12:35:31 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
12:35:35 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/05/11-wcag2ict-irc
12:35:36 <Zakim> inviting RRSAgent
12:35:36 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
12:35:37 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), maryjom
12:35:47 <maryjom> meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
12:36:02 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
12:36:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/05/11-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
12:36:32 <maryjom> agenda?
12:36:48 <maryjom> regrets: Shawn Thompson, Bruce Bailey
12:36:57 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
13:54:58 <mitch11> mitch11 has joined #wcag2ict
13:57:37 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
13:57:58 <Chuck> present+
14:00:31 <maryjom> present+
14:00:43 <Chuck> present+ lmiller
14:01:05 <mitch11> present+
14:01:54 <ChrisLoiselle> present+
14:02:14 <GreggVan> present+
14:02:36 <dmontalvo> present+ Daniel
14:02:53 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Scribe-list-&-instructions
14:03:33 <mitch11> scribe+ mitch11
14:03:38 <olivia-hs> olivia-hs has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:43 <mitch11> zakim, next item
14:03:43 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:03:49 <olivia-hs> present+
14:04:08 <maryjom> Link to schedule and milestones: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Schedule-and-milestones
14:05:09 <FernandaBonnin> FernandaBonnin has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:05:29 <mitch11> maryjom: progress slower than expected on Reflow
14:05:54 <mitch11> ... text-based interfaces appears on track for June
14:07:07 <mitch11> ... appendix on criteria problematic for closed functionality, aiming for June 30 to AGWG and publication process, leading to publishing in July; this timing might be at risk
14:07:16 <FernandaBonnin> present+
14:07:38 <mitch11> ... so we focus on remaining work items of above items; Mary Jo working with Michael on technical parts
14:08:01 <mitch11> q+
14:08:44 <Chuck> I will scribe for Mitch
14:09:05 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/44
14:09:16 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:09:19 <Chuck> mitch11:  is AAA in the timeline?
14:09:50 <Chuck> maryjo:  AAA is not in the timeline, it will have to be later.  None of the regulatory standards require AAA.  It will take us enough time to get A and AA done for EN 301 549.
14:10:21 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
14:10:23 <Chuck> mitch11:  the publication process doesn't preclude going back to AGWG?
14:10:36 <shadi> present+
14:10:58 <Chuck> maryjo:  It does not.  It's a plan in our scope statement.  People want us to address AAA.  I don't think we can do that along with the current round of updates.  There's a lot of AAA, and it will take a while to get through them all.
14:12:09 <Devanshu> Devanshu has joined #wcag2ict
14:12:24 <Devanshu> present+
14:13:34 <mitch11> maryjom: progress board is now up to date, showing AGWG progress and current tasks in progress in our task force
14:14:50 <mitch11> ... we should now concurrently work on 2.1 open issues, looking for owners for a few issues
14:16:08 <mitch11> ... looking to touch base with contributors on Problematic for Closed Functionality section, between our weekly calls
14:16:54 <mitch11> ... similar analysis is going on for text and command line applications
14:17:24 <mitch11> ... please contribute, analysis needed
14:17:35 <mitch11> ... for closed functionality
14:17:45 <GreggVan> q+
14:17:50 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:18:26 <mitch11> GreggVan: heads up on closed functionality, problem that all the standards have, we'll see in ANPRM from Access board but for now we're the first standard tackling
14:18:51 <mitch11> ... in past many assumed closed means closed to screen readers, so app must provide own speech
14:19:15 <mitch11> ... but now programmatically determinable becomes important for user groups: cognitive, voice control
14:20:00 <mitch11> ... expect more work required for programmatically determinable to make things functional for more disability types
14:20:16 <mitch11> maryjom: agree it's for more than blindness
14:20:36 <GreggVan> +1
14:20:47 <mitch11> ... this analysis not expected to cover that level of detail, would be left to another standards group, because we're not tasked with coming up with requirements
14:21:13 <mitch11> ... is it enough to say that, any other considerations to be noted?
