W3C

- DRAFT -

August 20, 2019 Authoring Practices Taskforce Telecon

20 Aug 2019

Attendees

Present
Matt_King, Jemma, evan, Dorothy_Bass, jongund, jamesn, sarah
Regrets
Chair
Matt King
Scribe
evan

Contents


<scribe> scribe: evan

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/wiki/August-20,-2019-Meeting

insertion/deletion role guidance

matt: there’s going to be another working draft of ARIA, which is relevant here

james: I don’t know when the working draft will be out
... it’s not implemented in gecko or blink yet

matt: where’s the right place for this in the APG? do we need guidance or should they be a pattern?

james: insertion/deletion are structural—they’re part of HTML
... why would use this rather than <ins> or <del>

matt: I don’t know if this is similar to button where you should use the element most of the time but may not want to sometimes

james: if they’re putting spans in, why can’t they put ins or del in instead?

matt: ins and del cannot cross certain boundaries in HTML?

james: correct
... I don’t think this is high enough priority to include [as a pattern] right now

<Jemma> https://w3c.github.io/annotation-aria/

james: we should wait for aria-annotations to be fleshed out more before proceeding with ins/del

matt: should we include aria-annotations in practices as well?

<Jemma> https://w3c.github.io/annotation-aria/#example-14-suggestion-using-ins-and-del

james: yes, but other items need to be created first (e.g., the aam)

matt: this is similar to aria-details, which we’ve removed to APG. maybe we should include aria-annotations along with it when we get to it (as a separate chapter)

james: once it’s at a maturity level where we can do that, we should. we shouldn’t write that chapter today.
... insertion/deletion is in aria for role parity

matt: alright, that works.

james: insertion/deletion is just an example, we have a bunch of other things

jemma: is aria-details a wrapper for insertion/deletion? is there any relationship?

matt: yes, aria-details is the method you use to describe details about the insertion/deletion (annotation)

Use of Group within List

matt: in our last discussion, we were leaning toward consensus that there was no reason to use group within list

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1011

matt: listitem must be either in a list or group but we should be able to remove group from that
... AT doesn’t have a meaningful way to convey it

james: the commenter said it doesn’t work anyway

sarah: i looked through list-related issues and found one that could’ve debatably used it but could’ve been better served by being a tree

<Jemma> git-help

matt: this would be a pretty easy pull request to fix it. is that the next step?

james: yes, that’s the best thing to do

matt: sounds like we have consensus to remove it!

Delay Before Displaying Tooltip

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/1099

<Jemma> "A tooltip is a popup that displays information related to an element when the element receives keyboard focus or the mouse hovers over it. It appears after a brief delay, typically about X milliseconds, and it disappears when Escape is pressed or on mouse out."

<Jemma> matt proposed this.

matt: ARIA says it SHOULD appear after a small delay. in APG we don’t use normative language like SHOULD or MUST
... we want to include language that clarifies ambiguous language and accounts for exceptions
... is there a number where I have “X milliseconds” that makes sense here?
... or a range?

james: what’s the setting in windows and macos by default?

jon: what’s the accessibility issue related to the delay?
... so if I make something that pops up when it gets keyboard focus, is that not a tooltip? or is the delay related to an accessibility requirement?

matt: notice that the first sentence doesn’t say anything about a delay

<Dorothy_Bass> can you measure it if you are using dialup? do you need to say how long?

Dorothy_Bass: I think the delay is fine but you can’t know how fast or slow it is

jon: why are we saying it at all?

matt: because it’s in the spec

james: I don’t mind if the spec removes the normative language, and instead says “typically”

jon: can the spec say it may appear…?

james: I think that’s less clear

matt: if it “typically” does, what are the reasons when there wouldn’t be a delay?
... the reason I usually hear is that it’s a distraction

