Meeting minutes
<jamesn> - aria #2231: turn on automatic prettier formatting for ARIA spec
<jamesn> - aria #2242: Netlify to replace pr-review
<jamesn> - aria #2228: re-direct "moved" PRs after merge (html-aam left with 2 PRs)
<jamesn> - [revisit] automation and synonyms (via aria #2073)
aria #2312: Decide on PR naming/labelling convention
spectranaut_: if you look at the PRs, there's a lot going on now. Square brackets for specs, editorial, then there's tags for the same.
… started by moving PRs but I think it's not necessarily something for the long term
jamesn: for querying, tags etc are better
… in PR, it helps with merge commit title.
… if we run into changelog problems, we can use that as a backup.
… it also helps with github links from changelog to commit history.
… it takes you to all of the specs (now).
spectranaut_: core-aam still points to core-aam repo history.
jamesn: I see. Once we change it, we get the aria history.
spectranaut_: if they need it, they can look at the history of the file.
jamesn: I wonder if this is currently useful at all.
spectranaut_: right, doesn't seem too useful
… so we need editorial in PR/commit message?
jamesn: yes, for changelog, I can filter out certain things.
… I think I can filter by file, too.
… but I won't be able to filter labels.
spectranaut_: so I'd suggest to just keep "editorial" and otherwise use labels.
mel: +1
rahim: +1
aria #2238 / PR #2288: Fix commit log for specs with monorepo
pkra: do we need more reviewers for https://
spectranaut_: this one looked great. It seems we get per-spec contributors.
jamesn: are we sure?
spectranaut_: well, that's why more review is needed :)
jamesn: is it still coming from the repositories?
… github API gives you top 100 contributors to repository.
… long term, other repos won't have contributors.
… where's participants.js?
pkra: that's an "older" one to get W3C API
… then there's gh-participants
jamesn: that's from respec
… I think that builds from git repo
… it probably currently pulls from old repos
… it will eventually be the ARIA repo list, same across specs. I think that's fine.
spectranaut_: right, that's fine.
pkra: +1
spectranaut_: does this list include people who opened issues?
jamesn: not clear but pretty sure it's just commits.
… GH's "top contributor" list.
mel: I noticed the list of participants is blank for accname.
spectranaut_: that's a bug.
mel: I don't see it for core-aam either.
… or dpub-aam.
jamesn: ok, we need to fix this.
aria #2294 / PR #2307: Prettier throws errors on PRs opened from forks
pkra: w3c/
… and w3c/
pkra: background was that our CI prettier doesn't work for forks
… daniel changed CI to avoid error
… I'd prefer to have a check, leave it to authors
spectranaut_: makes sense. merging this would give us potentially "unformatted" code?
pkra: right.
mel: do we have a prettier config?
pkra: no, all left to CI
spectranaut_: could you add one, Mel?
mel: yeah.
pkra: great. would not solve the issue
spectranaut_: let's merge this then and continue.
mel: have opened issue.
<melsumner> created a new issue and assigned it to myself: w3c/
aria #2287: Add ReSpec aliasing clarity in README.me's "Editorial Documentation" section
pkra: w3c/
rahim: came up while working on accname issue.
… definition pointed to accname for a node.
… I had assumed that would map to DOM text node.
… so I looked into it, learned about respec. it would be good to have that as documentation.
spectranaut_: could you take it on?
rahim: yes.
jamesn: I find respec somewhat confusing and contradictory. Some things you cannot alias, some things you can.
rahim: yes, I ran into that.
… a good trick is right-clicking to list aliases.
… I'll write it up.
aria #2286: Prettier removed a line break from a pre-formatted code example
pkra: w3c/
… I couldn't reproduce it.
… do we feel like we need to do something about it?
jamesn: you mentioned investigating latest version?
pkra: right, didn't get to it
mel: a prettier config file should help here, too.
spectranaut_: could you take it on?
mel: yes.