<scribe> scribe: CarlosD

Call for review

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1630

Wilco: one PR left in call for review ending today

Update from the ACT Task Force

Wilco: we are largely done with checking the rules for publication as proposed on the WAI website
... there are just one or two PR needing to be merge
... we're ready to go to the next phase that is to write the scripts to automate the migration
... the CG website will eventually be discontinued
... rules will migrate to the WAI website
... but we need to decide how to manage the documentation that is on the website

<Wilco> https://deploy-preview-51--wai-wcag-act-rules.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/act/rules/

Wilco: we are also looking to move the implementation trackers to the WAI website
... we are reviewing this with EO tomorrow
... because this is going to be the first piece of the WAI website to move to the new design

<Wilco> https://deploy-preview-51--wai-wcag-act-rules.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/act/rules/aria-hidden-no-focusable-content-6cfa84/#implementations

Wilco: the implementation tables at the bottom were manually inserted
... this will also be linked to the test tools list, but I haven't figured out how yet

CarlosD: when this becomes automated it would be good to have a link from the tool name to a tool information somewhere

Wilco: these were just put here to create awareness... they will be improved
... for example, including it the implementation is fully automated, semi-automated, ...

anne_thyme: I will miss the mapping to success criteria in the new list

Wilco: that will be part of WCAG 2.2
... they will be listed in the understanding documents
... and maybe in the quick ref

shadi: there are plans to update the quick ref, but I'm not sure about the scope
... is there anything we can do with the old rules listing

Wilco: I don't think we should have another entry point

anne_thyme: I think we need to ensure we have a useful interface to the act rules, similar to what we have on the current website

<shadi> +1 to Anne

Wilco: I agree
... the CG website is not going down, at least until WCAG 2.2 is out

<Helen> Do we have a 2.2 date yet?

anne_thyme: will the WAI and the CG website be aligned?

Wilco: yes
... there isn't a date...

<anne_thyme> WCAG 2.2 timeline: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.2_Timeline

Wilco: we have been working with Silver towards integrating ACT with WCAG 3
... blending rules with methods
... we have an example with decorative images
... it was straightforward
... but it won't be for all rules/methods
... it is on a AG survey starting today
... I'm confident that it will be accepted
... and ACT will be the way to test WCAG 3

anne_thyme: I'm not so positive, because I see still some holes
... we can get there, but we will have to figure some things out

Wilco: a couple of the issues are how to maintain a rule set that large

Jean-Yves: perhaps different groups of people can maintain rules for different technologies

Wilco: that hasn't worked for WCAG 2

shadi: I don't think that we should combine rules to make them applicable to different technologies, compromising the quality of the rules
... that should be solved at the interface level, allowing people to find methods for the technology they're looking for

Assigned issues

Wilco: 2 PRs open

aron: I've made progress on table headers have assigned data cells

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1548

aron: looking for feedback

Jean-Yves: I can review it...

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/assigned/Jym77

Jean-Yves: need discussion about the issue of extra spaces in the accessible name
... according to AG some extra spaces are OK

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/assigned/carlosapaduarte

CarlosD: I couldn't find a live stream that meets our needs
... we could use a webcam to live stream for passed examples

Wilco: that works

Update from website migration

Wilco: I already did that

Organising background citations (Who can work on this?)

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1531

Wilco: we need to assign this to someone

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1531#issuecomment-769169901

Helen: I'll take it

New rule: 'Status text update has aria-live property'

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1590

Wilco: there's a difficulty with the test cases... they are dynamic
... for the test cases to work, you need to load them, click a button and then run a test
... these are different from our previous test cases because we need to interact with them before running the tests

Jean-Yves: it sound related to the state transition the sub group worked this winter

<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1590/files#r642454970

Wilco: instead of relying on the load event to let the implementor know the page is ready for testing we could fire a "ready for test" event
... but it would be tricky for manual testers

<Wilco> https://cucumber.io/docs/gherkin/reference/

Wilco: or we could have a solution based on gherkin syntax

<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/wiki/AccName_1.1_Testable_Statements#Description_test_case_664

Wilco: this can be interpreted by manual testers or can be programmed into a tool for automated testing

aron: in this PR we could replace all click events with onload events

anne_thyme: my concern is that tools that would work on the examples might not work on real websites because those would not have a script to tell the tool when to test

Helen: I'm for the gherkin approach

Jean-Yves: even in this approach the tool won't be able to test websites that don't have those kind of instructions

Wilco: even if automated tests can't test it, it doesn't mean we shouldn't have rules for testing

anne_thyme: do the tests specify the instructions needed to trigger the events?

aron: some do
... we can trigger a timeout on page load that would run a script to interact with the example

Wilco: doing it on a timeout would work, but we need an event to tell the tool to start or stop testing

CarlosD: is this a problem for manual or automated testers?
... for a manual tester the test description should be enough

Wilco: a semi-automated tool could be driven by a user to know what and when to test

CarlosD: the user could read the test description

Helen: if we write the description in a way that makes it easier to interpret then people would have less excuses to make websites inaccessible

Wilco: everyone should review this rule

aron: don't judge the applicability and expectation yet

Wilco: this is a good topic for the next meeting

anne_thyme: we could have a separate meeting to work on this

aron: I'll arrange a meeting

Wilco: final thoughts

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: CarlosD, aron, anne_thyme, Wilco, Jean-Yves, Helen
Present: CarlosD, aron, anne_thyme, Wilco, Jean-Yves, Helen
Found Scribe: CarlosD
Inferring ScribeNick: CarlosD

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth


WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)