19:57:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria-at
19:57:32 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/01/28-aria-at-irc
19:57:47 <Matt_King> MEETING: ARIA and Assistive Technology Community Group
19:58:10 <Matt_King> CHAIR: Matt King
19:58:16 <Matt_King> rrsagent, make log public
19:58:21 <Matt_King> present+
19:58:29 <Matt_King> rrsagent, make minutes
19:58:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/28-aria-at-minutes.html Matt_King
20:01:37 <Matt_King> https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/wiki/January-28,-2021-Community-Group-Meeting
20:01:39 <michael_fairchild> michael_fairchild has joined #aria-at
20:01:51 <Matt_King> https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/wiki/January-28,-2021-Community-Group-Meeting
20:03:18 <michael_fairchild> present+
20:04:25 <rob_fentress> rob_fentress has joined #aria-at
20:04:33 <michael_fairchild> scribe: michael_fairchild
20:05:09 <rob_fentress> + present
20:05:40 <michael_fairchild> topic: Workstream planning
20:06:08 <michael_fairchild> mk: our vendor contracts are still pending, and should happen really soon.
20:06:26 <michael_fairchild> mk: should them finalized by Feb 8
20:06:53 <michael_fairchild> mk: we have a tentative kickoff plan for the different work streams
20:06:55 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria-at
20:07:05 <jongund> present+ jongund
20:08:01 <michael_fairchild> seth: in the kickoffs we will do meta planning such as figuring out cadence, priorities, stakeholders, roadmap, etc
20:09:26 <michael_fairchild> mk: our tentative date to kick off the app dev workstream is 2/11 during this time
20:09:41 <michael_fairchild> mk: and we would have a 90min agenda instead of 60
20:10:02 <michael_fairchild> mk: for automation, we will also need to find a 90min window with Michael to kick off that work stream
20:11:21 <michael_fairchild> mk: we will offline the coordination of that meeting time
20:11:43 <michael_fairchild> mk: and we will publicly share that time so that others can join
20:12:39 <michael_fairchild> mk: 2/16, we will be kicking off a workstream for the authoring practices at 11 pacific
20:13:15 <michael_fairchild> mk: for testing writing, I don't know that we need a formal kickoff. We do want to prioritize the backlog.
20:14:23 <michael_fairchild> mk: we should also discuss the attribute testing from pattern testing at that time
20:15:18 <michael_fairchild> James: on 2/11, this will be a 90min call. Will the full 90 minutes be for planning?
20:15:31 <michael_fairchild> mk: yes, the entire meeting will be for planning
20:15:57 <michael_fairchild> topic: Working mode updates
20:16:17 <michael_fairchild> mk: issue 375, I just today added another comment with some proposals.
20:16:36 <michael_fairchild> https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/issues/375
20:16:56 <michael_fairchild> mk: I'd like to discuss those proposals
20:17:18 <michael_fairchild> mk: this is about streamlining the process
20:17:40 <michael_fairchild> mk: running a test is a really good way is to ensure that the test is accurate
20:17:54 <michael_fairchild> mk: and we have the ability to update a test without affecting other tests
20:18:17 <michael_fairchild> mk: that gives us a potentially much faster way to work
20:18:47 <Matt_King> Community group members run tests to achieve two goals: 1) Ensure the tests are sufficiently accurate and complete to publish as draft expectations that
20:18:49 <Matt_King> are ready for stakeholder review; 2) Generate draft test data that is ready for stakeholder review. Editors may publish draft tests and test data at their
20:18:50 <Matt_King> discretion after at least two community group members have generated identical results. Editors are responsible for ensuring the quality and completeness
20:18:52 <Matt_King> of reviews. Reviewers are responsible for raising issues against tests where they do not meet community group quality guidelines.
20:20:22 <michael_fairchild> mk: what do people think of the language that I put in here?
20:20:42 <Matt_King> present+ Hadi
20:20:49 <michael_fairchild> hadi: can you read your proposal?
20:26:52 <michael_fairchild> mf: (reads the comment in the issue)
20:28:28 <michael_fairchild> mf: do you have an example of what a quality guideline would be?
20:29:18 <michael_fairchild> mk: how assertions and instructions are worded in a consistent way, that commands are appropriate for the assertions, etc.
