Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Announcements;
janina: Anything to add? Nothing.
janina: We have a new charter! Almost on time. Old charter expired at the end of July.
janina: New charter means some things. You have to renew your participation. If you are here as a member organization youäll have to talk to your rep to get you added back to the APA-WG. For invited experrts, there is a link in the e-mail you got this morning.
janina: You have to do this. Thereäs a 45-day grace period.
<JF> That form is at: https://
janina: Any questions about that?
<JF> +1 to shorter charters
janina: This is a two-year charter. It expires end of July 2023.
TPAC Planning https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2021/GroupMeetings
Becky: The link is now in the chat for joining the APA-WG.
<janina> https://
janina: There will be some additional tweaks as we move forward. We may add and/or subtract a bit, but there are three categories of meetings.
janina: Cross-group meetings for the first week.
janina: Two meetings for the second week, perhaps halv-day meetings.
janina: There's Pronunciation being discussed and so on. There are also questiosn coming fromm other directions.
janina: We'll try to have a discussion of AAPI++ and what that may look like. The existing APIs are 20 years old.
janina: A couple suggested break-out sessions, some for us, some for our guests. At the bottom of the page there are references to coordinations with Silver in particular but also with AGWG.
janina: Some of what was previously on our list has been pulled to AGWG or Silver. We may get invited to do presentations for some of our specs in their meetings. We'll become visible and evident over time.
janina: I'm pointing to the Silver planning page at the end of the page.
janina: If there's general agreement that this is the right idea, Becky and I can do outreach to other chairs for meeting preparations.
amy_c: I bourght this up to the CSSWG last week. They said just let us know. Give a rough time we want to meet and then they can bring in issues they want to discuss as well.
amy_c: Not to early though.
janina: Not before Boston noon time.
amy_c: CSSWG have got the animations already, whcih might help with not setting up seizures.
janina: That's the reason why this is among th ethings on our agenda.
janina: Please feel free, everyone, to add content to this Wiki. Feel free to throw in notes at the bottom. Let's make this useful.
becky: Thanks for doing all that work, Janina!
janina: Now comes the hard work fo scheduling.
janina: How about we send an e-mail suggesting Noon Boston preferred as time and then you, Amy, pick a day of the week? That should be preferable to most people.
amy_c: Does one of the charis need to send this?
janina: Theoretically, yes, but we could delegate.
amy_c: I'll copy you guys in.
becky: Please do so.
Task Force Updates;
PaulG: Pronunciation: we're attacking localization and i18n as an addendum.
janina: With the goal of publishing an updated WD.
PaulG: Soon.
janina: RQTF: XAUR - thanks for taking a look at that and voting! Josh makes sure this gets published.
janina: Expect two documents out of RQTF to go FPWD early September. SAUR is almost ready now. Also the documents on remote meetings need a little more work but should be fairly close to wide review.
janina: Definitely SAUR is no note track.
Lionel_Wolberger: Personlaization is moving along nicely. Thanks to the chairs for setting up things for TPAc.
janina: The one thing I notice dfomr COGA is that they formed a community group to broaden participation. They may need some guidance, Michael, to understand the implications of things they want tto publish.
janina: I did note that they started a community group and that's part of their recruiment strategy.
MichaelC: I'm a little involve dwith that.
janina: Good.
FAST Progress
Joshue108: No updates from FAST this week apart from MichaelC and I meeting and discussing a little. Jake is back this week so we will be able to get an update from him.
New Charters Review https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: there is a proposed charter for the HTMLWG. Scope is some legal stuff. HTML, DOM and Fetch. They have AIRA as a liaison but not APAWG.
becky: We should be there, too.
General agreement.
janina: I belive amy_c and someone else are doing deep dives on the diff here.
becky: I'm happy if htey add APAWG as a liaison.
MichaelC: I'll write that up.
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: The Centralized Identifier WG. They don't list us a s liaision. Theirs are two othe rtechnical groups.
MichaelC: I don't think we need to liaise with them.
MichaelC: And that's it.
Accessibility Review Comment Tracker https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3c/a11y-review
becky: The Picture-in-Picture comment went through a CFC and I had that posted.
MichaelC: I have an issue for PiP from April 8. Is that the one?
becky: I've added our approved comment into the issue. It's still marked with A11y needs resolution. Our view is completed but it's still open until they agree.
MichaelC: There seems not to be anythignto do from our prespective here then.
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: For CSS Color 4 there is an updated accessibiity considerations statement issue. Wen tvia Amy AFAIK.
MichaelC: They have marked this as fixed. Are we good to sign off on that?
becky: They accepted the comment Amy provided.
MichaelC: So sign off?
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: Then we have for CSS scrollbars add wied value to scrollbar width.
janina: We have a review from Paul on that.
becky: In an e/mail.
MichaelC: They#ve also posted "Rejected by resolution, commenter not satisfied". The commenter being someone I don't know.
PaulG: I reviewed in support of allowing a "wide". "Wide" would bprovide an option that doesn't exist right now fo rpepople to access the scrollbar easier than is currently allowed.
janina: Little easier to land on it.
PaulG: I'm basically siding with the OP based on A11y arguments.
MichaelC: Would you put that as a comment in the issue?
PaulG: If the group agrees to.
<Lionel_Wolberger> +1 to the use case: easier to land on, easier to see
janina: I feel you had a good use case. I would also add "easier to land o" and "easier to see its status". If they give further pushback we can do a further CFC.
MichaelC: You might watn to reopen the issue or leave it to the chairs. They might summarily close it.We have a tracker in our mirror issue and thehy can't go past us without us signing off.
<PaulG> https://
PaulG: I upsted the issue on GitHub.
janina: I suggest you just reopenthe issue based on this. Say we have a use case which this would serve.
MichaelC: I'll reopen it. If I can... Yes I can.
new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
MichaelC: That's it for th ereview tracker this week.
MichaelC: Three specs to look at.
MichaelC: CSS masking module level 1.
<MichaelC> CSS Masking Module Level 1
MichaelC: This is one of thos specs that was last updated in 2014 and hten in CR in 2021.
MichaelC: This is masking in the graphics sense of you can have a mask that filters what shows form layers underneath it. Mostly SVG stuff but a CSS version.
becky: We would have expted to have been notifeid of a working draft or something.
MichaelC: They're doing this aadministratively adn there should be no point in reviewing it.
amy_c: I'm looking at a list of changes to it on GitHub.
amy_c: There are changes since 2014. Several bullet points there. I don't mind taking a look at it.
janina: I was wondering if this might be useful for simplification.
Lionel_Wolberger: I'm not sure.
janina: Neither am I.
PaulG: The most common use case is for generating non-text content.
<MichaelC> HTML diff of CSS masking since 2014 version
PaulG: It's often skipped by AT. There is no note on a11y and such things in the document. So that is needed.
Lionel_Wolberger: It's entirely visual masking and visual cropping. There a re gemometries and so on.
amy_c: I think of it as bringing Photoshop capabilities into the browser.
Lionel_Wolberger: The alt is quite challenging. There are significant questions here.
PaulG: A common example is taking an SVG, giving it a CSS background, you treat the SVG as a cutout which can be animated. In addition ot the concerns that there is non-text content plus there should b e amechanism for stopping potential animation-like actions.
becky: Amy wants to review this. Action?
amy_c: Yes please.
Action: carney review CSS Masking (https://
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2305 - Review css masking (https://
Some dicussion on usernames, as per usual.
<MichaelC> action-2305: https://
<trackbot> Notes added to action-2305 Review css masking (https://
<MichaelC> MathML Core
MichaelC: Next up: MathML Core is a FPWD.
becky: We have pretty good repsentation there, don't we?
NeilS: I'm a co-chair of that group.
becky: So we're covered.
MichaelC: And done.
CSS Update (Amy) https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues
amy_c: Just bringing up the HTML review really. The changes made to HTML are imrovements fo rthe good of everyone. A lot of bugs squashed.
amy_c: The list of items they noted might be of a11y interest are good and there's good representation there as well.
becky: Any comments?
Crickets.
janina: Thanks for doingthat Amy. That's a slog.
MichaelC: I didn't record an action in the Wiki and I suauaally do if there is one.
becky: Then we'll take it off our list.
MichaelC: I thinkwe might have a formal review request from them.
janina: Meaning we should respond and say we like what you've done.
MichaelC: amy_c, do you want to do the honours?
amy_c: Yes, I'll do that.
Dangling Spec Review Cleanup: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Category:Spec_Review_Assigned
MichaelC: We've go the active ones.
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: Mitigating Broser Fingerprinting in Web Sepcifications.
MichaelC: We had discussions in 2019, we thought Lionel_Wolberger might be a good person to take a look at this more closely.
janina: We put your name on it in your absence.
Lionel_Wolberger: I'm passionate about anti-fingerprinting, but what should I review here?
MichaelC: You should look at if it introduces A11y problesm and if it contrasts with use cases within the scope of the group.
FredrikFischer: I'll take this.
Action: fischer to review Mitigating Browser Fingerprinting in Web Specifications (https://
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2306 - Review mitigating browser fingerprinting in web specifications (https://
<MichaelC> action-2306: https://
<trackbot> Notes added to action-2306 Review mitigating browser fingerprinting in web specifications (https://
<MichaelC> action-2306 due 3 weeks
<trackbot> Set action-2306 Review mitigating browser fingerprinting in web specifications (https://
<JF> bye all!
<becky> regrets, gottfried zimmerman