<Wilco> MJM: going to have to step down as chair from the task force, and will step back as participant as well.
maryjom: due to circumstances, have to step down and leave the group
... will focus on Silver
... hope IBM will have replacement
... wish you all good luck
Wilco: worked since many years together on this, will miss you!
maryjom: yes, 4 years
daniel: thank you for your work!
kathyeng: thank you for your work!
trevor: appreciate everything
Wilco: down another member, close to minimum
... wondering about different approaches
... could maybe move some tasks to the community group?
... could also help streamline some of the processes
... still gathering ideas for a proposal
trevor: which kinds of tasks were you thinking of?
Wilco: mostly rule reviewing and maintenance
... requires more in-depth knowledge of WCAG
... which may need additional support from this group
trevor: so rules would go straight to AG?
Wilco: yes
... also results into a lot of overhead
trevor: largely expected that
shadi: how would that impact participation?
trevor: only have limited time
... would need to be careful if work time increases
... may not be able to participate in two groups
kathyeng: similar situation
shadi: timing of CG can be more difficult for US timezones
Wilco: was thinking of having different topics
... for the different meetings
... to meet people's interests
kathyeng: can CG join the TF?
Wilco: several participants not from W3C Member organizations
Wilco: minor updates, mostly editorial
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/commit/1b21bc7a1a9068382917c9299c8613f32c4365fc
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/commit/aa79f5a188b6be0494ff4f3f08fd0f661df2e5dc
Wilco: tweak to assumption based on this group request
... following updated policy, can go to CFC
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/93339/ACTScrollableElement/results
trevor: fine going to CFC
maryjom: fine too
dmontalvo: fine with me
RESOLUTION: "Scrollable element is keyboard accessible" rule can go to CFC
trevor: reads like giving a failure notice that gets ignored
Wilco: read it in the same way
... supposed to say failure of assistive technologies
... maybe wrong place
shadi: is this accessibility support?
Wilco: think just phrased wrongly
... and should go to the background
... don't need headers attribute if you have correct header markup
... not sure about fallback behavior
<Wilco> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/tables.html#algorithm-for-assigning-header-cells
Wilco: example seems correct but the assumption incorrect
... checks for hearders attribute first, then for table headers
trevor: read it the same way but needs testing
... could imagine AT having support for simple tables but not for more complex
... accessibility support testing with regular and irregular tables is needed
Wilco: question on tables constructed with ARIA attributes
trevor: expand scope to role="table"?
Wilco: wouldn't work because can't define on non-native
kathyeng: confirm situation that algorithm addresses
... IDs in the headers are not in the table
... would not be failures if IDs are valid
... is it failure of WCAG?
Wilco: would fail rule
kathyeng: but not necessarily fail WCAG?
Wilco: correct, rule is making an assumption
kathyeng: if one good ID and one bad ID, bad ID should be simply ignored
shadi: can we change expectation from "each token ..." to "at least one token ..." or "valid tokens ..."
kathyeng: seems to be similar to discussion on mapping accessible name calculation
... pointed to the algorithm in that rule
... could use similar approach for this rule too
shadi: which approach results in more accuracy?
Wilco: from my experience, this works well
... rule needs to go back and will need re-survey
RESOLUTION: rule needs to go back and will need re-survey