IRC log of wcag2ict on 2024-05-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:59:47 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
12:59:51 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/05/24-wcag2ict-irc
12:59:51 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
12:59:52 [Zakim]
Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
12:59:53 [maryjom]
zakim, clear agenda
12:59:53 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
12:59:58 [maryjom]
chair: Mary Jo Mueller
13:00:13 [maryjom]
meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Extra Friday Teleconference
13:01:21 [ChrisLoiselle]
scribe: ChrisLoiselle
13:01:58 [ChrisLoiselle]
Mary Jo: Copied all proposals to a Google doc. We can work live if we want to.
13:02:13 [maryjom]
Google doc to work through potential edits: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit?usp=sharing
13:02:34 [Sam]
Sam has joined #wcag2ict
13:02:44 [Sam]
present+
13:03:40 [shadi]
shadi has joined #wcag2ict
13:03:52 [shadi]
present+
13:04:07 [shadi]
q+
13:04:19 [ChrisLoiselle]
Chuck: Talks to work we did many years ago . Asks if we feel that 2013 document has improved with the work that we've done on this new document. Talks to diminishing opportunity to influence the world.
13:04:21 [maryjom]
ack shadi
13:04:28 [GreggVan]
GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
13:04:52 [Chuck]
q+
13:05:12 [GreggVan]
q+
13:05:23 [ChrisLoiselle]
Shadi: I hear what you are saying. I feel stakes are much higher, it will be adopted in Europe. It may make things worse on how it is written. We need to be thoughtful.
13:06:11 [ChrisLoiselle]
Chuck: Acknowledges concerns and we will work through issues.
13:06:11 [Chuck]
ack Ch
13:06:13 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:07:11 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: Window closing? If it is going to stand for another 11 years, we want to make sure it is good.
13:08:19 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I'm in the EN, it will be looked at. I haven't heard that I wish we had this answer from WCAG2ICT yet.
13:08:51 [maryjom]
Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:08:51 [Zakim]
ok, maryjom
13:08:53 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I think what we are trying to hit on are the finer points.
13:08:55 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:09:12 [ChrisLoiselle]
agenda?
13:09:38 [maryjom]
Google doc to work through potential edits: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit?usp=sharing
13:09:50 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: We will start with survey.
13:09:54 [maryjom]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-handle-comments/results
13:10:36 [Chuck]
s/doc/day/
13:10:51 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: I copied in original to survey, then put in options in Google Doc.
13:11:29 [Sam]
q+
13:11:35 [ChrisLoiselle]
There are 4 options now in Google Doc.
13:11:51 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:12:17 [Chuck]
q+
13:12:19 [GreggVan]
q+
13:12:20 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:12:27 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
13:13:23 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I tried to incorporate everyone's suggestions. It seems the key point was that there was confusion on fully open or fully closed, that is why we went to closed functionality.
13:13:44 [ChrisLoiselle]
... if some closed functionality but some AT, what do you do with that scenario?
13:14:22 [maryjom]
ack Sam
13:14:30 [ChrisLoiselle]
... iPhone vs. Android debate, programmatically determinable AND do other things to meet.
13:14:34 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:15:02 [Chuck]
ack ch
13:15:12 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: This is covered. The notes talk to this. We've gone over closed functionality multiple times.
13:15:46 [GreggVan]
q+
13:15:55 [maryjom]
q?
13:16:01 [ChrisLoiselle]
I think this just confuses the situation. We have these situations throughout closed functionality. There is duality.
13:16:01 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:16:11 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:16:18 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
13:17:13 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I think we should go with Loic's. This would define platform software. Take off my note , according to Sam , I think he is correct.
