15:00:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
15:00:31 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/02/15-wcag2ict-irc
15:00:38 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:00:39 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
15:00:39 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
15:00:39 <Zakim> agenda cleared
15:00:39 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
15:00:43 <maryjom> meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
15:00:45 <olivia> olivia has joined #wcag2ict
15:00:48 <LauraBMiller> LauraBMiller has joined #WCAG2ICT
15:00:48 <maryjom> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
15:00:48 <Zakim> ok, maryjom
15:01:37 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
15:01:38 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
15:01:45 <shadi> present+
15:01:48 <olivia> present+
15:01:59 <maryjom> Regrets: Shawn Thompson, Bruce Bailey, Fernanda Bonnin
15:02:04 <mitch11> mitch11 has joined #wcag2ict
15:02:07 <mitch11> present+
15:02:26 <maryjom> present+
15:02:26 <loicmn> present+
15:02:32 <ChrisLoiselle> present+
15:02:33 <LauraBMiller> Present+
15:02:34 <PhilDay> present+
15:02:53 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
15:03:08 <olivia> scribe+ olivia-hogan-stark
15:03:10 <GreggVan> present+
15:03:15 <olivia> zakim, next item
15:03:15 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
15:03:23 <PhilDay> agenda?
15:03:32 <maryjom> Agenda+ Announcements
15:04:03 <dmontalvo> present+ Daniel
15:04:04 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results for the Review of 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication notes and SC problematic for closed guidance
15:04:05 <PhilDay> Announcements Survey results regarding responses to public comments - Group 1, starting at question 4 - Issue 216 Survey results for public and TF comments Survey results for the Review of 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication notes and SC problematic for closed guidance
15:04:24 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results regarding responses to public comments - Group 1, starting at question 4 - Issue 216
15:04:34 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results for public and TF comments
15:04:45 <olivia> zakim, next item
15:04:45 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:05:11 <Bryan_Trogdon> Bryan_Trogdon has joined #WCAG2ICT
15:05:18 <Bryan_Trogdon> present+
15:05:19 <olivia> maryjom: With Laura's help, we have pulled together conversations around closed functionality
15:05:28 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Work-left-for-second-public-draft
15:05:52 <olivia> maryjom: Have people made progress on self-assigned items?
15:07:08 <olivia> laurabmiller: Reach out if anyone wants me to to chat about an item
15:08:08 <olivia> maryjom: Let me know so I can create surveys. No more open surveys for this week. We are waiting on content for a few things.
15:08:12 <olivia> zakim, next item
15:08:12 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Survey results for the Review of 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication notes and SC problematic for closed guidance -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:08:30 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Accessible-auth-round3/results
15:08:44 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1op2IO_LEUr9hafvX1doPkwZ2iV1928o_dKgBVl5UYQk/edit?usp=sharing
15:08:58 <maryjom> Topic: SC 3.3.8: Note 3
15:09:09 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Accessible-auth-round3/results#xq4
15:10:32 <olivia> maryjom: 4 said to incorporate as is, Loïc had some edits.
15:11:11 <GreggVan> q+
15:11:13 <maryjom> q?
15:11:16 <olivia> maryjom: Any concerns with adding Loïc's text?
15:11:16 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:12:14 <PhilDay> +1 for Loic's proposal
15:12:31 <olivia> +1
15:12:40 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate Note 3 by adding “If the non-web software is an application” to the beginning of the sentence.
15:12:44 <PhilDay> +1
15:12:49 <mitch11> +1
15:12:50 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
15:12:59 <Sam> present+
15:13:10 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:13:13 <ChrisLoiselle> +1
15:13:18 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate Note 3 by adding “If the non-web software is an application” to the beginning of the sentence.
15:13:40 <maryjom> Topic: SC 3.3.8: Note 4
15:13:42 <PhilDay> Updated language should therefore be: Note 3: If the non-web software is an application, passwords used to unlock the underlying platform software are out of scope for this requirement as these are not up to a software application’s author.
15:13:51 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Accessible-auth-round3/results#xq5
15:14:27 <olivia> maryjom: All 5 said to incorporate as proposed in google doc
15:14:51 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate Note 3 by adding “If the non-web software is an application” to the beginning of the sentence.
15:14:57 <Sam> +1
15:15:08 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate Note 4 as proposed in the survey.
15:15:14 <PhilDay> +1
15:15:16 <mitch11> +1
15:15:16 <olivia> +1
15:15:18 <Sam> +1
15:15:34 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate Note 4 as proposed in the survey.
15:15:36 <PhilDay> Note 4: See also the Comments on Closed Functionality.
15:15:55 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:15:58 <maryjom> Topic: SC 3.3.8: Part 1 - content in SC problematic for closed functionality
15:16:12 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Accessible-auth-round3/results#xq6
15:16:55 <olivia> maryjom: 5 preferred option 2, as is
15:17:06 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1op2IO_LEUr9hafvX1doPkwZ2iV1928o_dKgBVl5UYQk/edit#heading=h.g5mgm937pv8c
15:17:17 <PhilDay> Option 2 (replaces “methods” with “mechanisms” in the text): 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum) - There are situations where meeting this success criterion is problematic: ...
