Meeting minutes
<janina> Date 11 Dec 2024
Agenda Review & Announcements
<JF> aenda?
<JF> aenda?
<gautierchomel> last minut regrets for me, with apologises.
janina: I would like to welcome back John (JF)
New Charters Review
matak: Nothing new this week
New on TR
Open Screen Application Protocol
<Roy_Ruoxi> - tracker: https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> - spec: https://
Open Screen Network Protocol
<Roy_Ruoxi> - tracker: https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> - spec: https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> splitting the Open Screen Protocol document into two independent parts
<Roy_Ruoxi> Open Screen Protocol
<Roy_Ruoxi> reviewed at 2022
Roy_Ruoxi: They splitted the previous document in these two now
Roy_Ruoxi: We didn't file a issue last time
matatk: Can you stream only one or do you have to send both (audio and video)? Our question from last time. I think we should first look at the documents if this changed
<Fazio> depends how its rendered by final cut or other app
<Fredrik> Welcome back from the wilderness, John!
<JonCohn> presnet+
<Fredrik> So are you then John Foliothothothot?
JF: matatk you can assign me to this spec, what is the due day? First week of january sounds doable
ACTION: JF to check if Open Screen can stream audio only - due 2025-01-08
<matatk> gb, status
<gb> matatk, the delay is 15, issues are off, names are off, full issues are printed 10 at a time; and the repository is w3c/
<Roy_Ruoxi> gb, help
<gb> Roy_Ruoxi, I am a bot to look up and create GitHub issues and
<gb> … action items. I am an instance of GHURLBot 0.5.
<gb> … Try gb, help commands or
<gb> … see https://
Spec review requests
WebRTC API
<Roy_Ruoxi> - tracking: w3c/
<Roy_Ruoxi> - spec: https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> review history: https://
Roy_Ruoxi: They added new content, want us to review these changes. So another round of review
PaulG: Looks really low level
Roy_Ruoxi: They have an a11y section
janina: I will ask someone from RQTF for their opinion on this
WebCodecs
<Roy_Ruoxi> - tracking: w3c/
<Roy_Ruoxi> - spec: https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> review history: https://
Roy_Ruoxi: I think we don't have to review this document, because it is quite low level
<Roy_Ruoxi> Other comments: As a low-level media encoding and decoding API, applications that use WebCodecs take on responsibility for providing accessibility features. We would welcome your insight into whether this brings about new requirements for platform-level accessibility features.
janina: It is worth taking this up and talking to TAG about it.
matatk: Good idea. We have our planeary meeting 7am tomorrow (my time), so I could bring this up, if we have time. Or mention that we would like to talk about this sometime
Input events
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> Due: 2024-12-19
matatk: I want to give an update to some older specs
Roy asked for more time last week in the github issue, however no answer
Dr. Keith will pick this up
Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Rules Format 1.1
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> Due: 2024-08-14
matatk: We are not under time pressure on this one, first public working draft, if you get confused by the due date
<matatk> TAG's comment: w3ctag/
matatk: This is very meta. There is a project to create a set of test procedures for audits. And this is the latest revision on how to write those test procedures, not the tests themselves
matatk: Some areas of this spec are no precise enough for the use in automatic testing, but overall there are big possibilities here
matatk: What is the aim with this specific project? Their goal? Good question, we don't know. I think, when it comes to auditing it's about tooling to help the people that do these audits
<JF> +1 to Paul (re: AI)
PaulG: This is important for the future in the context of AI, I think.
Comment review requests
Allow any element to be the child of a custom element (parser weirdness permitting)
<matatk> source: whatwg/html#10722
<matatk> tracking: w3c/
matatk: I added the (spec/ comment) issues we talked about today to the calender weekly invitation. Will do so in the future as well
<matatk> Thanks steveF for commenting: whatwg/
[css-overflow-5] Focus order of generated controls
<matatk> source: w3c/csswg-drafts#10912
<matatk> tracking: w3c/
PaulG: There are lots of discussion about scroll/ scrollbars and how they could be more accessible
PaulG: These changes are really good.
matatk: They specifically asked for help. Four options were proposed in the issue. I'm wondering Paul if you can check these solutions?
PaulG: I'm not a native keyboard user so I don't want to talk for these people. We need a diverse set of opinions.
matatk: We need to come back to this next time, but please add comments to our tracking issue i
CSS Update (Paul)
matatk: Finished for today, see you next week