Meeting minutes
<JJ> https://
<JJ> https://
<Zakim> JJ, you wanted to Ask about Intro
Guidance naming
There are multiple suggestion on github. Mobile is not preffered.
*the term mobile in the guidance name is not preffered
because it includes and not limited to native mobile apps, mobile web apps, mobile web content, and hybrid apps using web components inside native mobile apps.
<Joe_Humbert> +1 for now, though I feel others like Patrick will push back
<JJ> Do we agree to use the title "Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile (WCAG2Mobile)" for our draft, keeping the option open to change the term "Mobile" in a future stage?
<Aash> +1 to JJ
Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile (WCAG2Mobile) can be used as a working title
later we can drop the term "mobile"
<Illai> +1
<Karla> I prefer WCAG22Mobile
<Tim> +1 to Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile (WCAG2Mobile)
Karla should it not be WCAG22-2-Mobile?
<Karla> Yes, Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile
3.3.2 Labels or Instructions
Illai Are we refering to the entire component or the spinner alone for this SC?
JJ Google and Apple need to make more efforts to make the native components accessibile
Joe_Humbert the example looks like just a pop-up and that should be fine. However, the spinner is overlaid on calendar, which could be a problem for some users.
<Illai> +1 JJ
<Karla> +1 JJ
JJ this needs to be updated by Apple
<JJ> Do we agree to keep the original proposal text for 3.3.2 by Julian?
<Illai> +1
<Joe_Humbert> +1
<Aash> +1
<Karla> +1
<Tim> +1
Aash did not understand the 4 orientations concepts?
@jj
Joe_Humbert No more work needed to support all 4 orientations. It is same rendering in terms of pixels
JJ it is a best practice to support all 4 orientations.
Illai should we propose this in conjunction with target size SC?
<JJ> Should we add a note to 1.3.4 about the best-practice of supporting all 4 (or more) orientations of a device?
JJ we can add 4 orientation in notes, along with the target size SC, basic and advanced.
<Illai> +1
<Aash> +1
<Karla> +1
<GleidsonRamos> +1
<Tim> +1
1.3.4 Orientation
1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus
JJ it would be interesting to see what happens to hover interaction if you use mobile devices with mouse
Aash considering the stats, we should focus more on focus on taps and deprioritise the mouse based Interactions
<JJ> Move 1.4.13 to medium variation because it needs more research?
<Aash> +1
<Karla> +1
<Tim> +1
<Joe_Humbert> +1
<Illai> I would say move it to large variation
JJ the scope is likely to increase when we replace keyboard with assistive tech
<JJ> Move 1.4.13 to large variation because it needs more research?
<Illai> +1
<GleidsonRamos> +!
<GleidsonRamos> +1
ACTION: Add a note to 1.3.4 about the best-practice of supporting all 4 (or more) orientations of a device
ACTION: Move 1.4.13 to medium variation
<Illai> But we are adding 3D touch for example
Aash traditionally the mobile apps are not designed for Hover. so the medium variation should be ok
ACTION: Keep "Mobile" definition as is, keep option open to change it in the future
Illai we are not considering hover, but we are considering long taps and 3D touches, so the impact would be large
2.1.4 Character Key Shortcuts
Illai the keyboard shortcuts is mostly related to ipads. In a prev meeting, Watch OS came up. so are we trying to cover all operating systems? Where are we going to stop?
Illai by supporting more operating systems we are getting deeper into this
JJ our main focus is phones and tablets
ACTION: In draft, mention current scope of our work (Android, iOS, iPadOS on phones and tablets)
Joe_Humbert we need to keep the first note. A lot of long press options exist on both OS. It is an OS gestures.
<JJ> Keep 2.1.4 as is, making sure to include Note 1 exception?
<Aash> +1
<Joe_Humbert> +1
<Illai> +1
<Karla> +1
<Tim> +1
<GleidsonRamos> +1
ACTION: Keep 2.1.4 as is, making sure to include Note 1 exception
JJ We are planning to release draft in December
<JJ> https://