13:01:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #matf
13:01:17 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-irc
13:01:17 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:01:18 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), JJ
13:01:21 <JJ> Zakim, this is MATF 26 March 2025
13:01:21 <Zakim> got it, JJ
13:01:24 <quintinb> quintinb has joined #MATF
13:01:25 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:01:31 <JJ> Meeting: MATF 26 March 2025
13:02:01 <JJ> agenda+ Outcome: WCAG2Mobile Call For Consensus (CFC) in AG WG
13:02:04 <JJ> agenda+ 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures
13:02:08 <JJ> agenda+ 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation
13:02:11 <JJ> agenda+ 2.5.3 Label in Name
13:02:21 <quintinb> present+
13:02:31 <Tanya> present+
13:02:35 <GleidsonRamos> GleidsonRamos has joined #matf
13:02:48 <Joe_Humbert> Present+
13:03:39 <AlainVagner> present+
13:03:44 <JJ> move to next agendum
13:03:44 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Outcome: WCAG2Mobile Call For Consensus (CFC) in AG WG -- taken up [from JJ]
13:03:48 <JJ> chair+
13:04:03 <RacheleD> RacheleD has joined #MATF
13:04:10 <Karla> Karla has joined #matf
13:04:15 <RacheleD> present+
13:04:27 <Karla> present+
13:04:33 <JJ> https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/104
13:04:40 <JJ> https://github.com/w3c/matf/discussions/103
13:04:54 <julianmka> present+
13:05:46 <julianmka> JJ: CFC passed with some comments as discussed last week. One further comment came in after CFC which has been added to the issue queue.
13:05:50 <JJ> https://github.com/w3c/matf/pull/100
13:06:16 <Jamie> Jamie has joined #matf
13:06:22 <Jamie> present+
13:06:25 <julianmka> ...will work with Kevin to finalize light editorial changes and publish our First Public Working Draft
13:06:44 <JJ> ACTION: Add comment in index.html that it is auto-generated
13:07:18 <julianmka> ...Publication will be accompanied by a news item on the W3C's news page
13:07:51 <hdv> just excited!
13:07:53 <JJ> scribe: julianmka
13:07:54 <hdv> well done all!
13:08:03 <hdv> present+
13:08:09 <julianmka> No questions, just congrats all around!
13:08:16 <Illai> present+
13:08:38 <JJ> move to next agendum
13:08:38 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures -- taken up [from JJ]
13:08:42 <pauljadam> pauljadam has joined #matf
13:09:43 <JJ> https://w3c.github.io/matf/#success-criterion-2-5-3-label-in-name
13:11:53 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:11:56 <julianmka> JJ: Continuing from last week's discussion. Summarizing notes added in WCAG2ICT. Note 4 in particular seems to cover some of the conversations we've had before, like pull to refresh or more complicated screen reader gestures.
13:13:39 <julianmka> ...Seems like WCAG2ICT covers most situations, but we might need a note to clarify some of those platform-level gestures (pull to refresh for example)
13:14:31 <JJ> Poll: Apply 2.5.1 as written, emphasizing Note 4: "This requirement also applies to platform software, such as user agents, assistive technology software, and operating systems. Each layer is responsible for its own pointer actions only, not for those in an underlying layer."?
13:14:54 <julianmka> +1
13:14:56 <GleidsonRamos> +1
13:14:56 <AlainVagner> +1
13:14:58 <pauljadam> +1
13:14:58 <RacheleD> +1
13:14:59 <Tanya> +1
13:15:00 <Karla> +1
13:15:01 <quintinb> +1 - do we have a definition of "underlying layer"?
13:15:08 <Joe_Humbert> -1
13:15:10 <Illai> +1
13:15:25 <Jamie> +1 with possible note for custom actions
13:15:55 <julianmka> JJ: "Underlaying layer" means "software or operating system"
13:16:19 <pauljadam> You can add a button to refresh
13:16:30 <julianmka> @Joe_Humbert: Worried about requiring devs to deal with shortcomings of the OS.
13:17:16 <quintinb> +1 pauljadam - any programmatic action can be invoked on their own layer
13:17:17 <pauljadam> it's not required to use pull to refresh and you can easily add a button to do the same thing
13:17:40 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:18:09 <julianmka> JJ: Maybe we need some kind of exception similar to the component discussion for elements that are not changed by the author.
13:18:59 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:19:15 <julianmka> ...Are there some instances where native components as-is are accessible by default?
