13:55:31 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:55:35 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/06/19-wcag2ict-irc
13:55:35 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:55:36 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:55:42 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
13:55:42 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:55:48 <maryjom> chair:  Mary Jo Mueller
13:55:54 <maryjom> meeting:  WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:56:01 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
13:56:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/06/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
13:56:10 <maryjom> agenda+ Announcements
13:56:33 <maryjom> agenda+ PR Proposal approvals
13:56:38 <maryjom> regrets: Chris Loiselle, Jennifer Strickland
13:59:11 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:07 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:58 <loicmn> present+
14:01:31 <PhilDay> PhilDay has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:40 <maryjom> present+
14:01:41 <PhilDay> present+
14:02:42 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
14:02:44 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:51 <bbailey> present+
14:02:51 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:02:51 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:03:12 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:31 <PhilDay> maryjom: Have heard that EN 301 549 process has changed - for comments
14:03:32 <bbailey> Happy Juneteenth!
14:03:54 <PhilDay> ... Now have to submit via the JTB form rather than on GitLab
14:04:56 <PhilDay> maryjom: Asked what the deadlines are for comments for EN 301 549
14:05:01 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: 26th June
14:05:10 <PhilDay> ... 1 week today
14:06:00 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Works both ways (the process change). Visibility to comments and responses to them through the JTB system is probably better, although GitLab would still work.
14:06:38 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Put comments in the JTB forms.
14:07:09 <PhilDay> ... good to duplicate existing comments from GitLab into the form - so all information is in 1 place
14:07:29 <PhilDay> GreggVan: 2 suggestions. Provide suggestions, don't just raise issues without a solution.
14:07:59 <PhilDay> ... If it does relate to a GitLab issue, then include the reference to the GitLab issue as well in the JTB form
14:09:40 <PhilDay> We are late in the process, and very few people to work on it (TF is disolved). So always add suggestions on any issue or problem raised.
14:10:10 <Mike_Pluke> present+
14:10:30 <PhilDay> maryjom: If there are any challenges with WCAG2ICT work - then EN team should feel free to bring it to Mary Jo to then raise with the WCAG2ICT Task Force and make sure we catch it quickly.
14:11:57 <bbailey> +1 for "source" over "horse's mouth"
14:12:01 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:12:01 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- PR Proposal approvals -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:12:15 <PhilDay> First one is not actually a PR
14:12:15 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 620 – Closed functionality
14:12:25 <PhilDay> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/620#issuecomment-2963514062
14:12:26 <maryjom> Link to issue 620: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/620
14:12:38 <maryjom> Link to proposed answer: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/620#issuecomment-2963514062
14:12:50 <PhilDay> We had talked about this a few months ago, but never created a formal answer.
14:13:08 <PhilDay> So Mary Jo proposed an answer that needs reviewing.
14:13:23 <PhilDay> Proposed answer: DRAFT TF ANSWER (not approved yet):
14:13:23 <PhilDay> Assistive technology (AT) is a defined term with guidance in the form of word replacements in WCAG2ICT. In the definition there are several examples provided of different assistive technologies. Closed functionality is any functionality that prevents users from attaching, installing or using that variety of assistive technology. An alternative
14:13:23 <PhilDay> keyboard is only one form of AT. Some ICT is closed to some types of AT but not others, and would have closed functionality that may require some alternate way for users to access and use the ICT because that form of AT cannot be installed.
14:14:52 <PhilDay> maryjom: Any discussion needed?
14:14:53 <bbailey> +1 and i just added thumbs up on github
14:15:03 <PhilDay> +1 from me
14:15:17 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 620, use the proposed answer, as-is
14:15:22 <PhilDay> +1
14:15:23 <loicmn> +1
14:16:10 <PhilDay> GreggVan: questions "... that variety of assistive technology" - limited only to those technologies listed as examples in the definition of AT.
14:17:12 <PhilDay> GreggVan's proposal: Assistive technology (AT) is a defined term with guidance in the form of word replacements in WCAG2ICT. In the definition there are several examples provided of different assistive technologies. Closed functionality is any functionality that prevents users from attaching, installing or using assistive technology. An alternative
14:17:12 <PhilDay> keyboard is only one form of AT. Some ICT is closed to some types of AT but not others, and would have closed functionality that may require some alternate way for users to access and use the ICT because that form of AT cannot be installed.