13:17:44 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/CkKIHzfu/
13:17:53 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/NsZBN111/
13:18:15 [mitch11]
mitch11 has joined #wcag2ict
13:19:02 [mitch11]
q+
13:19:10 [mitch11]
present+
13:19:23 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:19:32 [maryjom]
ack mitch
13:19:49 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit#heading=h.uv5kqqps26uf
13:19:49 [Chuck]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit#heading=h.3052ielwj3l
13:19:50 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-handle-comments/results
13:20:14 [maryjom]
closed functionality (as used in WCAG2ICT)
13:20:14 [maryjom]
a property or characteristic that prevents users from attaching, installing, or using either assistive technology or the accessibility features built into platform software
13:20:22 [maryjom]
platform software
13:20:22 [maryjom]
collection of software components that runs on an underlying software or hardware layer, and that provides a set of software services to other software components that allows those applications to be isolated from the underlying software or hardware layer
13:21:01 [maryjom]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mgC_YiHl5qgoLmcCYacwfEziHnr1zVZnAMzEMPCF9Io/edit#heading=h.fgqbv7qosfzf
13:21:07 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: Recaps for Mitch on current options, recommending rewording on Option 3 Loic's with Mary Jo's edits
13:22:13 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Open to Mitch's take once he reads through.
13:22:36 [ChrisLoiselle]
Mitch: I don't see any red flags .
13:22:58 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Will take forward in a survey.
13:23:21 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: Would this be the one to now review against the original? Platform being its own term now?
13:24:17 [maryjom]
q?
13:24:18 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: Unless we define what assistive technology is, it is up for debate.
13:24:39 [ChrisLoiselle]
... i.e. captions, computer, etc.
13:24:41 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:24:43 [mitch11]
q+
13:24:53 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:24:57 [maryjom]
ack mitch
13:25:16 [mitch11]
https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/#dfn-assistive-technologies
13:25:35 [ChrisLoiselle]
Mitch: WCAG has a definition of Assistive Technology. It doesn't include a feature built in to browsers.
13:25:40 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:26:02 [Sam]
q+
13:26:03 [ChrisLoiselle]
Mitch:q+
13:26:06 [ChrisLoiselle]
sorry...
13:26:08 [maryjom]
q?
13:26:11 [maryjom]
ack sam
13:26:13 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:26:19 [ChrisLoiselle]
q+
13:26:27 [Chuck]
scribe+ Chuck
13:26:33 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: Option 3 vs. Option 1 (original)?
13:26:38 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: yes.
13:26:45 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:27:16 [mitch11]
q+
13:27:23 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:28:01 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: Will we include "we recommend" ? To move it along .
13:28:56 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: Here is original vs. here is what we worked on.
13:28:56 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:28:56 [maryjom]
q?
13:28:56 [maryjom]
ach ChrisLoiselle
13:29:19 [Chuck]
ChrisLoiselle: We are leaning towards option 3 and the closed functionality has the "or". I see the notes to reviewers, the definition does not include accessibility features. Those conflict with eachother.
13:29:57 [GreggVan]
q+
13:30:11 [Chuck]
ChrisLoiselle: Closed functionality term that is in the google sheet has "or". Mitch mentioned definition. MJ's note to reviewers does not include accessibility features. Does it conflate or conflict with how we are including it?
13:30:16 [maryjom]
ack ChrisLoiselle
13:30:20 [maryjom]
ack mitch
13:30:22 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:31:52 [ChrisLoiselle]
Mitch: edited Note to reviewers to address. We are talking about accessibility features that are more mainstream.
13:32:05 [Sam]
https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/#dfn-assistive-technologies
13:32:36 [maryjom]
q?
13:32:40 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
13:33:16 [mitch11]
q+
13:33:27 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: It is a OR statement so catches both.
13:34:35 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: Goes beyond mainstream user agent. Talks to user agent vs. mainstream users.
13:34:42 [maryjom]
Poll: Take options 1 and 3 to the TF to reivew? 1) Yes, 2) No
13:34:58 [maryjom]
...specifically for Question 1
13:35:10 [mitch11]
q-
13:35:16 [mitch11]
1
13:35:21 [Chuck]
Poll: Take options 1 and 3 to the TF to reivew? 1) Yes, 2) No
13:35:29 [GreggVan]
1
13:35:30 [Sam]
1
13:35:32 [shadi]
1
13:35:34 [ChrisLoiselle]
1
13:35:42 [Chuck]
q?
