Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference -- 16 Oct 2018

<laura> having trouble connecting to audio

<Chuck> scribe: Chuck

condolences

<laura> Scribe: Laura

Silver TF update pre-TPAC

awk: silver will be on the TPAC agenda

JS: we have 3 prototypes and an editors draft to show
... we will have an exercise with the WG.

Shawn: think about IA and plain language
... testing focused around silver goals
... think about use cases and edge cases.
... please reach out to us.

JS: think about Success Criteria that didn’t make it into 2.1 that could go into silver.

Shawn: will do into depth at TPAC.

<AWK> AWK: Can we provide links to goals, prototypes, etc for WG members to review in advance?

awk: can you provide links to what we are to review?

shawn: yes we can.

<alastairc> It would be good to say which ones the group should look at, or is it all of them?

awk: would be good to have links in advance.

JS: some need explanation.
... will email the list of links for WG to review to the list.

awk: any other questions?

ACT TF Update pre-TPAC

MM: update on ACT TF
... working on rules
... getting ready for publication.
... would like WG to review it

<shadi> https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-rules-format.html

awk: link to the spec for the group?

MM: will do after TF CFC
... community group working on rules to try things out for implementations.

awk: will examples help WG?

<shadi> https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/pages/rules.html

MM: yes. but may not be up to date.

shadi: Please have a careful review.
... request to the WG will include review of spec, exist criteria, and rules
... have open source implementations for the rules.
... need to have a discussion on transitioning rules to get formal approval and acceptance criteria.
... somewhat like techniques process.
... don’t want to add overhead but need a process for review.
... that will be one of the discussion points at TPAC.

brooks: is the chance here to be 100 percent positive?

shadi: we are mapping to rule requirement.
... best practices would be a warning.
... we are developing rules that will be known failures.
... not all automated tests.

brooks: sounds like it is still open.
... could be a rubric.

shadi: as subjective as the SC are.
... some are a partial check.
... some rules are atomic rules. e.g. page title
... with machine learning may be able to automate more.

awk: rules format is a normative spec.
... we want rules so they don’t change.

shadi: exactly.
... only the spec is normative.

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to say I would not say SC are subjective so much as they need expert judgment

bruce: SC are objective but may require expert (human) judgement

shadi: we are trying to reflect SCs.
... test rules have test cases.
... rules are not procedures.
... test cases run implementations.
... working on manifest files for tool vendors.

<bruce_bailey> @@ I did not say SC are subjective, I said they are objective but may require expert (human) judgement

shadi: will be part of CR exsit.

awk: we will take more on tuesday.
... we have the registration list for TPAC.

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to say I hope to call in some

laura: may call in for some.

Bruce: Hopes to call in some.

<bruce_bailey> Say hi to Kathy Eng if you see her in Leon

awk: will have some people on the phone. May be challenging.
... 17 registrants and 17 observers.

<alastairc> Notes that the afternoon (easier US time), will be mostly working on techniques, so less useful for external participants.

<alastairc> FYI W3C posted a good link for an overview of the event and location info: https://www.w3.org/2018/Talks/TPAC-2018/ready-set-go/Overview.html#start

awk: will do our best.

Review of Techniques ready for initial review: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Ready+for+initial+review%22

awk: Techniques ready for initial review.

AC: some have been updated. Go through some for intial review.

PR 510

<alastairc> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag/tech-fitting-labels-inputs-viewport/techniques/css/tech-fitting-labels-inputs-reflow.html

ac: one of several supporting reflow
... tthis one to make sure horizontal scrolling doesn’t happen.
... procedure is fine and examples are good.

awk: need initial reviewers.

Bruce: is “flexbox” in the title descriptive enough?

awk: flexbox is a property of CSS right?

AC: yes.

awk: CSS module on flex

<AWK> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-flexbox-1/

AC: flexbox is the overall term for the properties.

awk: people should take a look

PR 494

awk: from jake https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/494

<scribe> …New technique for Using Fitting Images for Reflow, you can preview Using CSS max-width and height to fit images, and there is an associated example page.

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: looks like need more people to reivew.
... seems straight forward.

MG: is it an advisory technique?

AC: we define that in the understanding doc.

MG: looks like it could be sufficent. unless it can’t be followed to meet the SC.
... nice technique.

AC: do we need to test em to rem changes ?

<gowerm> I think it is not a sufficient technique because images are excepted from the SC, so it is advisory since it provides a means of allowing two-dimensional images to display within the constraints of Reflow

<gowerm> So that would make it advisory for Reflow

AC: don’t think so.
... editorial.

PR457

<bruce_bailey> Scribe:bruce

<bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/457

<bruce_bailey> AWK: failure technique was discussed before

<bruce_bailey> Detlev not on call, does anyone see changes since Sept 20th?

<bruce_bailey> Change label to label-by

<gowerm> typo: elemwents

<Ryladog> +1

<bruce_bailey> This is a failure for name not containing label text, seems straight forwared

<bruce_bailey> +1

<AWK> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/457

<bruce_bailey> AWK: plus ones in pull request on git hub appreciated

<bruce_bailey> AWK: not hearing questions, will put on survey

<alastairc> Glenda - you did some testing on this, would you plus 1?

PR456

<bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/456

<bruce_bailey> AWK: This is a possitive test for cancelling drag and drop

<bruce_bailey> Alastair did some testing, thinks it works but needs some editorial clarification

<bruce_bailey> AC: please make updates before TPAC

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Anyone reviewing techniques, historically it is detail of procedure which needs more attention

455

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Visible labels match names

<bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/455

<bruce_bailey> AWK: to Glenda, there was a question to what Dragon NS responded to

<bruce_bailey> Glenda: Needs to check changes and test with DNS

s/exsit /exit /

<bruce_bailey> AWK: I have reached out to Nuance to ask about ARIA and expects to hear back

s/tthis /this /

<bruce_bailey> Previous discussion was on another technique.

