Wilco: have a guest, Hidde to talk about redesign of ACT rules
Hidde: redesigning the ACT rules in the same form as WCAG
... welcomes suggestions, questions, concerns
Shadi: we will put this on a survey for comments
... just putting all together and making it easier to consume
... the Overview may change to take just about ACT rules
... will work with the chairs to propose the text
... Important to make sure the organization makes sense as input
... questions on One sentence description, organization on the survey
Travis: raised the question about examples
Wilco: yes that is in the plan, look at the examples in the ACT rules community
... would look similar
... color coding will help, make it easier to read
... The order of the mapping and applicability was changed
Hidde: no that was not intentional
Shadi: there was a plan to put the mapping on the right side bar
Travis: have to be careful, side bar is read last by a SR
Hidde: we can address that
Shadi: Use of side bar was to applicability first for folks to understand the rule
Daniel: Have difficulty knowing whats in the sidebar, test cases are grouped by category and can be collapsed
Shadi: yes exactly the type of input we need to decide on the design
... on organization and order
Hidde: need to add the heading
... question is does the techniques have mapping to SCs?
... yes...we put it as data like
Kathy: will the anchor link on the test cases be added?
Shadi: no, we can add it
Kathy: anchor outside of the heading is OK, inside is a problem
Shadi: All Techniques have that functions and few other places so we can put in the rules
Wilco: ok lets get the survey out
this is exciting
Wilco: had a an interesting discussion with Siteprove, i want to use the next call as a joint call with the community group
... to discuss accessibility support and ACT rules, context was the iframe rule
... We don not include test cases that fail in some browsers, but for iframe we cannot ignore that problem
... good topic for a joint meeting
Levon: to get some ideas from the community group?
Wilco: yes, do we need to get access to Zoom?
Shadi: yes, have them ask the password in IRC
Wilco: CFC got approved?
Mary Jo: one thing from Moe
Wilco: change suggestions requested, seems mostly editorial
... Shadi can you make the edits?
Shadi: some content may need rewording, see the comment at the top
... No change o meaning but changes still may need a CFC
... we could make the edits and publish and if there is a bug we can still edit it after we publish
Wilco: hearing no disagreement, let do that
<Levon> I'm going to have to drop a few minutes early today, I have a 3 hour meeting in 15 minutes... :/
Wilco: Comment from Kathy about assumptions
... yes we are making an assumption about the control at the top
Mary Jo: same comment about the mapping to G170
Mary Jo: yeah this is introducing additional aspect not included in the SC
Mary Jo: may be talk with AG WC
CPandhi: Comment about control mechanism
Shadi: we have to bring this to AG attention
Mary Jo: yes bring it up as an issue, so it gets addressed in the future
Trevor: Seems like the applicability takes care about >3 seconds
Wilco: this does not cover the edge case of a 5 minute video with 2 second audio
... looking at the implementation responses for the rules
... Liaisons should put issues pass feedback