<scribe> scribe: trevor
Wilco: did not this weeks
meeting, did get an update
... have vacations starting up so probably not a lot going
on.
... last week there was a CFC from AG to vote on adopting the
proposed method format that we worked on.
... it has been accepted, so going forward the methods with
include a test section that include applicability, examples,
glossary, etc. from act rules.
... a question here. Anne has questioned whether applicability
needs to be objective.
... specific image was decorative images. Rule says to
programmatically find decorative images. Whereas we might want
to find decorative and programmatically determine if they are
decorative.
... we currently require applicability is objective,
programmatic things are normally objective.
aron: Its logical, but it may affect the validity of the rule. The subjective part of what you consider to be a decorative image
Wilco: The reason we added the
objective requirement was as a control mechanism/quality
assurance.
... whatever you test you constrain in a specific way. Without
this, really strange rules may be possible
... we may consider how and under what circumstances we allow
subjective applicabilities.
... I think we should start considering a 1.1. version of the
rules format that considers some of these things.
... For example, we have an additional requirement that all
inapplicable examples needs to follow accessibility
requirement
... Could better define different types of implementations,
full/partial/etc.
... Would like to spend some time in upcoming meetings
discussing possible updates. Another example is satisfy/not
satisfied vs. the WCAG 3 format
kathyeng: Were there any other rules Anne brought up where the subjective applicability would help?
Wilco: Yes, like headings.
Logical thing is to find the headings and then check that their
markup is for a heading.
... We tried to write a rule like that, but couldn't define it
objectively.
... Another way is to allow the WCAG3/ACT group to lead and
figure out what they might need changed, which will inform any
changes we consider.
kathyeng: I have concerns about how automated tools will handle rules like that. How would they handle any subjective rules?
Wilco: Unsure, it will be
something we need to look at. I don't think it would matter
from looking at the fully automated rules.
... I think it affects semi-automated rules more so.
... Should we take this on as a topic for an upcoming
meeting?
trevor: Don't think that it would hurt to take a stab at it. May help us understand if their suggestions might be good or bad.
aron: What can I look at to see automated vs semi-automated rule.
Wilco: Currently not in there. Looking to specify that on the WAI website to be more clear.
aron: Thinking subjective part may only apply to semi-automated or manual tests.
Wilco: The way Anne suggested it,
is starting off with things that are decorative and checking
that they are.
... problem with things that are decorative but shouldn't be is
that is may be an issue of something else.
... may be complex, informative, or interactive that needs
further inspection.
kathyeng: If it helps, from the tested tester side we do this with headings. We have two tests for programmatic headings and things that look like headings.
Wilco: Find the headings and ask
if they are actually what they are marked up as. Then the
second step for finding the other headings.
... don't have a clear idea of how to capture that in
rules.
<Wilco> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OSkPFocXk4K3zYLnwS78WLsWO4PvE5yRcsauyefuIUI/edit#gid=0
Trevor: We set up the CFC ... the problem we may new it was coming is if it was backwards compatible enough ... we still need to keep the mp4 files basically, that PR does exist already
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1680/files
Trevor: First I deleted the mp4, but then we realized we needed the mp4 back ... I'd appreciate if you can checkout the branch and view the videos in browser, not locally
Aron: What is the benchmark here? At least they need to be supported by a couple of them
Trevor: All of the others are used the same code that I am using now, we are updating these to be consistent
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1665
Wilco: Don't allow description track to satisfy media SCs
Todd: haven't had time to work on it. Would appreciate if someone else could take that on
kathyeng: I can take it over.
Wilco: Not sure how much is left,
just need to finish.
... Let me talk about the sheet a little bit more. Looking to
automate more of it.
... there is now a last survey, survey, and accepted
columns.
... I have linked these up to a google form so that they are
automatically populated.
... Accepted checkbox is coming from the rules metadata. Rules
tab is updated from JSON in repo
... Tracks what rules we have and am looking to add when the
rule was last accepted, last updated. Will help us track if a
rule is currently up to date.
... Possibly how many implementations there are. Brings
together a lot of information
... Can start tracking everything all in one place. The basic
pieces are put together here.
... Links for the rules are also generated from metadata.
Trevor: Do you have macros as part of the sheet?
Wilco: Currently just one script and the rest is sheet functions
* ensuring sheet is accessible *
Wilco: Not much to update here.
Currently waiting for redesign for new rules pages. Waiting to
hear what work needs to occur.
... have been doing some additional work to automated the
setup.
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-tools
trevor: Have been playing with act-tools and had a couple problems. Will just email those over.
Wilco: Reached out to all of the
implementers on the CG site. They have all said to include
their data on WAI website
... reached out to others that have expressed interest, so
there may be additional implementations
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pulls
Wilco: Adding aron as co-author,
merging now.
... definition of test instructions, interesting but not
digging into it now.
... replace autocomplete value with failing value has been
approved.
... merging soon.
... Update included-in-accessibility-tree document, has some
changes requested.
kathyeng: we are seeing
difference in what is in the accessibility tree between
different browsers. E.g., edge and chrome include
aria-hidden="true" in their trees.
... question on how to handle browser differences in something
like this
Wilco: Unsure what is causing
this. Still guessing that they are not included but that the
developer tools are showing them
... we should not consider them as included in the
accessibility tree. May just need to make that explicit in the
definition.
aron: Its in the spec, and FF seems to be respecting the spec.
Wilco: I would like to do that in a separate PR if possible.
kathyeng: Just leave aria-hidden example as is and handle accessibility tree differences somewhere else?
Wilco: yes, I think thats what we
should do.
... we will need to update the file in a directory. It should
be an additional constraint to what is included in the
accessibility tree.
... "Elements with hidden state of true are not included in the
accessibility tree."
kathyeng: Will try and others can review
<Wilco> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSflIXQelUrrTb6UZutIZWjMDGKGJMAP9JBtM7JncwAT7PLeeA/viewform
Wilco: I have created a google
form. As mentioned earlier, looking to collect all of our data
in one place. Google forms is easy to connect to
spreadsheet.
... I would like to get back to reviewing rules that we think
might be ready to go to AG.
... Previously we used forms through the W3C system, but this
way should make it easier.
... Has all of the questions we used to have on the
surveys.
... Now have one survey that is permanently updated, and we
change the id of the rule being surveyed
... Have 3 rules that I would like to start surveying
kathyeng: Don't have permissions to access
<Wilco> https://forms.gle/4xpKXUwcaqjPEruM9
Wilco: Need to figure out how to add everyone. This will be in the agenda starting next week. Surveys open for 2 weeks