Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group Teleconference

31 March 2021


becky, Fazio, Gottfried, IanPouncey, janina, JF, joconnor, Jonny_James, Lionel_Wolberger, MichaelC
Amy, Frederik
Fazio, JF

Meeting minutes

Agenda Review & Announcements; MQ Video; Charter Update

Janina: old specs need attention

Janina: student presentation from a few weeks ago on poly fill will be published soon

Janina: Charter moving forward to formal consideration

Janina: Silver - can transcripts be viewed on braille or screen reader?

Task Force Updates; CfC Reminder

COGA wants more time

2 separate CFC's not 1 CFC for 2 specs

CFC open till midnight Boston on Friday

Fazio: COGA is looking for more time to comment on RAUR - they have a fair number of comments to submit

janina: suggest you let them advance and comment on the 1.0 version

agreed that if there were a small number of edits we could make the changes, but if there are a large number of comments we don't want to delay publication

We need these requirements to integrate into other specs

especially RTC - exposing some critical needs

so other groups are waiting on us

Fazio: COGA will meet tomorrow, will relay the concern and will get back

Fazio: would you be open for both? quick comments edits now, and more details later?

janina: concerned that getting Content usable out the door will delay this other task

Fazio: how are you defining RTC? Who is doing that?

janina: the WebRTC WG at W3C

they have split their spec into 2 parts, to advance as quickly as possible

Fazio: will investigate further

janina: Glad to see COGA showing back up at these meetings. Note that all of this is also announced widely on WAI-announce

ja: to report on RQTF which is also COGA related

they are looking at helper agents in voice assistance (the A lady, etc.)

apparently COGA have a document on that already - waiting for that too

JF: ongoing discussion about token values in Personalization

JF: misunderstanding with Internationalization

<JF> https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/6519

FAST Progress

Janina: would like a pointer to conversation

Josh: advancing user needs in functional needs group. Survey coming out on context of needs and additive value

MC: revised user needs still in draft form

New Charters Review https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22

<joconnor> http://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/user-needs-restructure/fast/index.html#collected-user-needs

<MichaelC> https://w3c.github.io/lds-wg-charter/index.html

MC: Declined to review

LW: a11y of these tools has been dealt with sufficiently to have minimum impact

thx Becky

LW: interested in accessible authentication

Horizontal Review Issues Tracker https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3c/a11y-review

MC: Do we need a new issue for keyboard collapsible expand?

MC: Media Queries waiting for a response to close

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

MC: no new publications

Dangling Spec Review Cleanup: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Category:Spec_Review_Assigned

MC: 47 assigned issues. No progress

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Rules_for_Simple_Placement_of_Japanese_Ruby

MC: MC: asked Makoto to review ruby

Janina: no known complaints

Janina proposes to close

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Fetch_Metadata_Request_Headers

JF: tracks back to CSS issue

<JF> the Ruby/CSS issue: https://github.com/w3c/a11y-review/issues/55

MC: no a11y specific implications

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Image_Resource

JF: done reviewing. Some changes were made. Included calculating image resource acceptable name

<MichaelC> close action-2284

<trackbot> Closed action-2284.

<MichaelC> close action-2256

<trackbot> Closed action-2256.

Janina, MC: close 2284 2256

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

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Feature_Policy

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/File_API

MC: I will handle

MC: accessibility impact statement to be drafted by Janina

MC: unless not needed

Janina: not sure

Becky: unsure also

Janina: drop it? objectons?

LW: low level process. Janina concurs

MC: user interface developed around API makes aa difference. Makes it important

MC: does that mean impact statement is more relevant

LW: Maybe provide low level impact statement. Becky maybe make it generic and reusable. MC: "don't mess up UI!

<MichaelC> action-2212

<trackbot> action-2212: David Fazio to Draft accessibility impact statement for file api -- due 2019-09-18 -- OPEN

Action item for Faziio https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/File_API

<trackbot> Error finding 'item'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/users>.

Other Business

Janina: any AT users view transcript?

LW: any TR security privacy section accessibility considerations is sample

rrsagent make minutes

Other Business

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).


Succeeded: s/MC: LW: a11y/LW: a11y

Maybe present: ja, Josh, LW, MC