13:35:57 [maryjom]
Topic: Question 2 - Update to closed functionality examples
13:37:00 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Talks to survey results https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-handle-comments/results
13:38:21 [ChrisLoiselle]
Mary Jo : Editing is happening in Google Doc.
13:38:21 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:39:19 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:39:42 [Sam]
+q
13:39:47 [maryjom]
ack Sam
13:40:08 [Chuck]
+1
13:40:37 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: I feel the parans should be removed. The this vs. that is confusing. Option 3 , I like for ease of reading.
13:41:22 [Sam]
+1 to MJ comment
13:41:33 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: The note, we add in different forms in different places.
13:41:40 [Sam]
q+
13:41:42 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: I like option 3, chair hat off.
13:41:43 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:41:46 [maryjom]
ack Sam
13:41:56 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:42:14 [ChrisLoiselle]
Option 3 edited option 2 would be the one Mary Jo.
13:42:38 [Sam]
q-
13:42:42 [maryjom]
Poll: Which options to take to full TF: 1) 1 and 3, 2) option 1 and 4, or 3) something else.
13:42:53 [Sam]
1
13:42:53 [ChrisLoiselle]
1
13:42:54 [GreggVan]
1
13:42:57 [shadi]
1
13:43:06 [mitch11]
1
13:43:22 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:43:36 [Sam]
q+
13:43:41 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:43:54 [maryjom]
ack Sam
13:43:58 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: do want to talk about the link preference?
13:44:05 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: I removed my concern, I'm fine with it.
13:44:09 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:44:56 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: for (1 of 2) General guidance - Note 8 of 1.4.10 Reflow , all 6 agreed .
13:45:14 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Moving on to (2 of 2) General guidance - Note 1 for 2.1.1 Keyboard
13:45:17 [maryjom]
Topic: Question 5 (2 of 2) General guidance for 2.1.1 Keyboard
13:45:19 [GreggVan]
q+
13:45:22 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:45:26 [maryjom]
ack g
13:46:32 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I tried to edit. Talks to soft keyboard definition , and the need for one. EN could then pick it up and use it.
13:46:34 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:46:37 [Sam]
q+
13:46:49 [maryjom]
ack Sam
13:47:06 [GreggVan]
q+
13:47:25 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: I think the term onscreen keyboard is something easy to understand, uses wikipedia as an example.
13:48:04 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Wiki share to virtual keyboard .
13:48:09 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: That makes sense.
13:48:33 [maryjom]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_keyboard
13:49:03 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: Virtual vs. soft works for me
13:50:10 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: In option 3
13:50:57 [maryjom]
q?
13:51:00 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Adds in text definition to virtual keyboard
13:51:01 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:51:03 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
13:51:50 [maryjom]
Poll: Take option 1 and 4 to the TF for question 5? 1) Yes, 2) No
13:52:02 [GreggVan]
1
13:52:03 [mitch11]
1
13:52:06 [ChrisLoiselle]
1
13:52:11 [Sam]
1
13:52:51 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Talks to question 6, (1 of 6) SC Problematic for Closed Functionality
13:52:58 [maryjom]
TOPIC: Question 6 SC problematic - Intro
13:53:00 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-handle-comments/results
13:53:02 [GreggVan]
q+
13:53:18 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:53:56 [ChrisLoiselle]
3 prefer proposal 1 as is, 4 prefer proposal with edits.
13:53:57 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:54:02 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
13:54:08 [Sam]
q+
13:54:24 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I took the edits and put them in to a new option.
13:54:46 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:54:53 [maryjom]
ack sam
13:55:32 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: Asks Sam if he prefers the edits made by Gregg.
13:56:01 [Sam]
q-
13:56:05 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: He agrees with Sam's edits.
13:56:07 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:56:23 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:56:26 [maryjom]
Poll: Take Option 3 to the full TF? 1) Yes, or 2) No
13:56:26 [Sam]
q+
13:56:27 [GreggVan]
1
13:56:29 [Sam]
1
13:56:32 [Sam]
q-
13:56:36 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
13:56:45 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: +1 to Mary Jo.