13:19:18 <JJ> ACTION: Draft 2.5.1, apply mostly as written, consider notes for: "Underlaying layer", "Custom actions", "Native Controls (e.g. Pull to Refresh)"
13:20:00 <Carol> Carol has joined #MATF
13:20:06 <Carol> present+
13:20:55 <julianmka> pauljadam: I have seen this as a challenging SC because people don't tend to like adding a simple tap alternative.
13:21:19 <quintinb> Ask a mobile designer / dev to put buttons on a carousel...
13:21:42 <quintinb> All the space in the world for adverts, but ask for obvious navigation...
13:21:49 <pauljadam> I often have to copy / paste this statement from the understanding doc: Examples of path-based gestures include swiping, sliders and carousels dependent on the direction of interaction
13:21:49 <pauljadam> I've built an example of Carousels in my iOS app that work with swipe gestures only as the bad example and then have single tap alternatives to the swipes in the good example.
13:21:49 <pauljadam> You to Everyone (Mar 26, 2025, 8:19 AM)
13:21:49 <pauljadam> In web pages and native apps you can swipe to go backwards with a gesture but then there is also a back button as the single tap alternative.
13:21:51 <pauljadam> In email apps you can swipe left to mark as read or mark as unread etc but you can also tap buttons to do this without swipes.
13:21:58 <julianmka> +1 to quitinb
13:22:09 <JJ> move to next agendum
13:22:10 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation -- taken up [from JJ]
13:22:25 <JJ> https://w3c.github.io/matf/#success-criterion-2-5-2-pointer-cancellation
13:22:54 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:24:27 <pauljadam> The native Toggle switch controls on iOS fail Pointer Cancellation success criterion. There's no way to cancel the down event.
13:24:49 <julianmka> JJ: Summarized SC - focus on down- and up-events (originally mice, but also now apply to touch events). Similar to 2.5.1, authors are only responsible for actions within their own content, not OS-level actions.
13:25:13 <julianmka> ...WCAG2ICT does the same wording replacements as 2.5.1, including "underlying sofware"
13:27:21 <JJ> q?
13:28:08 <pauljadam> If you make a custom toggle it will pass but that's because it works more like a Button
13:28:17 <pauljadam> Apple needs to fix it
13:28:26 <pauljadam> q+
13:28:28 <julianmka> JJ: To Paul's point, that raises the issue again that devs are responsible but not always able to adjust native control behavior (e.g. toggle switch in iOS)
13:28:38 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:28:38 <Illai> q+
13:28:42 <JJ> ack pauljadam
13:29:11 <julianmka> pauljadam: I woudln't give an exception, I would fail an app on this SC but as a platform defect that Apple needs to fix.
13:29:22 <Jamie> q+
13:29:38 <Joe_Humbert> I think we might need a wider exception for native un-modified control
13:29:45 <JJ> ack Illai
13:29:58 <julianmka> JJ: We've talked about this a few times where controls don't work right but devs can fix. If we keep giving exceptions, platforms will never improve.
13:30:32 <Jamie> wouldn't this apply to web as well, whether  native html or other?
13:30:57 <julianmka> Illai: I wonder if this fell between the cracks or was ignored intentionally because checkboxes in the web also use the down-event
13:30:57 <pauljadam> The way I apply WCAG to mobile is that everything that can be applied is applied like heading levels, if a developer uses a native toggle control they may still be failing WCAG, it's just that Apple is the developer causing the fail. I would not give blanket exceptions for native controls.
13:31:46 <JJ> q?
13:31:51 <julianmka> JJ: This SC only requires one of the listed things to be true, or it can be argued that functionality is essential.
13:31:52 <JJ> ack Jamie
13:32:38 <julianmka> Jamie: Was thinking about whether custom actions might also be covered in 2.5.2? Would we need to include a note in this SC if we add one to 2.5.1?
13:32:45 <JJ> ACTION: Make sure notes between 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 are consistent
13:33:05 <Tanya> q+
13:33:05 <pauljadam> Accessibility Actions can't be activated by single pointer taps though. They only work with VoiceOver, Switch Control, Keyboard, Voice Control.
13:33:34 <JJ> ack Tanya
13:33:43 <julianmka> JJ: Only offering custom actions would still fail one of the pointer SCs.
13:35:11 <julianmka> Tanya: Re checkbox or toggle -- for the Abort or Undo requirement -- Does the abort/undo requirement mean that the SC would be passed if the action can be undone, as with a checkbox that the user checks and then unchecks?
13:35:19 <pauljadam> ok so because the toggle is done on the down event then abort or undo would not apply
13:35:46 <pauljadam> yes
13:35:57 <julianmka> JJ: Depends on how you interpret the "Or" in the Abort/undo statement. Do both clauses need to be true?
13:36:03 <julianmka> q+
13:36:21 <Illai> q+
13:36:25 <JJ> ack julianmka
13:36:31 <pauljadam> So native SwiftUI Toggle still fails
13:36:41 <pauljadam> "and" is pretty clear
13:36:54 <JJ> ack Illai
13:37:02 <JJ> q?
13:37:03 <julianmka> julianmka: Perhaps we should ask the AGWG about the correct interpretation of the abort/undo clause
13:37:53 <julianmka> Illai: I think we're being a little too puristic here -- I think the SC is referring to actions that really can't be reversed, like submitting a form.
13:38:16 <julianmka> ...checkbox behavior could also be governed under on-input
13:39:32 <JJ> ACTION: Get clarification from AG WG on 2.5.2, "Abort or Undo": Completion of the function is on the up-event, and a mechanism is available to abort the function before completion or to undo the function after completion; --> How does this work for checkboxes and radio buttons that get activated on down event?
13:40:40 <pauljadam> no exception, apple needs to fix their bug
13:40:42 <julianmka> JJ: Seems like this SC mostly applies as-is. We need to keep consistent notes between this SC and 2.5.1. There could be some exception for native controls but we need to think more about that.
13:41:45 <JJ> ACTION: Create draft for 2.5.2 after receiving clarification on the "Undo" functionality
13:41:58 <JJ> move to next agendum
13:41:58 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- 2.5.3 Label in Name -- taken up [from JJ]
13:42:20 <JJ> https://w3c.github.io/matf/#success-criterion-2-5-3-label-in-name
13:44:06 <julianmka> JJ: Reviewed the SC language and defined terms. Key idea -- element has a visual label made up of text or images of text, so the accessible label must contain the same text programmatically. Important for voice users and screen reader users who have some sight.
13:44:49 <julianmka> ...Original SC note recommends using the visible label text at the beginning of the accessible label.
13:44:50 <pauljadam> I've seen testers trying to use Voice Control to test for label in name but you can only test for this SC using VoiceOver or Xcode Accessibility Inspector. For one, now Voice Control only shows the first string of a .accessibilityLabel OR a .accessibilityInputLabels and if there are .accessibilityInputLabels then the .accessibilityLabel will NOT
13:44:51 <pauljadam> display to VoiceOver.
13:45:15 <pauljadam> *sorry I meant not display to Voice Control
13:45:22 <JJ> https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/39#issuecomment-2670939511
13:45:30 <pauljadam> I can't edit my messages like Slack :(
13:46:05 <julianmka> JJ: In Github, Detlev points out the challenge of grouped content which has an accessibility label applied the whole group -- e.g. cards.
13:46:08 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:47:13 <julianmka> ...Detlev also brought up use of custom actions where the visual label isn't included in the accessible name.
13:47:17 <pauljadam> If you for example make a card a single focus point using Accessibility Actions then all that visible label text in the card needs to be the .accessibilityLabel or it would be a fail.
13:47:21 <quintinb> So do we need to add a note for grouping?
13:47:21 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:47:23 <pauljadam> +q
13:47:24 <Illai> q+
13:47:45 <JJ> ack pauljadam
13:48:16 <quintinb> +1 pauljadam all visible text should be spoken
13:48:34 <julianmka> pauljadam: Describes an example in his iOS techniques app with a card where all content is grouped and all content is included in the accessibility label.
