16:31:15 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:31:15 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/06/30-aria-irc
16:31:17 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
16:31:17 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #aria
16:31:19 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
16:31:19 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
16:31:20 <Stefan> present+
16:31:20 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference
16:31:20 <trackbot> Date: 30 June 2016
16:31:21 <joanie> present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
16:31:23 <MichaelC> present+ MichaelC
16:31:26 <richardschwerdtfeger> present+ Rich_Schwerdtfeger
16:31:32 <Stefan> present+ Stefan
16:31:34 <richardschwerdtfeger> RRSAgent, make log public
16:31:37 <richardschwerdtfeger> chair: Rich
16:31:41 <janina> present+ Janina
16:31:45 <MichaelC> present+ Cynthia
16:33:35 <joanie> scribe: joanie
16:33:39 <jongund> present+ jongund
16:33:42 <joanie> Topic: Automated Testing
16:33:49 <jaeun> jaeun has joined #aria
16:33:55 <richardschwerdtfeger> https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_1.1_Automated_Testing
16:33:59 <joanie> JG: The main thing is scheduling a meeting time.
16:34:23 <joanie> JG: I mainly want to coordinate with Cynthia and Joanie.
16:34:37 <joanie> JG: And Fred, if he's planning on participating.
16:34:46 <joanie> FE: I want to be sure SVG can do whatever HTML does.
16:34:57 <joanie> FE: If it works, then I don't need to be involved.
16:35:02 <joanie> FE: But that's up to you.
16:35:10 <JF> JF has joined #aria
16:35:18 <JF> Present+ JF
16:35:18 <joanie> JG: Joanie, Cynthia, and what about John (from Microsoft).
16:35:30 <joanie> CS: I'd prefer to do it as a one-off.
16:35:37 <joanie> CS: github might be easier.
16:35:48 <joanie> JG: But Shane mentions another testing resource.
16:36:11 <joanie> CS: I think we could share the test cases.
16:36:25 <joanie> JG: The main thing I want to do is set up a meeting time.
16:36:34 <joanie> RS: Why not set up a Doodle poll?
16:36:41 <joanie> RS: For the week after next, due to vacations.
16:36:41 <clown> clown has joined #aria
16:36:52 <joanie> JG: The people in India are probably not going to be participating in this.
16:36:58 <joanie> JG: John F?
16:37:11 <joanie> JG: Is it ok to not include them?
16:37:23 <joanie> JF: They're mainly interested in writing unit tests; not code.
16:37:35 <joanie> CS: I think we're still talking about frameworks and harnesses.
16:37:44 <joanie> JG: And also a templating system for writing test cases.
16:37:54 <joanie> JF: Cool.
16:38:00 <joanie> RS: Whom do you want on the call?
16:38:05 <joanie> JG: Anyone who wants to come.
16:38:10 <clown> present+ Joseph_Scheuhammer
16:38:17 <joanie> JG: I'll just send it to the ARIA list.
16:38:19 <mck> mck has joined #aria
16:38:27 <joanie> CS: John Jansen is not on the mailing list.
16:38:36 <joanie> MC: I think you should continue using the aria-testing list.
16:38:39 <jaeun> present+ JaeunJemmaKU
16:38:47 <joanie> MC: And John (Jansen) can be added to that list.
16:38:51 <richardschwerdtfeger> trackbot, make log public
16:38:51 <trackbot> Sorry, richardschwerdtfeger, I don't understand 'trackbot, make log public'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
16:38:57 <joanie> MC: You don't have to be a member of that list.
16:39:08 <joanie> JG: Could you send me the names of the people who are on the list?
16:39:09 <richardschwerdtfeger> trackbot, makelog public
16:39:09 <trackbot> Sorry, richardschwerdtfeger, I don't understand 'trackbot, makelog public'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
16:39:12 <joanie> MC: Checking....
16:39:21 <richardschwerdtfeger> RRSAgent, make log public
16:39:21 <Stefan> q+
16:39:22 <joanie> MC: I'll have to get that to you later.
16:39:31 <joanie> JG: I'll just send it to the test list.
16:39:40 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
16:39:42 <joanie> MC: Also send the initial mail to the ARIA list as well.
16:39:54 <joanie> MC: John Jansen is not on the testing list.
16:40:03 <joanie> CS: I'll check with him today. Or you can email him.
16:40:08 <joanie> JG: I'll copy him.
16:40:15 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
16:40:21 <joanie> Stefan: Question regarding sample project John sent around.
16:40:21 <richardschwerdtfeger> ack Stefan
16:40:35 <joanie> Stefan: I still have some compiling issues with Visual Studio 2015.
16:40:45 <joanie> Stefan: Do I need a more recent version of Windows 10?
16:40:47 <joanie> CS: Yes.
