Meeting minutes
Announcements
ChrisLoiselle: Announcements. Open to the floor
Welcome to Jennifer - new member.
JenStrickland: New to WCAG2ICT - been in AGWG for quite a while. In DC area.
<bba11y> Thank you Jen!
https://
Wiki gives overview & important links
Survey results: Review proposed updates to 2.4.2 Page Titled
https://
ChrisLoiselle: Want to try and move this on, or pause to allow us to work on other things
https://
(Proposal 1)
maryjom: Last week, we addressed the software portion of this - reached resolution for non-web software criterion
<maryjom> https://
maryjom: But then had another discussion on non-web documents
Question of what is the page title for a document - is it the filename, or the name that you see when you open the document?
Then further discussion - does a document always have a title that describes it purpose.
Consider movies, music, pieces of art. They may not have a title that describes the topic or purpose..
We had already addressed something similar for software - as name is not always the purpose of the software.
… But maybe we need similar adjustments for non-web documents; and will need to work on proposals for non-web documents.
ChrisLoiselle: Action item for the group is to propose possible proposal for non-web documents - create a draft pull request and circulate to the task force to review in next meeting.
(This is for 2.4.2. Page titled, specifically for non-web documents).
Edits to work on for EN 301 549
<maryjom> Issues related to EN 301 549 - https://
Mary Jo has added a tag specific to EN 301 549 work
… See link above
We may wish to harmonise language - remove mention of "underlying" when referring to platform software. And a few more issues
maryjom will add more issues to GitHub
Mike_Pluke: If we get rid of "underlying" it will be consistent with EN 301 549. There is some current discussion around platform software - but getting rid of "underlying" will help
maryjom: We also use "user agent" or "platform software" and our definition of platform software includes user agent. May need to tweak the definition
GreggVan: 2 things. 1) underlying platform software. Problem was that WCAG2ICT decided to get rid of underlying first, so it was removed in EN. There is no problem with using underlying in front of the term "platform software". The problem was a perception that the definition was for "underlying platform software".
GreggVan: 2) We would like it to be consistent in both EN and WCAG2ICT
… User agent / platform software. They should be defined as different terms. Platform software can act as a user agent.
Mike_Pluke: User agent is usually an agent for some type of content (e.g. for web, or for some type of document).
… Whereas platform software supports high-level software applications
maryjom: Only time we came up against this was from a public comment which had misinterpreted how it appeared. We never intended to define a new term "underlying user agent". Then we started removing use of underlying in some places where it was not needed
GreggVan: If you use it in some places and not others - causes people to question why it is used somewhere and not others
maryjom: We will have to review the doc for underlying
<ChrisLoiselle> Phil: Request for poll resolution ?
<ChrisLoiselle> Mary Jo: I will create PR then we can review.
maryjom will create PR to show the impact of removing "underlying". The TF will then review it
Now back on IRC - was dropped briefly
User agent discussion in issue 605
<bba11y> +1 for the editorial consistency wrt capitalization -- wcag2issues TF also doing the same.
Editorial / consistency changes: w3c/
maryjom: EN issue that is worth discussion...
<bba11y> +1 for keeping scrub of underlying separate from capitalization fix
bba11y: Welcome to Jen. Had some difficulties in main WCAG directory - doing maintenance on understanding docs.
If you don't keep changes fresh, it's easy to get a mismatch
So review PRs soon after creation, then merge as soon as it is approved.
maryjom: There was a note in 4 SCs and it would be good to discuss
In EN I noticed NOTE 1 in SCs 1.4.2 (in software), 2.1.2, 2.3.1, 2.2.2 all use the same note in EN
<maryjom> Since any [part of a non-web document or software] that does not meet this success criterion can interfere with a user's ability to use the [whole document or software], all content [in the document or software] (whether or not it is used to meet other success criteria) must meet this success criterion.
Note in question - see above
EN wanted to change the language to remove "must". This came from the original WCAG language and was carried forward in WCAG2ICT
In EN, the language is changed in all 4 SCs, but is not consistent
EN uses "shall" instead of "must"
<Zakim> bba11y, you wanted to mention wcag2issues has had recent difficulty with overlapping PRs and to ask to be reminded why we needed not at all ?
bba11y: Why do we have this note? Should be flagged with a note as it is a non-interference criteria.
maryjom: Taken directly from WCAG
… Only thing we did was word substitution to remove web terminology
(Discussion about whether notes should use the word "must" in WCAG.)
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
Mike_Pluke: Confirms that one note in EN does use "shall". It will be necessary for all content of the software to meet this success criteria
GreggVan: Because of the conformance model it would be necessary to ...
maryjom: Good to discuss what the change should be - and get it right in WCAG, WCAG2ICT and EN 301 549.
ChrisLoiselle: Link above points to deploy preview
Adding another sentence/para may be sufficient
ChrisLoiselle: Could make a change to Conformance Requirement rather than in the individual note.
maryjom: This note is in all 4 SCs in WCAG - so we should probably do it there
(in the notes)
<Zakim> bba11y, you wanted to file issue on wcag repo
bba11y: We have to have a NOTE 1 that works well for us (so remove the word must)
… This may be the first time we change a note with substantive changes (so may need to be NOTE 1 Modified).
maryjom: And we need an issue on WCAG2 to remove the word "must". bba11y to raise this
GreggVan: Will have to go through an errata process so could take some time
<Mike_Pluke> This is what we have put for 2.1.2 in EN 301 549, which I think is correct: Since any part of a non-web software that does not meet this success criterion can interfere with a user's ability to use the whole software, it is necessary for all content (which includes all parts of the software) in the software (whether or not it is used to meet other
<Mike_Pluke> success criteria) to meet this success criterion.
Mike_Pluke: Had a look at 2.1.2. Would be necessary to meet would be a better way of phrasing it.
Mike_Pluke: Very easy to misuse the word "must" or other similar imperatives. They tend to slip in!
bba11y to raise an issue on WCAG.
maryjom to create a PR in WCAG2ICT for us to make the change
maryjom: Couple of instances where there appeared to be a copy/paste error. Dragging movements table is in target size
maryjom: Not sure if this is the latest version.
GreggVan: posting the link to the latest version of EN
<GreggVan> https://
11.1.4.13
Has table for timing adjustable instead of hover
Mike_Pluke will follow up on these
<ChrisLoiselle> Open issue in wcag2ict to showcase that EN is editing current version 15 with edits.
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
<bba11y> Issue for AGWG: w3c/
We will talk again next week.