16:58:24 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:58:29 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/09/11-aria-irc
16:58:30 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:58:31 <Zakim> Meeting: ARIA WG
16:58:33 <jamesn> agendabot, find agenda
16:58:33 <agendabot> jamesn, OK. This may take a minute...
16:58:33 <agendabot> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/5a155237-d896-464b-9c5f-6dd1654293ae/20250911T130000/
16:58:33 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:58:33 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New PR Triage https://github.com/search?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+created:%3E=2025-09-04+repo:w3c/aria&type=Issues
16:58:36 <agendabot> agenda+ -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y
16:58:37 <agendabot> agenda+ -> TPAC Planning https://tinyurl.com/ariaf2fcandidate
16:58:39 <agendabot> agenda+ -> feat: aria-actions addition to the ARIA spec https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1805
16:58:42 <agendabot> agenda+ -> aria-keyshortcuts: Do multiple shortcuts define a set of alternatives, or a single sequence? https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2578
16:59:33 <Francis_Storr> Francis_Storr has joined #aria
17:00:24 <Adam_Page> Adam_Page has joined #aria
17:00:26 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_ has joined #aria
17:00:52 <spectranaut_> agenda?\
17:01:03 <Daniel> present+
17:01:17 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #aria
17:01:22 <filippo-zorzi> present+
17:01:31 <jcraig> scribe+
17:01:33 <jcraig> present+
17:01:35 <Rahim> present+
17:01:42 <jcraig> agenda?
17:01:45 <Adam_Page> present+
17:01:59 <spectranaut_> present+
17:02:03 <Francis_Storr> present+
17:02:09 <katez> katez has joined #aria
17:02:18 <katez> present+
17:02:30 <jcraig> zakim, take up item 1
17:02:30 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- -> New PR Triage https://github.com/search?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+created:%3E=2025-09-04+repo:w3c/aria&type=Issues -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:04:33 <jcraig> https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/2628
17:04:46 <Stefan> Stefan has joined #aria
17:04:50 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #aria
17:04:52 <Stefan> present+
17:04:54 <giacomo-petri> present+
17:05:20 <Rahim> q+
17:06:25 <jcraig> rahim: tallked to scott. we agree abbr[title] should not contribute to accname
17:07:09 <Adam_Page> q+
17:07:19 <jamesn> q+
17:07:28 <jcraig> is there any objection to it being announced on demand? should map to something that can allow the  expansion to be announced on demand.
17:08:03 <spectranaut_> ack Rahim
17:08:10 <jcraig> matt: how would you know, since we don't spec AT behaviors
17:08:13 <jcraig> q+
17:08:39 <jcraig> matt: whether it's on demand or automatically is dependent on context
17:08:39 <Daniel> present+
17:08:58 <ChrisCuellar> ChrisCuellar has joined #aria
17:09:03 <spectranaut_> ack Adam_Page
17:09:06 <jcraig> in some scenarios, it might be automatic on longer descriptoin a form fields
17:09:06 <ChrisCuellar> present+
17:10:06 <jcraig> Adam_Page: in aria-practices, APG issue pattern date picker has abbreviated representations of weekdays, e.g. Tuesday for Tuesday.
17:10:39 <jcraig> Adam_Page: would like abbr[title] and th[abbr] to behave similarly
17:10:54 <Daniel> q+ to say support for the abbr attribute is little
17:11:01 <Rahim> I do see an html-aam mapping for `abbr` (the attribute): https://w3c.github.io/html-aam/#att-abbr
17:11:03 <jcraig> Adam_Page: another more complex example about buttons in header cells
17:11:15 <spectranaut_> ack jamesn
17:12:02 <jcraig> jamesn: interesting that we're talking about exposing title on abbr for SRs, but keyboard users can't get it by default. what's the point in patching?
17:12:05 <spectranaut_> ack jcraig
17:12:14 <Matt_King> Matt_King has joined #aria
17:12:56 <giacomo-petri> q+
17:13:07 <Matt_King> q+
17:13:32 <Adam_Page> scribe+
17:13:54 <Adam_Page> jcraig: the goal to make this exposed to platform APIs I can’t imagine it would be objectionable
17:13:57 <Rahim> q+
17:14:12 <sarah> sarah has joined #aria
17:14:19 <jcraig> Daniel: abbr attr support is lacking?