15:17:17 <PhilDay> ...
15:17:20 <PhilDay> Systems that are designed for shared use (such as in a public library) or have closed functionality might block mechanisms typically used to assist the user, such as copying authentication information from a password manager. Instead, an alternative authentication method might be helpful, such as an identity card scanner.
15:17:25 <GreggVan> q+
15:17:30 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
15:17:32 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:17:47 <PhilDay> q+
15:18:13 <olivia> GreggVan: Methods is better than mechanisms because mechanisms applies to a physical thing.
15:18:37 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
15:18:38 <olivia> GreggVan: I would go with option 1
15:18:57 <mitch11> q+
15:19:04 <olivia> philday: I disagree, mechanisms is used in the SC
15:19:30 <olivia> GreggVan: Both are used, and it is only in the exceptions
15:19:36 <ChrisLoiselle> For reference, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mechanism#:~:text=%3A%20a%20process%2C%20technique%2C%20or,or%20by%20accident%20Richard%20Bentley
15:20:04 <maryjom> Poll: Use 1) "method" or 2) "mechanism in the language?
15:20:20 <mitch11> 2
15:20:23 <GreggVan> 1  but could live with 2
15:20:30 <PhilDay> 2, but would accept 1
15:20:32 <olivia> 2
15:20:33 <Sam> 2
15:20:34 <mitch11> 2 but can accept 1
15:20:44 <GreggVan> oops on the language
15:21:18 <GreggVan> can accept 2
15:21:24 <mitch11> q-
15:21:31 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
15:21:38 <loicmn> present+
15:21:48 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate part 1 of the SC problematic for closed functionality for SC 3.3.8 as proposed in Option 2 in the Google doc
15:21:51 <LauraBMiller> 2
15:22:02 <mitch11> +1
15:22:04 <PhilDay> +1
15:22:17 <olivia> +1
15:22:28 <PhilDay> q+ to ask if we can fix the language
15:22:33 <Sam> +1
15:22:33 <GreggVan> +1
15:22:36 <LauraBMiller> =1
15:22:37 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:22:55 <PhilDay> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#accessible-authentication-minimum
15:23:23 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate part 1 of the SC problematic for closed functionality for SC 3.3.8 as proposed in Option 2 in the Google doc
15:23:24 <PhilDay> +1
15:23:35 <PhilDay> Option 2 (replaces “methods” with “mechanisms” in the text): 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum) - There are situations where meeting this success criterion is problematic:
15:23:42 <PhilDay> ... Systems that are designed for shared use (such as in a public library) or have closed functionality might block mechanisms typically used to assist the user, such as copying authentication information from a password manager. Instead, an alternative authentication method might be helpful, such as an identity card scanner.
15:24:09 <maryjom> Topic: SC 3.3.8: Part 2 - Content in SC problematic for closed functionality
15:24:21 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Accessible-auth-round3/results#xq7
15:24:31 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1op2IO_LEUr9hafvX1doPkwZ2iV1928o_dKgBVl5UYQk/edit#heading=h.l241pv9zuirv
15:24:52 <olivia> maryjom: 1 said as is, 4 said with edits
15:25:40 <PhilDay> +1 to Olivia & Mary Jo's edits
15:25:51 <GreggVan> q+
15:26:03 <maryjom> Where standards for banking or security have authentication requirements that are regulated or strictly enforced, those requirements may take legal precedence over Success Criterion 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum).
15:26:17 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
15:26:17 <Zakim> PhilDay, you wanted to ask if we can fix the language
15:26:27 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:27:54 <olivia> GreggVan: Soon as we say "take precedence" people will take advantage of that
15:28:14 <PhilDay> Minor edit to include Gregg's suggestion: Where standards for banking or security have authentication requirements that are regulated or strictly enforced, those requirements may be judged to take legal precedence over Success Criterion 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum).
15:28:38 <loicmn> +1 to last proposal
15:28:47 <PhilDay> +1 to Gregg's edit
15:28:53 <mitch11> +1
15:28:56 <GreggVan> +1
15:28:58 <olivia> +1
15:28:59 <maryjom> Poll: Are you OK with Gregg's edit? +1, -1 or 0
15:29:03 <mitch11> +1
15:29:03 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:29:03 <PhilDay> +1
15:29:07 <olivia> +1
15:29:07 <loicmn> +1
15:29:12 <Sam> +1
15:29:16 <ChrisLoiselle> +1
15:29:19 <GreggVan> +1
15:29:25 <PhilDay> Suggested content therefore becomes: Where standards for banking or security have authentication requirements that are regulated or strictly enforced, those requirements may be judged to take legal precedence over Success Criterion 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum).
15:29:52 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate part 2 of the SC problematic for closed functionality for SC 3.3.8 as edited in the text shown in IRC (Phil's entry).
15:30:33 <maryjom> Resolved language: Where standards for banking or security have authentication requirements that are regulated or strictly enforced, those requirements may be judged to take legal precedence over Success Criterion 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum).
15:31:30 <mitch11> woo hoo
15:31:50 <GreggVan> √
15:32:09 <olivia> zakim, next item
15:32:10 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Survey results regarding responses to public comments - Group 1, starting at question 4 - Issue 216 -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:32:41 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Jan-public-responses/results#xq6
15:34:00 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/216
15:34:12 <PhilDay> Option 1  [For non-web documents or software] content [implemented using markup languages or software in a way that supports modification of] the following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:
15:34:20 <PhilDay> Option 2  [For non-web documents or software] content [implemented using markup languages, or that supports modification of] the following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:
15:35:16 <olivia> maryjom: Most liked option 2 as is. Mitch had concerns with language. Gregg had editorial change.
15:35:44 <mitch11> q+
15:36:28 <maryjom> ack mitch
15:37:21 <GreggVan> +1 to mitch
15:37:48 <olivia> mitch11: We don't have to make them the same because WCAG doesn't have them the same. No reason we can't look at them differently.
15:38:51 <PhilDay> Option 2 (attempt to insert Mitch's conditional) [For non-web documents or software] content [implemented using markup languages that supports modification of] the following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:
15:38:59 <GreggVan> q+
15:39:37 <PhilDay> q
15:39:41 <PhilDay> q+
15:40:02 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:40:43 <olivia> greggvan: It's not just the software, it has to be the platform.
15:40:59 <PhilDay> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#text-spacing
15:42:17 <PhilDay> Option 2 (attempt to insert Mitch's conditional, with typo corrected) [For non-web documents or software] content [implemented using markup languages that support modification of] the following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:
15:42:21 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
15:42:22 <olivia> maryjom: This one is for general guidance
15:42:47 <GreggVan> q+  to ask if these are listed in the closed functionality section
15:42:56 <mitch11> I would support Phil's edit
15:43:48 <mitch11> q+
15:43:56 <LauraBMiller> Q+
15:44:13 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:44:14 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to ask if these are listed in the closed functionality section
15:45:03 <olivia> maryjom: to respond to Gregg's question, this is listed.
15:45:14 <maryjom> q?
15:45:18 <maryjom> ack mitch
15:46:40 <GreggVan> q+
15:46:40 <PhilDay> Option 3 (attempt to insert Mitch's new broader coverage) [For non-web documents or software] content [that support modification of] the following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:
15:46:52 <maryjom> ack LauraBMiller
15:47:09 <olivia> mitch: I noticed that Phil's edit reverts it back to no change.
15:49:52 <maryjom> q?
15:49:57 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:50:01 <olivia> laurabmiller: do we agree that it should be expanded?
15:51:44 <ChrisLoiselle> need to drop, I will review editor responsibilities with Mary Jo and Phil. Great work all!
15:51:51 <olivia> GreggVan: we expanded to beyond mark up languages. If we go there, we are expanding on WCAG.
15:52:35 <maryjom> Poll: Should both SC 4.1.3 Status Messages and 1.4.12 Text Spacing be scoped only to content implemented in markup languages in WCAG2ICT? 1) Yes, 2) No or 3) I don't know
15:53:12 <Sam> 1
15:53:14 <loicmn> 1
15:53:26 <PhilDay> 3. I'm tempted to say 1, so we don't go beyond the scope of WCAG. But, it is nice to give guidance when we can...
15:53:34 <LauraBMiller> 3
15:53:34 <mitch11> 2, if the language allows it. Otherwise it must be 1.
15:53:41 <GreggVan> q+
15:54:05 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
15:54:24 <PhilDay> Now 1!
15:54:39 <mitch11> q+
15:54:44 <GreggVan> 1
15:54:49 <olivia> 1
15:55:26 <PhilDay> q+ to say Would this proposal work?
15:55:26 <PhilDay> Option 2 (attempt to insert Mitch's conditional, with typo corrected) [For non-web documents or software] content [implemented using markup languages that support modification of] the following text style properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:
15:56:10 <maryjom> q?
15:56:11 <maryjom> ack mitch
15:57:11 <GreggVan> 1 because everything else (programmatic access to status messages) is covered by other SC
15:57:19 <PhilDay> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#applying-sc-4-1-3-status-messages-to-non-web-documents-and-software
15:57:38 <PhilDay> Above link is the "Applying SC 4.1.3" in latest draft
15:57:43 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
15:57:43 <Zakim> PhilDay, you wanted to say Would this proposal work?
15:59:41 <GreggVan> q+
15:59:51 <olivia> maryjom: with Parsing we did not expand outside of mark up languages
16:00:21 <olivia> maryjom: with status messages we did. This will be a Friday conversation.
16:01:43 <olivia> rrsagent, make minutes
16:01:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/15-wcag2ict-minutes.html olivia
16:01:53 <mitch11> thank you, hope you feel better Mary Jo
16:02:31 <olivia> zakim, bye
16:02:31 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been shadi, olivia, mitch, maryjom, loicmn, ChrisLoiselle, LauraBMiller, PhilDay, GreggVan, Daniel, Bryan_Trogdon, Sam
16:02:31 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
16:08:47 <maryjom> rrsagent, bye
16:08:47 <RRSAgent> I see no action items