13:53:06 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:53:10 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-wcag2ict-irc
13:53:10 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:53:11 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:53:12 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
13:53:13 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:53:18 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
13:53:35 <maryjom> agenda+ Announcements
13:55:56 <maryjom> regrets: Bruce Bailey, Olivia Hogan-Stark, Mitchell Evan, Bryan Trogdon
13:56:19 <PhilDay> present+
13:56:24 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
13:56:42 <maryjom> agenda+ Survey results: (Group 2) Review Content Changes and Issue Responses for Public Comments
13:57:17 <maryjom> Agenda+ Handling of 4.1.1 Parsing from WCAG 2.0/2.1
13:57:41 <maryjom> Agenda+ Formatting of WCAG2ICT Notes
13:59:21 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:39 <Mike_Pluke> present+
14:02:05 <maryjom> maryjom has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:11 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:46 <FernandaBonnin> FernandaBonnin has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:02:57 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
14:02:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
14:03:07 <FernandaBonnin> present+
14:03:07 <PhilDay> present+
14:03:07 <maryjom> present+
14:03:13 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
14:03:14 <dmontalvo> present+ Daniel
14:03:23 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:03:23 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:04:17 <PhilDay> There will be some disruption to meetings coming in September - as Mary Jo moves. September 12th Mary Jo will be out.
14:04:47 <PhilDay> ... Same for 13th.
14:05:02 <Chuck> q+
14:05:05 <PhilDay> So we either need somebody else to host meeting, or we cancel the meetings that week
14:05:15 <maryjom> ack Chuck
14:05:33 <PhilDay> Chuck: Taking next week off.
14:05:55 <PhilDay> maryjom: Will be moving w/c September 30th
14:06:37 <PhilDay> That week may also be cancelled (3rd Oct)
14:07:01 <PhilDay> Apologies for late survey - was trying to get content together
14:07:26 <PhilDay> Survey is open for another week so people can give input
14:08:55 <PhilDay> Question on whether we are quorate today. We do meet Chuck's informal definition of a quorum.
14:09:26 <Chuck> q+
14:09:29 <PhilDay> California CA 1757 - was supposed to provide safe harbour - Bill was killed for the year. It may make a return next year
14:10:06 <PhilDay> Sam: there was room for improvement with that CA bill
14:10:36 <Chuck> ack Ch
14:10:40 <PhilDay> Chuck: Question: is the bill completely dead?
14:10:57 <PhilDay> maryjom: Bill is >4 years old. Not quite dead yet - just resting
14:11:44 <PhilDay> Zakim, next item
14:11:44 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Survey results: (Group 2) Review Content Changes and Issue Responses for Public Comments -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:12:04 <PhilDay> Sam: present+
14:12:04 <Chuck> present+
14:12:06 <maryjom> present+ Sam
14:12:25 <ChrisLoiselle> present+
14:12:46 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Group2-public-draft2/results
14:13:25 <PhilDay> It is quite early to discuss - but some issues are easy to discuss and reach consensus (hopefully)
14:13:30 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 1 - Update "virtual keyboard" definition's examples in the note
14:13:37 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Group2-public-draft2/results#xq1
14:13:42 <PhilDay> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/478
14:13:48 <PhilDay> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/479
14:14:01 <PhilDay> [Mary Jo sharing screen]
14:15:05 <PhilDay> Virtual keyboard - we decided to not change the order, but did have some minor improvements in the discussion which might be worth including. See above PR
14:16:07 <PhilDay> Change reduces the list, clarifies MORSE code (not just code), switches (with sip & puff as an example), and ordering by alphabet.
14:16:49 <PhilDay> ... sounds was removed from the list as well
14:17:17 <PhilDay> Any objections to the proposed change?
14:17:31 <PhilDay> q?
14:18:21 <maryjom> POLL: Can we merge in the changes to Note 1 of "virtual keyboard" - adjustments to the examples, as-is? 1) Yes or 2) No
14:18:29 <PhilDay> 1
14:18:30 <Mike_Pluke> 1
14:18:30 <FernandaBonnin> 1
14:18:43 <ChrisLoiselle> 1
14:19:01 <PhilDay> 1: Sam
14:19:46 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Merge in the changes to Note 1 of "virtual keyboard" - adjustments to the examples, as-is.
14:20:15 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 2 - Issue 437 (Add new note): Success Criterion Applying SC 2.4.2 Page Titled to Non-Web Documents and Software
14:20:17 <PhilDay> Issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/437
14:20:22 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Group2-public-draft2/results#xq2
14:20:23 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
14:20:25 <PhilDay> Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.mkjkrsjpnf2z
14:20:31 <shadi> present+
14:21:31 <maryjom> Current version: "Although not required by this success criterion, ensuring that individual windows or screens have a title that describes the topic or purpose addresses the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally considered a best practice."
14:21:39 <maryjom> Suggested edit: "Although not required by this success criterion, ensuring that individual windows or screens have a title addresses the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally considered a best practice. It is assumed that the title would describe the topic or purpose in this case.
14:21:49 <maryjom> Alternative edit: "Although not required by this success criterion, ensuring that individual windows or screens have a title (where that title describes the topic or purpose) addresses the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally considered a best practice."
14:24:55 <maryjom> POLL: Which version of the note should we incorporate into SC 2.4.2 Page Titled? 1) Version as proposed (current version), 2) Suggested edit (above), 3) Alternative edit (above) or 4) Something else
14:25:10 <Mike_Pluke> 3
14:25:12 <FernandaBonnin> 3
14:25:13 <PhilDay> 3, but would accept 2 or 1
14:26:04 <PhilDay> This would be a new note to address input from public comment
14:26:12 <PhilDay> (Adding best practice)
14:27:12 <ChrisLoiselle> 3
14:28:32 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate the alternative edit version (above) of the proposed Note to SC 2.4.2 Page Titled, as-is.
14:28:42 <shadi> +1
14:29:13 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 3 - Issue 437 (Issue answer): Success Criterion Applying SC 2.4.2 Page Titled to Non-Web Documents and Software
14:29:14 <PhilDay> Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.devtkm8gm28y
14:29:21 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Group2-public-draft2/results#xq3
14:29:59 <PhilDay> Option 2: Answer to use IF the TF approves any changes
14:29:59 <PhilDay> Appreciate your comment @stevefaulkner. The TF has agreed to add a note to the editor’s draft to indicate that when an application has different views or windows it is a best practice for them to have a title. The exact verbiage we have added to the section Applying 2.4.2 Page Titled to Non-web Documents and Software is:
14:29:59 <PhilDay> @@Add the quoted note we agree upon here.@@
14:31:03 <maryjom> POLL: Can we answer Issue 437 as proposed above, as-is? 1) Yes 2) No
14:31:08 <PhilDay> 1
14:31:09 <FernandaBonnin> 1
14:31:17 <ChrisLoiselle> 1
14:31:34 <shadi> 1
14:31:45 <Mike_Pluke> 1
14:32:25 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Answer Issue 437 as proposed above, making sure to substitute in the quoted note we added.
14:33:06 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 464 (Add new note): Suggest slight clarification of audience and outcomes
14:33:08 <PhilDay> Issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/464
14:33:08 <PhilDay> Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.u4cl51xehn8t
14:33:23 <maryjom> Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Group2-public-draft2/results#xq4
14:34:39 <PhilDay> From issue 464: “APA appreciates the proposed Introduction section, but we believe that it would be helpful to mention the POUR principles explicitly, and to clarify the intended audience, and to reinforce the importance of obtaining user feedback when testing. We offer the following draft paragraph.
14:34:39 <PhilDay> "This document provides informative guidance on mapping WCAG to non-web ICT contexts. Readers are encouraged to keep in mind the core framing principles which undergird WCAG Success Criteria and are commonly expressed by the acronym, POUR: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. Developers are also strongly encouraged to obtain testing
14:34:39 <PhilDay> input from persons with disabilities using applications and content. The sections below provide further details on how individual success criteria may be interpreted outside of the web context."
14:35:07 <PhilDay> APA: accessible platform architecture working group
14:35:22 <PhilDay> option 0 - no change
14:35:35 <PhilDay> option 1 - accept additions as is
14:35:44 <PhilDay> option 2 - accept edited version of their additions
14:36:16 <PhilDay> We already mention Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust in the background section.
14:38:44 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
14:38:57 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
14:39:16 <Sam> q+
14:39:37 <maryjom> ack sam
14:39:39 <shadi> q+
14:39:59 <PhilDay> Sam: Seems like a repeat apart from the last sentence.
14:40:34 <PhilDay> ... Why do we need to add this suggested text?
14:41:13 <PhilDay> Question: do we do nothing, or add their new paragraph into the guidance section, or do we edit their suggestions and just add a little to the background & guidance.
14:41:26 <PhilDay> Sam: prefers option 2
14:41:51 <PhilDay> maryjom: Could remove strongly: "Developers are also encouraged to ..."
14:41:51 <Sam> +1 to removing "strongly"
14:42:05 <PhilDay> shadi: Agree that the last sentence is the only substantive addition.
14:43:00 <PhilDay> ... Also suggest the removal of mention of testing in the last sentence. Not sure what "commonly expressed by the acronym, POUR" - we could just leave this out.
14:43:39 <PhilDay> In background section, Shadi spotted a "should" which may be better expressed as "could"
14:45:23 <maryjom> POLL: Which option do you prefer 1) Option 0 - no change, 2) Option 1 - insert text suggested in issue as-is into Guidance section, 3) Option 2- Edited APA text or 4) Something else
14:45:57 <PhilDay> 3 - with minor edits suggested by Shadi & Mary Jo (i.e. just add last sentence with edits)
14:46:02 <shadi> 3) Option 2 - Edited APA text
14:46:04 <FernandaBonnin> 3
14:46:07 <Sam> 3
14:46:11 <Mike_Pluke> 3
14:46:12 <ChrisLoiselle> 3
14:46:19 <PhilDay> Should/could change from above:
14:46:20 <Sam> q+
14:46:25 <PhilDay> Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.0 to Non-Web Information and Communications Technologies (WCAG2ICT), approved in September 2013, described how WCAG 2.0 could be applied to non-web documents and software. WCAG2ICT was organized to mirror WCAG's sections: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. WCAG2ICT clarified when and how WCAG success
14:46:25 <shadi> q-
14:46:26 <PhilDay> criteria should be applied to non-web documents and software.
14:46:26 <PhilDay> Proposed edit from Shadi: (change shown in CAPS)
14:46:26 <PhilDay> Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.0 to Non-Web Information and Communications Technologies (WCAG2ICT), approved in September 2013, described how WCAG 2.0 could be applied to non-web documents and software. WCAG2ICT was organized to mirror WCAG's sections: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. WCAG2ICT clarified when and how WCAG success
14:46:27 <PhilDay> criteria COULD be applied to non-web documents and software.
14:47:16 <PhilDay> Sam: Clarifying which option 3 relates - it is labelled as option 2 in the google doc!
14:47:22 <maryjom> ack sam
14:48:18 <maryjom> POLL: Should we include the phrase "Commonly expressed by the acronym "POUR"? 1) Yes, or 2) No
14:48:23 <PhilDay> 2
14:48:35 <FernandaBonnin> 2
14:48:41 <shadi> 2, 1 (can live with 1)
14:48:45 <ChrisLoiselle> 2
14:48:47 <Sam> 2
14:48:48 <Mike_Pluke> 1 but not a strong preference
14:49:13 <PhilDay> Decision is to just add single sentence at the end of Guidance section: Developers are also encouraged to obtain input from persons with disabilities using applications and content.
14:50:39 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate the changes from Option 2, as edited in the Google doc into the Guidance section and the change of "should" to "could" in the Background section.
14:51:37 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 5 - Issue 465 Part 1 (Addressing SCs 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7): Seeking clarity for key term 'underlying platform software'
14:51:40 <PhilDay> Issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/465
14:51:40 <PhilDay> Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.70z79cid7qjy
14:51:48 <maryjom> Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-Group2-public-draft2/results#xq5
14:52:17 <PhilDay> Confusion with our use of underlying when referring to platform software
14:52:35 <PhilDay> - is "underlying platform software" different to "platform software"?
14:53:06 <PhilDay> option 1: no change
14:53:16 <PhilDay> (to SCs 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7)
14:54:05 <PhilDay> part of the problem is a similarity in visual style between a word substitution (underlying) and a definition (platform software)
14:54:34 <PhilDay> ... underlying has dotted underline, definition link has light grey, solid underline
14:55:14 <PhilDay> Current note used in 2.5.1, 2.5.2, and 2.5.7 (same note in all):
14:55:14 <PhilDay> 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).
14:55:36 <PhilDay> option 2: we could add a key term for underlying
14:55:49 <PhilDay> option 3: we could rewrite to avoid the use of the word "underlying"
14:56:30 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:56:37 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
14:57:12 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Think underlying is fine for native English speakers. But it is not a very common term, so might be confusing for some. So option 3 might be better understood
14:57:19 <PhilDay> q+
14:57:21 <shadi> q+
14:57:27 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
14:57:56 <maryjom> ack shadi
14:58:15 <PhilDay> shadi: concerned with changing substitutions, and what impact that could have
14:58:18 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:58:48 <PhilDay> ... it might cause other issues down the line. It helped to clarify the issue when the visual highlighting was described - that might be sufficient for the original question.
14:58:59 <PhilDay> ... The visual style could be logged with W3C for future improvement
14:59:33 <ChrisLoiselle> need to drop for another call, thanks all!
14:59:58 <PhilDay> ack Mike_Pluke
15:00:18 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: perfectly happy with leaving "underlying" - may also have something similar in the EN work.
15:00:24 <maryjom> POLL: Which option do you prefer? 1) No change, 2) Option 2 Add key term, 3) Clarify to avoid "underlying" or 4) Something else
15:00:31 <PhilDay> 2, then 1
15:00:38 <shadi> 1
15:00:41 <Sam> +1 just leave it as is
15:00:51 <Sam> 1
15:01:04 <Mike_Pluke> 1
15:02:06 <PhilDay> No change to SCs 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7
15:02:23 <maryjom> RESOLUTION:  No change to 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7 as a result of Issue 465.
15:02:39 <PhilDay> We will cover the rest of this issue next week to deal with "underlying"
15:03:32 <PhilDay> Extra meeting is happening tomorrow - we could pickup issues with Sam & Bruce
15:03:44 <PhilDay> And a couple of unassigned issues
15:03:46 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:03:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
15:04:14 <PhilDay> Meeting is 1 hour earlier than the Thursday meeting
15:04:21 <PhilDay> (Same Zoom link)
15:04:43 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:04:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
15:04:55 <maryjom> zakim, end meeting
15:04:55 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been PhilDay, Mike_Pluke, FernandaBonnin, maryjom, Daniel, Chuck, Sam, ChrisLoiselle, shadi
15:04:56 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
15:04:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
15:05:03 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, maryjom; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:05:04 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
15:05:09 <maryjom> rrsagent, bye
15:05:09 <RRSAgent> I see no action items