Dorothy_Bass: sometimes tooltips appear after a long duration

jon: we don’t have any delay on our toolbar “tooltips”

matt: those aren’t technically tooltips, though

jon: but to anyone looking at them, they would say, “that’s a tooltips"

james: I think the issue is kind of a non-issue. I don’t think any of us really care what the resolution is because it doesn’t make a great deal of difference

matt: yeah, this is minor issue

<Jemma> orginal issue ="ARIA Spec 1.1 and 1.2 for tooltip (role) both say: "authors SHOULD display the tooltip after a short delay". However, the Authoring Practices Guide 1.1 and 1.2 for Tooltip Widget both say "It typically appears after a small delay". The spec makes it sound like the delay is required whereas the APG makes it sound optional. They should be consistent."

matt: I think the right answer is to remove normative language from the spec so that APG and ARIA are equally ambiguous

Third Working Draft Milestone Review

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/milestone/10

matt: the point of this milestone is to make sure we have exactly the right things for this working draft
... jemma and I prioritized this list so the 10 most important things appear first
... let’s make sure we have the right things in this list and that we have someone to help us get this stuff done
... let’s take a minute or so on each of these

james: I can tackle the first two

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/727

<Jemma> "Review 1.2 IDL(Interface Definition Language) button example #727"

matt: it seems like there are implementation issues in this IDL button. what do we need to do here?

james: we just need 2 reference implementations
... the IDL stuff is already in the spec, so this one is not prioritized highly for me

matt: so it looks like we’re done for this

james: correct

matt: the next issue is draft meter pattern (https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/979)

sarah: I don’t mind taking it

matt: I don’t really know what will go into it but hopefully it’ll help explain why you’d make an ARIA meter

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/tree/MeterRoleSection/examples/meter

james: the nice thing about meter is that you don’t really need to include keyboard so it’s easier than most of the ones we’ve created

matt: the aria-rowindextext and aria-colindextext might be best in the grid and table or on on their own
... I might be able to get to this
... I have the sense that these aren’t hugely controversial but people will appreciate them when they appear

james: I agree
... another one on that note is aria-posinset and aria-setsize

matt: i didn’t have that in APG because, frankly, I didn’t think it’d get done in time

james: it might be easy for someone who knows tree grids

<Jemma> https://w3c.github.io/aria-practices/#treegrid

james: aaron’s the one who wanted this and opened it in the first place, so maybe we can get him to do it

matt: next is naming/describing. I’d like to get Simon to continue working on this

jon: if simon’s not available, I can help on that

matt: but I want your help on combobox first and foremost

james: i don’t think label/legend/fieldset are high priority for the third working draft

matt: issue #913 (listbox w/group) seems pretty simple

<Jemma> done - changed the priority for label, legend and fieldset

matt: I’d propose we just use one of our existing ones and change the content

sarah: I could do it by the end of September

matt: the meter one is higher priority of course
... we got through the list!

james: I have two more...
... checkbox and switch with aria-required

matt: do we need an example or can we just add text to the pattern?

james: text to the pattern is adequate
... it’d be nice to have an example
... your APG issue is much more generic, which is why it hasn’t been picked up

matt: let’s raise a separate issue for this

james: (referencing https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/252)
... the other one I was thinking of was aria-expanded on checkbox

matt: we do have a disclosure pattern, but that uses buttons

james: I think it makes more sense there

matt: I don’t have a very good example of when you’d do this

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/618

james: joanie says this works everywhere, so we may not need to add patterns for them since they’re an extension of existing patterns

matt: maybe you’re right. maybe we don’t need guidance on this one. maybe if someone came up with a pattern that we could include

sarah: I can attest to the fact that people will use it if it’s in APG

matt: maybe we say that we don’t need specific things for these roles
... sounds great

1.2 Non editorial features and other changes

<Jemma> group talked about aria-required, aria-expaneded, aria-posinset and aria-setsize on row. see above scribe.

<Jemma> The group talked about aria-required, aria-expaneded, aria-posinset and aria-setsize on row. see above scribe.

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
$Date: 2019/08/20 19:04:21 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/prosed/proposed/
Succeeded: s/dlay/delay/
Present: Matt_King Jemma evan Dorothy_Bass jongund jamesn sarah
Found Scribe: evan
Inferring ScribeNick: evan

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]