Synchronization Accessibility User Requirements.
JW: Lets discuss these
JS: I looked back for resolution but we didn't log it correctly
It needs to be entered by the scribe
RESOLUTION: RQTF requests APA call for consensus to publish SAUR as found at https://
JW: Any objections
JS: This will be out at some point today - CFC
JW: Two other matters are - that Michael is still working on this
JS: Yes, we can update in place
JW: I've also circulated a draft note
JS: May need to re-ping on that
CFC open till midnight next Weds
JW: We can work on announcements
JS: We hope to publish on 14th of June
JS: There is an issue around some lost messaging
We need access to older version of messages.
JW: We can work on announcement text
Accessibility of remote meetings.
JW: There was one open issue on this
Seeking clarification on applicability of WCAG to content presented during remote meeting
There is an open PR on this
Adds a clarification
If content is shared via screen sharing it should still be accessible a la WCAG
JW: There are also comments from Matt Atkinson - I've pinged him on this.
We can integrate suggestions
Do we want to merge now or wait for comments
SH: +1 to merging change
Good job Jason
JW: Discusses bit mapped videos being relayed as video tracks
Screen reader and other tools are being considered - as well as transferring info via A11y API across that channel
JW: My suggested change isn't dependent
SH: Q, on when standards change etc e.g. a la WCAG 2.2
do we need to revisit our references?
JS: There is no general rule - if we need to accomodate or update a la newer guideance we can - but that is more substantial
There are processes
SH: In some place there may be editorial tweaks needed etc - that answers that.
JS: Could be 22, or 23
JS: Maybe later this year
<Discussion on charters>
JW: There could be new guidance needed
JS: Referencing SAUR etc
JW: Closing thoughts? I'll merge that change
Inaccessibility of CAPTCHA.
JW: There is ongoing work
JS: There has been dialog but still in same spot
JW: When will we revisit?
JS: Next week good
Accessibility of collaboration tools.
JW: Some small progress here
I've been working on this - looking at potential requirements etc
Added some text etc
Relates to 4.1.3 - a la WCAG 2.1 - Status Messages
I've attempted to document some of the issues and we invite contributions
JS: That SC may need an update
JW: The requirement is to notify the AT, the AT doesn't have to pass that on.
JW: There are user agent issues here
JS: This doc is related
JW: Some issues are also cognitive
The intersections are interesting
JS: Do you recall if UAAG even looked at this?
JS: Don't know for sure but think any specific interface or Real Time is ommited.
SH: I've some items to update on the wiki
JW: We can bring this back next week
and work on note
Natural Language Interface Accessibility User Requirements.
JW: Thanks to Josh for working more in this
We have some comments from Kim Patch on the draft
Some editorial and substantive
Josh has added these substantive issues to Github
We have a thread discussing - lets keep on processing the comments
We can discuss further next week
Josh: notes he has entered the issues into GitHub and invites review.
JW: There is a CFC from APA regarding the reporting API
captures events and error conditions- so web service operators can understand user agent issues
That closes this week Janina?
JS: Midnight tonight
JS: Here is the SAUR CFC
JW: Thank you Janina - you will announce in upcoming APA meeting
SN: Sounds good
RK: Regarding the publication, I've been busy but want to let you know I support the note
JW: It has good material
RK: One more thing, it has been interesting talking about user agents and the server - this does impact auditory and visual descriptions
Predictive for more use cases - will pop up in side channel communication purposes
RK: That should be communicated
JW: If a client is suppressing noise, then the error reporting should be picked up by the A11y API
JS: Yes, have a technical report generated that is clear of the error for multi modal support
Interesting use cases - if they have good mainstream applicability
JW: Thank you Raja. On point.
Are you expecting APA to work on that, or refer it here.
JS: May be here
JS: Part of our conversation with Web Performance will be interesting
To have that conversation is APA likely to look at these use cases - or do in the next month or so.
JS: Appreciate that, this group should be discussing it.
JW: I think we are agreed, Scott?
JW: Lets put it on agenda next week
JW: Anything else we should be aware of?