12:46:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #matf
12:47:01 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/06/18-matf-irc
12:47:01 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
12:47:02 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Joe_Humbert
12:47:22 <Joe_Humbert> Zakim, this is MATF June 18, 2025
12:47:22 <Zakim> got it, Joe_Humbert
12:47:36 <Joe_Humbert> Meeting: MATF June 18, 2025
12:47:42 <Joe_Humbert> Chair+
12:47:45 <Joe_Humbert> present+
12:48:08 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ 2.4.7 Focus Visible
12:48:31 <Joe_Humbert> zakim, agenda?
12:48:32 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
12:48:32 <Zakim> 3. 2.4.7 Focus Visible [from Joe_Humbert]
12:48:32 <Zakim> 4. 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value [from Joe_Humbert]
12:48:32 <Zakim> 5. 2.4.7 Focus Visible [from Joe_Humbert]
12:49:04 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 2.4.7 Focus Visible
12:50:41 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 3
12:50:48 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 4
12:50:51 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 5
12:50:55 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ 2.4.7 Focus Visible
12:51:02 <Joe_Humbert> zakim, agenda?
12:51:02 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
12:51:03 <Zakim> 6. 2.4.7 Focus Visible [from Joe_Humbert]
12:51:47 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 1
12:51:51 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 2
12:51:54 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 3
12:51:57 <Joe_Humbert> zakim, agenda?
12:51:57 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
12:51:58 <Zakim> 6. 2.4.7 Focus Visible [from Joe_Humbert]
12:52:03 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 5
12:52:12 <Joe_Humbert> agenda- 6
12:52:17 <Joe_Humbert> zakim, agenda?
12:52:17 <Zakim> I see nothing remaining on the agenda
12:52:44 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ 2.4.7 Focus Visible
12:53:51 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ Keyboard interface definition
12:54:05 <Joe_Humbert> agenda+ Page definition
12:54:11 <Joe_Humbert> zakim, agenda?
12:54:11 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
12:54:12 <Zakim> 7. 2.4.7 Focus Visible [from Joe_Humbert]
12:54:12 <Zakim> 8. Keyboard interface definition [from Joe_Humbert]
12:54:12 <Zakim> 9. Page definition [from Joe_Humbert]
12:54:56 <Joe_Humbert> regrets+ Quintin Balsdon
12:57:30 <Jamie> Jamie has joined #matf
12:57:41 <Jamie> present+
12:57:43 <Tanya> Tanya has joined #matf
13:01:56 <Jon_Gibbins> Jon_Gibbins has joined #matf
13:02:04 <hdv> zakim, agenda?
13:02:04 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
13:02:05 <Zakim> 7. 2.4.7 Focus Visible [from Joe_Humbert]
13:02:05 <Zakim> 8. Keyboard interface definition [from Joe_Humbert]
13:02:05 <Zakim> 9. Page definition [from Joe_Humbert]
13:02:09 <rachaely> rachaely has joined #matf
13:02:19 <pauljadam> pauljadam has joined #matf
13:03:02 <hdv> present+
13:03:03 <hdv> scribe+
13:03:22 <Tanya> present+
13:03:28 <rachaely> present+
13:03:41 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: welcome everyone
13:03:47 <hdv> Zakim, draft minutes please
13:03:47 <Zakim> I don't understand 'draft minutes', hdv
13:03:55 <hdv> Zakim, take up next
13:03:56 <Zakim> agendum 7 -- 2.4.7 Focus Visible -- taken up [from Joe_Humbert]
13:04:02 <hdv> RRSAgent, draft minutes please
13:04:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/06/18-matf-minutes.html hdv
13:04:25 <Jon_Gibbins> present+
13:04:28 <Joe_Humbert> https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/51
13:04:38 <pauljadam> present+
13:04:56 <julianmka> julianmka has joined #MATF
13:04:58 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: this was discussed over a year ago
13:05:17 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: one of the big things was to define keyboard interface… we also talked about different techniques, covered that last time
13:05:39 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: most of the hang up on this issue was the discussion of keyboard focus indicator, researching that and possibly changing or expanding the definition / normative text
13:05:53 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: some research was done on different types of focus indications
13:06:04 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: it seems like people were ok with the current definition
13:06:10 <GleidsonRamos> GleidsonRamos has joined #matf
13:06:14 <GleidsonRamos> present+
13:06:15 <julianmka> present+
13:06:31 <hdv> github: https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/51
13:06:39 <Tim> Tim has joined #matf
13:06:44 <Tim> present+
13:06:54 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: we talked about adding a second note
13:07:00 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: is there any other discussion on this?
13:07:57 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: if there's no other discussion, I'll ask for +1s to see if we're ok keeping this SC as written, with the potential changes to a new definition for keyboard interface and adding that note
13:08:02 <Jamie> +1
13:08:09 <hdv> +1
13:08:10 <pauljadam> +1
13:08:13 <julianmka> +1
13:08:15 <rachaely> +1
13:08:24 <Tim> +1
13:08:24 <Tanya> +1
13:09:41 <hdv> Tanya: I created a bunch of sub issues this morning; we're currently discussing with @@@ and JJ, who is still on vacation. Still need to determine next steps in the process. For now I'd add a sub action, can do that
13:09:51 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: ok
13:10:22 <hdv> Zakim, take up next
13:10:22 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, hdv
13:10:25 <hdv> q?
13:10:49 <hdv> rachaely: maybe left over from last meeting
13:10:51 <hdv> ack ra
13:10:54 <Joe_Humbert> ack rachaely
13:10:56 <hdv> Zakim, take up next
13:10:56 <Zakim> agendum 8 -- Keyboard interface definition -- taken up [from Joe_Humbert]
13:10:59 <Joe_Humbert> https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/66
13:11:07 <hdv> github-bot, topic https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/66
13:11:07 <github-bot> Topic: Definition of "keyboard interface" in mobile application context
13:11:07 <github-bot> OK, I'll post this discussion to https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/66.
13:11:18 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: this started out from the original meeting last year in August
13:11:32 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: this is about defining keyboard interface, would want to include assistive tech like voice control
13:11:48 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: there was discussion re keyboard focus and cursor, technically they are different concepts
13:11:59 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: in WCAG virtual keyboards are examples of keyboard interfaces
13:12:13 <Carol> Carol has joined #MATF
13:12:18 <Carol> present+
13:12:47 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: Jamie commented on it too (see GH issue)
13:12:51 <Joe_Humbert> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#dfn-keyboard-interface
13:13:02 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: let's check the WCAG2ICT definition
13:13:06 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: that has 2 notes
13:13:29 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: *reads notes*
13:14:46 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: I don't see a lot of difference between WCAG 2 and WCAG2ICT
13:14:58 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: so I'd like to open it up for discussion
13:14:59 <hdv> q?
13:15:04 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: do we need to expand it?
13:15:07 <julianmka> q+
13:15:12 <hdv> ack jul
13:15:15 <Joe_Humbert> ack julianmka
13:15:29 <Jon_Gibbins> q+
13:16:06 <hdv> julianmka: in a lot of other conversations on keyboard accessibility, we have not extended the definition to virtual keyboards… given that, this definition seems sufficient to me. I appreciate the mouse keys shoutout, knowing that pointer emulation is not the same as being keyboard operable. This might give us what we need
13:16:07 <Tanya> q+
13:16:13 <hdv> ack jo
13:16:50 <pauljadam> pauljadam has joined #matf
13:16:54 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: something else that might need clarification… whether or not @@@ on Android counts as a keyboard interface… it's not like mouse keys, but it sits somewhere between mouse keys and keyboard, virtual or otherwise
13:17:28 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: on some Android devices there's a joystick like interface
13:17:31 <julianmka> q+
13:18:04 <Tanya> q-
13:18:06 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: my gut feeling is is that this doesn't really sit in the keyboard interface definition, you wouldn't call a joystick a keyboard, but would be able to use it to navigate
13:18:27 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: not sure if it is clear that that therefore doesn't count… wonder if we need to clarify
13:18:30 <julianmka> q-
13:18:39 <Tanya> q+
13:18:45 <hdv> ack Tanya
13:19:03 <rachaely> q+
13:19:18 <hdv> Tanya: looking into the issues that I was creating this morning… currently we have a sub issue for 2.1.2, it's about that we need a clear distinction between keyboard interface and accessibility interface
13:19:37 <hdv> Tanya: should definitely be taken into consideration in 2.1.1
13:20:32 <hdv> Tanya: when something that is focusable with keyboard interface is not focusable with accessibility interface, that would be a gap, that we could fix in this definition or in a separate note. Or maybe with accesssibility interface as a new definition
13:20:49 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: not sure if we have a def for a11y interface
13:20:55 <hdv> s/def/definition
13:21:12 <hdv> Tanya: don't think we have a separate definition for that
13:21:16 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: WCAG2ICT doesn't either
13:21:38 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: thanks for creating those sub tasks
13:21:40 <hdv> ack rachaely
13:22:08 <hdv> rachaely: agree with Tanya. To me this makes sense in context of focus visible, but not in terms of keyboard accessibility.
13:22:28 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: do people on the call feel we should separate the definition?
13:23:25 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: seems like rachaely and Tanya 's comments lean towards adding notes, as opposed to changing the definition, is that accurate?
13:23:37 <hdv> rachaely: yes to me it makes sense to leave the definition and add a note to 2.1.1
13:23:55 <pauljadam> q+
13:24:40 <hdv> pauljadam: I wonder; on iOS if you make something operable to VoiceOver, it works with all of the other AT, basically, so you don't have to do extra work for each one
13:25:08 <julianmka> q+
13:25:39 <Joe_Humbert> ack pauljadam
13:25:46 <Joe_Humbert> ack julianmka
13:26:01 <pauljadam> https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-app-accessibility/voice-control-accessibility-evaluation-criteria
13:27:00 <pauljadam> I've seen that happen when a developer makes something focusable only when swiping with VoiceOver but you could not directly touch the element and then it was also not keyboard or voice control operable.
13:27:01 <hdv> julianmka: in a lot of cases peoople have built components without the understanding of the accessibility APIs. Have seen cases where like VoiceOver is accessible, but keyboard is not… with Swift UI out of the box usually would work fine but when people role their eyes we need to have extra eyes on
13:27:20 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: a much larger discussion… let's vote on that, do we need a separate definition for accessibility interface?
13:27:38 <pauljadam> Note: Most of the work that goes into making your app accessible to VoiceOver users will also make it more accessible for Voice Control users. For this reason, we recommend you start with the VoiceOver Accessibility Evaluation Criteria before evaluating Voice Control.
13:27:42 <hdv> 0 (not sure)
13:27:45 <rachaely> +1
13:27:46 <Jamie> Jamie has joined #matf
13:27:47 <Carol> +1
13:27:48 <Tanya> +1
13:27:50 <Tim> +1
13:27:51 <Jamie> present+
13:27:52 <Jamie> 0
13:27:56 <julianmka> *when people build their own custom components, they need to have their eyes open
13:28:04 <Jon_Gibbins> -1
13:28:21 <pauljadam> I'd need to know what the definition is
13:28:28 <julianmka> 0 also not sure
13:28:54 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: based on this I think I should create an issue, wecan bring it up for discussion in another meeting… 
13:29:12 <Jon_Gibbins> I’m not sure we do. Unless I misunderstand the intent, I feel that an accessibility interface consistutes working to the platform’s native accessibility API, so that software works with whatever assistive technology we’re referring to (voice access, switch access, screen reader, etc.)
13:29:36 <Jamie> +1 to Jon_Gibbons definition lol
13:29:36 <julianmka> +1 to Jon_Gibbins
13:29:41 <pauljadam> Sort of strange that Apple has no guidance on supporting Switch Control or Full Keyboard Access https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-app-accessibility/overview-of-accessibility-nutrition-labels
13:30:07 <Jon_Gibbins> That’s essentially 4.1.2 mainly
13:30:15 <Joe_Humbert> ACTION: create github issue for "accessibility interface" definition
13:30:40 <hdv> Zakim, take up next please
13:30:40 <Zakim> agendum 9 -- Page definition -- taken up [from Joe_Humbert]
13:30:52 <Jamie> agreed pauljadam maybe it will be added later
13:30:57 <Joe_Humbert> https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/110
13:31:06 <hdv> github-bot, topic: https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/110
13:31:06 <github-bot> hdv, Sorry, I don't understand that command.  Try 'help'.
13:31:11 <hdv> github-bot, topic https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/110
13:31:12 <github-bot> Topic: Definition of "web page" in mobile application context
13:31:12 <github-bot> OK, I'll post this discussion to https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/110.
13:31:28 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: this is to try and figure out how we replace the word web page in the context of all success criteria, for WCAG 2.2
13:32:18 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: to bring up the context in the larger group… a lot of work happened, but seems to have stalled
13:32:19 <hdv> q+
13:32:42 <Jon_Gibbins> There is also the associated Issue https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/11
13:33:05 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: *reads comment in #110 *
13:34:19 <hdv> (this comment https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/110#issuecomment-2788714863)
13:34:35 <Jon_Gibbins> +q
13:34:46 <Joe_Humbert> ack hdv
13:35:28 <pauljadam> Do we just need to remove the word "web" and call it page? Or swap "web" with "app" and call it an "app page" :)
13:36:02 <hdv> hdv: +1 to 'seems to have stalled in the larger WCAG group'
13:36:40 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: I've also stalled my thinking on this
13:37:02 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: re using just the word 'page', would be a simple switch that would just work
13:37:18 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: as we're making a work in progress, we can use a working title, such as page
13:37:39 <pauljadam> I think simplest solution is just call it "page" but if it needs to be "app page" or "mobile page" seems fine, but it should remain a page so that Page Titled fits well.
13:37:45 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: I'd call them a screen… but then that's also a physical hardware term… view is problematic for similar reasons
13:37:59 <Jamie5> Jamie5 has joined #matf
13:38:17 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: the reason we're defining this for work in the standard… so that we can say this is what we mean by this phrase, you can call it something else, but this is what we call it. Whatever we end up with has to work for iOS / Android
13:38:32 <Jamie5> present+
13:38:34 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: another word was 'activity', but is a bit vague, sounds even like it coul be about multple screens
13:38:58 <pauljadam> mobile apps are the web :)
13:38:59 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: the W3C is about web, which is perhaps why we struggle with this view definition as it has to capture what is not web
13:39:10 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: we might get some pushback with what we're trying to define here
13:39:31 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: so it;s not en easy challenge
13:40:19 <pauljadam> View and Screen does not work in my opinion.
13:40:24 <Jamie5> q+
13:40:50 <Joe_Humbert> ack Jon_Gibbins
13:40:58 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: in WCAG 2.2 it is set of web pages… in WCAG2ICT it is set of software programs and set of documents etc
13:40:59 <Joe_Humbert> ack Jamie5
13:41:07 <Joe_Humbert> ack Jamie
13:41:15 <hdv> Jamie5: some people are still using the old mobile document from 2015
13:41:32 <hdv> Jamie5: the sooner we can move on from this topic and use a working definition… we can have somerthing to move forward from
13:42:21 <hdv> Jamie5: whatever we can agree on… and then we can get in the granular discussion  later
13:42:42 <hdv> Jamie5: but at the very least we can say we're not talking about a set of apps, move on from there
13:43:02 <Jon_Gibbins> +1 re Jamie5 on there being essentially no use for a “set of apps” definition
13:43:19 <pauljadam> Set of pages or set of mobile pages or set of app pages
13:43:28 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: i like the overall term Jon proposed
13:44:06 <pauljadam> no
13:44:19 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: we need to decide on an overall term we can agree on
13:44:32 <pauljadam> you need something that can be generically applied to both android and iOS and fits into WCAG, "page" is that :)
13:44:37 <rachaely> q+
13:44:39 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: what problems do people have with this definition… 
13:44:46 <hdv> q+
13:44:49 <Joe_Humbert> ack rachaely
13:44:55 <hdv> rachaely: I do like the term view as it is described in this definition
13:45:04 <hdv> rachaely: it's a pretty standard term used
13:45:18 <Jon_Gibbins> q+
13:45:23 <Tanya> q+
13:45:24 <hdv> rachaely: we also have the definition of a native mobile app
13:45:50 <hdv> rachaely: whats the value of that being in the definition?
13:45:55 <hdv> ack Jon_Gibbins
13:46:28 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: the issues are linked… I was considering originally set of web pages and set of software programs. There was a requirement to define them in that context
13:46:58 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: these are separate definitions we can deal with each one separately, eg accept one or multiple of them
13:47:14 <Joe_Humbert> ack hdv
13:47:24 <pauljadam> WCAG has the SC's Page Titled and Language of Page
13:47:38 <Jon_Gibbins> The text was originally quoted in a related issue for “set of web pages” / “set of software programs”: https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues/11
13:47:53 <pauljadam> q+
13:49:08 <pauljadam> look how many times the word "page" is in this checklist https://webaim.org/standards/wcag/checklist
13:50:13 <Jon_Gibbins> q+
13:50:25 <Joe_Humbert> ack Tanya
13:51:08 <hdv> hdv: I like view, screen, page (in that order), I don't agree with the problems the larger group sees in them. I don't beleive teams working on accessibility issues will actually, in reality, misunderstand what we're talking about when we use any of those phrases. Yes, theoretically people can poke holes in them, but people can to that with any term and also with a lot of existing WCAG, I know, I work at a government dept, that sees these all the
13:51:08 <hdv> time. I hope we won't be held back for much longer as I
13:51:55 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: yes we're looking for common ground, developers will undestand but also iuntermix these terms… we should define something and than we can move ahead
13:52:01 <pauljadam> hybrid apps can contain web pages right
13:52:10 <pauljadam> .html files are called web pages?
13:52:11 <pauljadam> :)
13:52:29 <hdv> Tanya: my understnaing is what we decide, should be applicable to native mobile apps, mobile web apps, hybrid apps and web components  too… whatever we choose, should be applicable to all of those things
13:52:55 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: what we sent out was drafted January of last year, it's old, and an early thing. Think we kind of moved away from talking about mobile web apps and hybrid apps
13:53:17 <Joe_Humbert> ack pauljadam
13:53:19 <hdv> pauljadam: native mobile apps could be hybrid
13:54:32 <hdv> pauljadam: I don't think users see a lot of difference between native apps and the web
13:54:49 <Joe_Humbert> ack Jon_Gibbins
13:55:07 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: I felt the same when we considered publishing the draft
13:55:45 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: we talked about including hybrid apps or any kind of web content. I think the feeling was that we already have the web content accessibility guidelines to apply to those situations… so our work is focused on native. But that is not reflected by the wording in the abstract
13:55:49 <hdv> q+
13:55:59 <Joe_Humbert> +1 to Jon's comment about WCAG already applying to web content
13:56:07 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: we'll need some clarity on that, are we talking about the web at all?
13:56:24 <pauljadam> if a user downloads an app in the App Store they don't know if it's a hybrid app or a pure native app
13:57:04 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: I lean towards 'page', but not sure if I consider native mobile to be the web, it works on the internet but is not HTML, CSS, JavaScript, but that's a whole different discussion
13:57:26 <pauljadam> an app you download from the app store can be made of HTML web views and wrapped into a native downloadable app
13:57:42 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: from my POV I consider this a translation of WCAG to native
13:57:55 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: to help people who are working on mobile to make their apps accessible
13:58:14 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: to answer the kind of questions that devs and designers have
13:58:14 <hdv> q?
13:58:23 <hdv> Jon_Gibbins: that's how I see this group's work
13:58:51 <Tanya> q+
13:58:55 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: I'll put an action out for the group to think about between now and the next meeting: get feedback on 'are we ok with just focusing on native mobile?'
13:59:22 <Jamie5> Joe_Humbert do we need to be discussing the larger topic of native vs mobile web app now?
13:59:31 <pauljadam> if we were writing techniques then you would know what platforms you are targeting
13:59:32 <Jamie5> q+
13:59:49 <pauljadam> because the web views techniques would be different than SwiftUI or Android Compose native techniques
14:00:31 <Joe_Humbert> ACTION: Consider for next meeting, Should the group only be focusing on Native mobile?
14:00:44 <Joe_Humbert> ack hdv
14:00:56 <Jamie5> q-
14:01:09 <Tanya> q-
14:01:12 <Jamie5> q+
14:01:22 <hdv> hdv: we need to carefully thread this needle, as traditionally W3C members are most interested in making standards for the web and explicitly not in non-web standards
14:01:49 <Joe_Humbert> ack Jamie
14:01:53 <hdv> Jamie5: we should probably wait until JJ is back to discuss this
14:02:25 <Joe_Humbert> close the queue
14:02:28 <julianmka> +1 Jamie5
14:02:38 <Tanya> +1 Jamie5
14:02:55 <Jon_Gibbins> +1 to Jamie5’s comment - wait for JJ as chair to return, short discussion and push for a vote on a working title
14:03:04 <hdv> Joe_Humbert: larger discussion definitely needs to wait until JJ is back
14:03:20 <Jon_Gibbins> …a working definition
14:04:29 <Joe_Humbert> Zakim, list participants
14:04:29 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Joe_Humbert, quintinb, hdv, julianmka, rachaely, Tanya, Karla, Jamie, Carol, pauljadam, Jon_Gibbins, GleidsonRamos, Tim
14:04:51 <Joe_Humbert> rrsagent, make minutes
14:04:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/06/18-matf-minutes.html Joe_Humbert
14:05:24 <Joe_Humbert> rrsagent, bye
14:05:24 <RRSAgent> I see 2 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2025/06/18-matf-actions.rdf :
14:05:24 <RRSAgent> ACTION: create github issue for "accessibility interface" definition [1]
14:05:24 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/06/18-matf-irc#T13-30-15
14:05:24 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Consider for next meeting, Should the group only be focusing on Native mobile? [2]
14:05:24 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/06/18-matf-irc#T14-00-31