scribe+
wilco: AGWG surveys back, 2 were
good
... some were pushed back
... would like to improve process before bringing more rules to
them
... for implementers, I did a prototype for HTML code
sniffer
... will talk to them before merging
... helped Todd with his PR
Will: didn't get to much this week
Helen: need to update affiliations with new job info
Kathy: liaison for a rule, need to address issues
Trevor: need to send a CFC for rule, opened a pull request for survey responses, catch up on state discussion
<daniel-montalvo> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act-rules/issues/173
Tom: working on frame rule
Daniel: onboarded a new member, terminology vs examples
wilco: surveys due next week
Trevor: it's been a while since
we discussed stateful rules
... where state can be added in rules - maybe applicability or
expectation or input aspects
... statefulness of a color contrast of a link (visited,
focused)
... in "Toy examples" section of issue 1511
... states under Applicability can get very messy
<trevor> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1511
Trevor: we already have concerns of complexity of rules
Will: does "only matching" mean it can only be used for the same purpose elsewhere?
Trevor: I don't think so
... not sure what it means
Will: if pseudo-class is used to identify a link, that class can't be used for highlighting
Trevor: not sure
... Carlos's example is more like what we're used to but still
a long list of Applicable states
... makes applicability very complicated
... I don't think option 2 under Toy examples is a good
solution because the applicability gets too complicated
Wilco: I agree
... what states don't we test? Transitions, not just initial
but also hover state, how to write rule for aria expanded false
and true
Trevor: Toy examples #3 solution set applicability to any link in any state and state is in expectation
<Github> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/3: added change management section draft for the review
Trevor: not a fan of leaving it up to implementors for better harmonization
Wilco: tools do single state testing, person running tool must navigate states
Trevor: we also consider manual
and semi-automated
... testing some states is good
Kathy: Trusted Tester provides some instruction on testing different states but don't cover all scenarios. Training covers some. Tester must be able to recognize when different states may exist to test.
Trevor: I don't think exhaustive is possible in rules. Test cases can give different examples but can't cover all.
Tom: semantic state change vs hover which is a UI side effect?
Trevor: both are human interaction state changes so not a distinction
Tom: it's hard to take every state into consideration
Trevor: contrast difference between states is very difficult, especially for links
Wilco: can that be its own rule? one rule for hovered and one for focused
Helen: focused and hovered should be separate rules
Daniel: that can work for links but not for aria-expanded true and false
Trevor: if each rule is only
concerned with a single state or single transition, will that
be tons of rules that are the same with just a state
difference
... will we have a composite rule for all these rules?
Wilco: for links, testing the
different states is of value. for other things it's not that
important
... one rule for default, one for focused...
Trevor: for aria-expanded, would we test that it's appropriately set, is it mouse and keyboard operable...
Daniel: there are FAQs where only one can be open at a time
Trevor: so each rule tests one state
Wilco: each rule can have a
different accessibility requirement so I wouldn't combine
them
... my preference for having multiple rules is it allows
stateless implementors to implement some parts
Trevor: for color contrast, yes.
For aria-expanded or error messages, does that work?
... I like separate rules to allow stateless tools to test as
much as they can
Tom: pseudo states you can test stateless
Wilco: javascript doesn't interfere
Trevor: can that be an assumption in a rule?
Wilco: that's seems to be an unsafe assumption
Trevor: I think we've found a direction, will add an issue
Wilco: I like using color contrast. should we focus on this?
Trevor: sounds good
Wilco: Welcome to new member, Catherine
<daniel-montalvo> Meeting: Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference