<scribe> scribe: Jean-Yves
CarlosD: no 1 week ones, a 2 weeks one from Giacomo (ends next week)
CarlosD: not a lot of time. Did
some reviews.
... #2160 needs 1 more review. Rest can go in CfR.
markrogers: an open issue got
unblocked, I'll move on it.
... got some comments on the "label in name" PR, will look at
it again.
Jean-Yves: may be fixed by Dan's PR.
markrogers: I have some case that are failing the rule but might be passing the SC, will look into it and report.
dan-tripp: mostly waiting for
feedback on my issues. My PR gets out of draft.
... discussion with Helen on AT testing.
<CarlosD> scribe+
<CarlosD> Jean-Yves: One PR that we will talk about today
<CarlosD> ... I was at CSUN and talked to lots of tool vendors
<CarlosD> ... since we already had a meeting with Evinced and today we're meeting Silktide
<CarlosD> Jean-Yves: After a first version for Target size enhanced I kept working in the target size minumum rule
<CarlosD> ... and came up with a large PR with a composite rule
<CarlosD> ... which will take a lot of time to review
<CarlosD> ... how can we move this faster?
<CarlosD> ... Mark had a good suggestion of putting the examples live that would make it a lot easier to review
<CarlosD> ... we could make it smaller by handling the atomic rules one by one
<CarlosD> ... but that would make it really hard to understand the full context and to understand why something is unnecessarily complex for a rule because it is needed in other
<CarlosD> markrogers: Branch deploys would be really helpull
<CarlosD> Jean-Yves: I don't know how much space we have on our github
<CarlosD> CarlosD: We should talk to Daniel about that
<CarlosD> Jean-Yves: I can try to move one of the rules to its own PR and we can see if we can move forward this way
scribe+
dan-tripp: I do not see wording in WCAG that justify the "link to full text" as passing.
CarlosD: we've talked about this with JY. Could not see reason either.
dan-tripp: this may refer to "conforming alternate versions"
Jean-Yves: "no alternative
version" is an implicit assumption to all rules.
... reasoning behind the "link to full version" might be that
this prevent loss of info, since the info can be attained.
CarlosD: should we update the rule to explicitly accept the link to full version.
Jean-Yves: we should also make an
assumption
... we should reach out to WCAG to ask them whether this passes
(without conforming alternative).
CarlosD: it is not clear whether more than the text of the poem is clipped.
Jean-Yves: maybe this is good because even the non-clipped text is partial compared to the full version. Whether we show 3 verses (unclipped) or 1 (clipped), the shown text is incomplete. So are we losing info by showing a smallest part?
CarlosD: the expectation doesn't say that at all.
Jean-Yves: initial PR to dig: https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1171
dan-tripp: I can check if there are discussions on this example.
<CarlosD> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1171#discussion_r404762436
This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Default Present: dan-tripp, Jean-Yves, CarlosD, markrogers Present: dan-tripp, Jean-Yves, CarlosD, markrogers Found Scribe: Jean-Yves Inferring ScribeNick: Jean-Yves WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]