Meeting minutes
ACT Standup
kathy: Activity on media alternative for video needs to be visible. Sounds like they are closing in on a decision. We also have another PR open regarding label in name
… paying attention to those PRs that are happening outside of ACT.
daniel: Was involved in the planning committee. Sent email to chairs for format 1.1. Open an issue about having the composite rules working properly on the W3C site. Took some time to figure that out.
tom: Not a lot ACT related. Has a colleague around international characters for color contrast. Doesn't like some of the assumptions, some of the font-sizes don't need to be as large due to differences.
… might get brough to WCAG for more clarification.
Trevor: Reviewed currently open PRs and rule writing guidance
… If an SC does not have an explicit exception we want it in the applicability, otherwise in the expectations
Review spreadsheet Updates needed
kathy: PRs open with WCAG are holding up progress on some of my rules.
… label in name that I mentioned earlier. I updated the rule, but the CG is putting together an algorithm to determine when things passes and fails. The understanding article is inline with what they are planning.
… AG asked ACT to review the update to make sure we are aligned.
<kathy> https://
kathy: take a look at it in advance and we can discuss it more next week.
… have a few rules that Wilco is the liason on, we will probably need to get someone else to be liason for.
tom: do you know what needs to be done on the language one?
… you can stick my name on it for now, can reassign later if needed
kathy: For daniel, there are two rules that are ready for AG.
daniel: We normally send larger batches like 5 or 6 instead of just 2 or 3.
kathy: I'm fine waiting
Focusable element has no keyboard trap via standard navigation
kathy: Comment about updating to format 1.1, adding 2.1.2 as a secondary requirement.
… assumptions question, not sure if the Browser UI is part of the navigation cycle.
act-rules/
trevor: There is an issue that addresses using "Web UI"
kathy: Think that cycling to the browser UI isn't part of the SC
tom: You should be able to get between the Browser UI and the page. Otherwise I would consider it a trap
kathy: I was interpreting that was you would need to go through the Browser UI to get into the application. I think this could be okay then
… toms comments on if these are actually a trap. Fail 2 you can shift tab backwards to get to the third element.
trevor: For fail 3 the expectation takes care of Standard keyboard navigation, so that should take care of using ctrl+L
tom: Is that definition from WCAG or from ACT?
trevor: Think its probably ACT
tom: Its probably fine to still flag this since it would be awful design anyways
kathy: Tom also has a comment on having a modal example where the escape key dismisses the modal.
tom: would be a good passed example to make sure people are using all of the keys to the standard keyboard nav and not just focusing on the tab, mistakenly thinking a modal window is a keyboard trap.
Focusable element has no keyboard trap via non-standard navigation
kathy: same comment about updating to format 1.1 and adding 2.1.2 as secondary
… tom's comment about the assumptions for the keyboard trap or in general.
… I'm reading it as the rule assuming that you cannot use standard navigation since that is covered in a separate rule.
tom: Do we need it in both the applicability and assumption?
kathy: Possibly not
… second comment on not needing the tab order to be cyclical.
tom: It kind of goes back to the first/last element discussion and the Browser UI.
… not fully understanding what the point of the assumptions is
… I think the only thing the assumption is adding is that the keyboard trap is cyclical. I think the first assumption is saying the same thing as the applicability.
kathy: Similar comment that cycling to the Browser UI is not an explicit part of the SC. Might need to just absorb that phrasing to make sure it meets the SC
tom; Think the second expectation should say "how to cycle with non-standard keyboard navigation" to get to the browser UI or a way to get to a place where you can use standard navigation
kathy: 1909 could also be relevant to this rule
tom: Not sure about my comment on expectation 3, trying to figure out what was confusing
kathy: Comment about using another keyboard shortcut