18:01:34 RRSAgent has joined #aria-apg 18:01:39 logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/03/18-aria-apg-irc 18:01:39 RRSAgent, make logs Public 18:01:40 Meeting: ARIA Authoring Practices Task Force 18:01:44 present+ jugglinmike 18:01:46 scribe+ jugglinmike 18:01:54 present+ jem 18:02:00 present+ Daniel 18:02:04 present+ howard-e 18:02:10 present+ Adam_Page 18:02:37 present+ ari 18:02:41 arigilmore has joined #aria-apg 18:03:03 present+ arigilmore 18:03:06 present- ari 18:03:28 CurtBellew has joined #aria-apg 18:03:42 present+ CurtBellew 18:03:51 present+ lola 18:04:30 present+ Matt_King 18:06:08 Jem has joined #aria-apg 18:06:30 present+ 18:06:37 Matt_King has joined #aria-apg 18:06:48 Topic: Setup and Review Agenda 18:06:51 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/wiki/March-18%2C-2025-Agenda 18:06:52 present+ 18:07:08 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/wiki/March-18%2C-2025-Agenda 18:07:52 Matt_King: We might re-arrange the agenda depending on whether Jon joins 18:08:03 s/joins/joins us today/ 18:08:12 Matt_King: Any requests for change to agenda? 18:08:30 Adam_Page: If we have a few minutes to spare, I can give a quick update to issue 3215 (the expandable region) 18:08:49 Matt_King: Sounds good--that's already on the agenda under "publication planning" 18:09:08 Jem: We'd love to hear about CSUN, Matt_King! 18:09:19 Matt_King: Sure, we can tack that on to the end of the agenda 18:09:26 Matt_King: Next meeting: March 25 18:09:49 Matt_King: The following week, I am in some all-day meetings for work in London. I'll be in the wrong time zone and I won't be able to attend 18:09:59 Matt_King: I cancelled the meeting for April 1 18:10:10 Matt_King: So the following meeting will be April 8 18:10:23 Topic: Publication planning 18:10:37 Matt_King: Last time, before we changed the publication target to March 25 18:10:59 Matt_King: Right now, there are three things in the milestone. Two of them are merged, and they're very small changes (strictly editorial stuff) 18:11:33 Matt_King: The other thing in the milestone is PR 2991 which is on the agenda for today. It seems unlikely that we will wrap that up in time for the next publication 18:11:45 q+ 18:11:47 Matt_King: Should we just push out these two little changes? 18:12:10 Matt_King: Or should we push it out to some time in April? (There's no harm in letting these little changes sit there) 18:12:19 Matt_King: I don't have an opinion either way 18:12:27 ack Daniel 18:13:04 Daniel: These days, we're more flexible in terms of publication. As soon as something is ready, you can submit a pull request, and I can publish (perhaps within the same day) 18:13:58 Matt_King: That sounds good! I like to set goals and have dates that we're working towards as much as we can. But if the overhead of doing a publication is straightforward, then delivering two which are done--that's good 18:14:16 Matt_King: So let's stick to the plan. Or I suppose, we could publish even sooner than planned for the two things in this milestone 18:14:35 howard-e: I can make a publication branch for those two things today 18:14:48 Daniel: And I could have it published by Thursday 18:15:25 Subtopic: Consider adding an expandable "region" 18:15:29 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3215 18:15:36 Adam_Page: I finished an initial prototype 18:15:49 Adam_Page: I used Scott O'Hara's prototype as a starting point 18:16:07 Adam_Page: I built on it, using hypothetical real-world content instead of lorem ipsum 18:16:31 Adam_Page: I reviewed the minutes of the ARIA Working Group and found an example from Aaron Leventhal (sp?) 18:16:39 Adam_Page: I built on that concept 18:16:50 Adam_Page: I wanted to cover nested focusables, as well 18:17:20 Adam_Page: In Scott's example, everything that is expanded is static content. I wanted to support if there was more content in there 18:17:40 Adam_Page: Also, when you click expand, I put programmatic focus on the "expand" button 18:17:56 Adam_Page: And I added cursor support for selecting text within the interactive area 18:18:11 Adam_Page: I haven't committed anything to the repository, yet, but I do have a CodePen link that I can share 18:18:22 Adam_Page: I wanted to check in with you folks about the timeline 18:18:48 Adam_Page: Like Matt_King, I am also headed overseas next week. I don't know if that factors into the timing, but at the very least, I can have this up for review before I go 18:19:01 Matt_King: Sure. If you want to make a "draft" pull request, that will give us something to look at 18:19:21 Matt_King: There's also the table for roles, states, and interactions. Could you add that? 18:19:56 Adam_Page: I can do a draft pull request for the pattern itself, but I've been intentionally holding off on pattern documentation because I expect there to be some churn while we play with the example and discuss how it ought to behave 18:20:18 Matt_King: Yeah, that makes sense. Maybe you can just include an empty table in your "draft" pull request 18:20:20 Adam_Page: Sure 18:21:11 Matt_King: As I think about how we test these things in the ARIA-AT project, sometimes it's a really good idea to have a super-basic example that has as few interactions as possible but still covers the most basic stuff required for interoperability. And then, separately, something fancier 18:21:42 Matt_King: Specifically, I'm thinking about the nested focusables. I'm wondering if we want one example with those and one without because they may have different levels of support... 18:22:02 Adam_Page: That seems plausible. The nested focusables certainly felt like the most complicated aspect, initially 18:22:26 Adam_Page: But where I landed, it doesn't seem like the removal of those nested focusables will lead to a change that needs to be documented 18:22:46 Matt_King: Well, lets start with what you have then, and we can have a discussion about simplification as part of our review 18:23:20 Adam_Page: It took a little extra finesse to ensure that when a user uses a keydown, it doesn't interfere with text selection 18:23:38 Adam_Page: That the user should be allowed to click and drag with a pointing device without triggering the "collapse" behavior 18:24:05 Adam_Page: If it's collapsed, they should be able to select text (and copy it to their clipboard), and the same goes for the "expanded" state 18:24:23 Matt_King: I don't know if that would show up in the accessibility features or not, but commenting about it in your code would be helpful 18:24:34 Matt_King: You might want to mention it in the accessibility features, though. I don't know 18:24:52 Adam_Page: Yeah, I don't know if that ties back to anything normative. It could just be a case where we took special care 18:25:10 Matt_King: Selection is important for things like "select to speak" 18:25:16 Adam_Page: You mean, like, voice control? 18:25:34 Matt_King: Mac and Windows both have a feature where you can select text to have it spoken 18:25:50 Matt_King: So if you can't select text, you can't have it spoken. That's one way selection ties directly to accessibility 18:25:52 Adam_Page: Got it 18:26:17 https://cdpn.io/pen/debug/PwYMopM 18:26:21 Matt_King: So let's create a "draft" pull request with a skeleton table. That will generate a preview, and we can play around with it 18:26:31 Matt_King: Then we can discuss timeline when you return 18:26:57 Adam_Page: I shared a link to the example as hosted by Codepen 18:27:21 Topic: PR 2991 - Next steps on color settings practice 18:27:29 Matt_King: In Jon's absence, we'll skip this topic for now 18:27:41 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/2991 18:27:44 Topic: PR 3249 - Add HTML search to landmark practice 18:27:51 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/3249 18:28:04 Matt_King: I created a new pull request and merged an old pull request into that branch 18:28:10 Matt_King: that's where this pull request originated 18:28:18 Matt_King: The changes are for the "practices" page for landmarks 18:28:26 Matt_King: We have information about landmarks in two places onAPG 18:28:36 Matt_King: In the "featured practices" section and in the "landmarks" pattern 18:29:25 Matt_King: The "landmarks" pattern is pretty straightforward. It lists all the landmarks that we have (which need to be rewritten because they don't follow the APG template--they are the one aberration we have left... but that's a separate piece of work) 18:29:50 Matt_King: My question is: do we want to make a change to the practice without updating the corresponding "search" example page? 18:30:39 Matt_King: In the first comment on this pull request, I added a link to the preview that goes to the right place 18:31:58 Matt_King: The first change is under the heading "HTML Sectioning Elements" 18:32:19 Matt_King: The very last row of that table is new. It's saying that there is now an html "search" element and it corresponds to the role 18:32:36 Matt_King: The other change is under the section simply titled "Search" (a level-three heading) 18:33:11 Matt_King: Under that, there is a change under "HTML technique". There is also an "ARIA technique" 18:33:23 Matt_King: That's essentially all that this PR changes--those two places 18:34:57 Matt_King: A little further down, you'll find a link to two examples. It says "search landmark examples." If you follow that link, the page has a tab called "HTML techniques". It says that there is no "search" element. This pull request did not change that. 18:35:05 Matt_King: Should we push this pull request without updating that part? 18:35:23 Matt_King: Because this landmark example page needs to be rewritten (like all landmark example pages) 18:35:37 Matt_King: But if we pushed this pull request as-is, people would get conflicting information 18:35:43 Matt_King: So I'm reluctant to do that 18:36:19 Jem: I would support to push changes for search and then include a note on this example page that references your new text 18:37:07 Matt_King: I don't know about a note... I think we would just want to change the content of what's under the "HTML Techniques" tab 18:37:22 Matt_King: It's just a content update to this page. I didn't have time to make that change to that page 18:37:46 Matt_King: We do have the option to push this pull request out without changing it, but then the APG would have conflicted information 18:38:11 Matt_King: Ideally, we want an HTML version of the example under the "ARIA Techniques" tab 18:38:32 Matt_King: It's pretty straightforward. I'm recommending that it be done before we push this out 18:38:48 Matt_King: But that means someone needs to add a commit to pull request 3249 which does that 18:38:57 CurtBellew: This may be something that I actually have time to do 18:39:07 CurtBellew: It would look almost exactly the same as the ARIA Technique 18:39:32 Matt_King: Right, I think all you have to do is change the "div" to the "search" element and take away the "role=search". Oh, and also modify the text that's above it 18:39:34 CurtBellew: Got it 18:39:40 q+ 18:39:56 Matt_King: That would be really helpful! 18:40:56 q+ 18:41:09 Jem: I assigned the pull request to CurtBellew 18:41:31 ack Daniel 18:41:38 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3250 -> Issue on respec links 18:42:42 Daniel: Unrelatedly, there are ReSpec links in the first part of this example, and those no longer work. We should probably audit all the examples for this and fix it throughout with a separate patch 18:43:11 q? 18:44:38 Matt_King: I didn't recognize that as being ReSpec. It looks like Wiki markup. I will fix that in this pull request 18:44:50 Daniel: I'll take a pass on the rest of the pages and see if it shows up elsewhere 18:45:08 Matt_King: Thank you for that observation, Daniel! 18:45:23 Topic: Issue 3244 next step - relaxing some naming requirements 18:45:31 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3244 18:45:42 Matt_King: I've been going through issues trying to understand the next steps and document them 18:45:51 Matt_King: There are a lot of issues which seem to be stuck 18:46:06 Matt_King: I want the status of these issues to be more clear 18:46:21 Matt_King: We previously discussed this issue. There is clear alignment that this is high-priority 18:46:34 ack me 18:46:43 Matt_King: We have multiple patterns plus the naming practice that needs to be updated. I don't know if it needs to be all done at once 18:48:31 Lola: Is this just editorial changes, then? 18:48:53 Matt_King: Well, it's all documentation work. It's not editorial in the sense that we're changing the meeting... But it is writing 18:49:04 Lola: Is there a hard deadline? 18:49:06 Matt_King: No 18:49:10 Lola: You can assign it to me 18:49:13 Jem: Yay! 18:49:41 Matt_King: I recommend that you go through them one at a time. That will make it easier for us to review. Also, doing that first one will make it much more clear for how to do the rest 18:49:55 Matt_King: In the "ARIA Roles, States, and Properties" section 18:50:01 Jem: [reads the section] 18:50:53 Matt_King: The change would be for the label to the group 18:51:15 Matt_King: There are two elements here: buttons and groups 18:52:01 Matt_King: The bullet on the "radiogroup" element needs to change. Honestly, I'm not sure how we want to word it 18:52:16 Matt_King: The current wording describes what we want most of the time 18:53:24 Matt_King: Somehow, we have to come up with a wording that says... "Optionally if it doesn't have a visible label, it is labelled by aria-label, unless a label isn't necessary because the label on each button is sufficient for the user to fully comprehend the purpose of the radio" 18:53:35 Matt_King: That is definitely too wordy, but that's the general idea 18:53:38 Lola: That makes sense 18:55:11 Matt_King: We don't want to change the existing guidance. It should be perfect almost all the time, it's just that there are rare and exceptional circumstances (where there is no visible group and the labels on the buttons are sufficient) 18:55:34 Lola: Adam_Page, the examples that you mentioned in the beginning of the issue--are those just examples, or are those the three affected patterns 18:55:46 Adam_Page: Those are just examples. I didn't do a thorough dive through all of the APG pages 18:56:29 Matt_King: I think if you start with radio, we can do "word smithing" there. Then, whatever format we come up with for radio, it will probably be relatively easy to extend it to all these others. It's the same general problem, after all 18:56:39 Jem: Why are we trying to relax the requirement? 18:57:14 Matt_King: The argument in the ARIA working group was that forcing people to come up with an aria-label in circumstances where such a label isn't necessary, it can make accessibility work (and it creates work that doesn't need to be done) 18:57:17 Jem: got it 18:57:26 Matt_King: It's not super common, in my experience 19:01:31 Matt_King: Thanks to everyone for being here and supporting the APG! 19:01:36 Zakim, end the meeting 19:01:36 As of this point the attendees have been jugglinmike, jem, Daniel, howard-e, Adam_Page, ari, arigilmore, CurtBellew, lola, Matt_King 19:01:39 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 19:01:40 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/18-aria-apg-minutes.html Zakim 19:01:47 I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 19:01:47 Zakim has left #aria-apg