14:17:40 <PhilDay> (remove "that varienty of")
14:18:53 <PhilDay> s/varienty/variety
14:19:50 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 620, use the proposed answer, as-is
14:19:55 <loicmn> +1
14:19:56 <PhilDay> +1
14:20:02 <bbailey> +1
14:20:04 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:20:11 <GreggVan> +1
14:20:16 <GreggVan> present+
14:20:19 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 620, use the proposed answer, as-is
14:20:47 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 696 - 2.2.2 Pause, stop, hide: Note 5 should provide the full info about the WCAG 2.2 Intent section
14:21:09 <maryjom> Link to issue 696: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/696
14:21:20 <maryjom> Link to PR 697: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/697
14:21:23 <bbailey> q+ to suggest avoiding word "informative"
14:21:48 <PhilDay> Additional text from PR: While the success criterion uses the term “information”, the WCAG 2 Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.2 makes it clear that this is to be applied to all content. Any content, whether informative or decorative, that is updated automatically, blinks, or moves may create an accessibility barrier.
14:22:38 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
14:22:38 <Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to suggest avoiding word "informative"
14:22:44 <maryjom> ack bruce
14:23:13 <PhilDay> bbailey: May be confusing using the word "informative" - it is somewhat similar to "normative" - so it may be better to avoid the word "informative"
14:24:01 <PhilDay> ... informational or decorative
14:24:12 <PhilDay> GreggVan: whether decorative or not
14:24:28 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:24:44 <PhilDay> GreggVan: "even if just decorative, "
14:25:14 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Not sure that the change is needed, but also happy with the fix
14:26:21 <PhilDay> Proposed change: While the success criterion uses the term “information”, the WCAG 2 [Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.2](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/pause-stop-hide#intent) makes it clear that this is to be applied to all content. Any [content](#content-on-and-off-the-web), even if just decorative, that is
14:26:22 <PhilDay> updated automatically, blinks, or moves may create an accessibility barrier.</div>
14:26:54 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
14:26:59 <loicmn> present+
14:27:03 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 620, use the proposed answer, as-is
14:27:07 <PhilDay> +1
14:27:11 <loicmn> +1
14:27:12 <GreggVan> +1
14:27:14 <bbailey> +1
14:27:56 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 686, merge PR 697, as-is
14:28:02 <loicmn> +1
14:28:08 <PhilDay> Error in the reference in the resolution above -shoul.d refer to 697
14:28:10 <PhilDay> +1
14:28:11 <GreggVan> +1
14:28:16 <bbailey> +1
14:28:22 <PhilDay> s/shoul.d/should
14:28:31 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:28:32 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 686, merge PR 697, as-is
14:28:49 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 618 - [Editorial issues (mostly consistency) within the WCAG2ICT language
14:29:01 <maryjom> Link to issue 618: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/618
14:29:11 <maryjom> Link to PR 689: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/689
14:31:12 <PhilDay> Minor editorial changes. Changed to use "satisfy" this SC rather than "meet" this SC.
14:31:49 <PhilDay> Added links where missing, minor typos
14:32:20 <PhilDay> ... Also removed applications from "software applications that interpret" - just says software
14:32:48 <PhilDay> Consistently added in non-web for software
14:33:34 <PhilDay> Changed comply with to "satisfy"
14:34:31 <maryjom> ack bruce
14:34:44 <Mike_Pluke> Q-
14:34:55 <PhilDay> bbailey: should be link to "accessibility services of platform software"
14:35:03 <PhilDay> maryjom: Fixes in PR
14:36:23 <PhilDay> bbailey has another item to work on
14:37:32 <PhilDay> bbailey: word substitution on software - one of the first few
14:38:18 <PhilDay> ... wondered if we needed to add non-web to software
14:39:54 <PhilDay0> PhilDay0 has joined #wcag2ict
14:39:57 <PhilDay0> present+
14:40:02 <PhilDay0> scribe+ PhilDay0
14:40:30 <PhilDay0> Mary Jo checking in the PR
14:41:33 <PhilDay0> Bruce's suggestion was correct - we need to add "non-web" to "software that interprets"
14:41:50 <PhilDay0> maryjom: Adjusting PR
14:42:39 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 618, merge PR 689, as-is
14:42:43 <PhilDay0> +1
14:42:43 <loicmn> +1
14:42:53 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:43:23 <PhilDay0> bruce: +1 as dropped from IRC
14:43:31 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:43:35 <bbailey> +1
14:43:36 <GreggVan> +1
14:43:39 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 618, merge PR 689, as-is
14:43:53 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 605 - Name, Role, Value: clarify that non-web software does not have a user agent
14:44:02 <maryjom> Link to issue 605: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/605
14:44:12 <maryjom> Link to PR 632: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/632
14:44:51 <PhilDay0> Word replacement for "user agent"
14:45:06 <PhilDay0>  ###### Applying SC 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value to Non-Web Documents and Software
14:45:07 <PhilDay0>  This applies directly as written, and as described in [Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 4.1.2](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/name-role-value#intent), replacing “user agents, including assistive technologies", with “assistive technologies and accessibility features of software” and the note with: “This success
14:45:07 <PhilDay0> criterion is primarily for software developers who develop or use custom user interface components. For example, standard user interface components on most accessibility-supported platforms already meet this success criterion when used according to specification.”
14:45:07 <PhilDay0>  With this substitution, it would read:
14:45:08 <PhilDay0>  **4.1.2 Name, Role, Value:** For all [user interface components](#dfn-user-interface-components) (including but not limited to: form elements, links and components generated by scripts), the [name](#dfn-name) and [role](#dfn-role) can be [programmatically determined](#dfn-programmatically-determinable); states, properties, and values that can be
14:45:08 <PhilDay0> set by the user can be [programmatically set](#dfn-programmatically-set); and notification of changes to these items is available to <INS>[[assistive technologies](#dfn-assistive-technologies) and accessibility features of [software](#software)]</INS>.
14:45:08 <PhilDay0>  <div class="note">
14:46:42 <PhilDay0> q+
14:48:41 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
14:48:54 <PhilDay0> PhilDay0: question if the link should go to "accessibility services" but this goes to "accessibility services of platform software" which we did not have in the text
14:50:42 <PhilDay0> bbailey: Question on the verbiage of the word substitution
14:51:28 <PhilDay0> should state that NOTE 1 is changed / replaced / edited
14:51:53 <PhilDay0> ... Main concern - NOTE 1 should state that it is added
14:52:34 <PhilDay0> ... or modified
14:53:52 <PhilDay0> bbailey: more important to add the parenthetical description (MODIFIED) is added to NOTE 1 rather than to update the description.
14:54:23 <PhilDay0> Daniel: Will have to have a closer look at this. At the moment we just do it for "added" not for modified.
14:55:30 <PhilDay0> bbailey to open new issue to cover this
14:56:10 <PhilDay0> Daniel to see what can be done on PR 632
14:56:32 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 605, merge PR 632, as-is
14:56:40 <PhilDay0> +1
14:56:44 <loicmn> +1
14:56:47 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:57:02 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:57:04 <bbailey> +1
14:57:04 <PhilDay0> bruce: +1 (dropped from IRC)
14:57:06 <GreggVan> +1
14:57:08 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 605, merge PR 632, as-is
14:57:18 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 606 - Revise word substitution in glossary "target"
14:57:27 <maryjom> Link to issue 606: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/606
14:57:36 <maryjom> Link to PR 698: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/698
14:58:29 <PhilDay0> Glossary definition, target, change word substitution.
14:58:44 <PhilDay0> ## dfn-targets
14:58:44 <PhilDay0>  #####  Applying “target” to Non-Web Documents and Software
14:58:44 <PhilDay0>  This applies directly as written and as described in the WCAG 2 glossary, replacing “page” with “content”.
14:58:44 <PhilDay0>  With this substitution, it would read:
14:58:46 <PhilDay0>  @@ -615,7 +615,7 @@ region of the display that will accept a pointer action, such as the interactive
14:58:46 <PhilDay0>  <div class="note">
14:58:46 <PhilDay0>  If two or more targets are overlapping, the overlapping area should not be included in the measurement of the target size, except when the overlapping targets perform the same action or open the same <INS>**[[content](#content-on-and-off-the-web)]**</INS>.</div></DD></DL>
14:58:49 <PhilDay0> Replacing page with content
14:59:01 <PhilDay0> Instead of non-web document or content presented by software
15:01:10 <bbailey> i could go either way
15:01:57 <PhilDay0> PhilDay0: Slight preference for the original
15:02:12 <PhilDay0> GreggVan: content is clearly defined - so should be OK
15:04:08 <PhilDay0> ... But changing "page" (unit of conformance) to "content" (sub unit of conformance) is a bit confusing
15:04:25 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 606, merge PR 698, as-is
15:04:40 <loicmn> +1
15:04:40 <GreggVan> +1
15:04:40 <bbailey> +1
15:04:42 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:04:44 <PhilDay0> +1
15:04:48 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: To resolve issue 606, merge PR 698, as-is
15:05:08 <bbailey> Added Changed notes would benefit from parenthetical #699
15:05:12 <PhilDay0> There are a small number of additional changes that could help with EN 301 549 so will try and get these done of next week.
15:05:22 <bbailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/699
15:05:47 <loicmn> loicmn has left #wcag2ict
15:05:50 <PhilDay0> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:05:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/06/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay0
15:05:57 <maryjom> zakim, end meeting
15:05:57 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been loicmn, maryjom, PhilDay, bbailey, Mike_Pluke, GreggVan
15:05:57 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
15:05:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/06/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
15:06:03 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, maryjom; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:06:03 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
15:06:11 <maryjom> rrsagent, bye
15:06:11 <RRSAgent> I see no action items