13:49:03 <JJ> ack Illai
13:49:04 <julianmka> ...You also can't use VoiceControl to test for this SC
13:49:17 <pauljadam> Well you can use Xcode Accessibility Inspector without needing source code access
13:49:40 <pauljadam> There is no accessible description property in native apps LOL unless you consider the Hint :)
13:49:49 <pauljadam> +q
13:49:59 <Jamie> q+
13:50:01 <julianmka> Illai: We need to make a distinction between the name shown and content that describes it. In web, we have aria-described by which allows supplementary content to be included but not made part of the name semantically
13:51:14 <julianmka> JJ: No similar technique in iOS. For Voice Control, you could also set accessibilityInputLabels to something shorter
13:52:03 <JJ> ack pauljadam
13:53:10 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #matf
13:53:10 <Carol> Carol has joined #matf
13:53:10 <pauljadam> pauljadam has joined #matf
13:53:10 <Jamie> Jamie has joined #matf
13:53:10 <Karla> Karla has joined #matf
13:53:10 <RacheleD> RacheleD has joined #matf
13:53:10 <GleidsonRamos> GleidsonRamos has joined #matf
13:53:10 <quintinb> quintinb has joined #matf
13:53:10 <Illai> Illai has joined #matf
13:53:10 <JJ> JJ has joined #matf
13:53:10 <julianmka> julianmka has joined #matf
13:53:10 <Tanya> Tanya has joined #matf
13:53:10 <AlainVagner> AlainVagner has joined #matf
13:53:10 <github-bot> github-bot has joined #matf
13:53:10 <JJ> https://www.w3.org/TR/accname-1.2/
13:54:07 <julianmka> Illai: This is taking it too literally. All of the text cannot be considered the single name.
13:55:15 <pauljadam> if you don't want to speak the entire card as the .accessibilityLabel then don't combine its focus into a single element.
13:55:25 <julianmka> JJ: Key idea in Detlev's question -- nested content where multiple controls are available and exposed through custom actions.
13:55:54 <JJ> q?
13:55:59 <julianmka> JJ: I shared a link to the label/ description computation rules for web. This is a big difference between web and mobile.
13:56:28 <julianmka> pauljadam: Combining focus is not required, you can keep card content separate from its actions.
13:59:07 <JJ> Zakim, close the queue
13:59:07 <Zakim> ok, JJ, the speaker queue is closed
13:59:24 <pauljadam> Voice Control will never show the full accessibility label
14:00:22 <julianmka> Jamie: 2 thoughts -- 1: About focus on an entire card, there are many scenarios where a card has a lot of text and that's the actionable thing. It's not ideal to have that all announced as the label, but it happens a lot in apps today. There's no way to separate the actionable part of the card from the descriptive content. I get questions about
14:00:23 <julianmka> this in my work a lot.
14:00:23 <julianmka> 2: Also wanted not to dismiss Voice Control scenarios from this discussion since the wording of the SC doesn't exclusively discuss screen readers as the only impacted assistive technology. We haven't covered use cases for including voice commands.
14:00:58 <JJ> ACTION: Add note to clarify the requirements for Name for grouped content (and nested controls with 1 touch target)
14:02:11 <julianmka> JJ: Closing idea -- how do we want to handle SCs which we have closed/completed for the first draft that get reopened or need further work?
14:02:16 <julianmka> ...will think about it with the editor group.
14:02:29 <quintinb> Thanks julianmka for scribing!
14:02:46 <Illai> Illai has left #matf
14:02:55 <JJ> rrsagent, make minutes
14:02:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-minutes.html JJ
14:04:00 <JJ> regrets+ JonGibbins
14:04:16 <JJ> regrets+ JeroenHulscher
14:04:21 <JJ> regrets+ JeroenHulscher
14:04:23 <JJ> rrsagent, make minutes
14:04:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-minutes.html JJ
14:50:23 <JJ> rrsagent, bye
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> I see 6 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-actions.rdf :
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Add comment in index.html that it is auto-generated [1]
14:50:23 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-irc#T13-06-44
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Draft 2.5.1, apply mostly as written, consider notes for: "Underlaying layer", "Custom actions", "Native Controls (e.g. Pull to Refresh)" [2]
14:50:23 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-irc#T13-19-18
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Make sure notes between 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 are consistent [3]
14:50:23 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-irc#T13-32-45
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Get clarification from AG WG on 2.5.2, "Abort or Undo": Completion of the function is on the up-event, and a mechanism is available to abort the function before completion or to undo the function after completion; --> How does this work for checkboxes and radio buttons that get activated on down event? [4]
14:50:23 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-irc#T13-39-32
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Create draft for 2.5.2 after receiving clarification on the "Undo" functionality [5]
14:50:23 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-irc#T13-41-45
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Add note to clarify the requirements for Name for grouped content (and nested controls with 1 touch target) [6]
14:50:23 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/03/26-matf-irc#T14-00-58
14:50:28 <JJ> zakim, bye
14:50:28 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been quintinb, Tanya, Joe_Humbert, AlainVagner, RacheleD, Karla, julianmka, Jamie, hdv, Illai, Carol
14:50:28 <Zakim> Zakim has left #matf