13:58:17 [ChrisLoiselle]
(2 of 6) SC Problematic for Closed - 1.3.4 Orientation
13:58:53 [maryjom]
Question 7: Take Option 3 forward to tf? 1) Yes, or 2) No
13:58:57 [GreggVan]
1
13:58:57 [Sam]
1
13:58:58 [ChrisLoiselle]
1
13:58:58 [mitch11]
1+
13:59:00 [mitch11]
qq+
13:59:02 [mitch11]
q+
13:59:04 [ChrisLoiselle]
100+
13:59:10 [maryjom]
ack mitch
13:59:10 [Zakim]
mitch, you wanted to react to Sam and to
14:00:16 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: from web to non web .
14:01:02 [ChrisLoiselle]
MaryJo: fixed displays are meant to be used in orientation in installation. The ability to change is not the intended use.
14:01:11 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
14:01:12 [GreggVan]
q+
14:01:16 [ChrisLoiselle]
?
14:01:27 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
14:02:10 [Sam]
q+
14:02:13 [shadi]
shadi has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:14 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: We weren't going to talk about hardware accessible. This is a constraint. When software is run on hardware that can't be changed. We should make that comment.
14:02:27 [ChrisLoiselle]
Perhaps adding the word "only".
14:02:34 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
14:02:36 [maryjom]
q?
14:03:07 [ChrisLoiselle]
Mitch: Talks software that runs on such products as edits on option 3.
14:03:09 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
14:03:19 [maryjom]
ack Sam
14:03:21 [ChrisLoiselle]
q?
14:04:08 [ChrisLoiselle]
Sam: I think original is fine.
14:04:45 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I created an option 4.
14:05:29 [ChrisLoiselle]
Gregg: I have fixed in place monitor and it rotates.
14:06:28 [mitch11]
scribe+ mitch11
14:07:09 [mitch11]
scribe+ mitch
14:07:39 [mitch11]
GreggVan: added an option 5 adding "that prevent"
14:07:53 [shadi]
+1 to Gregg's suggestion
14:07:55 [mitch11]
... based on option 1 with a smaller edit
14:07:59 [Sam]
+1 to greg
14:08:27 [maryjom]
Poll: Take option 5 - it's editorial to the TF: 1) Yes, 2) no
14:08:31 [mitch11]
1
14:08:35 [Sam]
1
14:08:40 [GreggVan]
1
14:08:41 [shadi]
1
14:09:04 [maryjom]
...clarifying the question - this is for question 7.
14:09:22 [mitch11]
topic: question 8
14:10:08 [maryjom]
Mary Jo to send note to Chris to see if he's OK with Option 2
14:10:19 [mitch11]
topic: question 9
14:11:18 [mitch11]
GreggVan: clarifying how to mark green in the doc as reminders for Mary Jo to follow up
14:12:28 [mitch11]
... Pointing out Question 9 options are all editorial only
14:12:46 [mitch11]
maryjom: use option 3
14:12:51 [GreggVan]
1
14:13:01 [maryjom]
Poll: Use option 3 for question 9? 1) Yes or 2) No
14:13:01 [Sam]
1
14:13:08 [mitch11]
1
14:13:56 [mitch11]
TOPIC: question 10
14:14:11 [GreggVan]
q+
14:14:32 [mitch11]
maryjom: recapped questionnaire results
14:14:49 [Sam]
q+
14:14:53 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
14:15:30 [mitch11]
GreggVan: can't use option 1 or 3 because they would make a normative judgment
14:15:54 [mitch11]
q+
14:16:35 [maryjom]
ack sam
14:16:39 [maryjom]
q?
