Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference

26 May 2016

See also: IRC log


Janina, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, Michiel_Bijl, LJWatson, MichaelC, matt_king, Joseph_Scheuhammer, JF, JamesNurthen, Bryan_Garaventa, jongund, JaeunJemmaKu


<Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016May/0157.html

<scribe> scribe: fesch

<Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016May/0157.html

<cyns> Automated accessibility testing with webdriver, open source from Microsoft https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2016/05/25/accessibility-test-automation/

rs: ARIA & HTML synchronization

ARIA & HTML synchronization

rs: we have dependencies on ARIA 1.1, we need to get it out the door
... SVG 2 may go to CR end of June

HTML may go to CR in June

rs: if there are really pressing issues... or something we need now, then we should consider ARIA 1.2
... and do that in parallel with ARIA 2

mk: what about strictly editorial stuff?

rs: I don't want to revisit stuff like presentational at this point
... that is a big editorial change

mk: concern is on taking resources away from testing...

<MichaelC> rs: yesterday met with TAG

<MichaelC> need to look at Web Components in ARIA 2.0 context

<MichaelC> we have the skills to make something pervasive

<MichaelC> will need all hands on deck for it

<MichaelC> want to get 1.1 out soon soon soon

<MichaelC> so we can focus on that

<scribe> scribe: fesch

mc: I would only like to do something with clear requirements and no scope creep

<jamesn> +1 to no 1.2

cs: ARIA 1.1 was a distraction to 2.0 lets not do it again

rs: I think James Craig valuestep thing is really for 2.0

mk: If you map out a plan for 2.0, and we have low hanging fruit, can be branch and publish a 1.2?
... that way the ATs are not afraid to implement it

cs: folks have been implementing before it comes out.

rs: would need adequate consensus

jn: can get everything in 2.0 if we do it in a reasonable timeframe

<cyns> +1 to jamesn on keeping the scope of 2.0 realistic

rs: need to work with lots of groups... working with TAG...

<MichaelC> mc: need ARIA 2.0 requirements at the *front* of the process

rs: we have consensus that we need to focus on 2.0

<MichaelC> we told TAG yesterday we´d start a draft end of summer 2016


rs: book your rooms now

mc: I have heard airfares will go up


May 12 CFC posinset, setsize

<Rich> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016May/0015.html

rs: if we accept the modification for link
... will satisfy SVG folks

mk: I didn't understand the last requirement
... I read it as hiding the hiding abstract roles

mc: removing the taxonomy from the spec is editorial action
... to make it less confusing
... there are abstract roles that only exist to support the taxonomy

mk: that was postponed

rs: you can still remove the drawing

mc: the taxonomy still exists...

rs: and we did some cleanup on the taxonomy
... we agreed to take menuitem radio... for posinset setsize

mc: I've made the changes -

rs: there was a discussion on presentational children, my holdup is treeitem
... we don't have an alternative for tree

bg: I tested this morning in chrome and safari

mk: it was written and mapped as presentational
... people want to use it, but it isn't mapped that way

rs: are you suggesting they use treegrid?

mk: it would take major content by an AT to make it readable with a reading cursor
... there are several techniques that provide access from a treeitem - a parallel structure

rs: people are creating trees with stuff inside of them

fe: folks do not understand that treegrid would be a tree
... a treegrid is a table with twisties

mk: a tree item that contains complex stuff is like a one column table
... the content can be controlled by the tree but not owned by the tree

rs: we did the same thing where a grid can have one column

gb: I have done treegrid controls

rs: with a single column?

gb: at present AT present a treegrid like a X

mk: that kind of thing that was meant for the us to tell AT's to fix

rs: if you have an action item for treegrid

mk: it is in our plan
... we will break grid out into two flavors... to show real world implementations

rs: if the APG makes an example can we except it as is?

fe: what is the timing?

mk: this year
... the APG will prioritize and gridtree in the next 6-8 weeks

jn: what people want is to put controls in - and the don't have support for it

mk: if you expect things to in something, then we need a pattern on it

jn: we could have a property on it that says we have complex children on it would be one way to go
... i don't like it.... (sigh)

decision: to accept the CFC from last week on action-2006

<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 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html#action01]

<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].

rs: Separator role
... we want to feature freeze by June 9 and review by June 16
... inconsistencies, wording issues... not new stuff
... I will be out for 3 weeks
... I may be in the June 16 call...

mc: may need an email...
... I can get consensus on June 9 - or June 2 and Rich as the chair to accept the decision

mk: what if someone finds an important question - does Rich need to be present?

mc: I am not going to make big decisions - if we are not getting consensus - then I might delay until Rich gets back in --
... I know there are things that don't have consensus, but I don't want to drag rich away from vacation

mk: are there other things in master branch what still needs to be done

rs: during my vacation when do you want me to check in?

mc: please check in on June 14
... after the June 2 meeting I will put out a CFC
... did we approve the primer?

