Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Announcements
Janina: There is a path forward on building new technology around AI and W3C. More to come.
Adapt TF face-to-face meeting (early May)
<matatk> https://
matatk: No expectations outside of Adapt folks to attend but looking to finalize Methodology to show symbols with web content. As an augmentation, symbols are helpful, but need standardization - which is the reason for the workshop.
Janina: Feel free to join if you like - it is in progress but contributions welcome
Respec & Dark Mode
<matatk> speced/
matatk: Some W3C docs support dark mode well, some don't. Of the two tools we use, Respec has the ability to support dark mode but the rendered style sheet don't always support viewing so that rendering mode is not A11y supporting. We need someone to help fix the underlying style sheet. Looking for a technical volunteer to make fixes.
Janina: Without a default compliant dark mode, drafts are limited. Neha would like to help and matatk will pass information around via the mailing list to keep everyone up to date.
matatk: Suggested, review to see what needs to be fixed, then move on to potentially fixed.
New on /TR
CSS Form Control Styling Level 1
<matatk> w3c/
PaulG: Looking to make styling controls more consistent across browsers. Should make things more standardized if used
matatk: Note that there is no a11y consideration section in document for now. PaulG feels that it might be worth pointing out at least to understand the advantages of using native controls to style.
matatk: Would be worthwhile checking to see if an accessibility consideration section would add value?
PaulG: For anyone who is a good auditor, jumping in now to participate and contribute at the core level would be great
ContentEditable
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: First public working draft - this has accessibility consideration section, but not yet written up.
matatk: We will have to come back to this . Anyone already familiar with this would be welcome to volunteer.
Dr_Keith: Willing to volunteer
steveF: Also willing to volunteer
New Charters
Chinese Web Interest Group re-charter
<Roy_Ruoxi> - charter: https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> - issue: w3c/
Roy_Ruoxi: Charter, Chinese web interest group wants to work with us on A11y issues in China.
matatk: No objections on first look at charter.
Spec review requests
Web Neural Network API
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> Due: 2025-06-20
matatk: Not due until June. These are public facing threads so no internal discussion thread is set up. We need to figure out a process for discussion.
webauthn-3
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> Due: 2025-03-31
<matatk> Comments from Fredrik from 2021: https://
matatk: For web authentication, we are good with it. One remaining item, when last reviewed May 2021- in this current review, were older comments out of date? Fredrik: Many changes made, old comments not an issue any more
Comment review requests
Alternative text for short-form video
<matatk> source: whatwg/html#11080
<matatk> tracking: w3c/
matatk: Questions from APA - do we need anything else or can we close?
matatk: If there are questions after the call, feel free to connect
matatk: Second question around roles - do we need a video role? There a 'model' element being proposed that like video/audio but has a 3d rendered model inside. If device can handle it and render it, it will be used. Is this a media element like video?
<Fredrik> We~re on a role!
matatk: Models can be very big - a preview of the model via a video as a kind of thumbnail might work. We should start thinking about it, maybe other elements might also need a role too.
<matatk> Demo of <model-viewer> - the <model> element will be a lot like this (with extras): https://
Fredrik: This definitely should have some asynch discussion - model tag would be interesting in terms of new input modalities. Write and list discussion might be good
<Fredrik> +1
matatk: Thoughts on role for video?
<Dr_Keith> +1
<Neha> +1
<chiace> +1
<Fredrik> I'll need to step away for the rest fo the meeting, but I'd like to state for the rec ord that I am in favour of the model tag if that is a discussion at all. :)
matatk: General support for video - what's missing from what we currently have?
Dr_Keith: Should have a role because devs are doing things ad hoc. A proper role would be a good alternative.
<Zakim> janina, you wanted to ask about an audio role as well?
PaulG: Having a role that gives users an expectation of what they could experience with video would be good. More efficient
Janina: Note that there's an audio role but it isn't much/well used.
<steveF> https://
steveF: Video element exposed as a grouping element. Some platforms have a sub role of video. Should perhaps go the ARIA working group?
matatk: Images have a role, etc. If video could be directly interacted with, there might be advantages. Worth looking at ARIA group issues to understand if this has already been discussed and considered.
steveF: Will check in the ARIA group to see if this has been discussed already.
matatk: Are there pain points in the spec for focus?
CSS Update (Paul)
<matatk> s/Janina: There is a path forward on building new technology around AI and W3C. More to come./Janina: There is a path forward on progressing RQTF's AI and Accessibility document. There is also work on improving academic citations within W3C. More to come./