Meeting minutes
<janina> /join #rqtf
Agenda Review & Announcements
Re-chartering update
matatk: We are in the process of finalising the proposed new charter for APA.
matatk: We need to go back to the AC, the high council of the W3C, and get the votes and make sure everything is correct in the proposed charter.
<Roy_Ruoxi> https://
matatk: This will be sent out for CFC in a timely fashion so that it can go to the AC to be considered there as well and then hopefully go through.
matatk: We've been working on deliverables (well, the section on deliverables) for the TFs of late.
New charters review
WAI IG
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: The W3C/Strategy GitHub repository is where a lot of strategic (natch!) issues are discussed about work the W3C is discussing doing.
matatk: This is a review ffor the WAI Interest Group recharter.
matatk: The IGs act as forums for discussion, awareness-raising and generally keeping people up to speed.
<Roy_Ruoxi> reviewed history from last week: w3c/
matatk: It's about sharing ideas, reviews from the wider community and so forth. Nothing very formal.
matatk: No one seems to have objections or comments about this charter. Last time, we said we wanted some more time to review it.
matatk: Any concerns from these reviews?
janina: I don't see why we shouldn't just sign off on it. Theres a very active list there. Interesting issues do pop up.
matatk: Apprently, we don't have any obejctions. Roy, would you sign off for us?
Web Payments Working Group Charter
<Roy_Ruoxi> - charter: https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> - issue: w3c/
matatk: This is a group that has been going for some time.
janina: Ten years.
matatk: They're all about digital wallets, user identification and the like.
matatk: The normative specs they work on is Secure Payment Confirmation, Payment Method Manifest, Payment Handler API, Payment Request API. One is the back, one is the front, of those two.
matatk: There is discussion about adding a payment link type ot HTML, to the rel attribute. Certainly mixed opinions on this so far.
matatk: They are aware of a11y as a concern.
janina: We had a TF stood up for payments work. We usually got "that's not our spec" back from Web Payments WG.
matatk: As with most W3C specs, the general approach is to not specify UI where possible other than to say that "the browser will provide UI for this", relying on that browser vendors know to provide a11y.
matatk: For this one, I don't see a11y popping up. But i wouldn't expect it to in the charter. It's a default part of horizontal review. We should look out for the specs this group comes out with.
JonCohn: I would be interested in tracking this, also I know (of) Ted Drake at Intuit who was involved with this.
matatk: Any objections to this charter going ahead as is?
matatk: Hearing none.
matatk: Roy, would you mind signing off for us?
Roy_Ruoxi: Sure.
Spec review requests
matatk: no new ones I think.
matatk: My instincts were correct.
Audio Session
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> Due: 2025-04-24
matatk: This is Janina.
janina: I had a brief look. I think we may waant an a11y considerations section, since there isn't one right now. I ttalks about managing both input and output of audio and being cognoscent to other audio in the environemnt. At the absolute least in an a11y section, if there is a screen reader, don't kick the mic in too soon since you're listening
for the user but not for the TTS (or at least you should be). Maybe the spec could help there.
matatk: Sounds like we have at least one question to ask them.
matatk: We will get to the point of having this process where we raise issues, not make a whole review, from the Github perspective.
matatk: There isn#t a privacy section, either, but thta tis not our hats.
janina: Do you want me to log that as a comment in our tracker with potentially some draft language? Or as a separate issue in our tracker referencing this one?
matatk: Essentially, the workflow is that we open an issue on our side in a11y?review, our commetn tracker repo, not the... I should ask PLH to rename these.
matatk: The process is really good, the names are (part of) the problem.
matatk: We write na issue in there whoich then puts it on our dashboard. We then follow a series of mechanical, manual steps, that ends up with that issue being in the source repo and us tracking it from our comment repo, working really nicely.
niklasegger: A few weeks ago I volutneered to look at the Decentralized Identities spec. I found no issues. You explained just now that you are in the process of creating this porcess. Should I wait? Tehy have moved from FPWD to WD in April. I found nothing of concern here, just to reiterate.
matatk: I#ll figure out if we have a review request for it or whether it was just in the APA review repo.
niklasegger: I got the link directly to the spec, no thread inclueded.
<Roy_Ruoxi> https://
<matatk> /github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/155?pane=issue&itemId=92381069&issue=w3c%7Ca11y-request%7C86///github.com/w3c/apa-review/issues/11
matatk: Decentralized Identifiers is the name of the spec, nothing else.
matatk: We can put a comment on it and say that Niklas reviewed it and had no concerns.
niklasegger: Thanks for the clarification!
Web Neural Network API
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> Due: 2025-06-20
matatk: Janina is looking at this one. It#s not due for some time.
janina: I'm on the audio.
matatk: And assigned ot this review...
matatk: I highlighted the sections in the document which we need to look at which dont add up to a large amount.
matatk: When we do get someone to review it...
janina: RQTF?
matatk: Maybe that's why we assigned it to you?
matatk: It's about basically providing hardware acceleration for runnign LLMs and other models in the browser.
matatk: Some models actually run very well on GPUs, but some don't. It's about harmonising between GPUs, MPUs and otehr PUs.
Dr_Keith: It seem socnfusing enought that I can learn something from it.
chiara: I'll happily contribute, too.
<Roy_Ruoxi> https://
Comment review requests
Popover and dialog elements with lots of content can be inaccessible
<matatk> source: whatwg/html#11176
<matatk> tracking: w3c/
matatk: Remeber these links for commetn review issues go to APA's repo. These threads are just for APA to talk about the issues.
PaulG: It's worth waiting to heare what CSSWG replaies once they get around to it. What they talk about is potentially chanign the default UA styles for these popovers. Problem is noted and itseems to be that removing the content or if the content is appropriate but not working as intended, then that's a problem. It will go a bit back and forth
between CSSWG and WHATWG and a trackign issue for the nunce.
matatk: From our perspective: you said the keyword "tracking". We can take it off the agenda until it comes up again.
Alternative text for short-form video
<matatk> source: whatwg/html#11080
<matatk> tracking: w3c/
matatk: Demelza and Steve comented on the source issue here. This is about providing short alt texts for short form videos. The advice given seems very good. Tehre are a couple of posts on that long thread that I wanted to highlight. One of them is a comment from someone that covers a whole range of options and talks about the ned for a role. The
other one was from Demelza and Steve that makes a suggestion that works for short form video.
matatk: Did we think that we needed a role for that element? You interact with the video elemtn controls, not the elemnt itself.
matatk; i introduced the upcomign model element which is a HTML element ocntaining a 3D model. It is interesting bevause it has a lot in common with images and videos, but is a bit more complex. A ideo usually ahs a start, an ene and just one video in there. A model can have multiple animations that can be shown. You can also interact with it and
move it and turn it and so forth. They can also be huge. You may have both an image and video thumbnail.
matatk: Thinking ahead to whether we need that and whether we need more alternative text-like attributes may be interesting anf fruitful.
matatk: I think we should do the following: Anyone who is interested in this can add to the discussion, what challenges do we see here, what extra spec work needs to be done ... so a few open questions we should discuss. Janina, Roy and I can get in contact with the corresponding working groups, however, before that we should get ahead of this one,
like creating a meaningful comment
CSS Update (Paul)
PaulG: More work on HDR. Otherwise nothing new, this week's meeting got canceled
Actions check-in
ReSpec color contrast issues
<matatk> speced/
matatk: Anyone itching to do actual coding? CSS? We use the published dark mode version for the specs, however it is not WCAG compliant.
Other business
W3C AC2025
<matatk> https://
matatk: I was lucky to go to the AC meeting and present on the A11y and AI panel. A lot of interesting topics. The slide are already available, use the link Matthew posted just above
matatk: Videos will get released in the future. I will follow up
Be done
> rrsagent, make minutes