<Wilco> scribe: Emma

Final call https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/461

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1506

Wilco: only 1 in final call, Daniel working on it

Rules ready for W3C publication https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1120

Wilco: not much movement as task force has been looking at redesign

Jean-Yves: think a number of things need moved up

Wilco: ACTION to update lists

Aron: header issues need reviews to be ready for task force

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1505

Wilco: any volunteers to review 1505

Daniel volunteered

Helen and Wilco to look at one she was working on 1378

Wilco: Aria 3 should be out by end of year and unblock 'ARIA required owned elements'

Jean-Yves: attribute duplicated may not get an implementation as tools operate on DOM not source code

Wilco: OK to sit until someone picks it up

What to do of "`role` attribute has valid value"? https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1496

Skipping

inline links https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1010

Wilco: open for about a year, seems to be a difference of opinion

Carlos: partial check on use of colour, not passed final call yet
... two issues

<Carlos> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/non-text-contrast.html

Carlos: first issue, looking at colour contrast with inline links
... difference between hue and contrast in related WCAG documentation

Aron: believes a clear difference between hue and lightness, checks could be contrast only

Wilco: would black text with grey links pass

Aron: if the contrast is sufficient, yes
... a small change to hue could still pass if luminosity changes contrast sufficiently
... only a failure if the contrast ratio isn't sufficient

Wilco: if contrast difference is 2:1 that is a fail, but not what issue tests

Jean-Yves: we may want to write a rule for the aspects we agree on and perhaps extend it later
... need to determine if change of luminosity only should be treated as a change of colour

Wilco: use of colour is not only about colour blindness, also light sensitivity

Emma: doesn't a change in hex code mean the colour is different, even if hue is unchanged

Carlos: only questioning this because of the understanding documents

Jean-Yves: can we ask WCAG for clarification

Wilco: 'colour' covers hue and luminosity

Aron: somewhere there is a note that 'colour' is hue only

Emma: where two hues have the same luminosity they may not be distinguishable for some people

<aron> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Techniques/failures/F73.html

Helen: I tend to colour pick from a screen grab for testing

Aron: W3 link talks about 'colour' and 'hue' as the same thing

Wilco: so a contrast check is sufficient?

Aron: it is saying there needs to be enough contrast, even if hue is the same

Carlos: colour needs to be not the only distinguishing factor

Emma: example of using invert to make a link distinguishable only uses colour, but the invert is the additional factor

Wilco: if the contrast is sufficient and hover/focus add additional cues, is that enough?

Aron: I believe the contrast difference is sufficient

Carlos: So a sufficient contrast is enough to pass the test?

Wilco: I disagree

Emma: BBC guidelines don't allow only colour difference (before hover/focus) something more such as bold is needed

Wilco: lightness can be treated differently to colour/hue

Helen: should we park this until 2.2 is out? It clarifies on unfocus and focus state also

Shadi: there is a chicken-egg here, but perhaps this discussion can help 2.2

Wilco: not sure this can be addressed in 2.2
... the 3:1 ratio comes from nowhere

Carlos: an additional style on focus is still a failure in the examples

Wilco: none of it is in normative language

Aron: felt the same, but colour does seem to refer to hue only
... how would you check use of colour before 2.1?
... one example in WCAG is a colour only difference

Wilco: WCAG technique says additional style on focus/hover is enough extra if the contrast is sufficient

Helen: what if the hover/focus style is only a colour change?

Aron: is cursor changing another indicator?

Carlos: cannot rely on cursor

Emma: an inline link has to be visually distinguishable for all sighted users

Carlos: contrast with other text and background, as well as hover/focus colour, if colour the only cue

Emma: so is luminosity being considered as something other than colour?

Aron: it seems to be in WCAG

Wilco: I don't think its sufficient

Jean-Yves: WCAG doesn't specify a specific additional style, but lists a few possibilities none of which are hue or luminosity

Wilco: WCAG is inconsistent and think we need AG input
... Carlos, please reach out to AG

Final thoughts

Shadi: thinking of Phil Collins 'True Colors'
... conversations like this are also an essential aspect of this work

Daniel: interesting concepts for a blind person, good to be closing gaps in understanding

Aron: enjoyed the conversation

Carlos: progress made

Emma: nice to be chatting

Helen: nice to be chatting

Jean-Yves: good discussion

Wilco: favourite type of meeting

Thank you, cause I've no clue what to do

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)

Default Present: Wilco, EmmaJPR, Jean-Yves, Daniel, Carlos, HelenB, shadi
Present: Wilco EmmaJPR Jean-Yves Daniel Carlos HelenB shadi Aron
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: EmmaJPR
Found Scribe: Emma

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: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


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.)