16:41:03 <joanie> CS: You should be able to get the other version of WebDriver to get it to compile.
16:41:16 <joanie> CS: But to get the accessibility improvements we've done, you really need to update.
16:41:36 <joanie> Topic: Static/Text Role
16:41:43 <MichaelC> scribe: MichaelC
16:42:17 <MichaelC> jd: Have sent proposal for review
16:42:18 <MichaelC> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jun/0274.html
16:42:31 <MichaelC> have made no changes since that was sent
16:42:31 <MichaelC> discussion happening on mailing list
16:42:38 <MichaelC> can explain background if needed
16:42:46 <Stefan> q-
16:42:48 <MichaelC> cs: not sure if needed, and worried about stripping context
16:42:52 <clown> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2086/aria/aria.html#static
16:42:57 <cyns> cyns has joined #aria
16:42:58 <MichaelC> rs: my concerns were resolved, about interactive content
16:43:15 <MichaelC> q+ to note emerging consensus? around JGW proposal
16:43:31 <MichaelC> I´m less concerned about the name, though know stability of name important
16:43:36 <cyns_> cyns_ has joined #aria
16:43:45 <MichaelC> think we should do a consensus call
16:43:50 <joanie> scribe: joanie
16:43:50 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
16:44:01 <joanie> MC: I noticed on the thread that Jason White made a proposal.
16:44:01 <richardschwerdtfeger> ack MichaelC
16:44:01 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to note emerging consensus? around JGW proposal
16:44:03 <MichaelC> ack me
16:44:11 <joanie> MC: And we might have some potential consensus.
16:44:16 <joanie> RS: I'm ok with that as well.
16:44:21 <joanie> CS: I don't think I saw that one.
16:44:24 <richardschwerdtfeger> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2086/aria/aria.html#static
16:44:33 <joanie> MK: I've missed a lot of stuff.
16:44:35 <MichaelC> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jun/0297.html
16:44:42 <joanie> MK: But my concerns are very much the same as Cynthia's.
16:44:54 <joanie> MK: My biggest concern is why do we need another way to hide stuff?
16:45:11 <joanie> MK: That seems to hurt accessibility more than help it.
16:45:30 <joanie> MC: As I understand Jason's proposal, using an empty roledescription would solve this issue.
16:45:45 <joanie> MC: And from the responses on the mailing list, most people seem to think that would address this need for now.
16:45:55 <joanie> CS: That seems like a reasonable approach for now.
16:46:05 <joanie> CS: It may not address SVG.
16:46:21 <joanie> MK: What we're really saying is that sometimes we want to hide the role.
16:46:25 <joanie> RS: Yes.
16:46:31 <joanie> MK: But role="none"....
16:46:42 <joanie> MK: In cases when you want to hide the semantics.
16:46:57 <joanie> CS: I think they want to keep an object in the accessibility tree, but not its children.
16:47:06 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
16:47:09 <joanie> JS: Yes, an object in the accessibility tree with a name.
16:47:23 <joanie> MK: But if you have a containing object in the accessibility tree....
16:47:37 <joanie> JS: In that case, the object with role="none" will not be in the tree, but its content will be.
16:47:45 <joanie> CS: No textual content and an object with a name.
16:47:54 <joanie> JS: I'm not defending either position; just explaining what they are.
16:48:05 <joanie> MC: It could be that the APG could explain how to do these.
16:48:16 <joanie> MC: My understanding is that existing ARIA can address these needs.
16:48:31 <joanie> CS: My understanding is they want the functionality of image, without the rolename being presented.
16:48:55 <clown> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2086/aria/aria.html#aria-roledescription
16:49:03 <joanie> MK: If the roledescription is null, and actual role is img, if AT ignores roledescription or there's a way to do so, there's a way to render it as if it hadn't been done.
16:49:11 <clown> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#ariaRoleDescription
16:49:25 <joanie> CS: I don't know about the other platforms, but in UIA, roledescription will be exposed as the localized roletype.
16:49:38 <joanie> CS: I don't know what would happen if the roledescription is an empty string.
16:49:42 <joanie> CS: But I'll have to check.
16:49:47 <clown> s/localized roletype/localized control type/
16:50:01 <joanie> RS: What I would like to do is get some consensus on which approach people want to take.
16:50:30 <clown> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2086/aria/aria.html#img
16:50:31 <joanie> RS: Use img to do this, or create a new role?
16:50:33 <joanie> CS: Image
16:50:36 <joanie> MK: Image
16:50:43 <joanie> JD: Image
16:50:53 <fesch> image +1
16:51:01 <joanie> MC: James noted on list that image has a different name-from.
16:51:09 <richardschwerdtfeger> RS: Image
16:51:12 <mck> image +1
16:51:15 <joanie> RS: Others?
