IRC log of wcag-act on 2017-08-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:53:45 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wcag-act
13:53:45 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:53:47 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
13:53:47 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #wcag-act
13:53:49 [trackbot]
Meeting: Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference
13:53:49 [trackbot]
Date: 21 August 2017
13:54:10 [Wilco]
agenda+ Upcoming public working draft of the ACT Rules Format
13:54:52 [Wilco]
agenda+ Review:
13:54:59 [Wilco]
agenda+ Review:
13:55:04 [Wilco]
13:55:46 [Wilco]
agenda+ Re-word Test cases to Test execution steps
13:56:00 [tobias]
tobias has joined #wcag-act
14:00:43 [Kathy]
Kathy has joined #wcag-act
14:01:15 [rdeltour]
rdeltour has joined #wcag-act
14:01:38 [anne_thyme]
anne_thyme has joined #wcag-act
14:01:50 [Kathy]
14:02:06 [tobias]
14:02:11 [rdeltour]
14:02:26 [anne_thyme]
14:02:33 [Kathy]
scribe Kathy
14:02:49 [Sujasree]
Sujasree has joined #wcag-act
14:03:08 [MoeKraft]
MoeKraft has joined #wcag-act
14:03:14 [Wilco]
14:03:15 [MoeKraft]
present+ MoeKraft
14:03:20 [Sujasree]
14:03:20 [Wilco]
14:03:23 [shadi]
14:03:40 [Kathy]
zakim, take up next
14:03:40 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Upcoming public working draft of the ACT Rules Format" taken up [from Wilco]
14:03:59 [Wilco]
14:04:00 [Kathy]
Wilco - main topic is that we want to publish
14:04:10 [Kathy]
... we got some feedback
14:04:48 [Kathy]
Stein Erik - two main comments
14:05:20 [Kathy]
... first one is about versioning, change from first draft.
14:06:01 [Kathy]
... could be introducing a mess, a check in a rule you should have version number and then you can check the results
14:06:57 [Kathy]
... second is test case types, we believe there are only two types tests - in the browser or http/non-rendered
14:07:20 [Kathy]
... simplification would be good because the document is complex already
14:08:05 [skotkjerra]
skotkjerra has joined #wcag-act
14:08:10 [Kathy]
Tobias - some people have been confused about the types; the document already says that there could be other types
14:08:10 [skotkjerra]
14:08:40 [Kathy]
Wilco - versioning, the comment is to not do two methods but sticking to one
14:09:08 [shadi]
+1 to one consistent method of versioning
14:09:28 [shadi]
14:09:42 [Wilco]
ack s
14:09:51 [Kathy]
Shadi - put in an editor note for public review
14:09:59 [Kathy]
... we don't have to do a decision right now
14:10:29 [Kathy]
... editor note will give the options
14:10:53 [Kathy]
Wilco - we can do an editor note to collect feedback
14:11:01 [MoeKraft]
14:11:35 [Kathy]
Moe - we should try not to be too prescriptive, we should not select one over the other
14:12:05 [Wilco]
Editor note: The task force is considering different methods of identifying the version, either by number, date or other, and is looking for feedback on the subject from reviewers.
14:12:13 [Kathy]
Wilco - what about this for the note
14:12:18 [rdeltour]
14:12:29 [tobias]
14:12:40 [MoeKraft]
14:12:42 [Kathy]
... does this address the concerns
14:12:54 [Kathy]
14:12:59 [anne_thyme]
14:13:13 [shadi]
14:13:25 [rdeltour]
14:13:25 [Kathy]
zakim, take up next
14:13:26 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Kathy
14:13:29 [shadi]
q- m
14:13:34 [Kathy]
zakim, take up next
14:13:34 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Kathy
14:13:56 [Wilco]
ack rd
14:14:59 [Kathy]
Romain - minor comment, ACT data format the Earl format specification does not match
14:15:13 [Kathy]
Wilco - they are grouped by property
14:15:35 [Kathy]
Romain - does this make it incompatible with Earl
14:15:52 [Kathy]
Shadi - I don't think so, it is how it is translated
14:17:04 [Kathy]
Shadi - we should remain compatible with Earl
14:17:54 [Kathy]
Wilco - let's make a issue to update the appendix
14:18:05 [Kathy]
zakim, take up next
14:18:05 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Review:" taken up [from Wilco]
14:18:41 [Kathy]
Wilco - the input types are over complicating the spec
14:19:29 [Kathy]
... the reason we have these 5, I have seen tests use all these types
14:20:00 [Kathy]
... dom tree tests are doing this (react has own dom library)
14:20:46 [Kathy]
... template and script testing; more speculative
14:21:08 [Kathy]
... can analyze JS code
14:21:18 [Kathy]
... all of them are valid environments
14:21:30 [Kathy]
... what are your thought on this
14:22:03 [Kathy]
Stein Erik - in our world it is tested in browser or not
14:22:23 [anne_thyme]
14:22:23 [tobias]
14:22:26 [Kathy]
... your arguments are fair
14:22:31 [Wilco]
ack a
14:22:47 [anne_thyme]
14:22:50 [Kathy]
Tobias - what Wilco said makes sense
14:22:57 [Kathy]
... didn
14:23:04 [Kathy]
t see that these were common types
14:24:10 [Kathy]
... people not technical, this could be confusing and we may want to elaborate and add examples
14:24:23 [Kathy]
Wilco - should we add an issue to look at this
14:24:30 [MoeKraft]
14:24:34 [shadi]
14:24:47 [Kathy]
... should we add an editor note
14:24:52 [Wilco]
ack t
14:24:53 [Kathy]
Tobias - no just an issue
14:24:56 [Wilco]
ack moe
14:26:01 [Kathy]
Wilco - the issues is that some of these are too specific
14:26:04 [Wilco]
ack s
14:27:31 [Kathy]
Shadi - wanted to mention something about a person who is trying to write text for manual rules in this format. The bookmarklet is to look at headings. This is a mixed mode. Should these be two separate tests? They are getting permission to send the tests
14:27:43 [Kathy]
... we may be making this too specific
14:27:48 [Kathy]
14:27:56 [Wilco]
ack k
14:29:39 [Kathy]
Kathy - two separate rules
14:30:26 [Kathy]
Shadi - there could be other scenarios, where they could be mixed rules. Some thing to keep in mind
14:31:37 [Kathy]
Wilco - can we get approval to send this to AG
14:31:51 [Kathy]
Sujasree - there are still issues to fix
14:32:22 [Kathy]
... there are 200 issues in the examples
14:32:28 [Kathy]
with color contrast
14:32:39 [Wilco]
14:32:41 [Kathy]
Shadi - is this the spec?
14:32:51 [Kathy]
Wilco - see example 5
14:33:17 [Kathy]
... this is the default CSS
14:33:50 [Kathy]
... there is also issues with the paragraph markers
14:34:15 [Kathy]
Shadi - will follow up
14:35:04 [Kathy]
Wilco - any objections to sending it to the AG
14:35:09 [Kathy]
14:35:10 [Sujasree]
14:35:10 [anne_thyme]
14:35:10 [tobias]
14:35:13 [rdeltour]
14:35:13 [shadi]
14:35:34 [Kathy]
RESOLUTION: send to the AG group
14:35:47 [shadi]
14:36:37 [Kathy]
Wilco - we are agenda item 2
14:36:37 [shadi]
zakim, take up agendum 2
14:36:37 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Review:" taken up [from Wilco]
14:38:09 [Kathy]
Wilco - text updated and examples added
14:38:17 [MoeKraft]
MoeKraft has joined #wcag-act
14:38:22 [MoeKraft]
14:39:04 [Kathy]
Wilco - any objections to this going out to the AG
14:39:20 [Kathy]
zakim, take up next
14:39:21 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Review:" taken up [from Wilco]
14:39:44 [Kathy]
Tobias - cleaned up the assumption section
14:40:05 [Kathy]
... added in test cases
14:41:11 [Kathy]
Wilco - need to add in the text alternative
14:41:47 [Kathy]
... anything else on this one?
14:42:26 [Kathy]
... no comments
14:42:32 [Kathy]
zakim, take up next
14:42:32 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Re-word Test cases to Test execution steps" taken up [from Wilco]
14:42:36 [MoeKraft]
14:42:44 [Wilco]
ack moe
14:43:07 [Kathy]
Moe - we should use test execution not test case
14:43:30 [Kathy]
Wilco - we are using test steps
14:44:27 [Kathy]
... only in the second one
14:44:49 [Kathy]
14:45:06 [rdeltour]
14:45:32 [Wilco]
14:46:07 [Kathy]
Wilco - took out step 5 text about video
14:46:13 [Kathy]
... few wording changes
14:46:36 [Kathy]
... changed the selector
14:46:43 [Kathy]
to check for source
14:47:27 [Kathy]
... examples page has a warning since the video/audio starts automatically
14:47:50 [Kathy]
... any other comments
14:48:32 [Kathy]
Wilco - do we need to move this to the W3C site?
14:49:21 [Kathy]
Shadi - let's take this offline to figure out where it needs to go
14:49:55 [Kathy]
zakim, take up next
14:49:55 [Zakim]
I do not see any more non-closed or non-skipped agenda items, Kathy
14:50:04 [Wilco]
TOPIC: Reword test cases
14:50:30 [Kathy]
Moe - the section that we had with test cases, changed to test execution
14:50:42 [Wilco]
14:51:27 [Kathy]
Wilco - this will not go into the draft
14:51:46 [Kathy]
... looks good to me
14:52:36 [Kathy]
Moe- some language updated to clarify step vs. execution
14:53:29 [Kathy]
14:53:32 [tobias]
14:53:57 [shadi]
14:54:02 [rdeltour]
maybe just "Outline of the actions neccessary to..." ?
14:54:31 [Kathy]
Moe - should we merge? Hold off until published
14:54:52 [Wilco]
14:54:54 [Kathy]
Wilco - update with the last change and we will hold
15:14:54 [shadi]
trackbot, end meeting
15:14:54 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
15:14:54 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Kathy, tobias, rdeltour, anne_thyme, Wilco, MoeKraft, Sujasree, shadi, skotkjerra
15:15:02 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:15:02 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
15:15:03 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
15:15:03 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items