Meeting minutes
<janina> Date 26 Jan 2022
<Matthew_Atkinson> agenda
Agenda Review & Announcements
janina: standard agenda, asks for any other updates?
<crickets> - no other items
Proposed Change in Teleconference Hour--Can we move to 10:00 AM (Boston)?
janina: proposed change to meeting time to 10:00 am Boston (US Eastern) time
janina: if any issues please speak up now, so far no complaints
Task Force & Deliverables Updates
janina: new feature in W3C where people can raise issues on APA documents/notes/specifications, we will discuss any issues here
janina: personalization - still working on closing i18n issue #144, making progress but it is slow; starting to look at naming the upcoming specifications clearly to promote people understanding the purpose
<Matthew_Atkinson> Here's a link to the list of specifications known to the horizontal review tracker: https://
janina: planning on a follow up meeting with COGA but need the naming of specifications to be complete
janina: RQTF is closing on synchronization user a11y req should be publishing soon;
<Matthew_Atkinson> Here's the Personalization tracker: https://
janina: also working on other documents
Fredrik: what is meant by clear titles in personalization vs. cardinal numbers?
Fredrik: I only know them by the numbers
janina: currently we have agreed that first word of title will be personalization, last word will be module, may or may not include the word semantics within the title and include a description of the content: help, content, tools, etc
janina: have suggested personalized adaptation: <module name> but that does not have consensus
paul: nothing to report on pronunciation, several absences at today's meeting
Fazio: am back in US but have no updates from COGA this week
Matthew_Atkinson: there are 3 pronunciation items within tracker list of issues filed by other groups on a specification
michael: believe the tracker link is created whenever a github repository is created
<JF> https://
<Fazio> I will
michael: when an issue is filed against a specification it will get added to the list; for a11y we (apa) will see the items in our tracker if a11y-needs-resolution or a11y-tracker label is added
michael: no longer required to accept comments on a spec via email; official method is filing a github issue
Janina: David to remind COGA that there is a tracker to monitor github issues on a document/specification that needs to be monitored
janina: more info to come from Janina and Matthew
Matthew_Atkinson: this is for other groups within W3C that require a horizontal review: ex: i18n and APA/A11y
FAST Update
Joshue108: nothing to report today; lack of quorum at recent meetings
MichaelC: functional needs subgroup has matured to a point where I believe we should take up the work in APA and make it an APA deliverable. expect the same people to be involved with involvement from WCAG 3 group;
MichaelC: believe FAST / functional needs should be an APA publication
janina: yes, since FAST started in APA and we have responsibility for horizontal reviews and we have the broadest scope
Janina: any objection to this work coming back to APA?
janina: no objections from group; expect people currently working on this will continue to work as part of APA
MichaelC: want list of user needs to be comprehensive and thus believe it belongs in APA
New Charters Review https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: audio working group
MichaelC: have a liaison statement to APA
janina: believe they are lower level than we need to be concerned with; believe we can sign off
MichaelC: decentralized working group
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: registries, method rubrick, no liasion statement
MichaelC: we did review in August and had no comments
janina: believe they should have a liasion statement due to CAPTCHA and we may work with them on joint publications
MichaelC: will add a comment that APA wants to draw attention to recent updates to CAPTCHA document and prospect of joint publication
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: verifiable credentials
Janina: our concerns are within the general domain of security and not necessarily with individual groups; we do review their specifications
MichaelC: will take up at planning call about security groups
A11y Review Comment Tracker https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3c/a11y-review
MichaelC: no activity
new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: web of things description has an explicit review request
Joshue108: I responded to profiles but believe there is a broader engagement with wot that we need to consider
janina: we need to determine where we get involved in some of the specifics, api's and middleware (the actually controller)
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: mini app packaging
MichaelC: self contained applications that run inside of a mini app container, doc does have an a11y considerations section;
MichaelC: reads a11y section
janina: have concerns that this sounds normative and is within a non-normative specification
Janina: will write up a comment to that effect
ACTION: janina to review miniapps
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2317 - Review miniapps [on Janina Sajka - due 2022-02-02].
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: incremental font transfer ... - how to get an incremental update of an online font
Fredrik: I will review; don't expect we will have any issues; did not with the previous font transfer spec
<MichaelC> https://
<MichaelC> https://
Fredrik: <discussed in group> all agreed to need to respond; no action for Fredrik
MichaelC: CSS conditional rules module level 4
janina: we have no one to review
Fredrik: will reach out to person who may be able to help
MichaelC: others in list are also CSS so will defer for now
Actions Checkin (Specs) https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/open
janina: any actions to report on within the group?
<crickets> no one responded
Web XR -- Josh https://github.com/immersive-web/layers/issues/278
Joshue108: there was discussion about use of particular language
Matthew_Atkinson: we agreed last week that Josh has completed his action;
janina: no need for a separate agenda
<MichaelC> https://
Dangling Spec Review Cleanup: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Category:Spec_Review_Assigned
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: concern about identification of sign language within BC47 ; sign language can be identified and i18n is also including a mechanism
<MichaelC> BC47 language lookup ^