13:51:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #matf
13:51:06 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc
13:51:15 <Joe_Humbert> Zakim, start meeting
13:51:15 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:51:17 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Joe_Humbert
13:51:42 <Joe_Humbert> Zakim, this is MATF November 20 2024
13:51:42 <Zakim> got it, Joe_Humbert
13:52:00 <Joe_Humbert> Meeting: MATF November 20 2024
13:53:10 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context)
13:53:24 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ 2.4.6 Headings and Labels
13:53:38 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures
13:53:51 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ 3.1.1Language of Page
13:54:25 <Joe_Humbert> zakim, agenda?
13:54:25 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
13:54:26 <Zakim> 1. 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) [from Joe_Humbert]
13:54:26 <Zakim> 2. 2.4.6 Headings and Labels [from Joe_Humbert]
13:54:26 <Zakim> 3. 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures [from Joe_Humbert]
13:54:26 <Zakim> 4. 3.1.1Language of Page [from Joe_Humbert]
13:55:01 <Joe_Humbert> present+
13:55:07 <JJ> JJ has joined #matf
13:55:44 <JJ> rrsagent, bye
13:55:44 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
13:55:59 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #matf
13:55:59 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc
13:56:01 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:56:03 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), JJ
13:56:07 <JJ> Zakim, this is MATF 20 November 2024
13:56:07 <Zakim> got it, JJ
13:56:13 <JJ> Meeting: MATF 20 November 2024
13:56:18 <JJ> chair+
13:56:28 <JJ> agenda+ 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context)
13:56:32 <JJ> agenda+  2.4.6 Headings and Labels
13:56:36 <JJ> agenda+ 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures
13:56:39 <JJ> agenda+ 3.1.1Language of Page
13:56:43 <JJ> agenda+ 3.1.2 Language of Parts
13:56:48 <JJ> agenda+ 3.2.2 On Input
13:57:45 <Joe_Humbert> present+
14:01:10 <Illai> Illai has joined #matf
14:01:14 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #matf
14:01:23 <QuintinB> QuintinB has joined #MATF
14:01:26 <Illai> present+
14:01:27 <QuintinB> present+
14:02:03 <Detlev> present+
14:02:22 <JJ> present+
14:02:50 <dotjay> dotjay has joined #matf
14:03:22 <Tim> Tim has joined #matf
14:04:12 <dotjay> present+ Jon Gibbins
14:04:14 <Detlev> An issue for the agenda (future) would the contrast exception for OS-driven keyboard focus
14:04:56 <Tim> Present+
14:05:08 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
14:05:12 <JJ> ACTION: Add agenda item for contrast exception for OS-driven keyboard focus
14:05:37 <JJ> scribe+ QuintinB
14:05:41 <QuintinB> Weee
14:05:42 <JJ> move to next agendum
14:05:42 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) -- taken up [from JJ]
14:06:35 <Detlev> q+
14:08:51 <JJ> ack Detlev
14:10:01 <QuintinB> Detlev In my exp links are expected to leave an app and open a browser. Is this the general expectation, and it's not made clear by WCAG2ICT
14:10:05 <dotjay> We are perhaps delving into a general accessibility consideration here. Links versus buttons is an issue for all platforms.
14:10:43 <dotjay> For mobile, perhaps it’s more about clarifying hybrid situations?
14:10:53 <QuintinB> If a business wants to throw away money developing links where buttons should be, that's really their perogative
14:11:00 <julianmka> julianmka has joined #MATF
14:11:06 <julianmka> present+
14:11:19 <Tim> Does it help to make notion of 'internal link' vs 'external links'?
14:11:37 <Joe_Humbert> q+
14:12:01 <Detlev> q+
14:12:07 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
14:12:49 <QuintinB> Joe_Humbert I agree with Detlev - Google and Apple have muddied the water by allowing developers to make anything a link, and doing it themselves
14:13:21 <QuintinB> I think we can - Google and Apple need to be accessible too - just because they allow devs to be bad doesn't mean they have the right to
14:13:38 <JJ> ack Detlev
14:14:46 <QuintinB> Detlev Determinable context can be made more clear and while controls can be made better. Are there established ways of getting to the context in mobile apps?
14:16:03 <dotjay> q+
14:17:24 <JJ> ack dotjay
14:17:38 <Aash> Aash has joined #matf
14:17:46 <Aash> present+
14:18:38 <Joe_Humbert> q+
14:18:53 <QuintinB> dotjay Differences between desktop/mobile - navigating by link is possible on mobile, so getting context is possible. We don't see the "f7" display all links on mobile. What does context mean in the sens of mobile and is it different from desktop?