16:51:25 <joanie> MC: I don't have a technical stake in this game.
16:51:38 <joanie> MC: I think Jason's suggestion is an elegant solution for now.
16:51:44 <joanie> RS: I think this is a temporary solution.
16:51:52 <joanie> RS: We need to work on a better solution past 1.1.
16:52:05 <joanie> RS: But this will get what we need to do for now.
16:52:13 <joanie> JW: This is not meant to replace the new role.
16:52:22 <joanie> JW: It's meant to address some of the use cases for now.
16:52:33 <joanie> RS: Image or text for 1.1, Jason?
16:52:49 <joanie> MC: I think on the list, people are happy enough for now, with Jason's suggestion.
16:53:11 <joanie> JW: Joanie's draft of the role points out that unless you are an accessibility API expert, it's not obvious what the use cases are.
16:53:30 <joanie> JW: But this needs to be explained somewhere (non-normative documents or otherwisse).
16:53:46 <joanie> JW: I'm fine with the image approach for now.
16:54:13 <joanie> RS: It sounds like we have a resolution.
16:54:22 <joanie> RS: Do we want to have image support name from content?
16:54:29 <joanie> RS: That would require some additional authoring work.
16:54:31 <clown> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2086/aria/aria.html#img
16:54:37 <joanie> MC: I think we shouldn't meddle at this point.
16:54:47 <joanie> MC: I think we can live with img as it is.
16:55:02 <joanie> MK: I've still not seen any of the use cases.
16:55:11 <joanie> MK: I don't think this improves accessibility.
16:55:20 <joanie> MK: It seems people are trying to stylize speech.
16:55:34 <joanie> MK: And I think that requires implementation in screen readers.
16:55:42 <MichaelC> q+
16:55:44 <joanie> MK: It's user preference like punctuation level.
16:55:52 <joanie> MK: We may need a property to express this.
16:56:00 <joanie> MK: Screen readers could have image announcement levels.
16:56:19 <joanie> MK: Anything that hides semantics or flattens stuff in the tree is dangerous.
16:56:35 <joanie> MK: And I'm also concerned with null roledescriptions.
16:56:42 <MichaelC> q+ to say taking this approach means no technical change from the current status quo, but does (we think) remove objections to this status quo, and don´t think we want to ask Apple to remove / change its existing support for text role yet
16:56:43 <joanie> MK: It's going to be hard to write about this in the APG.
16:56:54 <joanie> MK: All authors think they know what they're doing.
16:57:06 <joanie> RS: It's like live regions being misunderstood.
16:57:25 <joanie> RS: It looks like the consensus is to move the static/text role to ARIA 2.0.
16:57:41 <joanie> RS: But in the meantime, to make the use of Jason's suggestion.
16:57:55 <joanie> MC: We can resolve to move the text/static role to ARIA 2.0.
16:58:05 <joanie> MK: Does roledescription allow for empty strings?
16:58:12 <clown> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2086/aria/aria.html#aria-roledescription
16:58:15 <joanie> MC: We should not ask Apple to remove their support.
16:58:26 <joanie> RS: We already resolved to move this to ARIA 2.0 once.
16:58:31 <joanie> RS: So this is not new.
16:58:38 <joanie> RS: And that resolution passed CfC.
16:58:51 <joanie> CS: And we're asking for an authoring topic regarding flattening the tree.
16:58:58 <joanie> RS: That would be something for the APG to deal with.
16:59:07 <joanie> MK: You can create an action for that if you want.
16:59:08 <Stefan> q+
16:59:17 <joanie> MC: Looking at the spec, roledescription just says string.
16:59:26 <joanie> JS: It also has some SHOULDs
16:59:54 <MichaelC> ack me
16:59:54 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say taking this approach means no technical change from the current status quo, but does (we think) remove objections to this status quo, and don´t think
16:59:56 <MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#aria-roledescription
16:59:58 <Zakim> ... we want to ask Apple to remove / change its existing support for text role yet
16:59:59 <joanie> JS: (Reads from spec)
17:00:24 <joanie> MK: So if you put it on role of img, it doesn't say anything about the string.
17:00:36 <joanie> CS: That makes sense. You can only put it on elements in the tree.
17:00:39 <clown> "Authors SHOULD only use aria-roledescription on elements that equate to a valid WAI-ARIA role (have an implicit WAI-ARIA role semantic) or have a valid WAI-ARIA role applied. If neither condition is met, then user agents MUST NOT expose the aria-roledescription."
17:00:43 <joanie> JS: It says nothing about empty string.
17:00:54 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
17:01:04 <joanie> CS: Which means screen readers probably won't say anything.
17:01:05 <joanie> q+
17:01:13 <joanie> MK: In some cases roledescription is a property.
17:01:26 <joanie> MK: In some cases we say an empty string is like not providing the property.
