– DRAFT –
Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group Teleconference

Agenda Review & Announcements;

TPAC Planning https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2021/GroupMeetings

<becky> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2021

becky: hopefully your WG meetings has started to discuss TPAC meetings

<janina> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2021

becky: the sooner the better as it helps with planning and arranging meetings with groups that should meet. Are there any teams APA should consider meeting?

becky: TPAC is virtual again this year

Task Force Updates;

becky: Personalization didn't meet this week

janina: synchronization accepts SAUR acronym

janina: research questions has been looking into the literature for tolerances between types of media. It's going to be helpful to several groups.

janina: pronunciation has a presentation accepted for Denver and we're getting some comments, looking for more reviews

<Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel very eager to read that research that Janina mentioned

<joconnor> Here is the initial request https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2021May/0015.html

Fazio: we're looking at the COGA requirements and we see cases for COGA benefits as well that aren't mentioned, should we call that out

joconnor: we encourage the feedback, looking forward to it

FAST Progress

MichaelC: the list of needs it ready for survey

MichaelC: next up is the checklist

MichaelC: members of AG are helping

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

MichaelC: no new charters

janina: I need to bring up the devices and sensors charter

MichaelC: RQTF was going to get back on that

janina: we have a concern in the new deliverables, an API for contact info, we need to make sure they get the UI right for accessibility

MichaelC: the contact picker API does seem to be out of scope, we could comment that

MichaelC: it may be better as part of web platform and needs more accessibility review

janina: we could mention it, it would trigger a need for a liason to APA

Lionel_Wolberger: the API doesn't seem to require a UI on first reading

Lionel_Wolberger: they say it plays a role in social graphs

becky: we're trying to understand the relationship to device/sensor

MichaelC: contacts is a software feature and therefore I believe belongs in web platform

Lionel_Wolberger: the examples point to data use only

MichaelC: *reads draft statement*

<Lionel_Wolberger> +1

becky: any objections?

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

<MichaelC> In APA review, the group wonders if the Contact Picker API is in scope of the WG, which otherwise focuses on APIs for specific hardware features. It seems that API might be more suited to the Web Platform Working Group (or whatever it is currently named). APA thinks this API would have more user interface implication than the other APIs. If this is in the charter, API requests to be included as a liaison in section 4.1, with text like "Coordinate on

<MichaelC> accessibility of user interface features implied by the APIs".

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6319

MichaelC: we can track and put in a pointer to the new wcag 3 color contrast ratios

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6283

<MichaelC> https://github.com/mfreed7/csswg-drafts/commit/5ee55cb0ac1185025ff35e068e31b456343061c3

becky: we can sign off

<MichaelC> https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5678

we can close our issue, theirs is already closed

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues/4

MichaelC: horizontal review request

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues/5

MichaelC: no comment on either

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

<MichaelC> Web of Things (WoT) Discovery

<Fredrik> Seconding Paul!

sure I'll review this for accessibility considerations

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

<amy_c> https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues/3#issuecomment-848938568

<amy_c> https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues/36

amy_c: this was already reviewed in January, I didn't find any issues

<amy_c> https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues/17

amy_c: we commented about font icons should have alt text, they changed to "should" language with an example of the printer character

there's a preference order of these techniques, I'd like to see that in the description

amy_c: we can collaborate on the response (with Paul G)

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

janina: I thought was Lionel_Wolberger was doing is right on. There's a little bit of terminology clash between the way we talk about audio descriptions in the MAUR. I'd want to suggest we update that. I can send you the info.

<joconnor> WebXr Layer https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2021May/0040.html

<joconnor> https://www.w3.org/TR/webxrlayers-1/

joconnor: there are so many components and parts of the stack and I suggest if we have any concerns we should be tracking it