scribe+

Privacy and Security considerations for ACT Rules Format 1.1

<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/conformance-testing/wiki/Scribe_Rotation_List

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/576/files

Wilco: Need to figure out if we need a single IRC channel for both TF and CG
... First issue open by Daniel. Can't move to candidate recommendation until this is approved.

Helen: Where is this going?

Wilco: Into rules format 1.1

dmontalvo: We're just required to have a privacy and security section in w3c standards now

Rachael: Is origins a defined or understood term somewhere?

dmontalvo: Just tried to use the language that the security and privacy groups are using, but, I agree the terminology isn't something that comes from our space.

Wilco: That is a fair question. I guessed that meant websites, but I don't know that.
... Can we add an inline definition somehow?

dmontalvo: I'll work with my teammates and get a better definition

Helen: Grammatical - shouldn't end with of.

thbrunet: "of which this group is aware"

Wilco: We'll give to Kathy as one of the editors to tweak

shunguo: Extra space in "this group", but shouldn't matter

Wilco: In the interest of time, are we okay with Daniel and Kathy working out the details and moving on?

Helen: yes

Wilco: We'll send an email to review with a CFC

Annual Rule Reviews

thbrunet: All of mine are not in the 1.1 format, so what should I put for final statement?

Wilco: That'll be in one big PR

thbrunet: Okay, I have more done than noted, but wanted clarity. So if it's just the format, I'll say it's ready to publish

Wilco: First will be HTML images contain no text
... Looks like just rule format problem
... Next one, ARIA state or property has valid value

Just rule format also

Wilco: Just rule format also
... 09o5cg: Text has enhanced contrast
... Some open issues. First related to aria-disabled. Some work in progress for the CG.

Helen: I looked at it, and don't think it needs to be updated for that issue

Wilco: Regarding the decision whether it's ready to publish. Do these issues need to be resolved?

shunguo: BTW, aria-disabled was deprecated in ARIA 1.2

Wilco: Yes, we looked at that. Do we want to allow aria-disabled even though deprecated. CG is looking at that
... Text contrast minimum

Sage: A number of these we discussed. But, have a bunch of stuff there.
... Some of this is the 1.1 format changes.

Wilco: Was there a secondary requirements explanation missing here?

Kathy: RF Says there needs to be an explanation of why a secondary requirement is a secondary requirement in the background section.

Wilco: Fair point, but, not sure we want them in the background. We may need to update the rule format for that
... Test target is defined in the rule format. We don't include a definition in the rule.. worth a conversation on that.

Kathy: I think the "except" part was in the expectation instead of applicability because we didn't allow subjective. Now that we allow subjective, should that be moved?

Wilco: Rules format doesn't explicitly say that we can reference external specs. We should clarify that.

Sage: There's a link in the applicability to the inheriting semantic... but the link text doesn't match the definition text.
... Not sure if those should really be used interchangeably?

Wilco: Was done intentionally. The example has a note about being specific about role in the text, but referencing the definition because we did this all over.
... Regarding shared glossaries, we don't use shared glossaries. Each rule has it's own glossary.

thbrunet: Clarification - we use shared definitions, but on build they end up on individual rule pages, right?

Wilco: Yes.. we freeze definitions of a rule, so rule may have an older definition frozen for that rule.
... Regarding the Total Validator implementation, they have three items that represent one ACT rule. So, pass pass can't tell is can't tell. So, every fail example is fail or can't tell and therefore consistent.
... Can you clarify the Q3 comments?

Sage: From the rule format. Should emojis be considered in this rule?
... Gave me the idea of perhaps a new assumption that should be added

Helen: Depends on how emoji is interpretted. If it's an emoji with "OK", that could be text. But, if it's an icon, then not treated like text. Depends on the context.

Wilco: Not sure if needs to be part of this rule. Maybe a separate rule? If it's important, maybe open another issue?

Sage: As someone who uses emojis and dark mode, I know I sometimes have issues reading the emoji against the background. If this is something that is text specific, it's technically not text, but images of text.

thbrunet: For clarity, when we're talking about emojis, we mean unicode, not reactions.

Sage: I was thinking both.

thbrunet: The reason I ask is because unicode emojis are in a font, whereas Slack-like reactions are really images.

Wilco: I think might need to be a separate rule

Sage: Pass example 10 - if you open the example, and then follow the link, the link is broken.

Wilco: Okay, we should fix from w3c.org to w3.org, but doesn't break the example

Sage: I think we also talked about the next in the working hours

Wilco: Are we okay to say good to go?

Sage: I think so

Wilco: Next rule: Object element rendering non-text content ... fine, done
... Next rule: Important line height in style

suji: Just some open issues

Wilco: I looked at this one today. inherit !important is not a thing. CG had a conversation
... Since this was approved with this in it, not sure it's urgent, just that one example is technically not valid CSS
... But valid for an ACT rule if it shows a useful scenario.
... Is this urgent? (group: No)
... I will assign the issue to me to look at
... Next rule: Element with aria-hidden ... done
... Next rule: Headers attribute specified ... in the same table.
... Open issue

thbrunet: Open PR on this
... Looks like I have a todo to respond to comment on the PR

Wilco: Is it blocking Kathy?

Kathy: I don't think so

Wilco: Next rule: Autocomplete valid value ... done
... Image has non-empty accessible name ... done

Helen: Can I send out this survey?

Wilco: go for it

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: Kathy, Helen, suji, Daniel, thbrunet, Rachael, Sage
Present: Kathy, Helen, suji, Daniel, thbrunet, Rachael, Sage
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: thbrunet
Inferring Scribes: thbrunet

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth


WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)