Meeting minutes
AGENDA ITEM: Final call https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/461
<dmontalvo> Wilco: Definition of sub language tag -- This one is on track, converstaion there but not too much.
<EmmaJ_PR> +present
<dmontalvo> ... Link is descriptive ... another rule added to the lists. We have now 59 of them.
<dmontalvo> Jean: It still has one test failing.
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: Table headers... ATs would fall back if there is no headers attribute or it is incorrect.
<dmontalvo> Wilco: If the headers attribute is used and there is not need for it to be used, then we might have issues.
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: Then if we need the header attribute but it was misstyped, we would need to change the example.
<dmontalvo> Sailesh: Is this to test a particular technique related to the headers attribute?
<dmontalvo> Wilco: If the headers atribute is there and it is not needed, there might be a problem there.
AGENDA ITEM: Rules ready for W3C publication https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1120
<dmontalvo> Wilco: I am looking for somebody to take up some of the feedback from the TF
<Wilco_> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/issues/431
<dmontalvo> ... Basically go througgh that list and either solve the issues or explain what we should not solve them.
<dmontalvo> J: I will take action on this.
<Wilco_> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/issues/430
<Wilco_> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/issues/429
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: I could do this.
<Wilco_> https://act-rules.github.io/rules/
<dmontalvo> Wilco: Next is to decide which rules we should send to the TF
<Wilco_> https://act-rules.github.io/rules/5c01ea
<Wilco_> https://act-rules.github.io/rules/c487ae
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: Maybe we need to update the example description.
<dmontalvo> Wilco: Wilco: I'll take the link has accessible name one
Jym: Volunteers to take up the aria rule (that anne authored) for AG feedback
Ok, take over Daniel
<skamra> Hi, trying to join the ACT-R call, need password to join the wbex meeting
Hi Skamra, the password is act-rules
<EmmaJ_PR> acr-rules
<EmmaJ_PR> act-rules
One element relevant for multiple success criteria https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1049
<skamra> Thanks
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: Five different proposals. We have two rules for buttons having accessible name as image button fails two SCs.
<dmontalvo> ... Should we have one rule for all buttons and then one specific for image rules? If so, image will be flagged by two rules.
<dmontalvo> ... We could keep going and not be crazzy about that, or we could move to on to having one rule for all buttons and other for image button.
<dmontalvo> Emma: This is my point, if it does not exist then it is not applicable. First check if the thing exists and then if it is descriptive.
<dmontalvo> Wilco: I don't have aprefference.
<dmontalvo> Emma: I think we need to be consistent, there is another situation where we are doing it differently, don't mind what to change but we need to seek consistency.
<dmontalvo> Wilco: Proposal is to change the button rule to include the image button, right?
<dmontalvo> Emma: Yes, and that will be a new rule that the image button is descriptive.
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: I agree with you Wilco.
<dmontalvo> Emma: Are we going to make it like page title?
<dmontalvo> Wilco: Yes. First thing we change the applicability as said above and then we add new rule that image button accessible name is descriptive.
<dmontalvo> Sailesh: You have to do two separate tests, so I am in favor of these two rules.
Improve example descriptions in page title rules (2779a5 / c4a8a4) https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1099
<dmontalvo> Daniel: I will review and likely approve this.
Doc title (2779a5) allows pass, ignoring 4.1.1 https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1091
<dmontalvo> Wilco: Does the tile element have to comply with HTML spec?
<dmontalvo> ... Major browsers don't care, just take the first one even if it is in the body.
<dmontalvo> Sailesh: We should test for 4.1.1 separately, not trust browsers fallback mechanism, authors should provide valid code.
<dmontalvo> Daniel: I see these as excerpts or snippets, if AT and browsers don't complain I don't see a problem.
<dmontalvo> Emma: But we should encourage to produce good code and good practice
<dmontalvo> Wilco: We need to think, can we use this? Does it work?
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: This happens in otehr rules as well, especially in 4.1.1. I have no strong opinion.
<dmontalvo> Emma: Maybe if we make even clearer that we are not supporting this way of coding, just that it works.
<dmontalvo> Wilco: We could add a note about this saying this is bad code and can cause bugs
<dmontalvo> Shadi: We are inheriting a problem which is the guidance itself. I don't think we should be reinterpreting that. If we write the rule we need to stick to the spec
<dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: The spec tells what to do but also it tells what happens if you do otherwise.
<dmontalvo> Wilco: You are welcome to write a rule around 4.1.1
<Dagfinn> We have some microphone issues here
<skamra> i can hear, but cant unmute from the webex