12:58:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #matf
12:58:06 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/03/12-matf-irc
12:58:06 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
12:58:07 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), JJ
12:58:09 <JJ> Zakim, this is MATF 12 March 2025
12:58:09 <Zakim> got it, JJ
12:58:15 <JJ> Meeting: MATF 12 March 2025
12:58:26 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
12:59:31 <JJ> chair+
13:00:13 <JJ> agenda+ WCAG2Mobile Call For Consensus (CFC) in AG WG
13:00:19 <JJ> agenda+ 2.4.4 Link Purpose
13:00:24 <JJ> agenda+  2.4.6 Heading and Labels
13:00:29 <JJ> agenda+ 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures
13:00:40 <JJ> agenda+ 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation
13:02:07 <RacheleD> RacheleD has joined #MATF
13:02:24 <Joe_Humbert> present+
13:02:27 <RacheleD> present+
13:03:39 <JJ> regrets+ TanyaVanWorkum
13:03:48 <JJ> regrets+ TimGravemaker
13:03:53 <JJ> regrets+ JonGibbins
13:03:56 <JJ> regrets+ hdv
13:04:26 <AlainVagner> present+
13:04:43 <JJ> scribe: Joe_Humbert
13:04:47 <JJ> move to next agendum
13:04:47 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- WCAG2Mobile Call For Consensus (CFC) in AG WG -- taken up [from JJ]
13:06:50 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ providing an update on CFC, Title changed based on task force and larger group issue. After feedback, new title: Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile Applications (WCAG2Mobile)
13:06:50 <JJ> New title: Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile Applications (WCAG2Mobile)
13:08:11 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ we may get more feedback from other chairs after CSUN. CFC shoukd go out next week (Wednesday) after CSUN
13:08:58 <JJ> move to next agendum
13:08:58 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- 2.4.4 Link Purpose -- taken up [from JJ]
13:09:23 <Joe_Humbert> https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/36
13:09:31 <quintinb> quintinb has joined #MATF
13:09:34 <quintinb> present+
13:09:47 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ summarizing current guidance from WCAG 2.2 and WCAG2ICT
13:10:25 <Jamie> Jamie has joined #matf
13:10:27 <Joe_Humbert> https://w3c.github.io/matf/#success-criterion-2-4-4-link-purpose-in-context
13:10:33 <Jamie> present+
13:11:34 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ talking about "link text alone..." part might need some changes for WCAG2Mobile
13:12:23 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ talking about 2.4.4 Note 1 added in WCAG2ICT
13:12:45 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ going over previous comments on GitHub ticket
13:13:13 <quintinb> q+
13:13:15 <RacheleD> q+
13:13:38 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie brought up the question about buttons that look like links
13:15:44 <Joe_Humbert> JJ reads off GitHub comment about what is a link and mentioned new link behavior with TalkBack. Also Actions from previous meetings about research around "link" behavior on native mobile
13:16:17 <JJ> ack quintinb
13:16:19 <quintinb> I think we need to define a link (e.g. interactive text). And add notes for touch target size, decide if formatting is going to be prescriptive (perceivable). Also, are we going to dictate what a link's behaviour should be?
13:16:25 <Jamie> q+
13:17:13 <Joe_Humbert> JJ mentions Paul's comment about how to fail button for a link issue https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/36#issuecomment-2699157129
13:17:54 <JJ> q?
13:17:57 <Joe_Humbert> JJ talks about the target size exception for inline content (links)
13:18:17 <JJ> ack RacheleD
13:18:55 <Joe_Humbert> RacheleD would like to definite what a link is on mobile. Cannot have an inline button
13:19:34 <Joe_Humbert> RacheleD talked about developers must make something inline a link because they cannot give it a role of button
13:19:47 <quintinb> I once told folks "You need to decide the business' incentive for clicking links, otherwise, keep not underlining links" - next day it was fixed
13:20:14 <JJ> ack Jamie
13:20:17 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ talks about his experience with adding links on mobile
13:20:36 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie asked about failure of 2.4.6
13:21:34 <Joe_Humbert> JJ said that if the visible text label is not clear it could be failed under 2.4.6 depending on interpretation, but "clear" is not defined
13:22:16 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie discussed around the wording of 2.4.6
13:22:49 <quintinb> If auditors are going to fail links on 2.4.6, it needs to be very clear that 2.4.6 applies to links.
13:23:46 <JJ> q?
13:23:59 <Joe_Humbert> JJ talked about a labels purpose and the definition of a Label in WCAG. And also that 2.4.4 is level A vs 2.4.6 is AA. Discusses link purpose
13:25:26 <Joe_Humbert> JJ talks about his experience with interpreting 2.4.6 and the more expansive definition of Label in WCAG
13:26:12 <Joe_Humbert> JJ talks about differences in WCAG around Label vs accessible name
13:26:16 <quintinb> q+
13:26:21 <Jamie> I wouldn't;t think that 2.4.6 applies to identifying the purpose of links
13:26:34 <Joe_Humbert> q+
13:27:07 <JJ> ACTION: Figure out what elements have a "label"? Does a link have a label? Or is a link a control and not a label at the same time?
13:27:14 <JJ> ack quintinb
13:27:14 <quintinb> I am concerned that links get used as an excuse for deceptive patterns - "that's not a cancel button, that's a cancel link"
13:28:05 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
13:28:49 <JJ> label
13:28:49 <JJ>     text or other component with a text alternative that is presented to a user to identify a component within web content
13:29:16 <quintinb> I think links in mobile should be far more well defined than for web
13:29:24 <JJ> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/4252
13:29:34 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert is a link considered a "component". The definition of Label uses Component twice
13:30:35 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ reads the response to the WCAG GitHub issues around "Component"
13:32:24 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert some of the instances of "Component" in WCAG are more abstract, particularly outside of SCs
13:34:29 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert if there is an exception for how a "component" is defined in WCAG it should have its own definition
13:34:33 <Jamie> +1 Joe to WCAG  define "component"especially if there is the idea that 2.4.6 is sn exception
13:34:53 <JJ> ACTION: We need clarification what would be considered a component within the label definition > https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-labels
13:35:47 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert please others comment on the github WCAG issue
13:36:10 <Jamie> q+
13:36:15 <JJ> ACTION: Comment/upvote https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/4252 with areas that need clarification
13:36:20 <JJ> ack Jamie
13:37:35 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie talks about the WCAG2ICT added note for software and links (Note 1). Should we build off this note for our interpretation?
13:37:51 <JJ> ACTION: Need clarification: "behaves like a hypertext link"
13:39:07 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie how is this task force defining links for native apps.  The lay person "a link leaves the app, a button stays in the app"  But is that definition accurate.  Can we apply WCAG2ICT as written or do we need to modify or add another note of our own
13:40:11 <Joe_Humbert> JJ our guidance for 2.4.4 may be related to if links are covered under 2.4.6 because most companies try and meet level AA
13:41:16 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie is 2.4.6 intended to mean visual purpose and 2.4.4 is the trait purpose
13:42:32 <Joe_Humbert> JJ talks about single page apps and how the intended purpose of links and buttons are becoming blurred with newer implementations because both are used for navigation to other Views/pages
13:43:04 <Joe_Humbert> JJ if buttons have issues with clear purpose they might fail 2.4.6
13:44:09 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie mentioned questions around tappable titles and description or purpose and if these might fail 2.4.4 or 2.4.6
13:44:52 <JJ> q?
13:45:26 <Joe_Humbert> JJ maybe a note to clarify what our task force views as a link or modifying Note 1 from WCAG2ICT. possibly only keeping the first sentence "In software, a “link” is any text string or image in the user interface outside a user interface control that behaves like a hypertext link."
13:46:12 <Joe_Humbert> @JJ mentions the new added note for 2.4.6 from WCAG2ICT
13:46:49 <JJ> q?
13:46:54 <Joe_Humbert> JJ we may need to definite headings and labels for WCAG2Mobile, suggesting this approach
13:47:27 <Jamie> q+
13:47:40 <JJ> ack Jamie
13:47:40 <Joe_Humbert> JJ 2.4.4 and 2.4.6 are more closely related then we realized
13:48:22 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie do we have an actions from the long conversation about 2.4.4/2.4.6
13:48:51 <Joe_Humbert> JJ we should make a draft of 2.4.4 and 2.4.6 and bring it back to the group
13:49:12 <JJ> 2.4.4: apply as written in WCAG2ICT, but add note to clarify "hyperlinks" in mobile apps
13:49:49 <JJ> 2.4.6: apply as written in WCAG2ICT, add note 1 to clarify "heading" in mobile apps and note 2 to clarify "labels" in mobile apps (mentioning buttons have labels, links have labels, etc.)
13:50:57 <JJ> Reply with +1, 0 or -1
13:51:02 <Joe_Humbert> +1. I think the drafted content will bring more feedback
13:51:02 <RacheleD> +1
13:51:13 <quintinb> +1
13:51:14 <Jamie> +1 but also add a note to 2.4.4 about whether it applies to buttons
13:52:08 <JJ> 2.4.4 add note 2 to mention it's a best-practice (or requirement?) that all controls/components that are used to navigate also conform to the requirements of 2.4.4
13:52:52 <JJ> consider that link purpose is not a 'best-practice' but requirement for links but also for those other kinds of components that navigate
13:53:18 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie should the change to 2.4.4 around "components" be more than a best practice (covers other controls)
13:53:31 <Joe_Humbert> q+
13:53:46 <JJ> ack Joe_Humbert
13:54:42 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert would adding other components tp 2.4.4 go beyond the current scope of the WCAG SC, 2.4.4
13:55:17 <Joe_Humbert> JJ it is not difficult to apply the requirements to other controls
13:55:41 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert I do agree with expanding the definition
13:56:25 <Joe_Humbert> Jamie yes we can because this is a different platform, that is part of the purpose of this group
13:57:06 <Joe_Humbert> JJ thinks it is worth trying to see what feedback we get with this change for 2.4.4
13:57:31 <Joe_Humbert> +1 to what Jamie and JJ said about expanding 2.4..4
13:57:41 <JJ> move to next agendum
13:57:41 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- 2.4.6 Heading and Labels -- taken up [from JJ]
13:57:51 <Joe_Humbert> JJ other SC might be ready for drafting
13:57:53 <JJ> Heading and Labels was discussed in previous item 2.4.4 because they are linked
13:58:30 <Joe_Humbert> JJ 1.3.3 is ready to make a draft. 2 SC are ready for drafting now
13:59:20 <Joe_Humbert> JJ next week discussion: 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures and 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation. other agenda items will be added. Hopeful for more rough drafts
13:59:37 <RacheleD> RacheleD has left #matf
14:03:56 <JJ> JJ has joined #matf
14:03:57 <JJ> rrsagent, make minutes
14:03:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/12-matf-minutes.html JJ
14:04:25 <JJ> rrsagent, bye
14:04:25 <RRSAgent> I see 4 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/12-matf-actions.rdf :
14:04:25 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Figure out what elements have a "label"? Does a link have a label? Or is a link a control and not a label at the same time? [1]
14:04:25 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/12-matf-irc#T13-27-07
14:04:25 <RRSAgent> ACTION: We need clarification what would be considered a component within the label definition > https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-labels [2]
14:04:25 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/12-matf-irc#T13-34-53
14:04:25 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Comment/upvote https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/4252 with areas that need clarification [3]
14:04:25 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/12-matf-irc#T13-36-15
14:04:25 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Need clarification: "behaves like a hypertext link" [4]
14:04:25 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/12-matf-irc#T13-37-51
14:04:30 <JJ> zakim, bye
14:04:30 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been Joe_Humbert, RacheleD, AlainVagner, quintinb, Jamie
14:04:30 <Zakim> Zakim has left #matf