<Wilco> scribe: Will_C
Will: acknowledges he is the scribe
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/rules/
Wilco: this page is different
now. Banner has been updated.
... Sidebar has been updated with new look to page content
Trevor: Are we going to work with the deprecated section? It's getting big. Wilco: yes
Wilco: How do we feel about the navigation at the top now?
Kathy: It's a bit odd in the banner
Wilco: It went live without our review. it's got a UI bug even.
Helen: the formatting is interesting. It's not conventional.
Will: said stuff.
Wilco: Updated all proposed rules
with links to test cases
... links within test cases are broken, b/c absolute paths, we
are working on it.
... automatic updating is occurring for the W3c website. goes
live every couple of days
... next, working on automating the implementation. Trialing it
on axe-core.
Helen: work faster, wilco
... just kidding
Wilco: now publishing proposed rules alongside approved rules
Wilco: akn7bn
Helen: Status update - looked at
the PR and fixed the items in it. out for review. might not
have done everything.
... Don't know if karen did more examples
Wilco: 1817, out for
reviews
... 1808 into call for review
... 1805 - jean yves asked for reviews
... proposing a new section at the top of test cases where the
content of test assets can be seen. Has mocked up a look
... Not merging it, just approving concepts
... 1804 - trevor to look ar that
... 1794 - needs reviewers, will and kathy added
WIll C: too much coffee
Wilco: update on widget
role.
... conclusion is that we cannot do this, due to new definition
of 'consistent implementation'
... you can't fail something for 4.1.2 and then also fail it
for 2.4.4. for example
... does everyone feel like revisiting?
Helen: 10 years down the road, it'll have to be revisited. Easier to keep it per item, images for 1.1.1, links 2.4.4., buttons 4.1.2.
Wilco: assuming it's cool
... Helen, 1779 is approved
... Rest of pull reqs are old. skipping those
... gonna talk to the community group chairs about closing old
PRs. At the least, non-members
Wilco: act rules check - didn't
complete. Passed example 4 needs a clearer example
... 1807 is an open issues. Failing items with negative
tabindex and aria-hidden=true
... Where does everybody stand? I don't think things with a
negative tabindex should always fail when there is an
aria-hidden="true"
... it's not alway a failure
kathy: Question of wether you could still use your mouse to activate the button?
Wilco: yes if you're not obscuring it
helen: you don't know in the context, sometimes things get hidden visually for a more accessible route
Will: talked a lot and it didn't matter in the end.
Kathy: If we can update the TC so that it isn't clickable then it wouldn't be a question
Wilco: Then we have to update the
rule
... there is an assumption in all rules about alternative
versions to be ok
... Tabindex-1 makes something focusable, making this
tricky.
Tom: People typically do it to
take it out of sequential order.
... The more important rule is don't have tabbable elements
inside an aria-hidden
Wilco: Proposal - we add an
assumption saying that focusable elements that are not part of
sequential focus navigation can be ignored, acknowledging that
there might be other acc issues
... might have to adjust the rule to focusable elements that
are part of sequential navigation
Tom: Change the name from focusable to tabbable?
<dmontalvo> +1 to those
Wilco: Any opposition to that?
Tom: THe argument is if you can see it to click on it you can see it to read it
Daniel: Question on definition of focusable. Tabindex-1 makes it focusable but it's not focused. Can we make it clear we mean 'programmatically focusable"/
<Wilco> draft RESOLUTION: Accept the case in 1807 as inapplicable for the aria-hidden rule and add an assumption
Wilco: no opposition
Helen: show me where skip links hurt you
Wilco: No
no objections
RESOLUTION: Accept the case in 1807 as inapplicable for the aria-hidden rule and add an assumption
Wilco: updating the spreadsheet
now.
... tom's comment about pass 4 making it difficult to
automate
... automatically redirecting focus does make it more difficult
to automate
... separate issue open for that.
Helen: Wan't Jean-yves talking about this one?
Wilco: 1811 covers this very thing.
Tom: i struggle because if it isn't exactly done this way, I have no idea how you put focus on it, script-wise
Wilco: Selenium lists out event
listeners, but the DOM doesn't
... difficult to test, not a realistic example.
... created as a way to keep focus in the modal.
... would prefer that modal case as example over this
simplified version
Tom: Every one of the failed examples are eventually a 'cant tell'
Wilco: how do others feel?
Helen: Whatever the devs say, I back up.
Will: ditto
Trevor: We have rules that are difficult for automation, manual testing will catch, but agree this one is not realistic
Wilco: don't throw out, adjust
Tom: illustrate it better. show an event listener hook
Wilco: How about replace it with
a modal pass and modal fail that show redirecting and focus in
the background?
... this came from a real-world false positive
Daniel: Modal will clarify this
Tom: Is there another role that could be applied other than link?
Wilco: proposal - replace passed ex 4 with a pass and fail example of a modal
Agree
No objections
<dmontalvo> +1
RESOLUTION: Replace passed example 4 with pass and fail example of a modal
Wilco: going through other
issues
... conclusion it needs more work, updating tracker
... sorry Kathy
Kathy: might be too technical with the modals
Tom: I can at least come up with the modal example
Wilco: audio alternative - from tom: should there be assumptions regarding usable native controls.
e7aa44
Tom: every example just uses 'controls' attribute
Wilco: I can see us adding a test case that uses a button element
Will: has value from a testers perspective since we want to see issues that match what we have found
Wilco: Blocker or no?
no blocker
Wilco: from Jennifer- the incorrect text took a minute to spot
Kathy: I didn't have a problem spotting the problem, but was amused
Wilco: does this need an
adjustment?
... we can adjust, not a blocker?
Not a blocker
Wilco: 1346 - seems like a thing
we may wanna do
... definitions don't belong in a note. play button should be a
link to the glossary
WIll: +1
Daniel: +1
Wilco: ended on q6 - #1346 needs
to be resolved
... failed examples to be more obvious
... add example of non-native controls
... last two are optional
... there are two new surveys open: meta-element and
meta-viewport. Please fill out before next week4
END