W3C

Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference

16 Jun 2022

Attendees

Present
Helen, Wilco, ChrisLoiselle, trevor, Daniel, ToddL
Regrets
Chair
Wilco
Scribe
trevor

Contents


<scribe> scribe: trevor

ACT rules sheet

wilco: Will on Meta element has no refresh delay, no updates
... myself on meta viewport allows for zoom. Ready for merge, putting into call for review
... Helen for object element.

Helen: Talking with Jean-Yves, making some more changes and probably ready for another review
... iframe with negative tab-index. Have some more changes to make

trevor: role attribute has valid value, waiting on Jean-yves for proposal

Open ACT pull requests

wilco: #1856 - Two approvals, need another review
... #1854 - Reviewing call for review status for further changes
... #1852 - Awaiting for reviews again
... #1835 - Needs to be sent out for review
... thats all of the main PRs for the moment.

Survey: Scrollable element is keyboard accessible

wilco: 8 responses, 8 accept as is, so pretty easy
... comment from Chris on understanding the whitespace comment.
... comment from Kathy, inapplicable example 1 doesn't use the same terms from the applicability.
... will add the vertical scroll distance. Okay to go through without.
... Tom question about how iframes are not considered scrollable elements for inapplicable example 6

Helen: May need to add additional text to the example to explain how its the content of the iframe and not the iframe itself

Wilco: Could also alter the definition to not include objects and iframes
... its really the embedded resource that is scrollable, but not the iframe

Chris: Think that wilco's definition above makes sense and would be a helpful distinction

Wilco: This is similar to the iframe doesn't have negative tabindex. One question is if we should merge them.
... don't think that would be best. A change in definition might be the easiest.
... leaning towards a stronger description text. Also should maybe link the negative tab-index rule to this
... definition is only used in one rule. Proposing - Update inapplicable example 6, rename scrollable elements to non-embedded scrollable elements, cross-link negative tab index rule, clarify inapplicable example 1 description
... think we can do all of these changes in an editorial update

Survey: HTML graphics contain no text

wilco: 5 accept as is, 2 accept w/ changes
... from Kathy, comment on Trusted Tester and how manual tester identifies images of text. Inapplicable if no text in image. Rule is applicable to all images
... rule passes many things that the Trusted Tester would consider inapplicable.
... Q7 from Kathy - Expectation should include another bullet about image not containing text.

trevor: Not sure how that would be different from the language bullet point

wilco: Could maybe change the order of the bullet points to make essential. We could pull the language into the expectation and list everything else be exceptions
... would follow the WCAG structure better.

trevor: Agree that it would be better

<dmontalvo> +1

wilco: Think image resource hides too much important info. See #PR1858
... essentially putting the rendered image resource definition inline of the applicability.

trevor: Feeling that it makes this applicability more technical on average

wilco: Didn't like that the definition was not a clear term and it was hard to guess what it meant

trevor: Could go either way, just think that its a bit more complicated than a usual applicability

wilco: I think we have others that are just as complicated

Chris: Prefer it spelled out with all of the details

ToddL: Fine with it

wilco: Jean Yves had a few comments on this.

trevor: Think there might be a bit more work with how to fully flesh out the definition.

wilco: Update rendered image resource definition. See PR #1858
... think this one needs a little bit more work.
... assigning chris.

Update from ACT implementations on WAI website

<dmontalvo> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act-rules/pull/103/#pullrequestreview-1008880189

wilco: Yesterday got some feedback that was mostly about leaving things to Daniel

<Wilco> https://deploy-preview-103--wai-wcag-act-rules.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/act/rules/

dmontalvo: Need to keep the draft banner

wilco: Still have 2 implementations that we are waiting on data/need to get data into the system for
... talk to Jared about Wave, reached out to LevelAccess, reached out to TPGi, need to see if we can develop those
... content with where this is to get this out of draft

<Wilco> draft RESOLUTION: Accept pull request 103 for merger

+1

<Wilco> +1

<dmontalvo> +1

<ChrisLoiselle> +1

<ToddL> +1

RESOLUTION: Accept pull request 103 for merger

wilco: Will merge this today and can hopefully go live
... have put in the automation now, the data will be pulled in every 6 hours

<dmontalvo> Trevor: Any manual way to trigger this?

wilco: Give them a PR with a preview to make sure it works
... so we are set there

CG issues are getting stale, should TF commit to answering open issues?

wilco: Raised by Mark and why we haven't finished his results.
... made the point that while there are published examples that are under contention in some issues.
... but then the CG never really got to them.
... one suggestion was to pull any contested example.
... now that we are responsible for all of this content, we shouldn't have any issues open for years.
... poll the group, how should we feel. Should there be some fallback that if CG doesn't resolve TF does.

<dmontalvo> Trevor: I feel we should take steps to resolve. Some of us may not have much bandwidth

<dmontalvo> ... Maybe having a sub team that specifically focuses on that within the TF

wilco: Its going to be more work that will have to come out somewhere

Chris: is there some kind of date or criticality tag that they could send us

wilco: It really depends on the issues, like new rule suggestions are not immediate. But issues with rules may need more immediate attention
... one solution is to tell CG it is their problem and give some of our support
... ideally CG does it, but they don't have set times and personnel
... can possibly talk with CG about pro-actively letting us know about issues they would like us to take on
... would remove some tracking work from us, but if issues aren't resolved within 6 months, they probably need to pull us in

dmontalvo: I think it sounds like a good proposal. On them to tell us which issues they cannot handle.
... work on a definition of what kinds of issues we might expect to get from them

wilco: We could give them requirements or ask CG to come up with those policies

Chris: Think we could give them some baselines and build off of that

wilco: Can take that up and let them decide how they want to handle it going forward

RESOLUTION: Wilco to talk to CG chairs about them coming up with a policy on how quickly to address issues

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

  1. Accept pull request 103 for merger
  2. Wilco to talk to CG chairs about them coming up with a policy on how quickly to address issues
[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.200 (CVS log)
$Date: 2022/06/16 14:20:26 $