Meeting minutes
New Issue Triage<https://bit.ly/3mtOMDR >
<jamesn> https://
<Jemma> https://
Scott_OHara: I'll take this
https://
https://
<MichaelC> Several features are deprecated in 1.2, so we do have precedent and pattern
New PR Triage<https://bit.ly/3dMcd7i >
<Jaunita_George> Question -- where's the draft for 1.3?
<jamesn> Secondary actions on items in composite widget roles #1440 for next week
Juanita: https://
Meaty topic for next week<https://bit.ly/3moWBuw >
<jamesn> in 2 weeks Data Visualization discussion
1.2 - How are we validating Author MUST statements?
<joanie> The implementation report and summary of changes seem to imply that the ARIA 1.1 comboboxes will remain, though that role highlights "Major Changes to combobox role in ARIA 1.2". This implies a lack of implementations of the ARIA 1.2 combobox changes, and raises questions of what other changes ARIA 1.2 brings that the summary of changes did not document.
joanie: The 1.2 changes are all for authors, except for valuetext.
StefanS: The ARIA group should certify a validator.
jemma: I think Joanie is asking whether we should validate what authors write?
<Zakim> jamesn, you wanted to ask Michael what we have done in previous versions
joanie: does that report need to include validators
jamesn: didn't we have validators in the past
MichaelC: I think that if we want authors must requirements, then we need to validate them
MichaelC: I have a vague memory of saying that it's trivial for authors to follow these requirements
jamesn: Harris, is there a way to know if axe covers all of these?
<Jaunita_George> Sorry, would this task force be the one who could help with this: https://
harris: possibly
scott: what do we need to prove here? We know that the implementations are there.
jamesn: I think we need to prove that author must statements are implementable
sarah_higley: why aren't the combobox changes listed in the section on substantive changes
jamesn: They are, but there are 2 sections that need to be merged into one. That will be done before PR.
scott: can we add a note to the 1.1 spec?
jamesn: no, sorry
scott: because a problem is that people still use the 1.1 spec because 1.2 isn't rec yet
sarah_higley: and people still have a link to the 1.1 spec
<Jaunita_George> I can help with the testing documentation with both manual/automated testing
Action: jamesn: find a diff between author requirements between 1.1 and 1.2
1.2 -User agent implementation expectations for name-prohibited roles with names?<https://github.com/w3c/aria/discussions/1449 >
scott: focusable div should be a group.
<Jaunita_George> Maybe a new role? Like role="generic"?
jamesn: should contenteditable be a textbox?
<Jemma> wow. that is a good idea.
<Jemma> Joannie's idea
scott: no, because contenteditable is allowed on every element, and having all textboxes doesn't work very well
Jaunita, we have a generic role: https://
scott: regarding authors must... it's a specification, follow it
Detectability of AT<https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1371 >
<jamesn> https://
<jamesn> https://
<Jaunita_George> Thanks @carmacleod.
jamesn: Any comments on the privacy group's proposed change?
jemma: JamesN, your comment is easier to read, but their comment says why
jamesn: not sure if we want to say "invasion of privacy"?
jemma: we don't want to scare people
jamesn: let's use tracking vector (with the link to the definition) instead of device fingerprinting
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> Note, the onboarding email message shouldn´t be too long, perhaps you want to put some of this info into a resource page you link to from the email
<Jaunita_George> Thanks!
<Jemma> thanks for the feedback, Michael
<Jaunita_George> Will do. Thanks so much!