17:01:41 <joanie> MK: Probably this is a gap in the property.
17:01:54 <joanie> MK: You shouldn't leave it up to user agents to ignore a string.
17:02:00 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria
17:02:15 <jamesn> rrsagent, make minutes
17:02:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/06/30-aria-minutes.html jamesn
17:02:15 <joanie> BG: Can we have aria-roledescription="null", rather than "".
17:02:18 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
17:02:28 <joanie> MC: It's too tricky to try to create a value of "null".
17:02:40 <joanie> Stefan: Has Apple already support for aria-roledescription?
17:02:41 <MichaelC> ack s
17:02:42 <joanie> RS: Yes.
17:02:44 <richardschwerdtfeger> ack Stefan
17:02:57 <joanie> Stefan: To be used together with role of application?
17:03:05 <joanie> RS: No, img.
17:03:23 <joanie> MC: The proposal is for role img, but the roledescription property is not constricted.
17:03:27 <clown> <div role="image" aria-roledescription="" aria-label="might fine label>  stuff </div>
17:03:32 <joanie> Stefan: I thought I read somewhere in the spec....
17:03:38 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
17:03:42 <joanie> MC: That is something else.
17:03:43 <Stefan> q-
17:03:44 <MichaelC> ack j
17:03:48 <richardschwerdtfeger> ack joanie
17:04:10 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
17:04:21 <MichaelC> jd: ¨¨ may map to null
17:04:37 <MichaelC> if we want explict support for ¨¨ on roledescription, may need to add a line
17:04:41 <joanie> scribe: joanie
17:04:47 <joanie> MC: I agree. I think one line is needed.
17:04:53 <joanie> RS: Would that require another CfC?
17:04:56 <joanie> MC: It would.
17:05:06 <joanie> JS: And we may want to special-case this in the Core AAM.
17:05:13 <joanie> RS: We could handle it that way.
17:05:37 <joanie> MC: The line we need to add to roledescription is non-destructive to the rest of the text in the spec about that property.
17:05:49 <joanie> MC: We could do a parallel CfC for pseudo last call.
17:05:57 <joanie> RS: I really want to get out a last call draft.
17:06:06 <joanie> RS: So, Michael, we're not adding anything new.
17:06:13 <jamesn> this seems like a huge hack.... if it allows someone to do the same as role=static I don't know why people see this as preferable
17:06:19 <joanie> RS: The text/static CfC already passed before.
17:06:25 <joanie> MC: I think we should log a resolution.
17:06:33 <joanie> MC: But that would not need to go out for CfC.
17:06:33 <jamesn> i like role=text/static.... it seems useful
17:07:04 <jamesn> I am speaking at a conference and have no phone access this morning
17:07:31 <joanie> (Drafting of resolution text)
17:07:36 <richardschwerdtfeger> proposal: The group reinfornces the decision to move the text role to ARIA 2.0, but also to write text for aria-roledescription to state how screen readers should handle “” as a value
17:07:51 <jamesn> why is role="img" aria-label="wibble" aria-roledesciption="" better than role="static" aria-label="wibble"
17:08:08 <joanie> JS: To point out that JamesN is saying he's in favor of the static/text role, but can't come to the call.
17:08:11 <jamesn> people can still do all the things that people are concerned about breaking
17:08:19 <joanie> MC: A number of people are in favor of it.
17:08:27 <joanie> MC: But they are also ok with putting it off.
17:08:42 <joanie> MK: JamesN was part of the CfC to push it off in the first place.
17:08:47 <joanie> MK: So I think we're fine.
17:09:02 <joanie> MC: Given that JamesN is participating via IRC, he can object if he wants.
17:09:10 <joanie> MC: But I think he is ok with the situation.
17:09:13 <jamesn> I am objecting
17:09:31 <joanie> MC: Oh, you (JamesN) are objecting.
17:09:40 <joanie> MC: This is hard because he's not on the phone.
17:09:51 <joanie> RS: Cynthia doesn't want to implement the static text role at this time.
17:09:55 <richardschwerdtfeger> Cynthia does not want to implement the text/static role at this time. due to it being another vehicle to hide content
17:10:03 <joanie> RS: Due to it being .... (typed above)
17:10:12 <joanie> MK: Was JamesN objecting to using image instead?
17:10:21 <joanie> MK: i.e. don't do either for 1.1.?
17:10:24 <jamesn> but role=img aria-roledescription will hide the content in the same way right - but you are ok with that?
17:10:31 <joanie> MK: Or is he objecting to not reviving the text role?
17:10:35 <joanie> MK: It's not clear to me.
17:10:41 <jamesn> i like the text role... i think it is useful
17:10:49 <joanie> MK: He could be talking about roledescription w.r.t. 1.1.