14:17:07 [GreggVan]
q+
14:17:26 [mitch11]
Sam: could accept option 1. Other options are confusing. Precedents elsewhere
14:17:30 [maryjom]
ack mitch
14:18:29 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
14:18:35 [mitch11]
mitch11: there's only the possibility of one software on this platform, so no two things to distinguish by title
14:19:42 [mitch11]
GreggVan: (paraphrasing) not sure I can accept a departure from normative
14:20:15 [shadi]
q+
14:20:24 [mitch11]
... make it a matter for others
14:20:38 [mitch11]
... to give this advice, it's good advice but not for us to say it
14:21:05 [mitch11]
q+
14:21:33 [Sam]
q+
14:22:07 [maryjom]
ack shadi
14:23:02 [maryjom]
ack mitch
14:23:04 [mitch11]
shadi: Saying there's an exception would be overreaching. Loic's suggestion makes sense, leaves it open
14:23:58 [maryjom]
ack Sam
14:24:21 [GreggVan]
q+ to go wiht
14:24:26 [mitch11]
mitch11: I can support any, leaning toward not getting normative. Pointing out 508 and EN already exempt this situation
14:24:34 [shadi]
q+
14:24:36 [mitch11]
Sam: prefer option 1
14:24:54 [maryjom]
Poll: Which option do you prefer to take to the TF? 1) Option 1, 2) Option 2, 3) Option 3
14:25:05 [Sam]
q-
14:25:16 [maryjom]
ack shadi
14:25:41 [GreggVan]
q+ to say I can accept 3
14:25:42 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
14:25:42 [Zakim]
GreggVan, you wanted to go wiht and to say I can accept 3
14:25:42 [mitch11]
shadi: "we" in option 2, have we used it before? Option 3 we have done this before
14:25:49 [mitch11]
maryjom: no we have have not said "we"
14:25:55 [mitch11]
3, can accept any
14:25:56 [Sam]
3
14:25:58 [maryjom]
Poll: Which option do you prefer to take to the TF? 1) Option 1, 2) Option 2, 3) Option 3
14:26:02 [shadi]
3 or 1
14:26:04 [Sam]
3
14:26:06 [GreggVan]
3
14:26:06 [mitch11]
3, can accept any
14:26:30 [mitch11]
TOPIC: question 11
14:26:39 [mitch11]
maryjom: recapping questionnaire results
14:28:00 [mitch11]
GreggVan: Option 1 is not an option because it makes a statement of fact that it doesn't have to be provided
14:29:40 [mitch11]
maryjom: Created a scratch spot in the Google doc for editing live on this call
14:31:00 [shadi]
how about "could be provided in forms other than text"?
14:31:01 [mitch11]
GreggVan: says it doesn't need text, that's not true
14:31:06 [mitch11]
q+
14:31:23 [shadi]
q+
14:31:42 [mitch11]
maryjom: would we just say it's problematic, there's an assumption for AT
14:31:49 [mitch11]
GreggVan: need to solve it a different way
14:31:53 [maryjom]
ack mitch
14:32:26 [shadi]
q-
14:32:47 [mitch11]
mitch11: added option 5, just saying it's problematic because it requires text
14:32:59 [maryjom]
q?
14:33:28 [GreggVan]
+1 to mitch !
14:34:00 [maryjom]
Poll: Go to the TF with option 5? 1) Yes or 2) No
14:34:09 [mitch11]
1
14:34:10 [GreggVan]
1
14:34:17 [Sam]
2
14:35:25 [maryjom]
https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#success-criteria-problematic-for-closed-functionality
14:35:37 [Sam]
1
14:36:23 [mitch11]
Sam: unclear of why
14:36:29 [mitch11]
GreggVan: discussion of how to phrase
14:36:33 [mitch11]
Sam: can change to 1
14:37:08 [mitch11]
s/can change/can change my support/
14:37:23 [mitch11]
GreggVan: I can let it go (regarding phrasing)
14:37:54 [mitch11]
maryjom: edited, Sam does this alleviate?
