from action-2006 see cfc: https://lists.w3.org/archives/public/public-aria-admin/2016may/0016.html [on Joanmarie Diggs - due 2016-06-02].
17:13:37 <fesch> rs: Separator role
17:14:02 <fesch> rs: we want to feature freeze by June 9 and review by June 16
17:14:21 <fesch> rs: inconsistencies, wording issues... not new stuff
17:14:36 <fesch> rs: I will be out for 3 weeks
17:14:50 <fesch> rs: I may be in the June 16 call...
17:15:04 <fesch> mc: may need an email...
17:15:42 <fesch> mc: I can get consensus on June 9 - or June 2 and Rich as the chair to accept the decision
17:15:48 <JF> Q?
17:15:57 <MichaelC> q-
17:16:11 <fesch> mk: what if someone finds an important question - does Rich need to be present?
17:16:59 <fesch> mc: I am not going to make big decisions - if we are not getting consensus - then I might delay until Rich gets back in --
17:17:36 <fesch> mc: I know there are things that don't have consensus, but I don't want to drag rich away from vacation
17:17:55 <jemma> jemma has joined #aria
17:17:57 <fesch> mk: are there other things in master branch what still needs to be done
17:19:38 <fesch> rs: during my vacation when do you want me to check in?
17:20:12 <fesch> mc: please check in on June 14
17:20:38 <fesch> mc: after the June 2 meeting I will put out a CFC
17:21:53 <fesch> mc: did we approve the primer?
17:22:56 <fesch> RESOLUTION: to publish ARIA 1.0 Primer  and 1.0 Practices as retired
17:23:26 <fesch> mk: that is documents has documents removed
17:25:16 <fesch> jg: if you give us permission for a subgroup, we can have a meeting for testing
17:25:21 <fesch> rs: go do it
17:25:58 <fesch> mc: the W3C has rules that docs must exist forever...
17:26:08 <fesch> rs: Separator role
17:26:11 <mck_> http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action2069-separator/aria/aria.html#separator
17:27:00 <jemma> present+ JaeunJemmaKu
17:27:04 <fesch> mk: rewrote 2 types of separator - static and interactive - like a widget
17:27:31 <fesch> mk: will add one row to the core AAM
17:28:21 <fesch> mk: you name a separator according to what would be expanded or collapsed
17:28:34 <fesch> mk: we have a windows splitter pattern in the APG
17:28:55 <fesch> fe: typo in static
17:30:56 <fesch> mk: will add valuetext
17:32:03 <LJWatson> zakim, agenda?
17:32:03 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
17:32:26 <fesch> mk: I didn't add text, but is should only give a value when it uses a variable
17:32:54 <LJWatson> q+ to ask about status of password role.
17:33:01 <fesch> mk: if it isn't a boolean, then it would be weird to say expanded 100%, collapsed 0%
17:33:45 <fesch> mk: have two changes typo static and and valuetext to table
17:34:40 <fesch> RESOLUTION: accept proposal for action-2069
17:35:27 <fesch> rs: how long do you want the CFC?
17:35:31 <fesch> mc: 6 days is fine
17:35:36 <MichaelC> ARIA PARIA Practices as staged for retirment: https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/
17:35:36 <MichaelC> ARIA Primer as staged for retirement: https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-primer/
17:35:36 <MichaelC> both modulo frontmatter changes for the TR pub
17:35:42 <fesch> rs: Keyboard shortcuts
17:36:07 <fesch> mk: do you want to look at the branch
17:36:12 <MichaelC> s/ARIA PARIA/ARIA/
17:40:11 <Rich> q?
17:41:08 <fesch> lw: wanted to ask about password role
17:42:03 <mck> mck has joined #aria
17:42:16 <fesch> jf: we have open actions on this
17:42:43 <fesch> rs: word from security folks was to get the security markers on the page
17:42:57 <JF> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2062
17:43:06 <fesch> lw: I am still worried about it
17:43:36 <fesch> rs: we have AT vendors going to render the text
17:43:57 <fesch> lw: I think this is a security problem no matter what
17:44:30 <fesch> rs: right now they will read whatever, if it says role password
17:45:02 <fesch> jf: two weeks ago we were going to get text into the spec
17:45:22 <fesch> rs: I would like a proposal on what wording you would like in the spec
17:46:19 <JF> ACTION: JF to provide draft text for password by 6/2/16
17:46:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2072 - Provide draft text for password by 6/2/16 [on John Foliot - due 2016-06-02].
17:46:26 <fesch> js: there is precedent going back to 2014 that AT behavior can be an exit criteria
17:47:09 <fesch> rs: put it on the agenda for next week
17:47:15 <LJWatson> Janina can you post a pointer to that decision? Thanks.
17:47:47 <fesch> rs: if it is only a warning for authors, that should easily be done
17:47:56 <fesch> jf: right
17:48:36 <MichielBijl> ???