14:21:41 <mitch11> ... maybe we describe the wide variety of closed functionality products, they might have a specific use case or technology in mind
14:22:03 <mitch11> zakim, next item
14:22:03 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Project standup and planning -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:22:11 <mitch11> zakim, next item
14:22:11 <Zakim> agendum 2 was just opened, mitch11
14:22:29 <mitch11> zakim, take up item 3
14:22:29 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Discussion on definition of Device-independent pixels -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:22:48 <maryjom> Issue 98 for proposing guidance for 1.4.10 Reflow: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98
14:23:17 <maryjom> Link to Mitchell’s comment on the definition: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98#issuecomment-1512930849
14:24:04 <mitch11> maryjom: we agreed previously "device independent pixel" is a better term for non-web ICT
14:24:56 <mitch11> ... different platforms define the concept of DIP, with different names, e.g. density-independent pixel on Android, see issue comments for size definitions
14:25:19 <mitch11> ... we may want to use those definitions when they exist says Mitchell, otherwise fall back to viewing angle
14:26:03 <mitch11> ... Sam contributed: devices that don't have a definition of DIP, question of whether the angle would work in such a situation
14:26:35 <mitch11> ... javila mentioned tools exist for some platforms to measure angle or size
14:26:41 <maryjom> Link to updated proposed definition: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98#issuecomment-1534745688
14:27:40 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
14:27:45 <Sam> present+
14:28:04 <Sam> q+
14:28:18 <maryjom> ack sam
14:28:54 <mitch11> Sam: some of pixel size is antiquated because it uses a curved angle
14:29:00 <mitch11> ... not everything has a definition
14:29:21 <mitch11> ... use definitions when available, otherwise say there are other standards out there
14:30:05 <mitch11> maryjom: let's split the definition into cases, first of which where it's defined by the platform
14:30:41 <maryjom> device-independent pixel visual angle of about 0.0213 degrees
14:30:54 <mitch11> maryjom: pasting from GitHub comment
14:30:55 <maryjom> Note: This unit is density-independent, and distinct from actual hardware pixels present in a display. The physical size of a device-independent pixel depends on the assumed viewing distance between the user and the hardware, as well as the platform. The platform may have its own standard device-independent measurement.
14:31:25 <maryjom> Example: In the case of a computer screen, the assumed viewing distance is considered to be an arm's length, which is around 28 inches (71 cm). At that viewing distance, the size of a device-independent pixel is 0.26 mm.
14:32:22 <maryjom> Poll: Is this a sufficient definition for platforms that have a concept of device-independent pixel size?
14:32:45 <mitch11> -1
14:33:03 <GreggVan> q+
14:33:17 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:34:24 <Sam> q+
14:34:36 <maryjom> ack sam
14:34:50 <mitch11> GreggVan: doesn't help beyond the term, doesn't shed light
14:35:14 <mitch11> Sam: let's be explicit about arc length calculation
14:35:31 <mitch11> maryjom: I also don't know
14:35:50 <mitch11> Sam: It's using the degrees and viewing distance, but even in CSS definition it lacks the calculation
14:36:47 <mitch11> lmiller: in the 90s we used actual pixels, now is the purpose to ensure when you zoom in the item is still viewable?
