16:52:17 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:52:21 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/10/12-aria-irc
16:52:21 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:52:22 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jamesn
16:52:29 <jamesn> meeting: ARIA WG
16:52:36 <jamesn> chair: JamesNurthen
16:52:42 <jamesn> agendabot, find meeting
16:52:42 <agendabot> jamesn, sorry, I don't understand "find meeting". Try "agendabot, help".
16:53:00 <jamesn> agendabot, help
16:53:00 <agendabot> jamesn, I am an instance of AgendaBot 0.5. For detailed help, type "help COMMAND", where COMMAND is one of invite, agenda, find, suggest, accept, this is, forget, status or bye. Or go to https://w3c.github.io/AgendaBot/manual.html
16:53:26 <jamesn> agendabot, find agenda
16:53:26 <agendabot> jamesn, OK. This may take a minute...
16:53:27 <agendabot> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/ecffaf8b-8aa7-4acc-b238-6088a86cf12f/20231012T130000/
16:53:27 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:53:27 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/45pEt8v
16:53:27 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3Qabwcj
16:53:29 <agendabot> agenda+ -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/ARIA-WPT
16:53:32 <agendabot> agenda+ Take ownership of -> ARIA in HTML https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/ from webapps
16:53:35 <agendabot> agenda+ -> popovertargetaction=show/hide when popover is already shown or hidden https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/505
16:53:38 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Clarify how aria-* attributes are expected to trickle down to nested elements https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2052
16:53:41 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Consider allowing combobox to open menus https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2050
16:53:44 <agendabot> agenda+ -> associationlist and related roles have tediously long names https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1662
16:53:47 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Requesting changes to new implementation-blocked merging process https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2055
16:53:50 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Update from PR #1018 for nameFrom: heading https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1860
16:56:43 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_ has joined #aria
16:58:15 <spectranaut_> agenda?
17:00:55 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #aria
17:02:12 <Adam_Page> Adam_Page has joined #aria
17:02:15 <CurtBellew> CurtBellew has joined #aria
17:02:27 <spectranaut_> scribe: spectranaut_
17:02:32 <Adam_Page> present+
17:02:48 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
17:03:26 <spectranaut_> zakim, next item
17:03:26 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/45pEt8v -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:03:35 <dmontalvo> present+ Daniel
17:03:37 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/dpub-aria/issues/57
17:03:54 <spectranaut_> jamesn: under discussion, do we need to agenda this scott?
17:04:04 <Rahim> present+
17:04:29 <spectranaut_> leave it for now, monitor it
17:04:44 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/509
17:04:53 <pkra> pkra has joined #aria
17:04:58 <pkra> present+
17:05:15 <spectranaut_> jamesn: grouping for accordions... scott can you do the same? agenda it if necessary?
17:05:33 <spectranaut_> scott: I think we can throw it back, it should start in html
17:05:40 <spectranaut_> scott: not in html-aam
17:06:22 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2059
17:06:59 <spectranaut_> jamesn: sounds editorial
17:07:09 <spectranaut_> jamesn: I'm guess we need someone to take ownership....
17:07:14 <spectranaut_> Rahim: I'm happy to do that change
17:07:22 <spectranaut_> Rahim: does the group agree
17:08:24 <spectranaut_> Rahim: in css 3, generated content, they use "alternative text" instead of "text alternative"
17:09:07 <spectranaut_> jcraig: maybe this should be defined somewhere... we should define a spec maybe in WCAG, then reference it?
17:09:16 <scotto> scotto has joined #aria
17:09:18 <spectranaut_> jamesn: this instance should be changed though
17:09:20 <scotto> present+
17:10:24 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/207
17:10:30 <spectranaut_> jamesn: sounds kind of editorial....
17:10:38 <spectranaut_> Rahim: I raised it, happy to do this one
17:11:02 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2058
17:11:40 <spectranaut_> jamesn: does this need agenda-ing?
17:11:59 <spectranaut_> jamesn: I'm not sure if will be controversial, but people should read and think before talking about
17:12:15 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/506
17:12:53 <spectranaut_> scotto: this is related to what we talked about recently.... we said in previous meeting that title should not be part of the accname calculate for generics...
17:13:20 <spectranaut_> jcraig: I think we should talk about that -- this would be author provided text that would keep web engines from exposing it
17:13:37 <spectranaut_> jcraig: even though a sited user could hover over and see it
17:13:56 <stefans> stefans has joined #aria
17:14:01 <spectranaut_> scotto: it's not my intentional to get rid of it, it should go to description algorithm
17:14:03 <stefans> present+
17:14:14 <jamesn> q?
17:14:25 <spectranaut_> jcraig: since the name algorithm is normative.... if we explicitly exclude them
17:14:30 <spectranaut_> jamesn: it is agenda'd
17:14:46 <spectranaut_> mcking: last week I raised an issue for prohibiting describeby on generics
17:14:58 <spectranaut_> s/raised/meant to raise/
17:15:19 <jamesn> agenda?
17:16:11 <spectranaut_> zakim, next item
17:16:11 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3Qabwcj -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:16:33 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2057
17:16:40 <spectranaut_> james: who knows idl and wants to review?
17:16:45 <spectranaut_> jcraig: I will take it
17:17:03 <Matt_King> Matt_King has joined #aria
17:17:15 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/507
17:17:17 <Matt_King> present+
17:17:32 <spectranaut_> jamesn: non normative
17:17:43 <spectranaut_> jcraig: you can add me as a reviewer
17:18:32 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2056
17:19:04 <spectranaut_> jamesn: anyone want to review?
17:19:40 <spectranaut_> (got reviewers)
17:20:09 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/206
17:20:27 <spectranaut_> bryan: I'll review
17:20:32 <spectranaut_> scotto: I'll review
17:21:07 <spectranaut_> zakim, next item
17:21:07 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/ARIA-WPT -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:22:18 <spectranaut_> jcraig: I think only mel's is stalled....
17:22:31 <spectranaut_> #34
17:22:51 <jcraig> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/41463
17:23:13 <spectranaut_> jcraig: the rest are in progress
17:23:41 <sarah_h> sarah_h has joined #aria
17:23:42 <spectranaut_> zakim, next item
17:23:42 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Take ownership of -> ARIA in HTML https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/ from webapps -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:24:57 <stefans> q+
17:25:16 <spectranaut_> stefans: isn't this the holy bible of the validators?
17:25:42 <spectranaut_> stefans: the only thing that defines the relationship between aria and html, and I think it only has advantages to own it
17:26:05 <spectranaut_> jamesn: please speak up if you have a problem with this
17:26:18 <spectranaut_> jamesn: but I will do a CFC to make it recorded
17:26:24 <pkra> +1
17:26:31 <stefans> +1
17:26:37 <spectranaut_> zakim, next item
17:26:37 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, spectranaut_
17:26:42 <spectranaut_> ack stefans
17:26:44 <spectranaut_> zakim, next item
17:26:44 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- -> popovertargetaction=show/hide when popover is already shown or hidden https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/505 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:27:01 <pkra> because scotto is the best (tm)
17:28:37 <spectranaut_> scotto: ok.... I'm worried about the future of this with other stuff going on in html. the crux of the issue is that a popover, in response to a button, can open or close it, or, it can just open it, or, it can just close the button. most use cases will probably be toggle, some will be only open, and in some, it might be closed
17:28:51 <spectranaut_> scotto: when you could expand and collapes a table, two different buttons
17:29:24 <spectranaut_> scotto: a button is set to close, but the popover is already closed, it doesn't do anything. it announces it is in the collapsed state... there is nothing to indicate why nothing is happened
17:29:25 <Matt_King> q+
17:29:28 <jamesn> q+
17:29:45 <spectranaut_> scotto: discussions about aria-expanded being added to a button that only closes the item
17:29:51 <sarah_h> q+
17:29:52 <jcraig> q+
17:29:54 <jamesn> ack Matt_King
17:30:01 <spectranaut_> scotto: should we programatically disable the buttons when they don't do anything? am I over thinking it?
17:30:09 <spectranaut_> ack Matt_King
17:31:12 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I don't think you are overthinking it I have a big concern about people using expanded and collapsed and pressed and not pressed on elements that don't actually toggle. I run into this a fair amount, as a user, this is a really hard to figure out... somethings you can deduce but you have to do a lot of looking around. depending on context this could be hard
17:31:39 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I would prefer there was not expanded and collapse on it at all, if is labelled opened and disabled, then its clear it is open
17:31:54 <jamesn> q-
17:32:02 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I would find it confusing if we also had expand/collapse
17:32:03 <jamesn> ack sarah_h
17:33:22 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: I would learn against making a button prorgammatically disabled.. having one html attribute that is more of a utlity attribute, it does one thing (shows or hides) having it do extra magic of disabling once the button is open.... I think it would be unclear to authors. there are times when we run logic -- look for buttons that are disabled -- if you need to manage focusablity. would we keep it focusable but disabled?