14:19:08 <QuintinB> I think in TalkBack you can show all links
14:19:35 <Detlev> I don't think "Link context" means being able to bring up a list of links an the view.
14:20:21 <julianmka> q+
14:20:32 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
14:20:40 <dotjay> Devlev: I meant to highlight situations where out of context versus in-context for mobile environments.
14:21:11 <Jamie> Jamie has joined #matf
14:21:18 <Jamie> present+
14:21:31 <dotjay> “Show all links” is simply an example of that. So much of the time on mobile, we are navigating into context and can discover context as the virtual cursor is moving.
14:22:22 <julianmka> q-
14:22:22 <Detlev> So would that mean checking for link context would only apply to like that 1. stand lone 2. are no clear in itself?
14:22:28 <QuintinB> Joe_Humbert Google can allow to show all links. iOS does tell users there is a link. That's because that's how links are created. Because we can assign the role ad hoc, it's hard. A link in an attributed string can't take you somewhere in the app because it doesn't know the context of the app
14:22:30 <Jamie> q+
14:22:33 <JJ> q?
14:22:36 <JJ> ack Jamie
14:23:55 <Detlev> q+
14:24:09 <QuintinB> Jamie If it's about navigation, then in an app setting, buttons do this job. So perhaps the context is a little different
14:24:47 <Joe_Humbert> +1 to Jamie about "Button" Purpose as a consideration
14:25:09 <julianmka> +1 to Jamie
14:25:54 <JJ> q?
14:25:57 <JJ> ack Detlev
14:26:42 <QuintinB> Detlev in most audits cases, the links are looked at as part of the context
14:27:14 <Joe_Humbert> q+
14:27:45 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
14:28:38 <QuintinB> Joe_Humbert there are limitations - in desktop the SR has a lot of flexibility. in iOS there is no in app link navigation rotor option
14:29:16 <dotjay> Interesting – I’d not noticed before that Link roles aren’t reachable outside of web content. How weird.
14:30:12 <JJ> q?
14:30:19 <QuintinB> I'd need to find an app with links to check
14:30:47 <QuintinB> I managed to convince my former company that links in apps where bad for business... perhaps too well
14:31:17 <dotjay> I believe that button purpose perhaps falls under 2.4.6 Headings and Labels as a button’s text label, and 1.1.1 for text alternative to an image button
14:31:18 <JJ> ACTION: Research link behavior on Android and iOS -> 1. Native link in text, 2. Native link on its own, 3. Web link in WebView
14:31:40 <JJ> ACTION: Research impact of broadening "link" to "links and buttons" or "interactive components"
14:31:41 <Jamie> keep in mind this is about clarity of text, for navigation purposes. If we feel that 2.4.6 covers buttons then we can leave this as links only
14:31:43 <Joe_Humbert> that was my problem QuintinB I would need to spin up my test app on my test Android device
14:31:55 <JJ> ACTION: Consider linking to 2.4.6 as best-practice
14:32:20 <JJ> s/ 2.4.6 2.4.9
14:34:01 <dotjay> Re 2.4.6 – For example, https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/general/G131
14:34:05 <dotjay> “The objective of this technique is to ensure that the label for any interactive component within Web content makes the component's purpose clear.“
14:34:19 <QuintinB> Jamie we need to be clear that we means specifcally links or buttons
14:34:25 <dotjay> But I agree that it’s somewhat ambiguous and 2.4.6 does not specifically call out buttons
14:34:38 <Detlev> +1 to Jamie
14:35:01 <Joe_Humbert> on Android, you can use navigation link mod in a native app on Android, I just tested
14:35:16 <Joe_Humbert> link mode*
14:35:30 <JJ> move to next agendum
14:35:30 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- 2.4.6 Headings and Labels -- taken up [from JJ]
14:35:32 <julianmka> WCAG2ICT seems to interpret 2.4.6 as relating more to content grouping, fwiw
14:35:37 <QuintinB> Nice thanks Joe_Humbert - I see my last comapny made them custom actions (facepalm)
14:36:38 <Joe_Humbert> q+
14:37:23 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
14:38:07 <QuintinB> Joe_Humbert this might be higher level - the "nebulous" word for descriptive is normative but does not have a definition
14:38:33 <QuintinB> Is it a problem that descriptive is not descriptive enough?
14:38:50 <dotjay> +1 Joe_Humbert
14:38:56 <Detlev> q+
14:38:57 <julianmka> q+
14:39:03 <dotjay> q+
14:39:44 <dotjay> +1 JJ
14:40:35 <JJ> q?