17:11:05 <joanie> MC: To attempt to summarize, I think he thinks the roledescription is too hacky.
17:11:15 <richardschwerdtfeger> We agree the aria-roledescription is hacky
17:11:15 <jamesn> i don't like hacking role=img with roledescription to do the same thing
17:11:32 <joanie> MK: There's a long-term impact to doing the roledescription.
17:11:48 <joanie> MK: So we have to determine if it's worth the risk.
17:11:55 <joanie> MK: Should ATs read the original role?
17:12:04 <joanie> MK: We wouldn't be able to go back on this description.
17:12:10 <joanie> MK: Well, I guess we *could*.
17:12:17 <joanie> MK: But is it worth the deprecation?
17:12:24 <joanie> MK: They'd have to change their code.
17:12:27 <jamesn> no. my phone crashed last night...
17:12:36 <joanie> MK: I still go back to the fact that I've seen no compelling case for this.
17:12:45 <joanie> MK: I would rather the screen readers just say "image"
17:12:48 <jamesn> what about the one i provided?
17:12:59 <joanie> MK: Maybe in the future we decide what to do to get screen readers to stylize speech.
17:13:10 <joanie> MK: But we want to make ARIA robust.
17:13:21 <jamesn> adobe one
17:13:50 <richardschwerdtfeger> scribenick: Rich
17:13:51 <clown> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jun/0284.html
17:13:58 <clown> jamesn example ^
17:14:23 <clown> Copying the example from the email:
17:14:24 <clown> <div class="plan_cost">
17:14:24 <clown>    <span class="superscript">US$</span>
17:14:24 <clown>    19
17:14:24 <clown>    <span class="superscript cents">99</span>
17:14:25 <clown>    <span class="per_month">/mo</span>
17:14:25 <clown> </div>
17:14:57 <clown> vs.  <div class="plan_cost" role="static" aria-label="US$19.99/mo"> spans from above </div>
17:15:05 <richardschwerdtfeger> MK: to make the examples speack without saying image in those cases it seems like a very fine level of control over the user experience. It is extremely rare and the benefit is negligable
17:15:15 <jamesn> this is not an image
17:15:49 <richardschwerdtfeger> MK: There were times when you had spacer images and you had to find the content. this is the complete opposite
17:15:58 <joanie> scribe: joanie
17:16:05 <jamesn> (of course Adobe could also fix their code so this included a decimal ;) )
17:16:18 <joanie> RS: So... We do have an implementation in iOS and OS X.
17:17:29 <joanie> JD: We have it in Chrome.
17:17:33 <joanie> RS: Positive?
17:17:39 <joanie> JD: James Craig said so.
17:17:42 <Stefan> q+
17:17:44 <joanie> JS: James Craig said so.
17:18:00 <joanie> MK: JamesN said earlier, it's not an image.
17:18:05 <joanie> MK: Do we need a symbol role?
17:18:19 <joanie> MK: A role that's designed to hide all of it's children....
17:18:28 <clown> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jun/0132.html
17:18:30 <MichaelC> q+
17:18:32 <joanie> MK: Dealing with how certain characters are spoken is different.
17:18:39 <jaeun> james said in the email, "I've confirmed that, with an explicit label, this works in WebKit,"
17:18:47 <clown> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jun/0132.html
17:18:50 <joanie> MK: And things like individual characters are a much, much different use case.
17:18:56 <clown> The text role implementations remain in both WebKit (Safari) and Blink (Google Chrome).
17:18:58 <joanie> JS: I've but the URL in above.
17:19:05 <jaeun> s/james/ james craig
17:19:07 <joanie> JS: And the quote from the message is above.
17:19:15 <joanie> jaeun: no
17:19:21 <MichaelC> q-
17:19:32 <joanie> s/craig/ N/
17:19:45 <Stefan> q-
17:20:13 <MichaelC> scribe: MichaelC
17:20:28 <MichaelC> jd: whole point of rewrite was to not change functionality
17:20:36 <MichaelC> worked hard with JamesC to be sure of that
17:21:03 <MichaelC> text role was meant turn text into not-text
17:21:17 <MichaelC> my concern was that people would assume an opposite impact
17:21:51 <MichaelC> so my proposal was to put in an accessible name, if there isn´t one, and eliminate the text-ness
17:22:01 <MichaelC> in theory, role could be put on a whole paragraph
17:22:09 <MichaelC> which messes up its navigation
17:22:33 <jamesn> I am going to have to go as my session is coming up soon.
17:22:34 <joanie> q+
17:22:35 <MichaelC> rs: sounds like still objections to the img / roledescription solution
17:22:53 <MichaelC> with the amount of concern, think should move to 2.0
17:22:57 <clown> q?
