19:05:20 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria-at
19:05:24 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/09/18-aria-at-irc
19:05:25 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
19:05:26 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jugglinmike
19:05:56 <jugglinmike> meeting: ARIA and Assistive Technologies Community Group Weekly Teleconference
19:07:25 <jugglinmike> Topic: Review agenda and next meeting dates
19:07:28 <jugglinmike> present+ jugglinmike
19:07:32 <jugglinmike> scribe+ jugglinmike
19:07:39 <jugglinmike> topic: Review agenda and next meeting dates
19:07:45 <jugglinmike> present+ ChrisCuellar
19:07:48 <jugglinmike> present+ james
19:07:53 <jugglinmike> present+ IsaDC
19:08:00 <jugglinmike> present+ dean
19:08:05 <jugglinmike> present+ Matt_King
19:08:11 <jugglinmike> present+ mfairchild
19:08:32 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Requests for changes to agenda?
19:08:40 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Hearing none, we'll stick with the agenda as planned
19:08:58 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: No CG meeting: Wednesday September 24
19:09:03 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Next CG meeting: Thursday October 2
19:09:09 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Next AT Driver Subgroup meeting: Monday October 13
19:10:56 <jugglinmike> Topic: Current status
19:11:09 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We went from 17 plans in candidate review to 18 plans
19:11:29 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Thanks to all the people who helped the latest plan advance, "Disclosure of Answers to Frequently Asked Questions"
19:11:58 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We had previously placed "Disclosure Navigation Menu Example" on hold, but I believe that's ready to move forward, now
19:12:33 <jugglinmike> present+ hadi
19:16:34 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We could use someone to review https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/pull/1299 . Perhaps howard-e because he previously worked on the builder that concerns the processing of that JSON
19:16:52 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: But we can re-assign to someone else at Bocoup if necessary
19:17:26 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #aria-at
19:17:34 <jugglinmike> Topic: Running test plan for Disclosure Navigation Menu Example
19:17:45 <jugglinmike> present+ Joe_Humbert
19:18:02 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: For this one, NVDA and VoiceOver are complete, but we're looking for two testers for JAWS
19:18:18 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I ran the bot last night, so the test plan should be ready to be assigned
19:18:25 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Do we have any volunteers?
19:18:55 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: The JAWS bot is done, so I can assign the test plan to a human
19:19:10 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: I can take that and begin work after I've completed my current testing
19:19:15 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That would be perfect, thanks
19:19:34 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: I will initiate a second bot run now that I've assigned the existing one to Joe_Humbert
19:20:28 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We'll need another tester for JAWS
19:20:36 <jugglinmike> Hadi: I can take that
19:20:58 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: I will assign the new test plan once the bot has finished collecting AT responses
19:21:10 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Thank you Hadi; it's so good to hear your voice!
19:21:36 <jugglinmike> Topic: Running Switch test plan
19:21:43 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Here, we have JAWS and NVDA complete
19:21:51 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We're waiting on results from Elizabeth
19:21:58 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: She isn't present today, but I can e-mail her
19:22:12 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That would be helpful; we haven't had her for a few meetings
19:22:25 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: If she is no longer available, we may need to ask someone else to pick it up
19:22:56 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: Though we have three testers assigned: Joe_Humbert, Elizabeth, and dean
19:23:04 <jugglinmike> dean: I just signed up for that this morning
19:23:27 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: But I need to assign the bot's results to you so that you don't have to enter the AT responses manually
19:23:52 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Let's wait until we hear from Elizabeth, though, since we don't want to ask you to do work that isn't necessary
19:24:13 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: I'll reach out to Elizabeth and let you know if we'll need your help with this one, dean
19:24:26 <jugglinmike> Topic: Running test plan for Switch Example Using HTML Button
19:24:33 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: Why do we have two JAWS versions?
19:24:43 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I thought I fixed that last night...
19:24:57 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I only see one row for JAWS
19:26:32 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The bot says that 8 tests are complete but that zero responses have been recorded
19:26:37 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: That looks like a bug
19:27:02 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: There is an open bug describing how you can currently enter a test plan for the same AT version multiple times. We have a fix that prevents that
19:27:20 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: But this behavior that we're reviewing now seems to be a new bug
19:28:09 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: We can file a bug for this. It seems like a high-priority bug to fix
19:28:17 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Maybe we can wait on testing this.
19:28:27 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Does anyone on this call have JAWS (besides Hadi and Joe_Humbert)?
19:28:37 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: It's a short test plan, so I can take it on
19:30:04 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Both testers reported "no output"
19:30:24 <jugglinmike> dean: Joe_Humbert reported "negative side effects" and then specified that the negative side effect was that there was no output
19:30:29 <jugglinmike> dean: Is that repetitive?
19:30:35 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I don't think we need to do that
19:30:43 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Okay, I can change mine
19:31:10 <jugglinmike> dean: It's the same conflict in Test 6
19:31:19 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: I will update my results on Test 6 as well
19:32:03 <jugglinmike> dean: As a follow-up from when I was reviewing NVDA tests: NVDA will focus programmatically on the element (and change its status from on or off), but it does not visually change focus
19:32:55 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That sounds like a JavaScript or CSS bug
19:33:09 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: If you're in browse mode, then the behavior you're describing is normal
19:33:21 <jugglinmike> james: Well, it's normal when you navigate. But when you click, then you should focus it
19:33:31 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: NVDA does, I thought, try to drag the focus along as its navigating
19:33:45 <jugglinmike> james: No, it does not, and the setting to enable that behavior has recently been removed
19:33:49 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That's a huge deal!
19:35:17 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Regarding the conflict: I marked the command as untestable; that's why I had to specify a negative side effect
19:35:30 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: So I should not mark this as "untestable", right?
19:35:45 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Correct. Just "no output" (which leads to a simple failure)
19:36:34 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I guess that's everything related to the Switch pattern
19:36:53 <jugglinmike> Topic: Running test plan for Tabs with Automatic Activation
19:37:00 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Hadi finished this one this morning!
19:37:12 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Last night, we had five conflicting JAWS results
19:37:31 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Was this the one where you, IsaDC, were going to make some corrections to Louis' results?
19:37:41 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: Yes, and I made those corrections
19:38:28 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: This is the one where JAWS says "selected selected"
19:39:30 <jugglinmike> Hadi: This does not seem like "excessive" verbosity to me. It is just one extra word ("selected")
19:39:37 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We're calling it "moderate"
19:40:27 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We decided to only have two levels and to place "minor" issues in the same bucket
19:41:52 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: So it falls in this very minor-to-moderate bucket, Hadi
19:42:01 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think Vispero would want us to call it out
19:42:16 <jugglinmike> Hadi: Should I report that these had negative side effects?
19:42:35 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Yes, if you could enable that and specify that there was redundant speech, and mark it as moderate, that would be good
19:43:57 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Looks like the problem I had in mind got fixed, so I can mark the VoiceOver test plan as "final"
19:44:07 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: Yay! That always makes me excited
19:44:21 <jugglinmike> Topic: Running test plan for Tabs with Manual Activation
19:44:41 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Let's see... We needed one more JAWS person, but I guess Hadi already signed up for disclosure, and Joe_Humbert's already done this one
19:44:47 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: So I guess we'll have to wait on that
19:44:57 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: As for NVDA, we don't have anyone, yet
19:45:06 <jugglinmike> dean: I'm available for work
19:46:21 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I ran the bot run once, and then I assigned that to Joe_Humbert. Next, I ran it again (so I could assign the new bot run to someone else)
19:47:53 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Is it going to end up making two different JAWS reports for the same JAWS version? Is it okay to leave it this way and assign the new JAWS bot run...?
19:48:02 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: Let me ask howard-e to see
19:48:23 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: How have we done this in the past? Would it have worked differently if Joe_Humbert had already started the work?
19:49:44 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: You can delete the report for the first run
19:50:32 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: For the run that has Joe_Humbert as a tester, you can assign that to JAWS Bot
19:51:14 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Alright, that's awesome
19:51:56 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: In the future, dean will be able to assign himself and then tell the bot to run it, and then when the bot is done, dean will be able to take it back
19:52:14 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: That's right. I don't think dean will even have to assign it to himself, first
19:52:33 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: But he could assign it to himself and then change his mind later, right?
19:52:39 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: yes
19:53:35 <jugglinmike> Topic: App Release
19:53:55 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We currently have two tabs on the Test Queue page: the manual queue and the automated reports
19:54:08 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: There are currently 42 reports that can be automatically run
19:54:46 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: But because not all of those have historic data, we're going to see a lot of output which doesn't match the prior output, so we're going to need people to go through and see if the output is equivalent, and if so, set the assertions accordingly
19:54:51 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: This will be a lot of work
19:55:06 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Everyone has plenty of work assigned to them right now, so we won't begin that effort, yet
19:55:13 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: But we will be addressing it in the near future
19:55:35 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: It's actually really exciting that we'll be able to collect data so efficiently. So big "hats off" to the Bocoup team!
19:55:42 <jugglinmike> Topic: CSUN and TPAC planning
19:56:05 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I have a proposal for a CSUN Session. It's titled, "Who Cares if Screen Readers Say the Right Thiing?"
19:57:00 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That question will be answered from five different points of view: users, web developers, standards authors, screen developers, and accessibility consultants
19:57:18 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I now have confirmed who the presenters for each of those will be
19:57:34 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: However, speaking at the session will not be limited to those presenters
19:59:16 <jugglinmike> james: I don't believe PAC will send anyone to CSUN
19:59:32 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'm super excited about this presentation
19:59:41 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Bocoup is also submitting a session
20:00:41 <jugglinmike> ChrisCuellar: We're still discussing our session proposal. It will likely include topics on the infrastructure we've built. It may include more speculative topics such as our AI research
20:01:01 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: As for TPAC (which is in November in Japan), there are three main things to disscuss
20:01:30 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: One is a workshop for the ARIA working group to teach people how to write test cases and test plans (really atomic tests)
20:02:17 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Another is about bringing ARIA-AT into the charter of a Working Group. That doesn't mean the Community Group is going to go away, but it will bring more formal W3C support to what we're doing. It could end up being a new working group that brings in ACT and possibly WPT work as well.
20:02:24 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Daniel is taking point on this
20:02:55 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: It's going to be formed as a joint meeting between AGWG and ARIA
20:03:15 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: And then ChrisCuellar and jugglinmike will be present and leading a breakout session
20:03:37 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We had awesome participation at the breakout we organized for last year's TPAC, so I'm super-excited about that
20:04:03 <jugglinmike> s/disscuss/discuss/
20:04:10 <jugglinmike> Zakim, end the meeting
20:04:10 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been jugglinmike, ChrisCuellar, james, IsaDC, dean, Matt_King, mfairchild, hadi, Joe_Humbert
20:04:12 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
20:04:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/18-aria-at-minutes.html Zakim
20:04:20 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
20:04:20 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria-at
20:04:40 <jugglinmike> RRSAgent, leave
20:04:40 <RRSAgent> I see no action items