17:14:24 <jcraig> q+
17:14:37 <jcraig> q+ to talk about verbosity
17:14:59 <jcraig> Daniel: would not get the expansion... "Tu"
17:15:05 <jcraig> zakim, close queue
17:15:05 <Zakim> ok, jcraig, the speaker queue is closed
17:15:15 <jcraig> ack giacomo-petri
17:15:19 <jcraig> ack Daniel
17:15:19 <Zakim> Daniel, you wanted to say support for the abbr attribute is little
17:15:19 <spectranaut_> ack giacomo-petri
17:16:02 <jcraig> giacomo-petri: in addition to keyboard users, people with cognitive disabilities could benefit
17:16:18 <jcraig> Matt_King: PR is available to review
17:16:30 <jcraig> https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/2628
17:17:03 <spectranaut_> ack Matt_King
17:17:07 <jcraig> Matt_King: we don't need prose in the PR right? we just add the table mapping
17:17:23 <jcraig> Rahim: yes... need platform mappings, not prose.
17:17:26 <spectranaut_> ack Rahim
17:18:18 <jcraig> Rahim: is it desirable to add a note or comment for existing abbr[title] to avoid using it for accname?
17:19:14 <Jacques> Jacques has joined #aria
17:19:32 <spectranaut_> ack jcraig
17:19:32 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to talk about verbosity
17:19:35 <jcraig> spectranaut_: maybe for the ARIA spec, not AAM
17:19:37 <front-endian-jane> front-endian-jane has joined #aria
17:19:46 <front-endian-jane> present+
17:19:46 <spectranaut_> zakim, open queue
17:19:46 <Zakim> ok, spectranaut_, the speaker queue is open
17:21:27 <jcraig> zakim, next item
17:21:27 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:21:50 <jcraig> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/54126
17:22:39 <jcraig> Blocked by ARIA PR https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/2237
17:22:48 <Rahim> q+
17:23:48 <jcraig> rahim: https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/53966 ready to be merged
17:23:51 <jcraig> zakim, next item
17:23:51 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, jcraig
17:23:57 <jcraig> ack z
17:24:02 <jcraig> ack Rahim
17:24:05 <jcraig> zakim, next item
17:24:05 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- -> TPAC Planning https://tinyurl.com/ariaf2fcandidate -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:24:40 <jcraig> spectranaut_: TPAC candidate topics
17:25:01 <front-endian-jane> front-endian-jane has joined #aria
17:25:03 <jcraig> Matt_King: for issues not tied to a spec, do you still want an issue?
17:25:07 <jcraig> spectranaut_: yes
17:25:30 <jcraig> s/yes/yes, with F2FCandidate label/
17:25:43 <jcraig> jamesn: TPAC is a group driven agenda
17:25:52 <jcraig> zakim, next item
17:25:52 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- -> feat: aria-actions addition to the ARIA spec https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1805 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:26:20 <front-endian-jane> Small comment back on PR 2237: there are some open comments/questions on it which haven't been responded to. Happy to review again when there is something to review again!
17:27:12 <Adam_Page> sarah: I reached out to Jocelyn recently, and chatted with Edge — they might have cycles coming up to work on it, but need Chrome update
17:27:43 <Adam_Page> ... I’ll email folks
17:27:59 <Adam_Page> spectranaut_: we need to button up reviews
17:28:07 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: we had some discussion at TPAC last year
17:28:10 <Adam_Page> ... especially inheritance
17:28:16 <Adam_Page> ... actions on multiple things in the tree
17:28:24 <Adam_Page> ... there were a lot of unanswered aspects in the PR
17:28:44 <Adam_Page> ... did we get to resolution on all that?
17:28:44 <Adam_Page> sarah: I thought we did, but I’ll go through it again
17:28:59 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: I may have missed reviewing changes after TPAC, I’ll review again
17:29:10 <Adam_Page> spectranaut_: there are a lot of comments and only one positive review
17:29:23 <jcraig> q+
17:29:23 <Adam_Page> ... so hoping to get more of those
17:29:28 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: I’ll review
17:29:40 <Adam_Page> spectranaut_: we really need someone from Edge and Google to review, right?
17:29:47 <Adam_Page> sarah: yes, Jocelyn began an implementation
17:29:54 <jcraig> q+ to taalk about Matt's comments at https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1805#issuecomment-1425060211
17:30:02 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: Brett Lewis sent me a video of what he’s done in JAWS, and I thought he demo’d in Chrome
17:30:15 <Adam_Page> ... we have an experimental pattern in APG
17:30:16 <fromt-endian-jane> fromt-endian-jane has joined #aria
17:30:45 <Adam_Page> sarah: maybe Jocelyn finished a test implementation
17:30:45 <Adam_Page> spectranaut_: we need to reach out to her
17:30:51 <Adam_Page> ... and maybe also get a positive review on the PR
17:31:15 <Adam_Page> ... sarah, it looks like you’ve resolved jteh’s feedback — so hopefully we can get a positive review from him too
17:31:29 <Adam_Page> sarah: there was one open question about User Agents MUST — would be nice to get jteh’s response
17:31:58 <Adam_Page> ... there’s still some wordsmithing needed
17:32:11 <spectranaut_> ack jcraig
17:32:11 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to taalk about Matt's comments at https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1805#issuecomment-1425060211
17:32:44 <Adam_Page> jcraig: this may no longer be an issue, but
17:32:44 <Adam_Page> ... re: the linked comment above from Matt
17:32:48 <Adam_Page> ... the first part was about fingerprinting
17:33:10 <Adam_Page> ... written as an author responsibility and that it opens a wide door
17:33:20 <Adam_Page> ... IMO, this one is not likely to be abused for fingerprinting
17:33:43 <Adam_Page> ... the same event is coming in whether it’s the AT or the mainstream mouse user
17:33:50 <Adam_Page> ... the UI might work differently depending on the author’s implementation
17:33:58 <Adam_Page> ... the second part is where I have more of a concern
17:34:05 <Adam_Page> ... around element requirements
17:34:22 <Adam_Page> ... [ please see comment for context ]
17:34:44 <Adam_Page> ... IMO these are much too rigid and restrictive
17:34:52 <Adam_Page> ... hoping these are no longer an issue
17:34:58 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: the problem I was reading in the original language
17:35:06 <Adam_Page> ... is that the language of the spec referred to “screen reader focus”
17:35:19 <Adam_Page> ... so we needed a way to get rid of that language
17:35:26 <Adam_Page> ... so that was me spitballing alternatives
17:35:31 <Adam_Page> ... I agree that they’re restrictive
17:35:31 <CurtBellew> CurtBellew has joined #aria
17:35:39 <Adam_Page> ... but I don’t know better alternatives
17:35:43 <CurtBellew> present+
17:35:56 <sarah> q+
17:35:58 <sarah> present+
17:35:59 <Adam_Page> ... we don’t know when screen reader focus is on the element
17:36:11 <Adam_Page> ... we didn’t have anything spec’d that the screen reader can request actions be made visible
17:36:17 <Adam_Page> ... with a SR command
17:36:23 <Adam_Page> ... there’s a chicken and egg problem
17:36:44 <Adam_Page> ... they’re supposed to be focusable so that you *can* click them
17:37:01 <Adam_Page> jcraig: you don’t know when it’s focused by the AT
17:37:15 <Adam_Page> ... the subtext there is that anytime you want it activateable, it should be visible
17:37:23 <Adam_Page> ... maybe that needs to be explained a bit better
17:37:29 <Adam_Page> ... but a core scenario is Gmail
17:37:33 <Adam_Page> ... a row for an email, with a delete button
17:37:41 <Adam_Page> ... the row itself may or may not be focused
17:37:51 <Adam_Page> ... but the buttons appear when you mouse over
17:37:58 <Adam_Page> ... since you can’t track SR focus
17:38:07 <Adam_Page> ... really those buttons should be debatable at all times
17:38:12 <Adam_Page> sarah: this seems like a rabbit hole
17:38:45 <Adam_Page> ... the intent was only to reference actual focus
17:38:51 <Adam_Page> ... document.activeElement focus
17:39:01 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: so then the mention of AT needs to be removed
17:39:10 <Adam_Page> jcraig: we’re arguing about what visible means
17:39:19 <Adam_Page> ... rendered but transparent
17:39:41 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: I think the spec isn’t clear the way it’s written
17:39:49 <Adam_Page> ... you should be able to expose the actions available on any element
17:40:09 <Adam_Page> ... but then it’s possible that a SR request would be equivalent to a mouse hover
17:40:15 <Adam_Page> ... there’s an event that the SR can do
17:40:24 <Adam_Page> ... that triggers the availability/visibility of the actions
17:40:44 <Adam_Page> ... the way it is, you’d currently only know the actions if you’re focused on it
17:40:48 <Adam_Page> sarah: we did talk about this at TPAC
17:41:03 <Adam_Page> ... and one of the proposals was that aria-actions="" (empty string) would be a meaningful mapping
17:41:21 <Adam_Page> ... I have a comment in the PR thread that might address this
17:41:27 <Adam_Page> ... an authors statement
17:41:38 <Adam_Page> ... that clarifies our intention for focus
17:41:46 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: so is that spec’d now?
17:41:48 <Adam_Page> sarah: not yet
17:41:57 <Adam_Page> ... I wanted to try this out a little more
17:42:02 <Adam_Page> ... in the course of trying to implement it
17:42:06 <Adam_Page> ... see if it was possible
17:42:12 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: I think we need some proposed language
17:42:44 <Adam_Page> jcraig: I think that addresses part of the misunderstanding
17:42:44 <Adam_Page> ... make it visible/available when it’s focused
17:42:44 <Adam_Page> ... but the inverse of that
17:42:49 <Adam_Page> ... is because you don’t necessarily know what AT focuses on something else
17:42:55 <Adam_Page> ... any of these actions could be activatable at any time
17:43:09 <Adam_Page> ... the difference is that if the browser sees that there’s an aria-actions attribute
17:43:15 <Adam_Page> ... but it points to an action that is not available
17:43:20 <Adam_Page> ... then the browser can exclude it
17:43:45 <Adam_Page> ... then when the SR lands on this element, they become available
17:43:49 <sarah> q+
17:43:53 <Adam_Page> ... it’s saving the privacy, fingerprinting implications
17:43:59 <Adam_Page> ... because of the way the structure works
17:44:12 <Adam_Page> ... but if the actions are always available, then a SR user could access them anytime
17:44:19 <spectranaut_> ack sarah
17:44:23 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: that sounds very different than the current spec language
17:44:44 <Adam_Page> sarah: I did notice something in the core-aam wording that covers this
17:44:49 <Adam_Page> ... have aria-actions added as an object attribute regardless of what’s in it
17:45:03 <Adam_Page> ... so we could add your suggestion for AX mapping, jcraig
17:45:28 <Adam_Page> ... so as far as spec goes, we could add an author MAY/SHOULD add empty string while they’re not rendered, and then populate it when they are
17:45:52 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: sounds like a user agent MUST then
17:46:50 <Adam_Page> sarah: please tell me what do for AX API — jcraig, could you help?
17:48:29 <spectranaut_> https://deploy-preview-1805--wai-aria.netlify.app/core-aam/#ariaActions
17:49:23 <Adam_Page> sarah: yes, please review the rendered preview ☝🏻
17:50:05 <Adam_Page> jcraig: when the element isn’t focused yet and the actions aren’t rendered yet
17:50:18 <Adam_Page> s/jcraig/sarah/
17:50:56 <Adam_Page> jcraig: I will chat with some people and see if we need more specific language
17:51:24 <Adam_Page> ... in this mapping, an author could just point to the IDs, and whether they’re exposed could be determined by whether they’re hidden
17:51:30 <Adam_Page> ... if they’re not actionable
17:51:35 <Adam_Page> ... but the DOM attribute doesn’t change
17:52:10 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: don’t we have to have browser MUST requirements when there‘s a mapping like this?
17:52:27 <Adam_Page> spectranaut_: if something is in core-aam, then it is a MUST
17:52:44 <Adam_Page> ... but if the browser needs to variably do different things, then it needs to be in the ARIA spec
17:53:04 <Adam_Page> ... if it’s in core-aam it doesn’t also need to be in ARIA
17:53:17 <Adam_Page> jcraig: it’s somewhere near the top, that everything is normative
17:53:48 <Adam_Page> ... there is an editorial issue claiming that some sections are non-normative
17:54:16 <Adam_Page> spectranaut_: let’s look into that later
17:54:23 <Adam_Page> ... we have 5 minutes left
17:54:44 <Adam_Page> ... do we have enough time for you, Jane?
17:54:48 <Adam_Page> Jane: no, let’s wait for the next meeting
17:55:42 <Adam_Page> Matt_King: I think this answers the question for now, but we need clarity on where/how browser requirements are expressed
17:55:49 <Adam_Page> ... I’ll keep that in mind when I re-review
17:55:51 <Adam_Page> sarah: to wrap up
17:56:05 <Adam_Page> ... I’m going to go finish the re-wording on the focus thing; remove mention of AT
17:56:15 <Adam_Page> ... and email Joceyln
17:56:44 <Adam_Page> ... update object attribute mapping in aam
17:56:44 <Adam_Page> ... added a comment for jcraig to get input on AX API mapping
17:56:48 <Adam_Page> ... and I think that’s it for me
17:57:03 <Adam_Page> spectranaut_: and Matt_King will re-review
17:58:05 <Adam_Page> zakim, end meeting
17:58:05 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Daniel, filippo-zorzi, jcraig, Rahim, Adam_Page, spectranaut_, Francis_Storr, katez, Stefan, giacomo-petri, ChrisCuellar,
17:58:08 <Zakim> ... front-endian-jane, CurtBellew, sarah
17:58:08 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
17:58:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/11-aria-minutes.html Zakim
17:58:16 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Adam_Page; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:58:16 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
17:58:24 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
18:13:07 <ChrisCuellar> ChrisCuellar has joined #aria
18:15:00 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
19:41:21 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:01:15 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:18:46 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:23:31 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:24:13 <ChrisCuellar> ChrisCuellar has joined #aria
21:11:31 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
21:20:15 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
21:51:01 <ChrisCuellar> ChrisCuellar has joined #aria
22:10:05 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
22:26:23 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
23:01:59 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
23:13:06 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
23:13:52 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
23:50:44 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria