13:38:06 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:38:10 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/05/08-wcag2ict-irc
13:38:10 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:38:11 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:38:14 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, clear agenda
13:38:14 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:38:24 <ChrisLoiselle> chair:  Mary Jo Mueller , Chris Loiselle
13:38:30 <ChrisLoiselle> meeting:  WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:38:42 <ChrisLoiselle> rrsagent, make minutes
13:38:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html ChrisLoiselle
13:38:58 <ChrisLoiselle> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:38:58 <Zakim> ok, ChrisLoiselle
13:39:45 <ChrisLoiselle> regrets: Mitch
13:42:37 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda: Announcements
13:42:55 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda: Issue 627: 2.4.2 Page Titled PR #626
13:43:34 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda: Work through edits on 2.4.2 Page Title Issue 627 Google Doc
13:43:56 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda: Analysis for SC language changes Google Sheet
13:44:55 <ChrisLoiselle> agenda?
13:45:30 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda: Announcements
13:45:32 <ChrisLoiselle> agenda?
13:46:08 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, start meeting
13:46:08 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:46:10 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:46:14 <ChrisLoiselle> zakim, clear agenda
13:46:14 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:46:21 <ChrisLoiselle> chair:  Mary Jo Mueller, Chris Loiselle
13:46:27 <ChrisLoiselle> meeting:  WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:46:35 <ChrisLoiselle> rrsagent, make minutes
13:46:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html ChrisLoiselle
13:46:45 <ChrisLoiselle> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:46:45 <Zakim> ok, ChrisLoiselle
13:46:52 <ChrisLoiselle> regrets:  Mitch
13:47:17 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda+  Announcements
13:47:29 <ChrisLoiselle> agenda + Issue 627: 2.4.2 Page Titled PR #626
13:47:41 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda+ Work through edits on 2.4.2 Page Title Issue 627 Google Doc
13:47:53 <ChrisLoiselle> Agenda+ Analysis for SC language changes
13:47:55 <ChrisLoiselle> agenda?
13:48:46 <ChrisLoiselle> For announcements, announce that the WCAG2Mobile FPWD published yesterday 6 May.
13:54:42 <PhilDay> PhilDay has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:31 <PhilDay> agenda?
13:59:34 <PhilDay> present+
13:59:43 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
14:00:19 <bruce> bruce has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:40 <bruce> present+
14:02:21 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:35 <maryjom> maryjom has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:46 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:03:46 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from ChrisLoiselle]
14:03:49 <loicmn> present+
14:04:21 <PhilDay> EN 301 549 - Gregg mentioned that the next draft is coming soon
14:04:57 <PhilDay> Publication of WCAG2Mobile - 1st mobile draft was published yesterday.
14:05:19 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:05:25 <PhilDay> https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2mobile-22/
14:05:28 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:05:28 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Issue 627: 2.4.2 Page Titled PR #626 -- taken up [from ChrisLoiselle]
14:06:25 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:06:25 <Zakim> agendum 2 was just opened, PhilDay
14:06:33 <ChrisLoiselle> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-U-EpohlWn5DzaG5kDGhuQIItYI5pCq_gCLFxLhcQH4/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.m7itzlcauhau
14:06:38 <bruce> https://www.w3.org/news/2025/draft-note-for-review-guidance-on-applying-wcag-2-2-to-mobile-applications-wcag2mobile/
14:06:48 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:06:48 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Work through edits on 2.4.2 Page Title Issue 627 Google Doc -- taken up [from ChrisLoiselle]
14:07:16 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:07:23 <bruce> Also, 2.1 republished https://www.w3.org/news/2025/web-content-accessibility-guidelines-wcag-2-1-updated/
14:08:37 <PhilDay> bruce: Had a hard time fitting the updates into the sources doc from google doc - so been doing edits in PR instead. Are we going to end up with 2 versions of 2.4.2 or just 1 version? Also are we renaming 2.4.2?
