15:58:20 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria-editors
15:58:24 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/05/28-aria-editors-irc
15:58:28 <Daniel> zakim, start meeting
16:00:15 <pkra> pkra has joined #aria-editors
16:05:18 <pkra> zakim, start meeting
16:05:52 <Daniel> zakim, start meeting
16:06:04 <Daniel> zakim, what is this meeting?
16:06:18 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #aria-editors
16:06:25 <Daniel> zakim, start meeting
16:06:25 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:06:27 <Zakim> Meeting: ARIA Editors
16:06:35 <pkra> scribe+
16:06:43 <pkra> topic: PR 2536
16:06:59 <pkra> Daniel: a fix to a change from the DPUB editorial?
16:07:22 <pkra> pkra: looks good. Weird that it has a prettier commit on dpub.
16:09:03 <pkra> ... we also wanted to run prettier on commits. I'm wondering if we should have a custom CI instead of the third party one. To pin versions and reduce flakiness.
16:09:11 <pkra> Daniel: I can do that.
16:09:43 <pkra> pkra: great! We had an issue to track this.
16:09:45 <pkra> ... https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2470
16:09:48 <pkra> ... I'll update that.
16:10:35 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_ has joined #aria-editors
16:11:26 <Daniel> Topic: Potential process updates
16:11:32 <pkra> topic: topic discussion from WG call May 15
16:11:38 <pkra> spectranaut_: we had a good discussion.
16:11:59 <pkra> ... lot of agreement that we sometimes spent too much time in triage
16:12:20 <pkra> ... one idea was keeping a board of priorities
16:12:36 <pkra> ... jamesn pointed out that we need people to work on things.
16:13:15 <pkra> ... for now, adding triage every other meeting. Everyone should agenda otherwise we don't.
16:13:31 <pkra> ... I feel some prioritization at triage would be good.
16:13:35 <pkra> ... I see 3 categories.
16:13:38 <Daniel> s/topic:/Topic;?
16:13:45 <pkra> ... "WG agrees, someone wants it"
16:13:57 <pkra> ... "WG agrees, needs someone to take it on"
16:14:00 <pkra> ... "neither"
16:14:05 <Daniel> s/Topic: Potential process updates//
16:14:14 <pkra> ... there may be skepticism.
16:15:31 <Daniel> q+
16:17:17 <pkra> pkra: it's good to hear there's  shared concern.
16:17:57 <pkra> ... I could imagine the chairs directing more strongly, e.g., doing triage.
16:18:32 <pkra> ... the bigger problem in my mind is that some things are stuck whether group members do something or not, i.e., when we cannot get vendors on board.
16:18:40 <pkra> ... even from vendors, e.g., name from heading
16:19:54 <pkra> daniel: I see the problem of influencing vendors, too.
16:20:40 <pkra> spectranaut_: I see chairs less proactive, since WG is a consensus driven process.
16:21:34 <pkra> ... but I can see the need to work on the communication with vendors. See what is being prioritized.
16:26:06 <pkra> pkra: I really appreciate the chairs work. I feel like there may be this hump we need to get over. Like CSS a decade ago.
16:27:40 <pkra> ... the ACT call was a good example of complicating things to make things smoother down the line.
16:28:34 <pkra> spectranaut_: right. It's important to keep the group working well. For triage, I think we will focus on hurrying it along.
16:28:53 <pkra> Daniel: regarding communication, I think we could try to improve our signaling.
16:29:24 <pkra> ... e.g. "we're waiting for commitment"
16:30:35 <pkra> spectranaut_: for prioritization, I was thinking about priorities from the WG's point of view.
16:31:03 <pkra> ... yesterday, we spoke about "what do we want to focus our energy on"
16:31:50 <pkra> Daniel: right. I was thinking about priorities being clear but no implementation signals showing up.
16:38:59 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:39:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/28-aria-editors-minutes.html Daniel
16:39:21 <pkra> thanks, Daniel
16:39:25 <pkra> I'll email them.
16:44:55 <pkra> pkra has joined #aria-editors