17:33:40 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: if it's disabled, we  would assumed it is not focuasable
17:34:02 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: also... the pattern of having a button that toggles a popup, I've never seen a pattern where the button becomes disabled
17:34:09 <scotto> here's an example of the current behavior for anyone unfamiliar - https://codepen.io/scottohara/pen/VwqNvOB
17:34:09 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: I'm not sure it should be disabled
17:34:14 <jamesn> ack jcraig
17:34:22 <spectranaut_> jcraig: I agree with sarah
17:34:38 <spectranaut_> jcraig: if the magic were to happen, it should be standard html or openui function
17:34:52 <spectranaut_> jcraig: if they agree it should happen, it is discoverable by authors
17:35:11 <Matt_King> q+
17:35:14 <sarah_h> q+
17:35:30 <spectranaut_> jcraig: I don't believe this magic should happen only on the accessibility side -- at least some AT, voice over used to not even try to click a button if it says it is disabled
17:36:05 <scotto> q+
17:36:09 <spectranaut_> jcraig: anyone could add another click handler on that button that runs another function
17:36:23 <spectranaut_> jcraig: this button isn't disabled, it is just not doing anything
17:36:39 <jamesn> ack Matt_King
17:37:18 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I'm not sure what we are talking about now -- what I am talking about is what authors should or shouldn't do -- if we are talking about browsers doing some magic, my bigger question is to what extend....
17:38:35 <jcraig> q+
17:38:46 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I think the bigger question is the way people are coding things, by default does it encouraging/supporting situations where we create things that are really difficult for users. you can already make a button does nothing -- you should somehow indicate that. I think you should use aria-disabled instead of disabled because often it is useful for these things to be focusable
17:39:11 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: dialogs have separate close and open, one is inside and one is outside
17:39:30 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I've never seen two buttons by each other where one only opens and one only closes
17:39:39 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: it is up to the author to say if it does nothing
17:40:27 <jcraig> q+ to ask won't most authors hide these from view when they aren't usable? seems like Matt's concern may be alleviated by the fact that most authors probably wouldn't expose that confusing UI
17:40:27 <spectranaut_> scotto: again I just posed the question because I don't have a strong opinion, but I have heard from some of my coworkers, that there was an announcement that it doesn't do anything
17:40:57 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: is there anything stopping the author from putting aria-disabled truee?
17:41:09 <spectranaut_> scotto: the whole point is to not have to do extra stuff, like javascript or aira
17:41:26 <spectranaut_> scotto: maybe we just shouldn't have aria-expanded, it's a button that doesn't do anything
17:42:41 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: if the browser absolutely knows that it doesn't do anything, and, if, the whole point of the pattern is to avoid having to use extra aria and javscript, and we want to provide an accessible experience, then it is imperative that we provide some indication to the user that the button does nothing
17:42:58 <jamesn> ack sarah_h
17:43:19 <jamesn> agenda?
17:43:23 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
17:44:00 <jamesn> zakim, close the queue
17:44:00 <Zakim> ok, jamesn, the speaker queue is closed
17:44:10 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: I don't think the browser does know that the browser does nothing, for example, a popover that shows on hover, but if you click the button it pins and puts focus on it. it would be open, but you could click it, and the popover is pinned
17:44:39 <Matt_King> Q+
17:45:19 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: I see a few possibilities, but if you can get to the button if the thing is opened or closed, and pointer users could still get to it, its already weird for a pointer using person to get to a button that does nothing
17:45:21 <jamesn> q?
17:45:34 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: so it is the web authors decision to leave the button clickable or not
17:45:46 <spectranaut_> sarah_h: we shouldn't overwrite it
17:46:02 <jamesn> ack scotto
17:46:06 <jcraig> ack me
17:46:06 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to ask won't most authors hide these from view when they aren't usable? seems like Matt's concern may be alleviated by the fact that most authors probably
17:46:07 <jamesn> ack jcraig
17:46:09 <Zakim> ... wouldn't expose that confusing UI
17:46:09 <spectranaut_> scotto: I see both sides of this, just tell me what to do
17:46:40 <spectranaut_> jcraig: maybe I am misunderstand the pattern, but most authors will put the close button on the popover -- or will this show up at all times anyway?
