19:56:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria-at
19:56:51 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/01/25-aria-at-irc
19:56:51 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
19:56:52 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Matt_King
19:57:11 <Matt_King> MEETING: ARIA and Assistive Technologies Community Group
19:57:19 <Matt_King> CHAIR: Matt King
19:57:23 <Matt_King> present+
19:57:29 <Matt_King> rrsagent, make minutes
19:57:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/01/25-aria-at-minutes.html Matt_King
19:58:57 <jugglinmike> jugglinmike has joined #aria-at
20:02:15 <murray_moss> murray_moss has joined #aria-at
20:04:16 <murray_moss> present+
20:04:22 <jugglinmike> present+ jugglinmike
20:04:23 <jugglinmike> scribe+ jugglinmike
20:05:03 <Matt_King> present+ Alysa
20:05:20 <jugglinmike> s/Alysa/Alyssa/
20:06:32 <jugglinmike> Topic: Review agenda and next meeting dates
20:06:43 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Next meeting: January 31
20:07:47 <jugglinmike> [no requests for additional topics]
20:07:53 <jugglinmike> Topic: Update from Vispero collaboration
20:07:57 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I met with Vispero yesterday
20:08:11 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: They are engaging with us on implementing the AT Driver protocol in JAWS
20:08:21 <jugglinmike> present+ Hadi
20:09:32 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: What that means for us here in this project is that once they have completed that work (we don't know how long it will take), we will be able to run the automated results collection for JAWS as well as NVDA
20:10:57 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That means collecting the JAWS speech automatically, and if the tests have already been run, then the system will compare the responses to the prior responses. If they match, then it will also re-assign the previously-reported verdicts
20:11:31 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Separately, the refactored test plans entered the "candidate review" phase
20:11:49 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Things are moving forward, and I'll be meeting with them again in two weeks
20:12:17 <jugglinmike> Hadi: Are they working on a scripting that collects the JAWS feedback and puts it in the form where we testers enter information
20:13:03 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Actually, we've already built something along those lines. It's been built to integrate with any screen reader which implements the "AT Driver" protocol (which we are also developing)
20:14:48 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Right now, the system supports NVDA. Bocoup is working on a project to integrate VoiceOver, and Vispero will be working on changing JAWS so it can be "slotted in" as well
20:14:56 <jugglinmike> Topic: Toggle button test issues
20:15:36 <jugglinmike> Subtopic: Issue 1031: Toggle Button Test plan, V23.12.14: Shouldn't role be 'Toggle Button' instead of 'button'
20:15:43 <jugglinmike> github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/issues/1031
20:15:50 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: This is a question about the "role" assertion
20:16:01 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Right now the toggle button plan says that "role 'button'" is conveyed
20:16:23 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Joe marked that as "passing," but when I looked at both JAWS and NVDA, the role that's coming across is "toggle button"
20:16:44 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I would consider it a failure if I came to a toggle button and the screen reader just said "button"
20:17:08 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #aria-at
20:17:18 <jugglinmike> present+ Joe_Humbert
20:18:16 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Apple doesn't have a non-selected state. I passed it because it said "button" and when it was selected, it had both a role and a state
20:19:15 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think this is a problem with a test. I think the assertion should be "toggle button"
20:19:32 <jugglinmike> Alyssa: but if it said "button pressed" or "button not pressed", then you could assume it was a toggle button
20:20:03 <jugglinmike> Alyssa: is the average consumer going to care if if it says "toggle button" as long as it also says the state?
20:20:51 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The problem is that VoiceOver doesn't speak the "not pressed" state, so for a toggle button which is not pressed, it only says "button"
20:23:45 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: When I look at the ARIA specification, all of them say that the role that gets sent to the accessibility API is "toggle button" which is distinct from "button"
20:24:11 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: I just verified: VoiceOver says "toggle button"
20:24:49 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: But what should we expect the screen reader to do?