14:37:56 [mitch11]
Sam: yes
14:39:11 [mitch11]
TOPIC: SC 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum), Shadi's topic
14:39:54 [maryjom]
Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18giKt9bddNEgnVmn3f8esr5SGhzJlf6vvX8MyBUmK48/edit#heading=h.4sbk41l5xxqd
14:40:03 [mitch11]
shadi: There's a lot of reliance on the ability to copy and paste, that content authors should not block copy and paste or block password managers.
14:40:26 [mitch11]
... There are cases in both closed and open that the platform doesn't support any of these techniques that WCAG assumes are available for web
14:40:32 [Sam]
q+
14:40:41 [mitch11]
... And in the software there's no way to get past the need to authenticate
14:40:51 [mitch11]
... Yesterday there was a note being proposed
14:41:30 [mitch11]
maryjom: we were drafting language in a Google doc
14:41:40 [mitch11]
... we talked about adding to Note 3, or adding a Note 4
14:42:05 [maryjom]
Minutes from yesterday: https://www.w3.org/2024/05/23-wcag2ict-minutes#t03
14:42:34 [maryjom]
q?
14:42:39 [maryjom]
ack Sam
14:43:10 [mitch11]
Sam: not just TVs, also firmware when hardware is not initialized, in support of adding a note
14:44:29 [GreggVan]
q+
14:44:40 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
14:45:00 [mitch11]
q+
14:45:07 [maryjom]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18giKt9bddNEgnVmn3f8esr5SGhzJlf6vvX8MyBUmK48/edit
14:45:13 [mitch11]
q-
14:46:32 [shadi]
q+
14:47:51 [mitch11]
q+
14:48:45 [maryjom]
WCAG language: A cognitive function test (such as remembering a password or solving a puzzle) is not required for any step in an authentication process unless that step provides at least one of the following:
14:48:45 [maryjom]
Alternative
14:48:45 [maryjom]
Another authentication method that does not rely on a cognitive function test.
14:48:45 [maryjom]
Mechanism
14:48:46 [maryjom]
A mechanism is available to assist the user in completing the cognitive function test.
14:48:46 [maryjom]
Object Recognition
14:48:46 [maryjom]
The cognitive function test is to recognize objects.
14:48:47 [maryjom]
Personal Content
14:48:47 [maryjom]
The cognitive function test is to identify non-text content the user provided to the Web site.
14:48:54 [shadi]
https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/accessible-authentication-minimum.html
14:48:55 [maryjom]
NOTE 1
14:48:55 [maryjom]
"Object recognition" and "Personal content" may be represented by images, video, or audio.
14:48:55 [maryjom]
NOTE 2
14:48:55 [maryjom]
Examples of mechanisms that satisfy this criterion include:
14:48:56 [maryjom]
support for password entry by password managers to reduce memory need, and
14:48:56 [maryjom]
copy and paste to reduce the cognitive burden of re-typing.
14:49:06 [maryjom]
https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#accessible-authentication-minimum
14:49:50 [maryjom]
https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/accessible-authentication-minimum.html
14:50:33 [mitch11]
Cognitive function test [New] A task that requires the user to remember, manipulate, or transcribe information. Examples include, but are not limited to:
14:50:40 [mitch11]
- memorization, such as remembering a username, password, set of characters, images, or patterns. The common identifiers name, e-mail, and phone number are not considered cognitive function tests as they are personal to the user and consistent across Web sites;
14:50:45 [mitch11]
- transcription, such as typing in characters;
14:50:50 [mitch11]
- use of correct spelling;
14:50:55 [mitch11]
- performance of calculations;
14:51:00 [mitch11]
- solving of puzzles.
14:51:22 [mitch11]
q+
14:52:41 [maryjom]
ack shadi
14:53:27 [mitch11]
shadi: 5 and 6 are similar,
14:53:27 [maryjom]
ack mitch
14:53:58 [mitch11]
... prefer 5
14:54:01 [mitch11]
mitch11: transcribing is normative in the definition
14:54:01 [maryjom]
q?