14:37:11 <mitch11> maryjom: CSS pixel is used in reflow and also in other places
14:37:34 <maryjom> Comment with all uses of CSS pixels in WCAG: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/98#issuecomment-1542464835
14:37:35 <mitch11> ... pasting earlier analysis
14:38:58 <mitch11> ... it's used in reflow; target size minimum (24x24 CSS pixels; 24 CSS pixel diameter circle for distance);
14:39:54 <mitch11> ... AAA target size enhanced; AAA focus appearance
14:40:28 <mitch11> ... "CSS pixel" is a term in definitions
14:41:23 <mitch11> ... flash thresholds don't mention pixels but are based on viewing angles
14:42:11 <mitch11> ... still in the linked comment, back to platform definitions: Android calls it density independent pixel; Windows calls it device-independent pixel; TBD about iOS
14:42:27 <mitch11> ... may not be measuring tools
14:43:06 <mitch11> ... and closed functinality software may have limited or no capabiltiy of increasing content size
14:43:38 <Sam> q+
14:44:12 <maryjom> ack sam
14:44:12 <mitch11> ... unsure of calculation
14:44:12 <mitch11> Sam: believe it's using the arc length because old CRT curved glass
14:44:39 <mitch11> ... CSS difficult or not possible for small screens, especially in combination with touch target size
14:44:50 <mitch11> ... other existing requirements, e.g. digital signage, in standards like EN and 508
14:45:04 <mitch11> q+
14:45:06 <GreggVan> q+
14:45:37 <mitch11> ... size... 508 based on fixed measurement; EN uses calculation with a different viewing angle (based on capital H)
14:45:41 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:46:11 <Chuck> mitch11:  referring to other standards, I like that as a fallback.  We should also remember that the EN updates are looking to us for guidance.
14:46:36 <Chuck> mitch11:  If we say "look to the other standards", it becomes circular.  We should do our best and not just refer to the other standards, as they are trying to refer to us?
14:46:48 <Chuck> maryjo:  You '-1' voted on the definition, anything to add?
14:47:14 <Chuck> mitch11:  It doesn't come across as a definition.  I agree with other comments that ask for the calculation and specificity.
14:47:27 <Chuck> maryjo:  I'll look to others in the group to find the calculation.
14:47:56 <Chuck> mitch11:  Your poll question was about the platform part.  We shouldn't need a calculation.  We should define platform.  The definition you listed, android for example, they don't define it based on viewing angle.
14:48:18 <Chuck> mitch11:  It's defined by an arbitrary number defined in software.  They could come to market with another device with a difference.
14:48:36 <Chuck> maryjo:  If you are using the platform definition, they are likely to have measuring tools based on that.
14:48:51 <Chuck> mitch11:  Screenshots and then their conversions.  That would be one such tool.
14:49:05 <Chuck> maryjo:  Sounds not so good.
14:49:13 <maryjom> q?
14:49:15 <Chuck> mitch11:  You can measure the viewport once and then you know.
14:49:15 <Sam> Arc Length Formula (if θ is in degrees)	s = 2 π r (θ/360°) where r is the view distance
14:49:19 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:49:39 <mitch11> GreggVan: agree the poll question looked like a discussion not a defintiion
14:50:06 <mitch11> ... perhaps the definition is an abstract concept intended to be device independent, but it doesn't have a physical size - if that's the truth
14:50:13 <mitch11> ... and the rest in a note
14:50:40 <mitch11> ... a good definition can be inserted into a sentence to substitute for the word, might be overly verbose but it would work
14:51:09 <mitch11> ... size varies, angle of view varies, but useful for handwaving technique
14:51:33 <mitch11> ... concern: if it has no size and no angle of view, we'll make up an imaginary thing, troubling
14:51:59 <mitch11> ... and if this is the reality, be up front about that, if it's true that it's not based on angle or size
14:52:17 <mitch11> maryjom: currently it is defined as angle, same as WCAG
14:52:47 <mitch11> GreggVan: so if it is an angle of view, what was the discussion about everybody defining it differently
14:52:48 <mitch11> q+
14:53:03 <Sam> q+
14:53:03 <mitch11> maryjom: recapping the draft
14:53:30 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:53:34 <mitch11> GreggVan: if a platform has something different okay, but we'll have our definition - might we warn platforms differ?
14:54:10 <GreggVan> +1 to that
14:54:42 <Chuck> mitch11:  I think it would help alot to...  we have to do it at notes.  It's normative WCAG.  I think also a goodly part of this confusion is already a problem in WCAG.  All the text you have there in original WCAG wasn't a note.  That would already have a problem.  I think we have to... word substitution won't do it.  We have to patch in notes.