14:40:35 <QuintinB> Joe_Humbert 2.4.6 des not talk about context. Labels need to be descriptive, but in links it mentions context
14:40:40 <JJ> ack Detlev
14:41:07 <Illai> +q
14:41:45 <Jamie> q+
14:41:49 <QuintinB> Detlev does programmatic text matter over visible text? e.g. and 'X' that has a label
14:41:55 <JJ> q?
14:41:59 <JJ> ack julianmka
14:43:15 <QuintinB> julianmka in terms of aligning to WCAG2ICT buttons and labels are things that set context. Wcag2ICT isn't really sufficient at the moment buttons and labels also require context
14:43:31 <JJ> ack dotjay
14:43:40 <QuintinB> dotjay nothing to add
14:43:43 <JJ> ack Illai
14:45:09 <QuintinB> Illai We need to have a place where button names and form labels are made clear
14:45:25 <JJ> ack Jamie
14:45:33 <QuintinB> Jamie forgot for now
14:45:40 <JJ> q+ to Your topic here
14:45:44 <JJ> ack JJ
14:45:44 <Zakim> JJ, you wanted to Your topic here
14:45:49 <QuintinB> oooh
14:45:57 <QuintinB> QuintinB likes this
14:46:21 <JJ> ACTION: Dive deeper into what we would consider a label (button label, link label, etc.)
14:47:16 <Jamie> oh, I remember... Label in name should address programmatic text, right Detlev?
14:47:40 <Jamie> +1 to Illai
14:47:53 <JJ> move to next agendum
14:47:53 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures -- taken up [from JJ]
14:48:20 <Detlev> @Jamie 2.5.3 Label in name just checks that the visible string is in the accname
14:49:13 <Detlev> Jamie the gap is things like icon buttons with bad name...
14:49:35 <dotjay> Yeah, we should remove anything that applies to non-web documents in the mobile guidance
14:50:08 <dotjay> s/applies to/references/
14:50:20 <Joe_Humbert> q+
14:50:28 <Detlev> q+
14:51:01 <Detlev> @JJ Gestures used to operate the AT or UA are exempt
14:51:33 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
14:52:11 <QuintinB> Joe_Humbert There is an alternative of doing gesture with voice control
14:52:17 <Jamie> +1
14:52:39 <JJ> ack Detlev
14:53:24 <JJ> Pointer Gestures explanation: https://tetralogical.com/blog/2023/03/17/foundations-pointer-gestures/
14:53:53 <QuintinB> Detlev This is referring custom gestures by the app developer - voice actions would cut it as it needs single pointer input. e.g. sliders should have arrow buttons
14:54:45 <dotjay> Currently reading the seemingly related issue on WCAG2ICT: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/284
14:55:07 <JJ> q?
14:55:46 <QuintinB> Detlev devs are responsible for what they build JJ that might not always be the case e.g. pull to refresh
14:57:49 <Joe_Humbert> q
14:57:52 <Joe_Humbert> q+
14:57:57 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
14:59:00 <JJ> ACTION: Think about if we want to include alternatives for gestures introduced by native mobile components like "Pull to Refresh", or add exception for platform provided technologies
14:59:05 <Detlev> @Joe good poinnt
14:59:28 <QuintinB> Sorry Joe_Humbert I missed that
15:01:12 <Joe_Humbert> We should be cautious about requiring developers to fix OS based items that they are not making them inaccessible (they cannot customize the element or control) because this would add extra requiremwnts for the dev by adding custom content
15:05:26 <JJ> rrsagent, make minutes
15:05:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-minutes.html JJ
15:07:33 <JJ> rrsagent, bye
15:07:33 <RRSAgent> I see 6 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-actions.rdf :
15:07:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Add agenda item for contrast exception for OS-driven keyboard focus [1]
15:07:33 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc#T14-05-12
15:07:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Research link behavior on Android and iOS -> 1. Native link in text, 2. Native link on its own, 3. Web link in WebView [2]
15:07:33 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc#T14-31-18
15:07:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Research impact of broadening "link" to "links and buttons" or "interactive components" [3]
15:07:33 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc#T14-31-40
15:07:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Consider linking to 2.4.6 as best-practice [4]
15:07:33 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc#T14-31-55
15:07:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Dive deeper into what we would consider a label (button label, link label, etc.) [5]
15:07:33 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc#T14-46-21
15:07:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Think about if we want to include alternatives for gestures introduced by native mobile components like "Pull to Refresh", or add exception for platform provided technologies [6]
15:07:33 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/11/20-matf-irc#T14-59-00