17:48:38 <MichielBijl> q+
17:49:36 <fesch> mc: I can do a CFC, but chair needs to ratify it
17:50:01 <fesch> mk: I will do the keyshortcuts  tomorrow
17:50:14 <Rich> q?
17:50:45 <fesch> ack LJ
17:50:45 <Zakim> LJWatson, you wanted to ask about status of password role.
17:51:11 <fesch> mb: why don't we move password into 2.0
17:51:20 <clown> jamesn text:  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016May/0159.html
17:51:39 <JF> We did not have a "review", we received a number of comments fromvarious members of the security WG
17:51:52 <fesch> rs: we have consensus, and we have a problem because AT are doing keyboard echo
17:52:08 <fesch> rs: we discussed this for weeks
17:52:34 <fesch> rs: we have it in HTML 5 people are using it and AT's are doing the wrong thing
17:53:07 <fesch> rs: they need to speak the rendered text, it is a better situation - we had a security review...
17:53:44 <fesch> lw: where is the CFC?
17:54:03 <fesch> rs: we went to the security group, nothing else came in
17:54:09 <MichielBijl> http://www.w3.org/2016/03/31-aria-minutes.html
17:54:16 <MichielBijl> http://www.w3.org/2016/03/31-aria-minutes.html#item02
17:54:41 <MichielBijl> Resolution from those minutes: RESOLUTION: Password role brings value even if not fully supported, UAs should map same as they map input type=password, want AT SHOULD but not MUST to enhance
17:57:51 <fesch> mc: we can put it in the test suite...
17:58:27 <fesch> lw: Rich said AT testing is not part of the exiting testing
17:58:38 <fesch> mc: we can include this on testing
17:59:26 <fesch> rs: mc you can add this in the testing, we need two implementations on the password role to exit
18:00:25 <fesch> mk: action-2039 is all editorial, and if mc can do CFC then that is OK
18:00:41 <fesch> mk: I would prefer if people would review it
18:01:16 <fesch> rs: presentational roles section -
18:01:43 <fesch> rs: we have presentational native host semantics, is there any objection putting it in as is?
18:01:59 <fesch> action-2044
18:01:59 <trackbot> action-2044 -- Richard Schwerdtfeger to Separate out text from role="presentation/none" so that a single location may be referenced in core-aam. -- due 2016-04-12 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:01:59 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2044
18:02:08 <Rich> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action2044/aria/aria.html#conflict_resolution_presentation_none
18:02:31 <fesch> rs: example was not right, fixed that
18:02:39 <fesch> +1
18:02:50 <clown> +1
18:03:11 <fesch> mk: does this also have to do with strong semantics?
18:03:30 <fesch> rs: in the case where you have host language elements that were presentational
18:03:57 <fesch> rs: if you have a SVG circle and no ARIA properties or role, it is treated as presentational
18:04:13 <fesch> rs: if you put a role on it, then it isn't presentational
18:04:47 <fesch> mk: in this same section there are things about strong semantics
18:05:04 <fesch> rs: some SVG elements like title must always be presentational
18:05:33 <fesch> mk: that basically is saying that implicit role is presentational
18:05:43 <fesch> rs: right and you cant change it
18:06:35 <fesch> mk: if something has strong semantics, and a user marks it up non presentational then the UA must honor  it
18:06:43 <fesch> rs: no second paragraph
18:07:11 <fesch> mk: in conflict ...
18:08:40 <clown> https://rawgit.com/klown/aria/action2044/aria/aria.html#implicit_semantics
18:09:26 <MichaelC> Test statement and feature at risk for password: https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/CR-pub/aria/aria.html#sotd
18:09:37 <Rich> q?
18:09:41 <mck> Host languages may document features that cannot be overridden with WAI-ARIA (these are called "strong native semantics"). These can be features that have
18:09:43 <mck> implicit WAI-ARIA semantics, as well as features where the processing would be uncertain if the semantics were changed with WAI-ARIA. Conformance checkers
18:09:44 <mck> may signal an error or warning when a WAI-ARIA role is used on elements with strong native semantics, but as described above, user agents must still use
18:09:46 <mck> the value of the semantic of the WAI-ARIA role when exposing the element to accessibility APIs.
18:09:56 <MichielBijl> ack me
18:14:54 <fesch> mk: need to change the sentence
18:15:08 <fesch> rs: with that exception is it OK?
18:17:41 <fesch> RESOLUTION: accept proposal for action-2044 with the modification in Conflicts with Host Language Semantics concerning permanent presentational elements
18:17:59 <fesch> rrsagent, make minutes
18:17:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html fesch
18:21:00 <fesch> rrsagent, make minutes
18:21:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html fesch
18:46:15 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
18:52:32 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria
19:00:49 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
19:07:59 <Rich> Rich has joined #aria
19:39:22 <Rich> Rich has joined #aria
20:07:08 <Rich> Rich has joined #aria
20:39:33 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
20:48:13 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria
21:25:53 <Rich> Rich has joined #aria
22:09:14 <Rich> Rich has joined #aria
22:46:21 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria
23:55:03 <sam> sam has joined #aria