20:29:59 <michael_fairchild> mk: maybe that doesn't need to be a quality guideline, or maybe it does. What do you think, James?
20:30:55 <michael_fairchild> James: I think its worth writing something down. We learned a lot during this process. What would be ideal is if we provide a wiki page with some tips and lessons learned. Then, depending on how the CG group feel about that, we can direct volunteers to that page.
20:31:27 <michael_fairchild> James: The risk is that there are some differences between tests. How they are laid out, how they are worded, etc.
20:31:57 <michael_fairchild> James: Now the Dialog Modal pattern can be used as a reference
20:33:07 <michael_fairchild> mk: we don't have a lot of people that can write tests, if someone like Microsoft wants to contribute tests for Narrator, or Google wants to contribute tests for TalkBack, that wiki page could be helpful
20:33:37 <michael_fairchild> James: that wiki page could also be helpful for people running tests to point out inconsistencies
20:33:47 <michael_fairchild> mk: michael, I wanted your feedback on this too
20:35:37 <michael_fairchild> Michael: I'm still thinking through it, but I think this is a good approach and we can revisit again if we need to
20:36:36 <jongund> q+
20:37:44 <michael_fairchild> Sina: there is an opportunity for separate pages. One would be test writing procedures. The other would be expectations around testers themselves.
20:38:01 <Matt_King> q?
20:38:01 <michael_fairchild> mk: go ahead and experiment with that idea.
20:39:04 <michael_fairchild> jongund: from my experience with APG, there needs to be assignment of reviewers. as new tests are created, we need to assign reviewers.
20:39:31 <michael_fairchild> jongund: otherwise the test authors may have to wait a long time to get feedback
20:40:58 <michael_fairchild> mk: everyone should review this issue and add suggestions / concerns so that we can update the working mode
20:41:35 <michael_fairchild> topic: New test development planning
20:42:21 <michael_fairchild> mk: there is a subset of open issues that are related to the ARIA-AT app
20:42:39 <michael_fairchild> mk: and some are related to automation
20:43:40 <michael_fairchild> mk: we do have a tag for each of those, to say that an issue is for the app or automation
20:47:08 <michael_fairchild> mk: test-runner is the label
20:48:27 <michael_fairchild> James: should I go through and make sure that labels are accurate?
20:48:42 <michael_fairchild> mk: yes, make sure that test-runner is used where appropriate
20:49:20 <michael_fairchild> mk: I think I should add a label for at automation
20:50:30 <michael_fairchild> mk: we have a number of open PRs. Does order matter?
20:50:58 <michael_fairchild> mk: I did see that there is one with merge conflicts
20:51:17 <michael_fairchild> James: there are 3 that I have conflcits
20:51:54 <michael_fairchild> Sina: can we merge and accept a few of them?
20:52:29 <michael_fairchild> mk: I'll also file an issue about making the script that runs smarter
20:53:19 <michael_fairchild> (sorry, that was James)
20:54:02 <michael_fairchild> Sina: should we do the earlier ones first, James?
20:54:08 <michael_fairchild> mk: yes
20:54:38 <michael_fairchild> Sina: do you feel confident resolving the merge conflicts?
20:54:56 <michael_fairchild> James: no, not all of them
20:56:41 <michael_fairchild> Seth: we might be able to help resolve the merge conflicts, but I'm not sure who would do that. An issue would be best.
20:56:51 <michael_fairchild> mk: James, what's the best order to merge these?
20:57:04 <michael_fairchild> James: I don't have a sense for the best order
20:59:02 <michael_fairchild> Sina: is it a good plan to have a couple of these merged in by next week?
20:59:09 <michael_fairchild> mk: yes
20:59:23 <michael_fairchild> mk: is there anyone on the call that can help review?
20:59:40 <michael_fairchild> Jon: I can help Hadi if he needs help
20:59:58 <michael_fairchild> Rob: could I maybe sit on the thing with Hadi?
21:00:10 <michael_fairchild> Jon: We could do the menu button
21:03:43 <michael_fairchild> Zakim, list participants
21:03:43 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Matt_King, michael_fairchild, present, jongund, Hadi
21:04:02 <michael_fairchild> RRSAgent, generate minutes
21:04:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/28-aria-at-minutes.html michael_fairchild
23:37:47 <Jemma> Jemma has joined #aria-at