Meeting minutes
Project planning update
JJ to meet with Tanya and will email us about some infrastructure and async working
<JJ> shoobe01: Can subordinate groups be created to work on specific tasks, or categories of tasks, but work offline/asynch, as much as possible? Slack or email each other to make plans, pursue individual tasks individually or collaboratively?
<JJ> any more suggestions?
2.5.1 Pointer Gestures
<JJ> w3c/
<JJ> w3c/
<JJ> 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures: All functionality that uses multipoint or path-based gestures for operation can be operated with a single pointer without a path-based gesture, unless a multipoint or path-based gesture is essential.
<JJ> Note
<JJ> This requirement applies to mobile applications that interpret pointer actions (i.e., this does not apply to actions that are required to operate the platform software, operating system, or assistive technology). Each layer is responsible for its own pointer actions only, not for those in an underlying layer.
<JJ> Note
<JJ> Examples of multipoint gestures include pinch-to-zoom, two-finger scrolling, split-tap (where one finger rests on screen while another taps), and multi-finger swipes.
<JJ> Examples of path-based gestures include swipe gestures requiring specific directional input such as carousels and sliders, custom drawing gestures, and pull-to-refresh actions.
<JJ> Multipoint and path-based gestures handled by underlying layers (platform software, operating system, or assistive technology) are exempt under Note 1.
No mention of a keyboard shortcut?
I suppose it's covered by 2.1.1
JJ is also looking at how notes are to be numbered
JavaScript isn't perfect?!?!
<shoobe01> +1 to this layering exception duplication feeling odd in Note #2
@Jamie The last sentence on the last note will make more sense on layers. If someone is reading this as a user. We see in the following note that the last note (scribe lost track) - maybe we should have a second note.
Should we define layer better than we do now?
<pauljadam> the exception for OS and AT does not seem relevant to developers, would only matter if you're the OS or AT developer 🤷♂️
agree pauljadam - it might sound like an "out"
<pauljadam> yeah I like the Example blocks
<Tanya> I like Example blocks more as well
<shoobe01> +1 to example blocks
<Tim> +1 to the example blokcs
<shoobe01> Q on them though. Should there be an example of meeting the requirement in example? "The gestural function is also available in a menu" or similar?
ACTION: Turn the examples in note 2 into example blocks
ACTION: Clear up the layer terminology (using examples?)
<Jamie> +1
<pauljadam> example does not say how to meet it
shoobe01: I was wondering if these are merely definitions or if we can use examples to demonstrate what is meant
<pauljadam> just says what it can be
<JJ> is it an improvement to include the normative text in all SC's, also if they apply 'as written'?
<Tanya> +1
Yeah I think keep normative text
<Tim> +1
<pauljadam> +1
<quintinb> +1
<rachaely> +1
<Joe_Humbert> +1
<shoobe01> +1
<Jamie> +1
Joe_Humbert So we repeat the text a 3rd time? It's under the collapsed for WCAG and the collapsed text for WCAG2ICT.
2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation
<JJ> w3c/
<JJ> w3c/
<JJ> This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.5.2.
<JJ> 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation: For functionality that can be operated using a single pointer, at least one of the following is true:
<JJ> No Down-Event
<JJ> The down-event of the pointer is not used to execute any part of the function;
<JJ> Abort or Undo
<JJ> Completion of the function is on the up-event, and a mechanism is available to abort the function before completion or to undo the function after completion;
<JJ> Up Reversal
<JJ> The up-event reverses any outcome of the preceding down-event;
<JJ> Essential
<JJ> Completing the function on the down-event is essential.
<JJ> Note
<JJ> This requirement applies to mobile applications that interpret pointer actions (i.e., this does not apply to actions that are required to operate the platform software, operating system, or assistive technology). Each layer is responsible for its own pointer actions only, not for those in an underlying layer.
<JJ> Note
<JJ> Functions that emulate a keyboard or numeric keypad key press are considered essential.
<JJ> Note
<JJ> The determination of "essential" should focus on whether the function itself requires down-event activation, rather than solely on technological constraints. However, limitations of the underlying technology platform may also constitute valid exceptions where developers cannot provide alternative implementations.
<JJ> Example:
<JJ> Examples of essential functionality for mobile applications include:
<JJ> Features required for meeting system requirements (such as waking a device from sleep, power management controls, and emergency functions)
<JJ> Interactions that require pointer down to function, such as drawing or sketching tools
Yeah I think this is when the front end dev deviated from the platform to make their own thing
<pauljadam> the drawing example makes sense for app developers but the waking device example would be only for device or operating system developers
<pauljadam> This one seems to vague or open to allow a developer to avoid making something accessible:
<pauljadam> However, limitations of the underlying technology platform may also constitute valid exceptions where developers cannot provide alternative implementations.
That could be useful pauljadam - if the developers are modelling the same functionality as seen on the OS... (but probably we could find a better example)
shoobe01: I worry about this stepping on the layering discussion. If it's only OS layer stuff.
shoobe01: most forms have drag away cancellation, but slider doesn't. We mustn't give to an easy an out to not meet the requirement
shoobe01: do we mean abort vs undo?
<JJ> Abort or undo for sliders, checkbox, toggles: start at off, you press to change state (on), then press to change state (off), is that sufficient to pass 'abort' or 'undo'?
<shoobe01> +1 on escape route comments
pauljadam - similar to ios Toggles - but you can just undo - it's about fault tolerance. Developers should not always get a pass due to "tech limitations"
<shoobe01> Signature is basically drawing. Could include in the example as well
pauljadam is our focus "apps" - not OS or AT's
(OS = Operating System)
(AT = Assistive Technology)
<JJ> Remove "Features required for meeting system requirements" from examples?
pauljadam "drawing application" might be too generic - we don't want people to think that that's the only alternative
<pauljadam> +1
<shoobe01> +1
<rachaely> +1
Agree to remove the first bullet point from the note?
<quintinb> +1
<pauljadam> can we remove "However, limitations of the underlying technology platform may also constitute valid exceptions where developers cannot provide alternative implementations." too?
<Joe_Humbert> +1
<Jamie> +1
<Tim> +1
<JJ> Remove "However, limitations of the underlying technology platform may also constitute valid exceptions where developers cannot provide alternative implementations."?
<pauljadam> +1
<Jamie> 0
<quintinb> +1 - developers should be putting pressure on the underlying layers to be more accessible
<Tanya> 0
<rachaely> 0
<shoobe01> +1
<Joe_Humbert> -1
<Tim> +0
<pauljadam> if it's not removed can there be some specific examples at least?
I think it's important that when we start thinking of apps written in layers (flutter / react native) - these platforms are not accessible and not excused from needing to be accessible
<shoobe01> I'm with quintinb's several comments here.
<Jamie> quintinb pauljadam it's not the job of an app developer as part of WCAG to put pressure on the platform
ACTION: Remove "Features required for meeting system requirements" from examples?
ACTION: Add more examples of 'essential' exception
Jamie I would like to chat more on this :)
Joe_Humbert I agree with Jamie - a good example is that Apple disregards well know issues with AT and takes a long time to fix the problem. If Apple doesn't care, the developers should not be docked for inaccessible platforms
<pauljadam> If there is a platform defect that a developer cannot fix it's a WCAG failure, just one they cannot fix and one that Apple would have to fix. Not sure where that lands in a lawsuit, don't think I've ever seen it discussed.
Joe_Humbert If OS's don't receive complaints I don't see how they're going to know there's a problem - use4rs can't phrase things in a technical way like developers can - but I think this is a little bit off topic
(sorry last comment was me, not Joe)
rachaely I agree with people not using x-platform as an out. Perhaps we should mention the operating system specifically to avoid confusion
<pauljadam> +1 to operating system
<quintinb> +1 to rachaely
<Tanya> +1 to rachaely
<Joe_Humbert> I still want everyone to complain about OS issues quintinb, even developers, but it should not be "potentially indicated" as a requirement for conformance
<Joe_Humbert> +1 to rachaely
<Jamie> +1 Joe_Humbert
Ah fair point Joe_Humbert
<JJ> replace "underlying technology platform" with "operating system" / "underlaying operating system"? (to limit exceptions on OS level)
<pauljadam> +1 to "operating system"
<Jamie> +1
<Tanya> +1
<Joe_Humbert> Also really want to figure out how to convince Google, Apple, react, etc. to fix accessibility issues more quickly and provide updates.
Jamie Talking about limitation of the underlying platform - maybe add something along the lines of "developers are encourage to file defect with the platform itself."
I was hoping to point out that as part of an audit, developers should be able to say "OS limitation - here's the evidence" and they can still pass the audit
<shoobe01> And when we talk about frameworks, etc to make choices that consider a11y when deciding which to go with, vs it always being a get out of jail free card that "the underlying layer doesn't do that easily"
but this does NOT apply to flutter / react native. That's a code / practice choice
<pauljadam> techniques could be platform specific
<quintinb> +1 pauljadam
<Joe_Humbert> +1 to quintinb
ACTION: Think of ways to collect limitations of underlaying layers (e.g. operating system, framework, etc.)
<JJ> move to the next agedum
<JJ> move to the next agendum
<JJ> move to the next item
2.5.3 Label in Name
Sounds like you need a macro JJ
<JJ> Check the PR: https://
chat soon!
bye