scribe
<Wilco> scribe: Carlos
Wilco: a couple of item with in week final call (one ending today)
Wilco: 3 items in 2 week final
call
... 2 or 3 rules are very close to entering final call
... closing https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1027
until Patrick picks it up again
Wilco: progress is staled
... added a due date in the tables
... we should aim to have at least one rule ready for the TF
per week
Aron: what is the process? the rules have been approved and implemented, then they need to be submited to the TF?
Wilco: yes
Aron: I could pick this up
Wilco: look at rules that have
been published and have no outstanding issues...
... update them because the writing style has evolved, try to
remove notes, update example descriptions if needed
<Wilco> https://act-rules.github.io/pages/design/rule-design/
Jean-Yves: preparing the rules
takes time because they have to go through final call
... we should also have a column for the CG PR to make it
easier to check progress
+1
Wilco: updating the table
Jean-Yves: we could use a label to identify the PR related to TF issues
Wilco: we're using only hex instead of the full alphanumeric range
<Wilco> https://www.random.org/strings/
Wilco: but there is no reason for it
<Wilco> https://www.random.org/strings/?num=1&len=6&digits=on&loweralpha=on&unique=on&format=html&rnd=new
Carlos: we need to update the documentation
Wilco: we are sending composite
rules to the TF...
... the composite rule has an implementation, but the atomic
rules (in the composite) don't
... We need to do better...
... the examples in the atomic rules should be consistent with
the accessibility requirements of the composite
... I think most the examples that we wrote already do
that
... Carlos has been using all the test cases of the atomic rule
in the composite rule, which achieves this goal
Jean-Yves: This is a good idea...
in the examples description of the composite we could add what
is the atomic rule that is passing or failing
... for complex rules (e.g. Bypass Blocks) it might make
writing the examples for the atomic rules very complex
... we don't require implementors to implement the atomic
rules
Wilco: we can try, as a rule of
thumb, to make the atomic rules consistent ...
... we can deviate from that if needed
... we should update the mapping, and include all the test
cases that are already not part of the composite rule
Jean-Yves: we should have a way for implementors to submit an implementation of atomic rules
Wilco: there is no reason to
prevent that
... (checks test cases) it's already possible to do that
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1356/files
Wilco: I created a PR with a
proposal on how we should think about test cases ...
... it's not always clear when something needs a test case or
not ...
Wilco: please read the part on testing the definitions
Shadi: I think it should be
comprehensive. I lean towards the more comprehensive, to ensure
consistency ...
... but it shouldn't be theoretical, it should be based on
real-world examples
Jean-Yves: we should avoid to have definitions tested in every rule their used
Carlos: perhaps the first rule where a definition is used could be responsible for testing it
Shadi: we are not responsible for
ensuring that implementors know how to implement the accessible
name computation
... if we base the test cases in real world examples we will
need to test the different ways an accessible name is computed
...
... because it will be different for images and labels
... if we end up with "hundreds" of test cases that's probably
an indication that the rule is too broad
Daniel: +1 to contextualize test cases as much as possible
Jean-Yves: perhaps split this into 2 issues (one for the what is a heading problem, and another to make some progress on the rule)
Wilco: final thoughts
This is scribe.perl Revision of Date 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/be pick this up/pick this up/ Succeeded: s/reasing/reason/ Present: Carlos Adil Jean-Yves Wilco Daniel shadi Found Scribe: Carlos Inferring ScribeNick: Carlos WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth 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]