17:55:30 RRSAgent has joined #aria 17:55:30 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/12/15-aria-irc 17:55:31 agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/2b92a902-1365-4ea0-8c68-9f8ae2106fe3/20221215T130000 17:55:31 clear agenda 17:55:31 agenda+ -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/3YqB9YL 17:55:31 agenda+ -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3Yq0OAu 17:55:33 agenda+ -> Last Meeting of the year - Deep Dive planning for the new year? https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates 17:55:34 RRSAgent, make logs Public 17:55:34 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jamesn 17:55:36 agenda+ GH Summary email 17:55:39 agenda+ -> ARIA ACT Rules review - reminder to review https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1847 17:55:42 agenda+ -> AccName Role Traversal Proposal - any updates? https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1821 17:55:44 agenda+ -> Better aria-expanded defaults for combobox https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1177 17:55:47 agenda+ [aria-haspopup at button should not change role]( -> https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/issues/51 https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/issues/51 & -> https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/pull/153 https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/pull/153 ) 17:55:51 meeting: ARIA WG 17:55:51 agenda+ -> 1.3 blocking issues https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A%22ARIA+1.3%22+sort%3Acreated-asc+label%3A1.3-Blocking+ 17:56:02 chair: JamesNurthen 17:56:51 regrets+ CurtBellew 17:56:59 regrets+ ChrisLane 17:57:07 regrets+ ValerieYoung 17:57:19 regrets+ TrishaSalas 17:57:29 regrets+ PeterKrautzberger 17:57:41 regrets+ CynthiaShelly 17:58:12 regrets+ AdamPage 17:58:23 regrets+ JamesCraig 18:02:27 agenda? 18:04:37 sarah_higley has joined #aria 18:06:01 MarkMcCarthy has joined #aria 18:07:02 present+ 18:07:04 scottono has joined #aria 18:07:16 present+ 18:07:20 zakim, next item 18:07:20 agendum 1 -- -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/3YqB9YL -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:07:41 jamesn: What the hell is this Scott? It's a chore, we don't need to talk about it, or that one 18:08:07 jamesn: Should dialog or element aria-modal cause live regions... 18:08:25 scribe: me 18:08:43 scottono: I'm interested in other peoples' opinions. People trying to use live regions outside of modal dialogs 18:08:44 Matt_King has joined #aria 18:08:55 jamesn: we need to replace hacky live region usage with something better, and then we don't have this problem 18:09:13 jamesn: we need to make it so people don't need to use hidden live regions, only things that are visible on the screen 18:09:46 Stefan has joined #aria 18:10:08 Matt_King: question about modal state 18:10:28 present+ 18:10:51 scottono: a team has a script that inserts a live region at the end of the DOM, and they open a modal, and then the live region announcement isn't made b/c they're inserting content into an inert document 18:11:04 Matt_King: the hidden live region doesn't work if it's aria-hidden, right? 18:11:09 jamesn: correct 18:11:20 Matt_King: is this an element with the HTML role of dialog? 18:11:34 scottono: in this context, an aria dialog with aria-modal=true, so it's hiding the content outside the dialog 18:11:42 Matt_King: why is that, aria-modal doesn't actually hide content 18:11:59 Matt_King: it doesn't affect the accessibility tree outside the dialog, right? 18:12:05 scottono: I don't think that's how it's been implemented 18:12:11 scottono: maybe that's where the disconnect is here 18:13:02 Matt_King: it's author responsibility if you're going to make the background inert. If you have a role=dialog and aria-modal=true, we don't expect that to have an impact on the browser's a11y tree. According to the ARIA spec it doesn't expect the author would remove content outside the dialog from the a11y tree 18:13:08 Matt_King: not like aria-hidden would do 18:13:23 scottono: I understand what you're saying, I just don't think it's been implemented that way 18:13:43 Matt_King: I would consider that a browser bug if they remove content outside the dialog 18:13:51 jamesn: isn't that what we've been telling people to do since forever 18:14:08 scottono: in most cases, we are telling authors content outside the dialog needs to be inert and hidden from the a11y tree 18:14:19 scottono: so it doesn't surprise me at all that this is how it's been implemented 18:14:44 sarah_higley: in terms of user experience, that's also what we want, right? 18:15:22 Matt_King: this could also be a reason there's also unintended side effects. THere's also the case where with some screen readers you could un-restrict and see content outside the currently focused window 18:15:33 Matt_King: you could still get outside the window and know what's there 18:16:11 Matt_King: we're making an assumption when we do that that the content has been made unreadable who can see as well. And it seems to me like there should be a dependency on if it's visibly unreadable that seems like the right behavior 18:16:24 Matt_King: because trimming it from the accessibility tree puts it 100% out of reach 18:16:37 q+ to remind folks this is triage 18:16:46 Matt_King: and I kind of worry about the situations where the dialog incorrectly remains open, where there's bugs 18:17:13 Matt_King: and the focus is outside the dialog and the dialog remains open 18:17:49 Matt_King: I understand the objective, I'm concerned about