14:54:26 [mitch11]
GreggVan: would like to keep "for non-web software"
14:54:43 [mitch11]
Sam: ok keeping those words
14:55:21 [mitch11]
GreggVan: does it have to say "password"? also passkeys
14:55:22 [mitch11]
q+
14:56:24 [Sam]
q+
14:56:31 [Sam]
q-
14:56:45 [maryjom]
ack mitch
14:57:37 [GreggVan]
q=
14:57:44 [GreggVan]
Q+
14:57:46 [maryjom]
ack. GreggVan
14:57:47 [Sam]
q+
14:58:15 [mitch11]
mitch11: we should say something like password, or else memory or transcription. Otherwise we might be talking about tokens, call center authentication
14:58:24 [mitch11]
GreggVan: with password in the example is good
14:58:25 [Sam]
q-
14:58:29 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
14:58:53 [maryjom]
Poll: Take option 5 to the TF for 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication 1) Yes 2) No
14:58:58 [Sam]
1
14:59:05 [Sam]
q+
14:59:15 [shadi]
1
14:59:20 [mitch11]
1
14:59:53 [maryjom]
TOPIC: Focus not obscured
14:59:55 [maryjom]
https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/374
14:59:59 [mitch11]
ack Sam
15:00:43 [mitch11]
Sam: substance better than from 2013, is it better?
15:01:13 [mitch11]
GreggVan: Yes, so when working on things like EN 301 549 they have guidance from this group, haven't solved but have provided our input
15:01:32 [mitch11]
shadi: agree that changes we proposed today were important improvements
15:01:59 [mitch11]
maryjom: when approved in the Task Force, yes it would restart the review, can talk to Chuck
15:02:22 [mitch11]
GreggVan: Could we ask Task Force people via survey by Monday?
15:03:02 [mitch11]
maryjom: Yes we could start it more quickly
15:03:32 [mitch11]
daniel-montalvo: Mary Jo if you want help with survey process let me know
15:04:17 [mitch11]
s/survey process/process of creating the survey/
15:04:42 [mitch11]
... I can help make it HTML
15:05:29 [mitch11]
maryjom: moving to the topic, issue 374
15:06:25 [mitch11]
summarized the issue and public comments
15:06:54 [mitch11]
s/summarized the issue/...summarized the issue/
15:07:00 [mitch11]
... we could can't maybe can't be met
15:07:13 [mitch11]
s/could can't/could say/
15:07:40 [mitch11]
GreggVan: if you can move or resize the toolbar it's not a problem
15:07:41 [mitch11]
q+
15:08:18 [mitch11]
GreggVan: or might be a problem if you're a keyboard user, maybe you can't move it
15:09:15 [mitch11]
... like on Macs there's a pop-up preview, then if you turn off the feature you lose the function
15:10:23 [mitch11]
q?
15:11:37 [maryjom]
ack mitch
15:13:13 [Sam]
q+
15:13:13 [GreggVan]
q+
15:13:24 [mitch11]
ack mitch11
15:14:14 [maryjom]
ack Sam
15:14:17 [mitch11]
mitch11: hinges on WCAG's note 1. Issue 374 is clearly written, I know Adobe software pretty well, but still I can't quite picture where the focus obscured problem is in the example
15:14:47 [mitch11]
Sam: We should expand the issue to smaller displays, overlapping
15:14:49 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
15:15:33 [mitch11]
GreggVan: The WCAG provision doesn't say it's in the initial provision, and Note 1 should not be allowed because it adds a normative
15:15:55 [mitch11]
s/should not be allowed/should not have been allowed/
15:16:26 [mitch11]
... so lots of software will fail this, it shouldn't have been written this way
15:17:18 [mitch11]
... So we can say, yes apply the SC, but Note 1 adds an impossible additional requirement, how to say this
15:17:23 [Sam]
q+
15:17:27 [maryjom]
ack Sam
15:17:47 [GreggVan]
q+
15:17:48 [mitch11]
Sam: can we say it's problematic for non-web software?