17:23:04 <MichaelC> even though JD´s proposal addresses my concerns
17:23:23 <jamesn> I would prefer the roledescrption solution to moving eveeyhting to 2.0 as we need this kind of thing
17:23:24 <MichaelC> so I can go either way
17:23:36 <chaals> chaals has joined #aria
17:24:00 <jamesn> if we move it to 2.0 we must support roledescription=""
17:24:21 <jamesn> (but i still think it is super hacky)
17:24:24 <MichaelC> jd: JamesC said he was ok postponing at least to 1.2 now we all understand the use case
17:24:30 <MichaelC> he was the main proponent
17:24:56 <clown> the email that joanie was referring to:  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jun/0291.html
17:25:14 <MichaelC> rs: seems like JamesN is (reluctantly) supporting the roledescription solution for now
17:25:18 <MichaelC> thanks for meeting us half way
17:25:53 <joanie> s/jaeun: no//
17:25:59 <joanie> q-
17:25:59 <MichaelC> mk: concerned about empty roledescription, what if it wipes out role?
17:26:10 <jamesn> so i am only ok with punting it if we have empty roledescription wiping out the role
17:26:11 <joanie> scribe: joanie
17:26:24 <joanie> MC: We agreed we need to add something to the spec for empty roledescription.
17:26:28 <richardschwerdtfeger> proposal: The group reinfornces the decision to move the text role to ARIA 2.0, but also to write text for aria-roledescription to state how screen readers should handle “” as a value
17:26:30 <joanie> MK: We need to address it in 1.1.
17:26:39 <joanie> MK: But I think we want to say empty means ignore it.
17:26:46 <joanie> RS: My proposal is above.
17:27:03 <joanie> JS: I would add to that, possibly changing the mapping of aria-roledescription based on the empty string.
17:27:09 <joanie> RS: What would you put in there?
17:27:14 <joanie> RS: You have to have an object.
17:27:30 <joanie> JS: Cynthia said, I think, they'd probably stick the role in.
17:27:46 <joanie> JS: So you want to explicitly say how to handle an empty string for aria-roledescription.
17:27:55 <joanie> RS: Well, that's what I have here.
17:28:07 <joanie> MK: I think we need to entertain different proposals.
17:28:16 <joanie> RS: That would extend things even longer.
17:28:28 <joanie> MK: I think we need to address this issue this week.
17:28:34 <joanie> MK: We may have competing branches.
17:28:36 <richardschwerdtfeger> proposal: The group reinforces the decision to move the text role to ARIA 2.0, but also to write text for aria-roledescription to state how screen readers should handle “” the value
17:28:47 <joanie> MK: I would like to say that we ignore the role if we have an empty string.
17:29:04 <joanie> MC: So MK, you're saying that we should make the proposed hack from Jason not work?
17:29:07 <joanie> MK: Yes.
17:29:16 <joanie> MK: I've become very anti-hack when it comes to ARIA.
17:29:20 <richardschwerdtfeger> RESOLUTION: The group reinforces the decision to move the text role to ARIA 2.0, but also to write text for aria-roledescription to state how screen readers should handle the “” value
17:29:24 <joanie> RS: I'm going to make this the resolution.
17:29:32 <joanie> RS: I'll give someone an action.
17:29:40 <joanie> RS: Who will take the action to deal with the "" value?
17:29:55 <joanie> MC: I think Matt may be right regarding competing proposals.
17:30:01 <joanie> MC: So I think we give one to Matt.
17:30:08 <jamesn> I only support this resolution of we can make it work using aria-roledescription - if not I do not support this resolution.
17:30:08 <richardschwerdtfeger> Action: matt create a proposal for handling the role description value of “”
17:30:08 <trackbot> 'matt' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., mgarrish, mking3).
17:30:11 <joanie> MC: And give someone on the other side an action.
17:30:27 <richardschwerdtfeger> Action: mking create a proposal for handling the role description value of “”
17:30:27 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2092 - Create a proposal for handling the role description value of “” [on Matthew King - due 2016-07-07].
17:30:39 <joanie> RS: Who will take a competing proposal.
17:30:57 <joanie> MC: I think Joseph or Joanie.
17:30:59 <joanie> JD: No.
17:31:03 <joanie> JS: No.
17:31:08 <joanie> JS: I think Jason should.
17:31:33 <joanie> MK: I can make two branches.
17:32:03 <joanie> Topic: CFC Result: Remove children presentational of true for menu item, tree item, and spinbutton
17:32:11 <joanie> RS: This will pass as a decision.
17:32:14 <richardschwerdtfeger> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016Jun/0065.html
17:32:17 <joanie> RS: Link above.
17:32:26 <joanie> Topic: Joanie Updates to separator role
17:32:40 <joanie> RS: I didn't have anything at the time. Do you have a link?