the side effects in practice. It seems the way the spec is currently written it seems like a bug to me 18:18:01 jamesn: let's talk about this in the new year when we have representation from Chromium here 18:18:54 jamesn: let's table this, and potentially this is a deep dive topic. Let's tackle live regions in the new year. Part of this is aria-modal. It wouldn't been better if AT handled this, but they don't 18:19:40 scottono: I did also mention in my response to that issue, there could also have been aria-hidden=sortof. We need to both make it so it's difficult to allow for virtual cursor to access content that shouldn't be accessed, but allow it to be accessible if someone does get to it 18:19:44 scottono: I agree this is a new year topic 18:19:58 Matt_King: I just want to make sure we don't dismiss it as not a bug, and there are complicating factors 18:20:09 jamesn: last one: calrify use for aria-rowindex on cell/gridcell elements 18:20:34 present+ 18:21:02 scottono: this is to get clarity on why aria-rowindex on cells/gridcells. In the example the row that the cells are in have aria-rowindex, so at best the attribute is redundant 18:21:14 scottono: this came up because a team wanted to mark a table up without row elements 18:21:30 scottono: it would work a lot better with CSS flexbox and grid 18:21:45 Matt_King: it's kind of a creative idea. I don't know if it should be considered because the table is so complicated 18:22:22 scottono: I don't know if I condone this, but some developers question why rows are the way tables are made. Why couldn't it be columns? And if one were to ignore decades of how this is done and make tables via columns, this would be a way to correct the rows 18:22:41 Matt_King: think of how this is like if you're making a spreadsheet, and you copy and paste columns. This would make it so easy 18:24:09 sarah_higley: I was talking with someone yesterday who wanted to do the same thing with trees -- treeitems are all flat, and everything is done with ARIA 18:24:18 Matt_King: it's a creative solution, and similar to treegrid 18:24:24 jamesn: maybe this is a road we need to go down 18:24:38 present+ Daniel 18:24:41 scottono: I want to see how this goes down with accessibility checkers, when their tests fail 18:24:58 Matt_King: you could literally use indexing to fix the random DOM order of your table 18:25:10 s/scottono: I want to see how this goes down with accessibility checkers, when their tests fail/ 18:25:31 Matt_King: she didn't minute the statement "don't minute this" 18:25:57 jamesn: OK, I've agenda'd it for the new year. It sounds like a deep dive where we need the right people in the conversation than an agenda though 18:26:10 jamesn: or it can be an agenda to start, and if there's any hope we can deep dive it 18:26:33 jamesn: we need James Teh, that's why I want to deep dive it and do an afternoon call 18:26:39 zakim, next topic 18:26:39 I don't understand 'next topic', sarah_higley 18:26:42 zakim, next item 18:26:42 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, sarah_higley 18:26:48 q? 18:26:50 q? 18:26:51 ack me 18:26:51 jamesn, you wanted to remind folks this is triage 18:26:59 zakim, next item 18:26:59 agendum 2 -- -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3Yq0OAu -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:27:11 jamesn: clarify image mappings 18:27:33 scottono: this is resolving that issue when lol what happens when an image doesn't have a src defined 18:28:10 scottono: I went into the AAM spec to call that out, and then opened up a rabbit hole b/c it's not whether the image has an alt attr, it's whether it has a name to expose it as an image or not. 18:28:14 jamesn: who wants to review 18:28:33 sarah_higley: I hate myself, I can review 18:28:45 jamesn: next, clarification label and for attribute. We already have reviewers on this 18:29:17 zakim, next item 18:29:17 agendum 3 -- -> Last Meeting of the year - Deep Dive planning for the new year? https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:29:46 jamesn: this is the last meeting of the year, congratulations 18:29:48 scottono: we made it! 18:30:08 jamesn: if anyone wants to propose anything, they can always email me or Valerie, it doesn't need to be in the meeting 18:30:22 ~silence~ 18:30:35 zakim, next item 18:30:35 agendum 4 -- GH Summary email -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:31:01 jamesn: has anyone been seeing the github summary email? 18:31:05 scottono: oh, I delete it 18:31:11 jamesn: so I take it you find it completely useles 18:31:22 scottono: when it just lists the things I did, I'm kinda like "yeah, I know" 18:31:37 jamesn: I can just send it to the chairs instead, because I find it useful personally 18:31:48 scottono: I spend so much time trolling github that I don't need it 18:31:53 jamesn: has anyone else seen it? 18:32:08 Matt_King: I haven't read it yet. It sounds like it might be useful because there are a lot of threads where I delete the whole thread 18:32:19 jamesn: I subscribe to the one for respec, so I can pay attention once per week 18:32:48 jamesn: so it's a way for people on the periphery to keep plugged in to what's going a little bit. If you look at it. 18:32:55 Matt_King: I agree with the assessment 18:33:11 MarkMcCarthy: I filter all my stuff to different folders, and only check before the meeting, so thanks for mentioning it 18:33:26 jamesn: I find it useful for surfacing old topics that have become active again 18:33:28 jamesn: OK 18:33:31 zakim, next item 18:33:31 agendum 5 -- -> ARIA ACT Rules review - reminder to review