15:17:59 [mitch11]
... and may be impossible to meet for some non-web software
15:18:09 [mitch11]
ack GreggVan
15:18:28 [mitch11]
GreggVan: Simpler to say, if this is true: this applies as written with the deletion of Note 1
15:18:33 [maryjom]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10LVvDYYqe0K8MBY_xj4wgUuKfhvTd8M2gcTrUjca19M/edit#heading=h.8tv90svf64t0
15:18:53 [maryjom]
We can make edits in the Google doc above.
15:18:53 [mitch11]
q+
15:19:00 [maryjom]
q?
15:19:35 [maryjom]
ack mitch
15:20:00 [Sam]
q+
15:21:04 [GreggVan]
q+
15:21:45 [maryjom]
q?
15:21:50 [maryjom]
ack Sam
15:21:51 [mitch11]
mitch11: or maybe refocus note 1, not delete it, to clarify don't penalize authors when users reposition toolbars creating a focus obscured
15:22:45 [mitch11]
Sam: What we the Task Force shouldn't do is remove normative, and if Note 1 turns out to be kind of normative then maybe we shouldn't remove it
15:23:09 [mitch11]
... Can we look at some language from the password one, may not be possible to meet?
15:23:12 [maryjom]
ack GreggVan
15:23:26 [mitch11]
GreggVan: agree with Sam
15:24:06 [mitch11]
... WCAG is written for content. Can get out of windowing if it's not the content. Then there are operating systems
15:24:28 [mitch11]
... Could say, for any software with overlapping windows it would be problematic
15:24:59 [mitch11]
... And we can't realistically change 2.2
15:25:31 [shadi]
q+
15:25:50 [mitch11]
q?
15:25:54 [mitch11]
ack shadi
15:26:31 [Sam]
+1 to shadi
15:26:31 [mitch11]
shadi: Agree with reusing wording from Accessible Authentication. Concern about "overlapping windows", just say some cases where not possible to meet
15:28:28 [maryjom]
q?
15:29:11 [mitch11]
maryjom: drafting in Google Docs
15:30:33 [mitch11]
GreggVan: What about non-web documents?
15:32:55 [mitch11]
maryjom: is that the document or the user agent?
15:34:31 [mitch11]
q+
15:35:19 [mitch11]
q?
15:35:25 [maryjom]
maryjom has joined #wcag2ict
15:35:26 [GreggVan]
q?
15:35:32 [maryjom]
ack mitch11
15:35:32 [mitch11]
ack mitch11
15:35:37 [maryjom]
ack mitch
15:37:22 [Sam]
q+
15:37:40 [mitch11]
mitch11: discussion of word choice
15:37:49 [mitch11]
q?
15:37:54 [maryjom]
ack sam
15:38:12 [mitch11]
Sam: review by Monday or Tuesday. In the US Monday is a holiday
15:38:24 [mitch11]
GreggVan: no problem, do it on Sunday (wink)
15:39:20 [mitch11]
s/Sunday (wink)/Sunday/
15:40:00 [Sam]
q-
15:40:01 [maryjom]
Poll: Go to TF with option 3? 1) Yes, or 2) No
15:40:05 [Sam]
1
15:40:05 [shadi]
1
15:40:17 [GreggVan]
1
15:40:22 [mitch11]
1
15:40:26 [mitch11]
q+
15:40:39 [maryjom]
ack mitch
15:40:39 [mitch11]
ack mitch11
15:41:54 [mitch11]
mitch11: and in the issue, acknowledge the Task Force is limited by what WCAG says
15:42:11 [mitch11]
maryjom: note to self reminder of the above
15:43:31 [mitch11]
... thanks all for a big meeting
15:44:36 [maryjom]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:44:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/24-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
15:48:57 [maryjom]
zakim, end meeting
15:48:57 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Sam, shadi, mitch
15:48:58 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
15:49:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/24-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
15:49:06 [Zakim]
I am happy to have been of service, maryjom; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
15:49:07 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wcag2ict
15:49:41 [maryjom]
present+ chris, maryjom, gregg, chuck
15:49:48 [maryjom]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:49:49 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/24-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
15:50:06 [maryjom]
rrsagent, bye
15:50:06 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items