20:25:00 <jugglinmike> Alyssa: It should say "toggle button"
20:25:27 <jugglinmike> Hadi: my interaction would be very different if I found a "toggle button" rather than a "button"
20:28:06 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: most buttons conventionally don't have state
20:28:39 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: When I hear "button not pressed", I think "well, of course, all buttons are not pressed"
20:29:34 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: There's another conversation about the difference between a button and a key
20:29:49 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: A lot of buttons don't "bounce back." Keys, on the other hand
20:29:56 <jugglinmike> s/hand/hand.../
20:32:03 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Also, keep in mind that iOS doesn't have radio buttons
20:32:48 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: It sounds like we're all in agreement that the test needs to change. The expected role should be "toggle button", not "button"
20:33:29 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think the test should be about what the screen reader is supposed to do. It should communicate the role in the Core-AAM, which in this case is "toggle button"
20:33:54 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think this just hasn't been documented properly because there are only two roles in all of ARIA which are like this: "menu button" and "toggle button"
20:34:37 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'll assign this issue to myself, and I'll update the test (that means we'll have to re-run the tests)
20:35:33 <jugglinmike> Subtopic: Feedback: "Navigate backwards to a pressed toggle button" (Toggle Button, Test 12, V23.12.14)
20:35:41 <jugglinmike> github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/issues/1030
20:35:58 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: This is the one that's related to "shift J" when quicknav is on and focus didn't move
20:36:20 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Well, focus DID move when I pressed "shift J"--it just didn't move to the intended place
20:36:57 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Did you check whether or not there was unexpected behavior?
20:37:35 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: When I first went through the test, I passed one of the assertions (just one)--the assertion that said it was a button. That's because I did land on the button
20:37:53 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: But it was the WRONG button, so I didn't know if it really passed
20:38:32 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: The system considered it a "pass" when I passed two and failed one
20:39:04 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: This happened when I looked at the conflicts. So maybe the wording for conflicts is specifically confusing
20:40:16 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: The other part of that same issue is: the assertion says that focus lands on a button. Focus landed on a button, but it was the wrong button. Is that a failure?
20:43:38 <jugglinmike> [group reviews the test and the AT response]
20:43:52 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: It IS a little confusing
20:44:05 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Maybe the "role" assertion should have passed
20:45:04 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Are you suggesting that we should make a change to the test?
20:45:46 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: I'm wondering if the tester knows the behavior is incorrect, but the assertion is satisfied, should the tester makes the assertion as "passing"?
20:46:06 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think it should pass
20:49:31 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Keep in mind that this is all dependent on how the test was constructed. If there happened to be some other element in that incorrect destination, then the "button" role would not have been spoken, and the assertion would have clearly failed
20:52:04 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: So it's clear that "B" is missing from the "button" test plan
20:54:12 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Two things need to happen. I'm adding them to the issue itself as a to-do list
20:54:52 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'll assign this to me for now
20:55:01 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: I'm glad I asked!
20:55:43 <jugglinmike> Topic: Feedback: "Navigate backwards to a pressed toggle button" (Toggle Button, Test 12, V23.12.14)
20:55:57 <jugglinmike> github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/issues/1029
20:56:18 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The assertion states, "the 'pressed' state is conveyed"
20:56:46 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Our guidelines say that we don't expect specific words
20:57:18 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: I was mostly wondering about automated testing
20:57:39 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Would an automated test accept alternate words like this?
20:57:59 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Yes, provided that a human tester had previously reviewed this response and marked it as acceptable
20:58:35 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The automated system will only assign verdicts if it can match AT responses to some "historic" response to which a human has already assigned verdicts
20:59:04 <jugglinmike> s/Topic: Feedback:/Subtopic: Feedback:/
21:04:35 <jugglinmike> Zakim, end the meeting
21:04:35 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Matt_King, murray_moss, jugglinmike, Alysa, Hadi, Joe_Humbert
21:04:37 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
21:04:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/01/25-aria-at-minutes.html Zakim
21:04:44 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
21:04:45 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria-at
21:04:51 <jugglinmike> RRSAgent, leave
21:04:51 <RRSAgent> I see no action items