14:09:01 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle: Google doc is for brainstorming ideas during call, then update PR after the call. If it is too confusing having 2 sources we could combine
14:09:31 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:10:03 <PhilDay> maryjom: Qs for bruce. Did you incorporate proposal 2 or 3 into the PR?
14:10:26 <PhilDay> maryjom: Gregg has also added another proposal which is different
14:10:59 <PhilDay> bruce: Updated PR that was done 2 weeks ago to incorporate proposal 2. Had issue with heading levels
14:11:22 <PhilDay> bruce: If all happy with proposal 2, is the PR close enough?
14:13:00 <PhilDay> [Chris sharing screen to show PR 626 split screen with the google doc]
14:13:33 <ChrisLoiselle> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/626
14:15:53 <maryjom> q+
14:16:11 <PhilDay> ack maryjom
14:16:47 <PhilDay> maryjom: Consider 2.4.1 - we did different things for software and documents. We didn't have separate headings, just parenthetic statements
14:17:07 <PhilDay> bruce: Couldn't use this model - as we don't have the word substitution for software
14:17:39 <PhilDay> q+ to say parenthetic still works
14:18:45 <PhilDay> bruce: suggests using separate headings for applying to documents vs software - to make it clearer
14:19:02 <PhilDay> maryjom: This change would be problematic for 2.4.1 where notes are split between the 2
14:19:54 <PhilDay> q?
14:20:17 <bruce> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/624/files
14:22:15 <PhilDay> PhilDay: Think the separate headings approach that Bruce has proposed is cleaner than the current parenthetic statements approach that we previously used.
14:22:36 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle & maryjom - does involve quite a lot of editorial work to do this
14:23:19 <PhilDay> maryjom: Suggest we put this to the group via a survey and compare the 2 approaches
14:23:39 <PhilDay> ... have an alternative PR with Gregg's proposal with the other formatting
14:23:52 <bruce> Sorry, that was wrong PR!
14:24:07 <bruce> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/626/files
14:24:19 <PhilDay> ACTION: create alternative PR, then issue survey comparing the different approaches. maryjom to do this.
14:25:48 <PhilDay> bruce: Does it make sense to have 2 subheadings rather than 1 (H6 vs H5)?
14:26:12 <PhilDay> bruce: Second question is what we do with short headings? Propose keep the same, and just change the text following
14:27:16 <PhilDay> maryjom: May need to replace the word page in the short name
14:27:27 <PhilDay> ... (show the word substitution)
14:28:27 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
14:28:36 <PhilDay> ... This was what the ETSI committee did - change the short name to include word substitution so it no longer referred to Page (which is web-specific language).
14:29:18 <PhilDay> bruce: If we do this word substitution we lose all the words that were in the WCAG 2.2 SC - none of these appear in the non-web SC title
14:29:47 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
14:29:54 <GreggVan> q+
14:30:03 <GreggVan> present+
14:30:08 <PhilDay> ack PhilDay
14:30:08 <Zakim> PhilDay, you wanted to say parenthetic still works
14:30:19 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
14:31:17 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Proposed language doesn't make sense to me. If name is defined as being descriptive - just stating every product's name should be its name
14:31:57 <PhilDay> ... What does the title of the product mean?
14:32:43 <bruce> Change would be:  2.4.2 Software Names: [Non-web software] have names that provide description identification.
14:33:35 <bruce> q+ to make change to handle in PR 626
14:33:50 <PhilDay> q?
14:34:22 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:34:37 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Intent of this provision - when you change pages (URLs) - that the user has an idea which page they have landed on.
14:34:39 <Mike_Pluke> present+
14:35:30 <PhilDay> ... Could apply to each "window" in software - but not all software has windows.
14:35:45 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:36:18 <PhilDay> ... If a product has windows, then each window should be differentiable
14:37:06 <PhilDay> ... But if we can't talk about windows - then just say it doesn't apply to software
14:37:49 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle: Could add this to a survey
14:38:21 <PhilDay> ... Then we could get some consensus
14:38:26 <PhilDay> q?
14:38:30 <PhilDay> ack bruce
14:38:30 <Zakim> bruce, you wanted to make change to handle in PR 626
14:38:52 <PhilDay> bruce: [looking at deploy preview on PR 626]
14:39:19 <ChrisLoiselle> https://deploy-preview-626--wcag2ict.netlify.app/#page-titled
14:39:31 <PhilDay> ... what this proposal would have "Software named: Non-web software have names that provide description identification.
14:39:56 <PhilDay> GreggVan: What would be the descriptive identification for the program Shazam?
14:40:15 <PhilDay> bruce: Shazam is meaningful for the person that is trying to change focus.
14:41:09 <PhilDay> q?
14:41:30 <PhilDay> ack Mike_Pluke
14:42:24 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
14:42:33 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Fundamental problem - descriptive identification doesn't add much more. Name is fine - just stop there as it's not really descriptive - it doesn't describe a topic or purpose. Name is an identifier. Not a descriptive identifier
14:42:58 <PhilDay> q+ to suggest unique identifier rather than descriptive
14:44:07 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle: Often have some sort of "About" section to get more information about the product - which could help the user to identify more about the product - so we could refer to context specific help for this
14:44:13 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:44:20 <ChrisLoiselle> ack ChrisLoiselle
14:44:23 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:44:26 <PhilDay> ack PhilDay
14:44:26 <Zakim> PhilDay, you wanted to suggest unique identifier rather than descriptive
14:44:54 <Mike_Pluke> q+
14:44:58 <ChrisLoiselle> Phil: Unique identifier could be an option
14:44:59 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:45:05 <PhilDay> ack Mike_Pluke
14:45:16 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: have no problem with unique identifier
14:45:35 <loicmn> q+ to suggest that unique identifier does not work
14:45:39 <PhilDay> ... And swapping windows - there is often a purpose for changing windows
14:45:44 <PhilDay> q?
14:45:45 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:45:50 <maryjom> ack loicmn
14:45:50 <Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to suggest that unique identifier does not work
14:45:55 <GreggVan> q+
14:46:20 <PhilDay> loicmn: We cannot require unique names - as they don't know all the other developers in the world.
14:46:47 <PhilDay> loicmn: Suggest we just stop and say it doesn't apply.
14:47:01 <GreggVan> q+ to say    how about    "where software has titles attributes for windows or screens, titles are provided that ...
14:47:04 <bruce> Maybe:  2.4.2 Software Names: [Non-web software] have names that provide meaningful identification.
14:47:06 <PhilDay> ... We could add a requirement to the platform to have programmatic access to the name
14:47:12 <PhilDay> q?
14:47:18 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
14:47:18 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say    how about    "where software has titles attributes for windows or screens, titles are provided that ...
14:47:20 <GreggVan> ACK G
14:47:46 <PhilDay> GreggVan:  "where software has titles attributes for windows or screens, titles are provided that ..."
14:48:22 <PhilDay> ... if there is a way to title them, then make these titles unique or differentiable within this software.
14:48:31 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
14:48:43 <loicmn> +1 to Gregg's proposal
14:48:53 <PhilDay> ack Crh
14:48:53 <Mike_Pluke> +1 also
14:48:55 <bruce> -1 to "unique identify" per Loic's concern that author cannot know their software name is unique
14:48:56 <PhilDay> ack ChrisLoiselle
14:49:02 <ChrisLoiselle> https://deploy-preview-626--wcag2ict.netlify.app/#page-titled
14:49:22 <bruce> Note 2 is what we had before
14:49:36 <PhilDay> Deploy preview - NOTE 2 (ADDED) addresses some of this concern
14:49:56 <PhilDay> ... Captures best practice
14:50:01 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
14:50:06 <ChrisLoiselle> ack ChrisLoiselle
14:50:08 <maryjom> q+
14:50:19 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Would add something to NOTE 2 (ADDED)
14:50:26 <PhilDay> q?
14:50:30 <PhilDay> ack maryjom
14:50:53 <PhilDay> maryjom: Notes would need adjusting - NOTE 1 would need to be removed altogether as we are not using Title.
14:51:07 <PhilDay> ... departing from WCAG so don't need to refer to Intent
14:51:35 <PhilDay> ... And note 2 also uses "Title" so we should reword this.
14:51:43 <bruce> q+
14:52:18 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle: We may also have to not talk about "word substitution" as it is not quite accurate
14:52:39 <PhilDay> We are substituting the whole SC - not just a word within it
14:52:50 <GreggVan> Although not required by this success criterion, ensuring that apps that have individual windows or screens that support a title or name for the window or screen, provide a title/name that allows unique identification, and where possible describes the topic or purpose).  This would address the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally considered a best practice.
14:53:56 <GreggVan> or better yet "  The does not apply directly to software through simple word substutio but ensuring that apps that have individual windows or screens that support a title or name for the window or screen, provide a title/name that allows unique identification, and where possible describes the topic or purpose).  This would address the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally
14:53:56 <GreggVan>  considered a best practice
14:54:00 <PhilDay> q?
14:54:06 <PhilDay> ack bruce
14:54:07 <GreggVan> q+
14:54:28 <ChrisLoiselle> rrsagent, make minutes
14:54:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html ChrisLoiselle
14:54:35 <PhilDay> bruce: These notes are what we currently have in WCAG2ICT. Part of what I was trying to do was reuse as much as we could - to avoid concerns from others
14:54:59 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:55:08 <GreggVan>  The does not apply directly to software through simple word substutio but ensuring that apps that have individual windows or screens that support a title or name for the window or screen, require that software provide a title/name that allows unique identification, and where possible describes the topic or purpose).  This would address the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally
14:55:22 <PhilDay> bruce: Think it is OK for notes to refer to Title, even if we have substituted Name for title - I don't think it is contradictory.
14:55:41 <PhilDay> GreggVan: instead of all the notes - just have the statement above
14:55:52 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
14:56:13 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:56:18 <GreggVan> The does not apply directly to software through simple word substutio but ensuring that apps that have individual windows or screens that support a title or name for the window or screen, be required to provide a title/name that allows unique identification, and where possible describes the topic or purpose).  This would address the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally
14:57:23 <maryjom> This does not apply directly to software through simple word substitution. However, ensuring that software applicationss that have individual windows or screens that support a title or name for the window or screen, require that software provide a title/name that allows unique identification (and, where possible, describes the topic or purpose).
14:57:23 <maryjom> This would address the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally considered a best practice.
14:57:42 <ChrisLoiselle> q?
14:58:00 <PhilDay> q?
14:58:11 <bbailey> Notes for 2.4.2 in PR 626 are unchanged from 15 November 2024 pub.
14:58:20 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle: Best thing to do is bring this proposal in a survey for comment from the larger TF
14:58:47 <bbailey> I think it is okay for notes to refer to title, even though the suggested replacement uses title.
14:58:57 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Quick question. Mike has 24 hours to do final tweak on EN 301 549.
14:59:06 <PhilDay> ... Then not revising until later in summer.
14:59:32 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Not convinced we've got enough that is finalised yet - so leave it for now in EN
15:00:04 <bbailey> present+
15:00:40 <PhilDay> maryjom: 1 quick question. If we do get language together - would we be able to submit as a comment on the next official version?
15:00:51 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Yes we can add from a comment
15:01:22 <PhilDay> GreggVan: This is the last chance for comments. And please do not wait until the last day for comments.
15:03:28 <ChrisLoiselle> regrets : Laura
15:04:38 <loicmn> loicmn has left #wcag2ict
15:04:48 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:04:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay