18:08:01 RRSAgent has joined #aria-apg 18:08:05 logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/10/22-aria-apg-irc 18:08:05 RRSAgent, make logs Public 18:08:06 Meeting: ARIA Authoring Practices Task Force 18:08:15 present+ jugglinmike 18:08:17 scribe+ jugglinmike 18:08:21 CurtBellew has joined #aria-apg 18:08:22 present+ Matt_King 18:08:31 present+ CurtBellew 18:08:31 present+ 18:08:38 present+ Adam_Page 18:08:43 present+ Lola 18:09:27 TODAY IS INTERNATIONAL CAPS LOCK DAY 18:09:40 TOPIC: Setup and Review Agenda 18:10:08 Matt_King: ANY REQUESTS TO CHANGE THE AGENDA? 18:10:14 hahaha 18:10:29 oh excuse me, HAHAHA 18:11:09 LOLA: I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE OLDER E-MAILS TO THE ISSUE TRACKER 18:11:22 PRESENT+ Bryan 18:11:40 Matt_King: THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE ON OCTOBER 29 18:11:45 TOPIC: Publication planning 18:12:06 Matt_King: WE HAVE THREE CHANGES WHICH HAVE LANDED AND ARE DEFINITELY SHIPPING NEXT WEEK 18:12:30 siri has joined #aria-apg 18:12:46 present+ 18:12:55 Matt_King: FIRST, A CHANGE TO LINKS WHICH TOUCHED OVER 50 PAGES. THEN A CHANGE TO THE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, AND THEN A CHANGE TO THE TOOLTIP BEHAVIOR 18:13:14 Matt_King: THAT MIGHT BE EVERYTHING FOR THE NEXT PUBLICATION, THOUGH WE MIGHT ALSO GET A CHANGE TO SKIPTO 18:13:33 jugglinmike: HOWARD WILL BE BACK NEXT WEEK, SO WE WILL BE ABLE TO SHIP THIS AS PLANNED 18:13:45 SIRI: ARE WE CHANGING TOOLTIPS? 18:14:00 Matt_King: JUST AN EDITORIAL CHANGE TO THE NOTE 18:14:39 s/SIRI/siri/ 18:14:44 s/LOLA/lola/ 18:15:06 TOPIC: New Skipto Scroll Preview Options 18:15:52 Matt_King: MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT JON'S WORK CONCERNS THE VISUAL INDICATION OF WHERE FOCUS WILL MOVE UPON SELECTION OF A PARTICULAR OPTION 18:15:59 q+ TO SUGGEST A FOURTH OPTION 18:16:24 Matt_King: IT WOULD BE GREAT IF FOLKS WHO CAN REVIEW THE VISUALS CAN TAKE A LOOK 18:16:51 Matt_King: DO WE MAKE NO CHANGE, CHOOSE THE SMOOTH-SCROLLING OPTION, OR CHOOSE THE INSTANT-SCROLLING OPTION? 18:17:06 ack Adam_Page 18:17:06 Adam_Page, you wanted to SUGGEST A FOURTH OPTION 18:17:39 Adam_Page: I'D LIKE TO CONSIDER USING BOTH KINDS OF SCROLLING BUT WE GATE THE SMOOTH SCROLLING ACCORDING TO THE "uses smooth scrolling" MEDIA QUERY 18:17:55 +1 to Adam's suggestion 18:18:16 Adam_Page: WE COULD GIVE APG USERS APG A NICE EXPERIENCE ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN PREFERENCE AND ALSO DEMONSTRATE A BEST-PRACTICE 18:18:51 Matt_King: BOTH OF THESE ARE GATED BASED ON THAT SETTING. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE THINKING THAT ONLY THE "SMOOTH SCROLLING" OPTION SHOULD BE, THOUGH 18:19:25 Matt_King: MAKE "SMOOTH SCROLLING" THE DEFAULT, BUT IF YOU HAVE "reduced animation" ENABLED, REVERT TO "INSTANT SCROLLING" 18:20:36 Can you share the link? 18:22:01 lola: THE SMOOTH SCROLLING OPTION IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW HERE https://deploy-preview-366--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/ 18:22:27 lola: THE INSTANT SCROLLING OPTION IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW HERE https://deploy-preview-364--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/ 18:23:21 Adam_Page: I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSION. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A "PREVIEW" EFFECT 18:23:40 Matt_King: AS FAR AS I KNOW, WHEN YOU ACTIVATE THE ITEM, THE SCROLLING IS ALWAYS INSTANTANEOUS 18:24:48 lola: I CAN DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND WHY THIS SHOULD BE GATED BY REDUCED MOTION. THE "SMOOTH SCROLLING" OPTION WOULD DISORIENT ME IF I WERE TO USE IT REGULARLY 18:25:51 lola: IF I'M HONEST, I DO PREFER THE "INSTANT SCROLLING" OPTION WITHOUT THE "SMOOTH SCROLLING" AT ALL 18:26:25 CurtBellew: I ALWAYS PREFER A SMOOTH SCROLL BECAUSE FOR ME, I TEND TO LOSE CONTEXT ABOUT WHERE I AM WHEN THE SCROLL POSITION "JUMPS" 18:27:05 siri: I WOULD LEAN TOWARDS Adam_Page'S ORIGINAL SUGGESTION 18:27:47 Adam_Page: I FEEL LIKE THERE IS NUANCE IN THIS CASE BECAUSE I THINK MANY USERS WOULD NOT EXPECT THAT WE SHOW A PREVIEW; THEY WOULD EXPECT THE PAGE ONLY TO RESPOND WHEN THEY ACTUALLY ACTIVATE THE BOTTOM 18:28:27 Adam_Page: USERS LIKE lola MIGHT NOT HAVE THE "reduced motion" SETTING ENABLED BECAUSE THEY GENERALLY AREN'T SENSITIVE, BUT THAT THEY WOULD STILL FIND THIS PARTICULARLY BEHAVIOR DISORIENTING 18:29:17 lola: I REMEMBER THAT WE DON'T WANT TO INTRODUCE SETTINGS ON APG FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, BUT PERHAPS WE HAVE A TOGGLE ON THE PAGE; THAT COULD BE OVERKILL, THOUGH. 18:30:02 Matt_King: WITHOUT ANY PERSISTENCE, I DON'T THINK A TOGGLE FOR THIS BEHAVIOR WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL 18:30:40 Adam_Page: MAKING IT SLOWER MIGHT MAKE THIS MORE AGREEABLE TO MORE FOLKS. A CHANGE LIKE THAT SHOULD BE EASY TO IMPLEMENT TECHNICALLY 18:30:46 q+ 18:32:30 Adam_Page: I THINK THIS IS NOVEL, AND I THINK THERE'S A VALUE IN PRESENTED A UI TO SIGHTED USERS WHICH GIVE THEM SOME ADVANTAGE OF THE HEADING HIERARCHY. ORIENTING THEM SPATIALLY ON THE PAGE ALSO SEEMS VALUABLE 18:32:50 CurtBellew: I ALSO APPRECIATE THE SMOOTH SCROLLING BECAUSE, AS I MENTIONED, IT HELPS ME UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING 18:35:35 q+ TO NOTE AN UNRELATED QUIRK IN THE DESIGN 18:35:48 jugglinmike: THIS ALMOST FEELS MORE LIKE A BROWSER FEATURE THAN A WEB APP FEATURE. USERS WHO APPRECIATE THIS WOULD PROBABLY PREFER IT IMPLEMENTED CONSISTENTLY ACROSS ALL DOCUMENT-FRAGMENT LINKS THAT THEY ENCOUNTER ON THE WEB AT LARGE 18:36:04 CurtBellew: THERE ARE WEB EXTENSIONS THAT IMPLEMENT THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR 18:36:33 Matt_King: IMPLEMENTING IT HERE COULD BE A FIRST STEP IN A JOURNEY TOWARD GETTING IT IMPLEMENTED MORE WIDELY 18:36:49 ACK lola 18:37:30 lola: WOULD SLOWING DOWN THE ANIMATION IMPACT THE USEFULNESS TO YOU, CurtBellew? 18:37:38 CurtBellew: NOT AT ALL 18:37:40 ACK Adam_Page 18:37:40 Adam_Page, you wanted to NOTE AN UNRELATED QUIRK IN THE DESIGN 18:38:15 Adam_Page: IN THE DESIGN OF THE MENU ITSELF--THE VISIBLE UI FOR IT--EACH HEADING IN THE HEADING SECTION IS PRECEDED BY THE HEADING LEVEL WITHIN A SET OF PARENTHESIS 18:38:37 Adam_Page: THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF COGNITIVE FRICTION TO UNDERSTAND THAT 18:38:53 Adam_Page: I DON'T THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE NECESSARILY HAVE TO ADDRESS NOW, BUT I WANTED TO NOTE IT AT LEAST 18:39:05 Matt_King: IF IT INCLUDED THE WORD "LEVEL", WOULD THAT HELP? 18:39:15 Adam_Page: I THINK SO, THOUGH THAT MIGHT BE VERBOSE 18:39:39 Adam_Page: TO ME, THE VISUAL INDENTATION COMMUNICATES THE HIERARCHY IN A MORE SUBTLE WAY 18:40:48 Matt_King: SO YOU'RE SUGGESTING TO ONLY PROVIDED THE LEVEL INFORMATION TO SCREEN READERS BECAUSE THE VISUAL INDENTATION IS SUFFICIENT FOR THOSE WHO CAN OBSERVE IT 18:40:53 Adam_Page: THAT'S RIGHT 18:42:34 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/3147 18:42:57 TOPIC: 1.4.3 Contrast Failure in Feed Example 18:43:32 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3149 18:45:26 lola has joined #aria-apg 18:45:31 q+ 18:45:33 Matt_King: IN THE FEED EXAMPLE, IN THE IFRAME, WE HAVEN'T SPECIFIED A TEXT COLOR FOR TWO OF THE ELEMENTS 18:46:15 siri: IF THE COLOR IS NOT SPECIFIED THAN HOW IS THE COLOR PROVIDED? 18:46:23 Matt_King: MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT IT IS INHERITED 18:47:06 Matt_King: TECHNICALLY, AS IT STANDS, THAT CONTRAST IS PROBABLY SUFFICIENT. BUT IF YOU'RE TESTING THIS IN THE WAY F24 SUGGESTS, THOUGH... 18:47:39 Matt_King: F24 MAY BE GOING BEYOND THE REQUIREMENT HERE. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT 1.4.3 DIDN'T INCLUDE THIS ASPECT OF "ROBUSTNESS" FOR COLORS 18:47:57 siri: MAYBE SOMETIMES YOU WILL INHERIT DIFFERENT COLORS FROM THE PARENT 18:48:27 lola: THE DEFAULT TEXT COLOR WOULD BE SET IN THE BROWSER'S INTERNAL CSS, AND IT IS USUALLY (AT LEAST IN "LIGHT" MODE) BLACK (OR A COLOR SIMILAR TO BLACK) 18:49:04 lola: ACCORDING TO THIS F24, IT'S GOING TO FAIL BECAUSE THE COLOR HASN'T BEEN SET. IS THERE ANY HARM IN EXPLICITLY SETTING THE COLOR JUST SO THAT DOESN'T FAIL, EVEN IF WE SET IT TO THE SAME COLOR IT WOULD TAKE BY DEFAULT? 18:49:09 Matt_King: NO, THERE WOULD BE NO HARM IN THAT 18:49:39 Adam_Page: I DON'T KNOW THAT I AGREE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. IT FEELS... OLD 18:49:55 Matt_King: YEAH, ANYTHING RELATED TO PERSONAL STYLESHEETS FEELS LIKE A 90'S PROBLEM TO ME 18:50:07 Matt_King: IT FEELS MORE LIKE A ROBUSTNESS ISSUE TO ME RATHER THAN A STRAIGHT-UP FAILURE 18:50:56 Adam_Page: ANY USER WHO HAS THE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD ACTUALLY CAUSE A PROBLEM HERE WOULD BE EQUIPPED TO RESOLVE IT THEMSELVES (BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HAVING SELECTED A NON-DEFAULT COLOR VALUE IN THE FIRST PLACE) 18:51:05 agreed 18:51:12 CurtBellew: INTERNALLY, WE HAVE A TESTING TOOL, AND I DEFINITELY DON'T TEST FOR THIS 18:51:36 s/AND I/AND WE/ 18:51:46 Matt_King: THIS HAS GOTTEN WAY MORE INTERESTING THAN I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO GET! 18:52:32 Matt_King: IF THIS PROBLEM APPEARS IN THIS ONE SPOT IN APG, THEN I HAVE A HARD TIME IMAGINING THAT IT DOESN'T OCCUR IN MANY OTHER PLACES, TOO 18:52:42 Matt_King: THAT SAID, I DON'T MIND MAKING A CHANGE HERE. 18:52:58 Adam_Page: I AM ABLE TO REVIEW THE PATCH 18:53:16 Adam_Page: I THINK THIS EXPOSES AN INTERESTING QUIRK OF WCAG, AND I'M INTERESTED IN TAKING THAT UP WITH THEM 18:53:42 Adam_Page: BUT I THINK THIS PAGE DOES A GOOD JOB BRINGING US TO ALIGNMENT WITH PRESENT-DAY WCAG 18:54:01 siri: SHOULD WE ADD A NOTE ABOUT THIS? 18:54:09 Matt_King: I DON'T WANT TO BRING TOO MUCH ATTENTION TO IT 18:54:11 siri: I CAN ALSO REVIEW 18:54:25 Matt_King: THANKS TO YOU BOTH! 18:55:15 TOPIC: Processing old issues reported to the mailing list 18:55:25 Matt_King: I THINK WE SHOULDN'T ASSUME THERE WAS EVER A PRIVATE RESPONSE 18:55:44 Matt_King: I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT HAVE EVER APPLIED TO SOMEBODY OFF THE LIST TO ANSWER A QUESTION 18:55:54 Matt_King: I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE REPRESENTING THE TASK FORCE WOULD HAVE DONE THAT 18:56:15 Matt_King: I THINK THAT, IN GENERAL, IT'S SAFE TO ASSUME THAT ANY REPORT WHICH WENT UNACKNOWLEDGED ON THE LIST IS UNRESOLVED 18:56:31 lola: HOW FAR BACK SHOULD I GO? 18:57:07 Matt_King: JANUARY 1, 2024 SHOULD BE GOOD 18:58:54 Zakim, end the meeting 18:58:54 As of this point the attendees have been jugglinmike, Matt_King, CurtBellew, Adam_Page, Lola, Bryan, siri 18:58:56 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 18:58:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/10/22-aria-apg-minutes.html Zakim 18:59:05 I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 18:59:05 Zakim has left #aria-apg 18:59:10 RRSAgent, leave 18:59:10 I see no action items