17:33:08 <joanie> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2091
17:33:22 <MichaelC> scribe: MichaelC
17:33:37 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #aria
17:33:44 <joanie> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2091/aria/aria.html#separator
17:33:49 <tzviya> present+ Tzviya
17:33:58 <joanie> Changes:
17:33:58 <joanie> * Add implicit values: valuemin (0), valuemax (100), and valuenow (50).
17:33:58 <joanie> * Make valuenow required and add an associated "authors MUST".
17:33:58 <joanie> * Add an "authors SHOULD" regarding valuemin and valuemax.
17:33:59 <joanie> * Remove aria-expanded as a supported property. If a platform needs
17:34:00 <joanie> this state, it can be mapped based on the values in the Core AAM.
17:34:07 <joanie> In addition, there was no statement suggesting that authors SHOULD
17:34:07 <joanie> provide an accessible name in environments when there is more than
17:34:07 <joanie> one focusable slider. That statement has been provided as part of
17:34:08 <joanie> these changes.
17:34:10 <fesch> q+
17:34:54 <MichaelC> jd: particularly want input on the removal of aria-expanded
17:35:18 <MichaelC> in implementation, if aria-valuenow > aria-valuemin, it´s expanded
17:35:26 <MichaelC> so don´t need the property explicitly
17:35:32 <joanie> If the separator is focusable, authors must set the value of aria-valuenow to a number reflecting the current position of the separator and update that value when it changes. Authors should also provide the value of aria-valuemin if it is not 0 and the value of aria-valuemax if it is not 100. If missing or not a number, the implicit values of these attributes are as follows:
17:35:37 <joanie> The implicit value of aria-valuemin is 0.
17:35:40 <joanie> The implicit value of aria-valuemax is 100.
17:35:42 <joanie> The implicit value of aria-valuenow is 50.
17:35:45 <joanie> In applications where there is more than one focusable separator, authors should provide an accessible name for each one.
17:36:14 <jamesn> Can we also recommend aria-controls or is that an APG thing?
17:36:42 <MichaelC> jd: To JamesN, dunno
17:37:02 <MichaelC> mk: I was trying to minimize changes
17:37:09 <MichaelC> but like the more substantial change here
17:37:30 <MichaelC> I think we should not put aria-controls
17:37:37 <MichaelC> there could be structures on either side
17:37:43 <MichaelC> gets to be overkill
17:38:02 <MichaelC> could use name to describe what´s going on by using name of region
17:38:05 <MichaelC> think we can address in APG
17:38:17 <MichaelC> so don´t need something about that in spec
17:38:24 <jamesn> normally seen as controlling one of the regions though.... I.e. what gets minimized when I activate the control
17:38:39 <jamesn> but fine with being in APG
17:38:45 <MichaelC> e.g., if between TOC and main content in a book reader, you´d give it a name of ¨TOC separator¨
17:39:06 <joanie> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2091/aria/aria.html#separator
17:39:15 <jamesn> that would control the TOC though - as if you minimized it the TOC would go away
17:39:42 <MichaelC> fe: would separators always be expressed as percents?
17:40:06 <MichaelC> jd: implict values are (implied) percent oriented
17:40:12 <MichaelC> but not required if author provides value
17:40:22 <MichaelC> there´s guidance to author about using them
17:40:28 <MichaelC> <which scribe missed>
17:40:48 <MichaelC> so you could have even negative values for valuemin etc.
17:41:18 <MichaelC> mk: UA calculates a percent based on the value range
17:41:26 <MichaelC> use valuetext if you don´t want a percent expresion
17:41:36 <MichaelC> fe: people might want a pixel value
17:41:40 <MichaelC> for a window size
17:41:46 <MichaelC> jd: that´s available in other APIs
17:42:01 <MichaelC> rs: ok with this draft?
17:42:26 <jaeun> it looks good to me
17:42:27 <MichaelC> mk: editorial, s/requesting/describing/
17:42:57 <MichaelC> jd: that was reflecting
17:42:59 <MichaelC> mk: ok
17:43:30 <MichaelC> fe: ? valuetext if you don´t want %
17:43:33 <MichaelC> mk: e.g., for slider
17:43:39 <MichaelC> jd: it´s supported
17:44:01 <MichaelC> mk: is it on this role?
17:44:06 <MichaelC> jd: don´t remember
17:44:07 <MichaelC> fe: yes
17:44:42 <jaeun> +1
17:44:43 <MichaelC> rs: ok to accept?
17:44:55 <jaeun> +1
17:45:11 <MichaelC> js: add ¨if focusable¨ to default values?
17:45:20 <MichaelC> jd: considered but thought not needed
17:45:27 <MichaelC> mk: only needed for mapping
17:46:34 <MichaelC> RESOLUTION: accept Joanie´s proposal for separator
17:46:44 <fesch> +1
17:47:31 <MichaelC> topic: Password role
17:47:39 <fesch> ack me
17:47:52 <MichaelC> rs: any use cases for custom passwords come forth?