https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1847 -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:33:47 https://github.com/w3c/aria/discussions/1850 18:33:48 jamesn: reminder to review the ACT rules, we have a github discussion that I should've put the link to 18:34:13 jamesn: we don't have a great number of people who have reviewed things yet 18:34:31 jamesn: some of the things I thought were problems weren't initially, but weren't 18:34:44 scottono: it was the ACT review that made me open up the issue on rowindex 18:34:57 jamesn: but if they've done a rule, it's something that's specified, so they've done their job right 18:35:12 scottono: yeah, exactly, if there are rules built around this, we should know what its purpose is 18:35:32 zakim, next item 18:35:32 agendum 6 -- -> AccName Role Traversal Proposal - any updates? https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1821 -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:35:43 jamesn: I want to know where we are on this 18:35:54 jamesn: I don't know if anyone on the meeting can give any details 18:36:00 scottono: Brian kicked it over to James Teh 18:36:17 jamesn: someone, probably me, should ping James Teh to see where we are on it, since it seems to have stalled 18:36:35 jamesn: personally I'm just in favor of writing in the spec whatever Chrome's doing, but I don't think Brian agrees with me on that 18:36:39 zakim, next item 18:36:39 agendum 7 -- -> Better aria-expanded defaults for combobox https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1177 -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:38:02 Matt_King: I don't want to make any changes to aria-expanded on the combobox. I want to make changes to aria-haspopup, but not aria-expanded. I think since that was Nov 3rd, and it's December Something, if you want to do the honors of closing the issue based on my comments and if Wilco wants to reopen it he could, does that seem reasonable? 18:38:17 jamesn: I just pinged Wilco to see if he wants to respond, and I'll close it in the new year 18:38:38 Matt_King: people can always reopen issues after you close them 18:39:39 zakim, next item 18:39:39 agendum 8 -- [aria-haspopup at button should not change role]( -> https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/issues/51 https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/issues/51 & -> 18:39:42 ... https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/pull/153 https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/pull/153 ) -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:40:11 jamesn: they have pushed a change to CHrome to expose aria-haspopup=dialog as a regular dialog 18:40:28 Matt_King: our plan, that scott and I came up with, was to deprecate aria-haspopup for everything but true, men, and false 18:41:04 scottono: I still think that's a pathway forward. We've often had arguments about exposing the element as the popup instead of the element triggering it 18:41:20 scottono: I appreciate that the mapping change happened because if we deprecate it that's what we want to happen 18:41:33 Matt_King: I think this is a positive change because it moves in the direction of deprecation 18:42:12 jamesn: the whole deprecating aria-haspopup values complete would mean that anyone who wants to try to convey that a button does launch something other than a menu wouldn't be able to do so 18:42:44 Matt_King: we had a pretty detailed discussion on that, and I think we were all aligned here that having a button tell you that it's going to open a thing created more noise, pollution, and problems than value 18:42:57 jamesn: I'm slightly surprised by that, because Apple does say that something launches a popup, right? 18:43:30 general 🗣️🌶️ 18:44:05 Matt_King: I think we had already gained consensus in the discussion, but if people want to object to the PR, they can object 18:44:18 jamesn: should we just go forward with the change based on what Chrome is doing? Or should we go further? 18:44:34 jamesn: the draft PR I created is that anything other than menu or true doesn't change it 18:44:37 sarah_higley: I'm in favor of that 18:45:03 scottono: practically I think it's fine Chrome implemented what they did, but I think we should go the extra step and remove everything else 18:45:14 Matt_King: I think we should have an extra role for menubutton 18:45:20 jamesn: I don't think we have that in every api, right? 18:45:27 Matt_King: do we not? I thought we did, I could be wrong 18:45:33 jamesn: I guess we could do something, it's the same thing 18:45:45 jamesn: I'm going to change this PR from a draft to something more formal 18:45:54 jamesn: and then if anyone wants to review that they can do so 18:46:12 https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/pull/153 18:47:43 jamesn: Didn't notice https://github.com/w3c/core-aam/pull/86/, I'll compare and close mine 18:47:58 zakim, next item 18:47:58 agendum 9 -- -> 1.3 blocking issues https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A%22ARIA+1.3%22+sort%3Acreated-asc+label%3A1.3-Blocking+ -- taken up [from 18:48:01 ... agendabot] 18:48:17 jamesn: where are we on the one that solves half of these? 18:56:53 zakim, end meeting 18:56:53 As of this point the attendees have been MarkMcCarthy, scottono, Stefan, Matt_King, Daniel 18:56:55 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 18:56:55 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/15-aria-minutes.html Zakim 18:56:58 I am happy to have been of service, sarah_higley; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 18:57:02 Zakim has left #aria