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Please look at examples of 455, as it goes into more detail

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Look as SC text, make sure technique not going too far

PR 454

<bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/454

s/UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: looks like need more people to reivew. /awk: looks like need more people to reivew. /

<bruce_bailey> Objective is to avoid path-based rendering

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Does not look like new commits since August 21, so please folks double check

s/could be sufficent. unless /could be sufficient unless /

386

<bruce_bailey> Text spacing overide

<bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/386

<bruce_bailey> Alastair tried to split up

<bruce_bailey> One split is text based elements where wrapping would be expected

<bruce_bailey> Another split would be navigation which should not wrap

<bruce_bailey> AC: seems like straigh forward examples

<bruce_bailey> AWK: I need to look at that one myself

<bruce_bailey> AWK: hopefully we can wrap up several of these to go to survey

<bruce_bailey> AC: Need help, Detlev will appreciate it

PR 516

<AWK> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/516

<bruce_bailey> AWK: This seems like errata

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Would like agreement that this is editorial, please see technique

RESOLUTION: Editorial, Editors will resolve

PR 515

<AWK> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/515

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Minor edit in spec, bad link to requirement, need to update syntax

<bruce_bailey> AWK: No hearing any objectives

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Error will remain in spec

RESOLUTION: accepted as proposed

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Editorial and errata go to git hub

<bruce_bailey> AWK: this is a new process, a little different from 2.0

<alastairc> Errata page: https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/errata/

<bruce_bailey> M Cooper: new w3c process we are following, git hub foccused

<bruce_bailey> AWK: there are three other items ready for review, will go to survey, all simple

<alastairc> Quick question on https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/501

<bruce_bailey> AWK: call for new issues

<bruce_bailey> Alastair asks about timing clarification

<AWK> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/501

<bruce_bailey> AC: Current SC has exception for legal policies

<bruce_bailey> AC: Tried to add compliance to privacy language there now. Are there reasonable standards to reference?

<bruce_bailey> AC: Cites HIPAA and one other. Is that about right?

<bruce_bailey> AC: Payment card was another

<bruce_bailey> KHS: Privacy regs different around the world

<bruce_bailey> KHS: List one, need to list a bunch more

<bruce_bailey> KHS: We should probably speak in broad terms

<Glenda> I think the text is this right?

<Glenda> “Examples of privacy regulations mentioned in the success criteria note, and related compliance standards, are PCI (Payment Card Industry) and HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996).”

<bruce_bailey> AC: PCI is pretty international

<bruce_bailey> KHS: Still might need to be careful, terms used in USA are different

<alastairc> The note in the SC is: "Privacy regulations may require explicit user consent before user identification has been authenticated and before user data is preserved."

<bruce_bailey> AWK: We do not need to cite reference in every country.

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Nice not to be too USA specific. Would we mention CA requirement?

<bruce_bailey> AWK: GDPR is widely know

<bruce_bailey> AC: The note mentions privacy regulation

<bruce_bailey> AC: This was the new AAA SC from coga

<bruce_bailey> about data being preserved

<bruce_bailey> regulation might preclude retaining information

<bruce_bailey> PCI says not to reveal CVV

<bruce_bailey> AWK: commenter notes that retaining CVV unlawful

<bruce_bailey> Bruce: Not too worried about this because FISMA not mentioned with current timeout requirement

<alastairc> The SC: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#timeouts

<bruce_bailey> Racheal: worried that scope in note expands SC

<bruce_bailey> Rachael: we should check that commenter cites are exactly on point

<alastairc> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/421

<bruce_bailey> AC: Thinks commenter note seem to be on point

<bruce_bailey> AWK: I will check with Adobe privacy team what they think

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Some rumors about France citing to WCAG 2.1 might be in the works

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: Also discussion that Germany may be updating BITV to reference 2.1 instead of 2.0

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: France reps expect to attend TPAC for ACT work and wanting to harmonize with EN 301 549

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: EN 301 549 references 2.1, so testing techniques need some updating

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: ACT rules will also be incorporating 2.1 as it moves forward

<bruce_bailey> AWK asks Shadi to clarify if French requirements are public sector

<bruce_bailey> Shadi thinks France is moving that way and Norway already covers business that are public facing

<bruce_bailey> Chuck: Can you clarify EN 301 549 status, has it been formally adopted?

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: Standard is completed and public facing (also numbered 2.1)

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: We are still waiting on formal implementing act

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: implemeting act is over due

<bruce_bailey> Bruce brings up correspondence from congress to DOJ and DOJ response back

<AWK> https://www.lflegal.com/2018/09/doj-cut/

<bruce_bailey> Bruce thanks AWK for link

<bruce_bailey> Mike Elledge to Shadi: Is EU legislation for all public websites?

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: Enforcement is for public bodies and their websites and apps

Oral argument in Gil v. Winn-Dixie appeal pushes back on using WCAG (.mp3)

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/system/files_force/oral_argument_recordings/17-13467.mp3

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: European Accessiblity Act still under development, may be like ADA

<bruce_bailey> Still sitting in parlement, back and forth

<bruce_bailey> Shadi: Commission elections early next year as well. Act could be in spring.

<bruce_bailey> AWK: Call in formation will be posted

<bruce_bailey> AWK: No call the week after TPAC

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2018

<bruce_bailey> AWK: We will make sure people can find the call in numbers

<bruce_bailey> MC: information about remote attendance in link

bye

<bruce_bailey> trackbot, end meeting

- DRAFT -

Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

16 Oct 2018

Attendees

Contents