RESOLUTION: to publish ARIA 1.0 Primer and 1.0 Practices as retired

mk: that is documents has documents removed

jg: if you give us permission for a subgroup, we can have a meeting for testing

rs: go do it

mc: the W3C has rules that docs must exist forever...

rs: Separator role

<mck_> http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action2069-separator/aria/aria.html#separator

mk: rewrote 2 types of separator - static and interactive - like a widget
... will add one row to the core AAM
... you name a separator according to what would be expanded or collapsed
... we have a windows splitter pattern in the APG

fe: typo in static

mk: will add valuetext
... I didn't add text, but is should only give a value when it uses a variable
... if it isn't a boolean, then it would be weird to say expanded 100%, collapsed 0%
... have two changes typo static and and valuetext to table

RESOLUTION: accept proposal for action-2069

rs: how long do you want the CFC?

mc: 6 days is fine

<MichaelC> ARIA Practices as staged for retirment: https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/

<MichaelC> ARIA Primer as staged for retirement: https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-primer/

<MichaelC> both modulo frontmatter changes for the TR pub

rs: Keyboard shortcuts

mk: do you want to look at the branch

lw: wanted to ask about password role

jf: we have open actions on this

rs: word from security folks was to get the security markers on the page

<JF> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2062

lw: I am still worried about it

rs: we have AT vendors going to render the text

lw: I think this is a security problem no matter what

rs: right now they will read whatever, if it says role password

jf: two weeks ago we were going to get text into the spec

rs: I would like a proposal on what wording you would like in the spec

<JF> ACTION: JF to provide draft text for password by 6/2/16 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2072 - Provide draft text for password by 6/2/16 [on John Foliot - due 2016-06-02].

js: there is precedent going back to 2014 that AT behavior can be an exit criteria

rs: put it on the agenda for next week

<LJWatson> Janina can you post a pointer to that decision? Thanks.

rs: if it is only a warning for authors, that should easily be done

jf: right

<MichielBijl> ???

mc: I can do a CFC, but chair needs to ratify it

mk: I will do the keyshortcuts tomorrow

<Zakim> LJWatson, you wanted to ask about status of password role.

mb: why don't we move password into 2.0

<clown> jamesn text: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016May/0159.html

<JF> We did not have a "review", we received a number of comments fromvarious members of the security WG

rs: we have consensus, and we have a problem because AT are doing keyboard echo
... we discussed this for weeks
... we have it in HTML 5 people are using it and AT's are doing the wrong thing
... they need to speak the rendered text, it is a better situation - we had a security review...

lw: where is the CFC?

rs: we went to the security group, nothing else came in

<MichielBijl> http://www.w3.org/2016/03/31-aria-minutes.html

<MichielBijl> http://www.w3.org/2016/03/31-aria-minutes.html#item02

<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

mc: we can put it in the test suite...

lw: Rich said AT testing is not part of the exiting testing

mc: we can include this on testing

rs: mc you can add this in the testing, we need two implementations on the password role to exit

mk: action-2039 is all editorial, and if mc can do CFC then that is OK
... I would prefer if people would review it

rs: presentational roles section -
... we have presentational native host semantics, is there any objection putting it in as is?


<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

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2044

<Rich> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action2044/aria/aria.html#conflict_resolution_presentation_none

rs: example was not right, fixed that


<clown> +1

mk: does this also have to do with strong semantics?

rs: in the case where you have host language elements that were presentational
... if you have a SVG circle and no ARIA properties or role, it is treated as presentational
... if you put a role on it, then it isn't presentational

mk: in this same section there are things about strong semantics

rs: some SVG elements like title must always be presentational

mk: that basically is saying that implicit role is presentational

rs: right and you cant change it

mk: if something has strong semantics, and a user marks it up non presentational then the UA must honor it

rs: no second paragraph

mk: in conflict ...

<clown> https://rawgit.com/klown/aria/action2044/aria/aria.html#implicit_semantics

<MichaelC> Test statement and feature at risk for password: https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/CR-pub/aria/aria.html#sotd

<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

<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

<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

<mck> the value of the semantic of the WAI-ARIA role when exposing the element to accessibility APIs.

mk: need to change the sentence

rs: with that exception is it OK?

RESOLUTION: accept proposal for action-2044 with the modification in Conflicts with Host Language Semantics concerning permanent presentational elements

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: JF to provide draft text for password by 6/2/16 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Joanie implement the presentational children resolution from action-2006 See CFC: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016May/0016.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html#action01]

Summary of Resolutions

  1. to publish ARIA 1.0 Primer and 1.0 Practices as retired
  2. accept proposal for action-2069
  3. accept proposal for action-2044 with the modification in Conflicts with Host Language Semantics concerning permanent presentational elements
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.144 (CVS log)
$Date: 2016/05/26 18:21:05 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the 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/last requirement/hiding abstract roles/
Succeeded: s/ARIA PARIA/ARIA/
Found Scribe: fesch
Inferring ScribeNick: fesch
Found Scribe: fesch
Inferring ScribeNick: fesch
Present: Janina Rich_Schwerdtfeger Michiel_Bijl LJWatson MichaelC matt_king Joseph_Scheuhammer JF JamesNurthen Bryan_Garaventa jongund JaeunJemmaKu
Regrets: Joanmarie_Diggs
Found Date: 26 May 2016
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/05/26-aria-minutes.html
People with action items: jf joanie

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]