Meeting minutes
Issue 476
<maryjom> w3c/
present
Discussing issue 476
Should we add a link to "software" in our word substitutions where it doesn't appear in the original WCAG language?
mitch11: This use of the definition looks good. May not be appropriate to put it everywhere
<bruce_bailey> sounds good
Issue 473
bruce_bailey: Add a sentence - tell people how to adapt them, then show an example rather than doing a formal word substitution.
maryjom: Our role is not to define every case - it is not a normative document
mitch11: Desire is to make this document more formal, but I can't see a real need for doing it
mitch11: I don't think that more formality will result in a better document here
<bruce_bailey> +1 more formality will not result in better results
mitch11: Sets of software programs - is rare, perhaps non-existent. Sets of documents do exist
ChrisLoiselle: Was reading through this earlier - may be worth considering a differentiation between group & set
… Looks like he might have used group & set interchangeably - but if there may be a more granular level that is needed. May be worth raising to WCAG
<ChrisLoiselle> be right back, apologies
mitch11: Trying to draft a reply. It can apply to documents as well. You could have to overlapping sets of documents. But I don't think there is any harm in that - you evaluate each set independently
<ChrisLoiselle> back
<mitch11> Draft response: The question is clearly stated. The Task Force considered making the advisory content more formal, but decided against making a change. While overlapping sets could occur, ...
<mitch11> we do not foresee a problem in evaluating each set as a set.
<ChrisLoiselle> +1
Proposal 1: No change to the content, with the following proposed answer
The question is clearly stated. The Task Force considered making the advisory content regarding “sets of software” and “sets of documents” more formal, but decided against making any changes. While overlapping sets could occur, we do not foresee a problem in evaluating each overlapping set as a set.
<ChrisLoiselle> I think we could remove that first sentence and still express the rest.
Proposal 1: No change to the content, with the following proposed answer
Thank you for your question regarding WCAG2ICT. The Task Force considered making the advisory content regarding “sets of software” and “sets of documents” more formal, but decided against making any changes. While overlapping sets could occur, we do not foresee a problem in evaluating each overlapping set as a set.
This will go to the TF for review & approval
issue 465
Issue came from APA working group: https://
Question on whether we should distinguish between platform software, and underlying platform software
mitch11: Agree it is confusing as it is. But it may be rather difficult to make this change - it's a complex update. Suggest we work on a 1 or 2 examples to see if we can reword it, then see how it works before we try and do all of them
Editorial change: in Example under NOTE 2 of the definition of platform software. Should read: Example: Examples of platform SOFTWARE are.
(caps show the insertion)
Looking at SC 2.5.1 to see if the use of "underlying" has modified the meaning of "platform software"
mitch11: Has already proposed an edit for these 2 notes, so there may still be an outstanding PR
Fix in above PR might also fix the problem that was raised in this issue
<ChrisLoiselle> added underlying layer phrasing too in note 4
mitch11: This this SC is a good example that we should work on. Use of underlying is sensible to differentiate between 2 layers of the architecture that we are talking about.
<bruce_bailey> +1 agreed we have made better already
bruce_bailey: underlying looks like it is part of the link.
It is actually part of the word insertion, which still looks quite similar to a link.
PhilDay: could consider changing the order of the sentence, so the word underlying is removed, and add "that sits beneath the software application" at the end
Current NOTE 3
This requirement applies to [user agents and other software applications that interpret] pointer actions (i.e. this does not apply to actions that are required to operate the [underlying platform software] or assistive technology).
Reorder NOTE 3
This requirement applies to [user agents and other software applications that interpret] pointer actions (i.e. this does not apply to actions that are required to operate the [platform software] or assistive technology that sit beneath the software application).
Same approach could be used for 2.5.2
Same note exists for 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.7 so we could re-order for all 3
3.3.8 uses the term
<ChrisLoiselle> I vote for holding off per what we recently changed and if need be, could change if not sufficient enough
The changes we already made might be enough - Mary Jo to go back to matatk
keyboard interface definition. we could just drop the word "underlying" and keep the meaning
3.3.8, NOTE 3, the underlying is needed.
Consensus is to show matatk the changes in the latest PR to see if this makes it clearer. Also explain the highlighting is a word sub, not a key term
Still have a number of items that are unassigned. Pick any and work on them!