<scribe> scribe: trevor
<Wilco> https://wai-wcag-act-rules.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/act/rules/m6b1q3/proposed/
wilco: Had first ever objection
to a CFC
... comments from will, no test case with image inside the
menuitem with valid accessible name
Will_C: From a testers
perspective, was the first the test case that came to
mind
... is a bit more old school like using an images as a
button.
wilco: No one seems to have a
problem with it, so we can add that
... next comment was including the title attribute as
unreliable in the accessibility support and then have a passed
example using the title.
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1886/files
wilco: sort of similar to this PR
adding role="img" to svg due to some accessibility support
issues
... opposition to the PR since trying to get all of our
examples to be accessibility supported is a constantly evolving
problem
... if there is legitimate problem, then that S.C. could be
failed due to that accessibility support problem.
... should try not to have accessibility support issues related
to the S.C. that is being passed
Will_C: As more of a tester, seeing that a rule specify it or not backs up how it will be tested in practice. Should try to avoid at least the obvious issues.
ChrisLoiselle: Is goal to build more robust examples and we are adding safeguards against the AT/Browser combos
wilco: The accessible name of
SVGs aren't announced in some cases, and the fix is the added
role. This would fail 1.1.1 if using that specific combo for
testing
... feel the same way for the menuitem, if it causes failures
due to accessibility support issue should be included
kathy: For the title, it is part of the spec and automated rules would and should pass it
wilco: Would argue that the svg + role="img" is also part of the spec
kathy: If there was a workaround to make sure that the title is read by AT, then could agree that it would fail
wilco: Would you fail 4.1.2 if the title wasn't announced?
kathy: no, I wouldn't
wilco: I'm digging a bit, because I am wondering if we should have something in the rules format that says the rules should not have accessibility support section. At least not those in the accessibility support section
kathy: Feel like there could be other rules impacted
wilco: We should give implementers the ability to fail things with known accessibility support problems
trevor: Worried about the moving target problem of this
wilco: Some maintenance with
this, but not too much more than the accessibility support work
that we are already doing.
... at the point is more up to the implementer to determine if
they want to determine how to fail these types of rules
ChrisLoiselle: The rules/test cases should at least be flagged with the accessibility support issue that could arise.
wilco: Leaving up to will to be
liaison for making changes to the rule
... determine if title is still accessibility support problem,
then we should remove it from the accessibility section
kathy: For earlier issue, title accessibility support may show up in other rules
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1908/files
wilco: No objections for this
CFC, but did have one comment
... should not be using the abbreviation SC 2.2.1, should write
out full name
RESOLUTION: Accept meta-refresh for AG with the update of PR 1908
wilco: No progress on object
element
... helen is not frame
... Chris, status on html graphics contain no text
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1873
ChrisLoiselle: Waiting approval
wilco: Looks like it is approved,
editorial so that can be merged today
... is this rule for CFC?
... Seems like so, will move it forward.
... will, image accessible name is descriptive.
wilco: only comment was to improve the description of examples
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pulls
wilco: First PR is the svg + role="img" that was already mentioned
kathy: Was only approving for
this particular rule, didn't think it would have broader
effects
... approved before i saw some of the last few comments, may
look at it again
thbrunet: Opens up additional questions like what the result should be when role="img" isn't there
wilco: I think the point is to intentionally leave it up to the implementors
kathy: In this one, I think
adding role="img" won't change results
... the other rule could cause implementors to get different
results
wilco: Iframes #1855 needs another approval, has some suggestions from kathy
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3APriority
wilco: Working on PR for #1853
<Wilco> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1172
wilco: Will you were looking at 1172?
<kathy> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/531/files
<Wilco> Here's a diff for anyone who's looking: https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/531/files/5c8814da972be7efba8e6d67c1d4b3b2d04400c6..3a42ca5286cce0c373e7df0d8c34e11d6f902cd1
kathy: Kept the conformance
requirements like they were before. Secondary requirements
cannot be considered to be not satisfied even when all of the
failed test cases are not failed
... since there are cases the rule doesn't cover that could
still pass the rule
... changed the example to contrast, where 1.4.6 is mapped as a
secondary.
... Then on line 245 the second example on no keyboard trap, it
has only a secondary attribute.
... have changed phrasing for when you might map to the
secondary criteria.
... Other options on what to call these criteria, associated is
an option.
... in 175, changed to all outcomes for a test target is failed
and inserted the test cases failing.
trevor: Some confusion over how outcomes are getting applied to test targets, thought there should only be one outcome for the test target.
wilco: Something seems a bit wrong. Test target only has one outcome per rule.
kathy: Trying to put more focus on the test cases where the S.C. fails. When all of the test cases would fail the S.C., then that S.C. would be listed as a conformance requirement.
trevor: Think it makes more sense of to keep it as the test case level
wilco: Should be any test target that fails the success criteria then the success criteria is not satisfied