17:48:22 <MichaelC> jd: orca users list, which is usually quite productive, didn´t even find much
17:48:49 <MichaelC> rs: objection to moving password to ARIA 2?
17:48:56 <MichaelC> jf: NO
17:48:59 <mck> +1 move pw role to 2.0
17:49:13 <joanie> +1 to move it to 2.0
17:49:23 <richardschwerdtfeger> +1 to mvoe to ARIA 2.0
17:49:30 <MichaelC> jf: ;) thanks everyone for responding to the concerns
17:49:37 <richardschwerdtfeger> s/mvoe/move/
17:49:46 <MichaelC> RESOLUTION: move password to ARIA 2
17:50:33 <MichaelC> topic: Spinbutton
17:50:36 <joanie> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2088
17:50:50 <joanie> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-2088/aria/aria.html#spinbutton
17:51:01 <joanie> Authors may create a spinbutton with children or owned elements, but must limit those elements to a textbox and/or two buttons.
17:51:04 <joanie> To be keyboard accessible, authors should manage focus of descendants for all instances of this role, as described in Managing Focus. When a spinbutton receives focus, authors should ensure focus is placed on the textbox element if one is present, and on the spinbutton itself otherwise. As a general rule, authors should not make the button elements keyboard focusable because users of devices with keyboards
17:51:10 <joanie> will likely prefer the use of the arrow keys to change the value of the spinbutton.
17:52:11 <MichaelC> rs: works except on IOS
17:52:18 <MichaelC> jd: doesn´t have keyboard anyways
17:52:36 <MichaelC> rs: yet Android does support keyboard
17:52:49 <MichaelC> jf: many devices support bluetooth etc. keyboards
17:52:58 <MichaelC> 20% of users use that
17:53:06 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
17:53:08 <MichaelC> jd: this text is aimed at users who are using keyboards
17:53:09 <richardschwerdtfeger> q+
17:53:26 <MichaelC> on non-keyboard devices, other input methods used
17:53:33 <MichaelC> ack r
17:53:47 <mck> q+
17:53:59 <MichaelC> rs: IOS doesn´t send keyboard input to divs and spans
17:54:18 <MichaelC> so forces use of the buttons for a spinbutton
17:54:26 <MichaelC> whereas on Android you could use the keyboard arrow keys
17:54:37 <MichaelC> ack m
17:54:41 <richardschwerdtfeger> ack richardschwerdtfeger
17:55:04 <MichaelC> mk: s/likely prefer/<something better than that>/
17:55:23 <clown> "…users of devices with keyboards will likely prefer the use of the arrow keys to change the value of the spinbutton."
17:55:31 <MichaelC> don´t think likely preferences of users is a justification we should use
17:55:36 <clown> "…users of devices with keyboards will use of the arrow keys to change the value of the spinbutton."
17:55:47 <MichaelC> jd: is that editorial? could we sort after meeting
17:55:48 <clown> "…users of devices with keyboards will use the arrow keys to change the value of the spinbutton."
17:55:50 <MichaelC> mk: yes, yes
17:56:17 <MichaelC> jd: hope we can accept modulo minor editorial changes
17:56:33 <MichaelC> bg: sounds clear to me
17:56:59 <MichaelC> still wonder how attributes like valuetext conveyed if focus not on the thing
17:57:09 <MichaelC> jd: it´s only supported on the spinbutton itself
17:57:19 <MichaelC> would be author error to put in other parts of the widget
17:57:33 <MichaelC> bg: have seen cases where valuetext not reflected in what´s displayed
17:58:12 <MichaelC> <something about a weird use case I´ve seen>
17:58:37 <MichaelC> jd: so maybe clarification needed
17:59:04 <MichaelC> mk: is AT responsibility to report what´s up
17:59:07 <MichaelC> jd: ORCA does
17:59:31 <MichaelC> we could ignore the fringe case, or we could hold up to refine
17:59:34 <joanie> s/ORCA/Orca/
17:59:52 <MichaelC> bg: like what´s there
17:59:58 <MichaelC> just want an addition about AT
18:00:17 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
18:00:30 <MichaelC> mk: not normative in a note, but could elsewhere
18:02:08 <MichaelC> RESOLUTION: accept Joanie´s proposal on spinbutton
18:03:27 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
18:03:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/06/30-aria-minutes.html MichaelC
18:04:45 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #aria
18:17:49 <chaals> chaals has joined #aria
19:12:04 <chaals> chaals has joined #aria
19:35:46 <clown> clown has joined #aria
20:55:32 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
21:27:24 <sam> sam has joined #aria