17:46:54 <spectranaut_> jcraig: what is stopping them from using this common pattern. this is already an edge case
17:47:00 <Matt_King> I am wondering if there are changinges to popover that could address to adress the situations that Sarah raised, which are really good use case examples
17:47:12 <spectranaut_> jamesn: it would be good to have some examples of where this is uses
17:47:40 <spectranaut_> scotto: sounds like maybe there are changes that should be made to the spec or author guidance
17:48:03 <spectranaut_> s/the spec/the non-aria spec/
17:48:44 <jamesn> zakim, open the queue
17:48:44 <Zakim> ok, jamesn, the speaker queue is open
17:48:49 <spectranaut_> zakim, next item
17:48:49 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- -> Clarify how aria-* attributes are expected to trickle down to nested elements https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2052 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:49:39 <spectranaut_> jamesn: this was filed based on the grid and readonly on a row, would that trickle down to a gridcell, would it trickle down to elements within the cell? or if you put on a group, does it trickle down to the things in group
17:49:55 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I seem to remember writing a whole bunch about this in the spec of 1.2.... is it not clear in the spec???
17:50:09 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I thought we said we are limiting trickle down... I need to read the issue
17:50:40 <spectranaut_> scotto: I added another issue, we were discussing allowing diabled on group, unlike fieldset on html, the fieldset only trickles down to the form elements
17:50:48 <spectranaut_> scotto: but on a group, it trickles down to anything focusable
17:51:10 <spectranaut_> jamesn: (reads the spec)
17:51:47 <spectranaut_> jamesn: (for aria-disabled)
17:52:00 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: is there not another issue related to disabled on group?
17:52:02 <jcraig> q+ to say this sounds like a magic bullet to load in your footgun
17:52:14 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: there are a lot of things that could be in a group, and could be focusable
17:52:29 <jcraig> ack me
17:52:29 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to say this sounds like a magic bullet to load in your footgun
17:53:02 <sarah_h> a magic bullet for my footgun sounds like something I would find in a DnD campaign
17:53:36 <spectranaut_> jcraig: it sounds like a convenience method ... I'd be wary that authors expect it to work. I could could around to things that aren't disabled...
17:54:10 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: how many apps are already using aria-disabled in groups?
17:55:48 <jcraig> q+ for a proposal
17:56:02 <spectranaut_> jamesn: the conclusopm O
17:56:35 <spectranaut_> jamesn: the conclusion is that we shouldn't expand the use, you should put aria-disabled on anything you specifically want disabled
17:56:47 <spectranaut_> s/jamesn: the conclusopm O//
17:56:51 <jcraig> ack me
17:56:51 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to discuss a proposal
17:57:42 <spectranaut_> jcraig: maybe this is naive, but there are things like aria-hidden that obviously apply to things below them, where as aria-disabled shouldn't cascade down, do we want a new characteristic in the characteristic table?
17:58:13 <spectranaut_> jamesn: aria-hidden is kind of like the exception -- we don't want to create something for an exception, do we?
17:58:23 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I'd have to look at all the states and properties
17:58:47 <spectranaut_> Matt_King: I'm wondering if removing aria-disable from somethings... we might consider removing it from these container elements
17:58:55 <spectranaut_> jamesn: we could consider it yes
17:58:56 <CurtBellew> q?
17:59:14 <spectranaut_> jamesn: we have concluded we do not want to expand usage
17:59:15 <CurtBellew> +1
17:59:26 <Rahim> Seems like we would encounter similar challenges with role="presentation"
17:59:34 <spectranaut_> jamesn: who should write a response on the issue 1972 about grid rows
17:59:55 <spectranaut_> scotto: I'll  doit
18:07:34 <bkardell_> bkardell_ has joined #aria
18:13:20 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
18:19:27 <spectranaut_> zakim, end meeting
18:19:27 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Adam_Page, Daniel, Rahim, pkra, scotto, stefans, Matt_King
18:19:29 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:19:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/10/12-aria-minutes.html Zakim
18:19:39 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, spectranaut_; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
18:19:39 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
18:54:12 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
19:02:26 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
19:26:25 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:39:49 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
23:58:25 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria