Meeting minutes
https://
https://
AG feedback on testable outcomes
Jeanne: We can address Andrew's comment, to be developed on creating a representative sample.
<Francis_Storr> https://
Wilco: Don't think sampling should go into this document
Jeanne: Alright, just want to provide an answer.
Wilco: Andrew's not in AG often, so maybe a response in the survey is a good idea.
Jeanne: I'll edit my comment to include a response.
https://
Jeanne: What to respond to Mary Jo?
… I always thought these should be clarifications rather than definitions.
Wilco: Not sure that works. It's still a definition, even if we call it something else.
Jeanne: You can say "in this application, we mean this"
… Everyone has its own definition of heading. We can constrain what we mean by heading.
Wilco: I prefer to use qualifiers with that "semantic heading" rather than "heading".
Jeanne: The definitions are always really useful when they are narrow, and have examples
Francis: Before you do anything, you need to define what you're talking about.
… having definitions, understanding what they are is super useful and important.
… Otherwise we'll end up in WCAG 2 territory, arguing what a focus is, or what a border is.
… They can be tedious to write, but getting it tied down is really useful.
Jeanne: There is a WAI subgroup working on a glossary.
Wilco: I don't think we need to worry about it too much, as we can change the definition term without changing the definition.
Jeanne: So research existing definitions
Wilco: We already have a sentence saying not to use definitions from existing standards. Should we add a list of standards?
Jeanne: Yes, I'll work on that.
Programmatic language
Francis: I reached out Jason for answers. He didn't know the answers to our questions, nor did he know anyone who could.
Francis: Some questions, when is a word widely enough adopted in a language to no longer need a lang attribute.
Daniel: Most people tend to prefer not to change language unless you're bilingual. Once a word is established, people feel okay.
Francis: In terms of scoring, is this down to the auditor?
Daniel: It's not just whether it is acceptable or not. It's not a very big issue. People can live with these kinds of things.
… Where do we set the boundary on what is and isn't acceptable. What's good in one community might not be for others.
… This might be an issue, if there are words that are not recognisable.
Wilco: Just to put it out there, is it actually an issue if individual words do not have a lang attribute?
Wilco: Do we have an example of a sentence with one word of another language, that we know for sure needs that lang attribute, or it will be a problem.
… Words that have different meanings in different languages?
Francis: yes
Wilco: Better assistive technologies can make this outcome obsolete
Daniel: Most of the time people prefer the weird pronunciations, rather than the dictionary pronunciations.
Wilco: So should WCAG 3 have a programmatic language outcome?
Daniel: There is a case, for example the browser local is different from the language of the screen reader.
… That's an issue, if the page doesn't have a language, there is a guess. It goes to the default language, you may be forced to change the screen reader.
Jeanne: What about if you have a large chunk of text, a paragraph in a different language. Wouldn't a language change be appropriate then?
Daniel: Yes, I speak a little French, for that it would be.
… When it comes to longer texts, there it's more of an issue.
Jeanne: It would certainly be easier if we moved away from individual words.
… One way we could address this is to have a method for screen readers, and say they have to do language detection.
… Makoto felt it important to include things to do for screen readers.
Wilco: It doesn't have to be screen reader, it can be the browser, or an extension in the browser.