14:54:58 <Chuck> mitch11:  I missed "note and example"....
14:55:15 <Chuck> mitch11:  I didn't undertand it because...  did you insert note into what is not a note?
14:55:23 <Chuck> maryjo:  Looking for a definition in WCAG...
14:55:42 <Chuck> maryjo:  <looking up and reading WCAG definition>
14:55:51 <GreggVan> q+
14:57:07 <maryjom> WCAG2ICT doesn't have this part of the WCAG definition included:
14:57:11 <maryjom> maryjom has joined #wcag2ict
14:57:35 <maryjom> A CSS pixel is the canonical unit of measure for all lengths and measurements in CSS. This unit is density-independent, and distinct from actual hardware pixels present in a display.
14:57:42 <maryjom> User agents and operating systems should ensure that a CSS pixel is set as closely as possible to the CSS Values and Units Module Level 3 reference pixel [css3-values], which takes into account the physical dimensions of the display and the assumed viewing distance (factors that cannot be determined by content authors).
14:57:59 <maryjom> ack sam
14:58:47 <mitch11> Sam: WCAG and elsewhere use an abstraction of a pixel, but people need a measurement, put a calipers to the screen
14:59:16 <mitch11> ... platform definition can differ from what's physically on the screen
14:59:30 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:59:30 <mitch11> q+
14:59:32 <GreggVan> q+ to say   applies as defined in WCAG with   CSS Pixes replaced by Device independent pixel ,  and "for content and software" for CSS,  and  NOTE  insterted in  front of the NOTE to identify it as a note.
15:00:46 <mitch11> q+ does WCAG have a typo, could this be a missing "note" nomenclature?
15:00:46 <mitch11> q+
15:00:46 <mitch11> GreggVan: does WCAG have a typo, could this be a missing "note" nomenclature?
15:01:17 <mitch11> ... and we can then substitute the note
15:02:20 <maryjom> ack mitch
15:02:30 <dmontalvo> Mitch: I like the idea of making an errata, if we can get it done, that would be great. Even if tehy can't take it, we can pretend that it is
15:02:51 <dmontalvo> ... I don't think The platform definitions are arbitrary, I think they are derived from the platform maker's decisions as to what should be the visual distance
15:03:17 <dmontalvo> ... You can obtain what the platform considers to be the visual distance, if we can't get to that, then we should define the visual distance
15:03:49 <mitch11> Sam: propose a side call
15:04:04 <mitch11> GreggVan: or in the email chain
15:04:26 <mitch11> maryjom: some have opposed the email chain; support a side call
15:04:33 <Sam> +1 to move comment
15:04:44 <mitch11> ... move the comment to its own issue
15:05:10 <mitch11> GreggVan: yes move; stay as close as possible to the definition. Say how what they wrote can apply, rather than just writing something new
15:05:55 <mitch11> maryjom: and also non-web doc, non-web software distinction?
15:05:57 <mitch11> q+
15:06:08 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:06:08 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say   applies as defined in WCAG with   CSS Pixes replaced by Device independent pixel ,  and "for content and software" for CSS,  and  NOTE  insterted in
15:06:12 <Zakim> ... front of the NOTE to identify it as a note.
15:06:12 <Sam> thank you... have to drop
15:06:20 <maryjom> ack mitch11
15:06:27 <maryjom> ack mitch
15:06:32 <mitch11> GreggVan: different dev would create havoc
15:06:42 <mitch11> s/dev/definition/
15:06:52 <mitch11> ... we want what they want, something concrete
15:07:37 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
15:07:42 <mitch11> maryjom: look for email about availability for side call
15:07:42 <dmontalvo> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:07:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/05/11-wcag2ict-minutes.html dmontalvo
15:07:58 <Mike_Pluke> present+
15:25:26 <olivia-hs_> olivia-hs_ has joined #wcag2ict
15:37:10 <maryjom> regrets: Thorsten Katzmann, Bruce Bailey, Shawn Thompson
15:37:16 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
15:37:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/05/11-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom