Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group Teleconference

Meeting minutes

<becky> regrets, Gottfried Zimmerman

<FredrikFischer> Janina is.

<becky> chair ?

<FredrikFischer> The EU is phasing daylight time out, by the way. ItÄs projected to be phased out in 2023.

<FredrikFischer> The trouble is, it has to be implemented on all the national levels first before it can be officially phased out. The French are not amúséd.

Agenda Review & Announcements; Charter; Time Changes

BG: Anything that people want to add?

<becky> https://www.w3.org/blog/2021/03/group-calendaring-service-enters-beta-test/

Please be aware of the group calendaring

<FredrikFischer> I'll double check it.

Anyone have feedback or like to review for a11y?

BG: Thats great

JS: Actions to track?

<FredrikFischer> How formal do you want the check to be?

<FredrikFischer> Please, yes.

Action: Fredrik to check the a11y of the calendar

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2285 - Check the a11y of the calendar [on Fredrik Fischer - due 2021-03-31].

<FredrikFischer> Right. I was more concerned with the formatting.

JS: If you find issues we can escalate for fixes.

<FredrikFischer> @Janina: sure.

JW: I did use if for RQTF - didn't encounter any

<JF> @Fredrik - any format works: email would suffice

JS: ARIA are using it

JS: Also next week EU goes to daylight time

Sydney moves April 4th

zakim close item 2

Task Force Updates

BG: The TFs are busy

Personalization are cleaning up doc and working away

JS: For COGA CFC, that we know is postponed for a week

We have found issues

I've looked through, extra content needed to explain how the doc is organised is needed

<Fazio_> uh oh

BG: EO is also looking at it

<becky> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/COGA-accept-response/results

They have a survey on some of the issues, if you want to look

We'd like all to review

JS: RQTF also had a request for a CFC

JOC: I've prepped e'thing and think we just need URIs for the CFC if that is possible by Michael

<FredrikFischer> @JF thanks!

JW: Gives overview of the RAUR and XAUR status

We discussed all related feedback, including new comments via Silver group

The TF is satisfied with the state of the document

<paul_grenier> I can't access the COGA questionnaire (linked above) "You are NOT allowed to see this questionnaire." Are we meant to just review the results?

<MichaelC> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/6d5bf713d9d7c65ecda104c213ad47b0e98cfbe1/raur/index.html

<MichaelC> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/6d5bf713d9d7c65ecda104c213ad47b0e98cfbe1/xaur/index.html

MC: I can give you URIs for these

JOC: Great

Janina: Maybe Michael should have a look

MC: You could do that.

MC: Documents are valid, thats good.

Looks like my comments wouldn't invalidate a CFC

<FredrikFischer> +1 on Paul's question about the questionaire.

JS: Sounds like we are pretty safe

I'll put out the CFC

BG: Paul has a question about the COGA questionairre

BG: On the EO survey

Paul should be able to review

<FredrikFischer> Aha. right. Thanks.

JW: Just to finish - there is work in RQTF on Media Syncronisation and work on Natural Language Interface Accessibility User Requirements ongoing

BG: Pronunciation?

Irf: We are keeping Micheal busy - we have a final edit etc

Planning on FPWD

Will then send to Michael for review

We have followed guidelines etc and will forward for CFC

JS: Spoken presentation

JS: We'll need a TR link

MC: Timeline?

Irf: Making final change tonight - by end of week

MC: Will put on my list

BG: Anything else?

DF: COGA are working through the issues etc - should be a couple of weeks

FAST Progress

MC: Within the Functional Needs subgroup we have been discussing the user needs

We are looking at structural options - start that with the Silver TF and expand

Will tie into Silver and FAST guideline dev

Thats it really

Packed agenda for tomorrow

BG: Good to see progress

New Charters Review

MC: There are no new charters for us

Horizontal Review Issues Tracker

MC: There are two types of issue here, new for our attention

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5857

CSS containment

Lots of discussion, flagged a week ago.

Should we track?

BG: Yes

<Volunteers>?

BG: They want AT users feedback

<FredrikFischer> One time has to be the first: let me! :)

<FredrikFischer> I am.

<FredrikFischer> Not just in the subjunctive.

BG: Thanks Fredrik!

<FredrikFischer> Yup.

<FredrikFischer> Yes.

<FredrikFischer> fredrika11y

<FredrikFischer> No!

<FredrikFischer> fredrika11y

MC: <Adds Fredrik to GH issue>

<FredrikFischer> @Becky: any deadline?

<FredrikFischer> Great. Thanks!

<FredrikFischer> Okay. Thanks!

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5983

MC: We have two issues, that are proposed as dealt with

CSS override details

MC: Ian says its ok, happy to close?

Amy?

AC: Thats ok

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5927

CSS Ruby layout

MC: We chatted a month or so ago, no decisions

JF was involved, is this ok to close?

JF: I'm not sure if they have answered the question

JF: Maybe UA issue

JS: If so, I'd rather agree

JF: I've not seen a working example

Happy to watch it.

JS: We are happy if the implementation of the spec includes keyboard a11y

Can we revisit?

MC: In terms of this tool, no.

We can say we want to see - a keyboard supported expand/collapse

but not trackable.

JF: We could file issue

MC: Messy

We can comment

MC: An open issue with stop it going ahead

JS: Sounds like a note like this is good

We can develop it

MC: Leaving open, but we want to see a demo of keyboard supported expand/collapse

BG: They may need to add UI

JF: Ruby expanded/collapsed state info needs to be exposed

JF: <riff on ARIA states>

MC: Relates to bigger issue on CSS => A11y tree

JS: lets not do that now

MC: We may need an issue in the CSS A11y tracker

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues

Can someone file it

JF: I will

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/a11y-review/issues/55

MC: We should move this into TR, closer

BG: Last one?

new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues/1

MC: <Gives overview of new repo>

When groups go into wide review

MC: In our wiki we decided in level 5 not to review

We could decline to review

JS: Thats ok

BG: <gives overview>

MC: Ok, that signals to them that we are done with Horz review

thats it

PG: I had an action about the vocabulary

I gave it a thumbs up, defer to JF

Image resource

JF: Ongoing

<JF> https://github.com/w3c/image-resource/issues/39

JF: <Gives overview of issue>

JF: Issue still open - being discussed, going well

BG: Relates to the manifest issue?

PG: Yup

<becky> https://github.com/w3c/manifest-app-info/issues/29

<paul_grenier> I found https://github.com/w3c/manifest-app-info/issues/29

PG: There is a PR showing people how to clarify

JF: These issues are related

BG: Anything else?

CSS Update (Amy) https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues

BG: Amy?

AC: I have things marked as questions from TPAC

<amy_c> https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues/6

Can we run thru?

CSS counterstyles - there had been a review

Still needs review

Need a status check on this.

JS: This is old

IP: I dont remember it

BG: OCBE

AC: We can close then

<amy_c> https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues/9

CSS Rhythmic Sizing

AC: We were to bring back to CSS - seems to still be public WD

Do they need us to review?

JS: I'd wait for it to come around, unless we have an issue

BG: We can wait till they ask for formal review

JS: Yup

BG: Close with a note for formal review

AC: Sounds good

<amy_c> https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues/12

Web Animations

These have the same note - relates to reduced motion etc

Drop?

JS: OCBE

Fixed by media queries 5

BG: Thanks Amy

– DRAFT –
Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group Teleconference

24 March 2021

Attendees