14:02:17 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:21 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/09/25-wcag2ict-irc
14:02:21 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:02:22 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
14:02:23 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
14:02:24 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:02:25 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
14:02:27 <maryjom> chair:  Mary Jo Mueller
14:02:34 <PhilDay> present+
14:02:35 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
14:02:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/25-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
14:02:44 <maryjom> agenda+ Announcements
14:02:47 <maryjom> agenda+ 1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus - Note 3 (Issue 773)
14:02:53 <maryjom> agenda+ 1.3.4 Orientation - Note 1 (Issue 779)
14:02:59 <bbailey> gregg's email to list:  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2ict-tf/2025Sep/0008.html
14:03:02 <maryjom> agenda+ Font size items in the EN 301 549 including (4.2.2, 5.1.4, 9, 10, 11.1.4.4)
14:03:09 <maryjom> agenda+ New notes from EN on 1.2.3 and 1.2.5
14:03:21 <maryjom> agenda+ 2.4.2 Page Titled - application of SC to non-web docs?
14:03:35 <loicmn> present+
14:03:48 <Daniel> present+
14:03:54 <bbailey> present+
14:04:08 <maryjom> present+
14:04:08 <PhilDay> present+
14:04:14 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:04:14 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:04:18 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
14:04:36 <PhilDay> Gregg's email to list: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2ict-tf/2025Sep/0008.html regarding changes to EN v19 that will go into v20
14:04:36 <bbailey> RRSAgent draft minutes
14:04:46 <GreggVan> present+
14:05:07 <bbailey> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:05:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/25-wcag2ict-minutes.html bbailey
14:05:14 <PhilDay> Comments are due by end of this meeting
14:05:43 <bbailey> s/RRSAgent draft minutes//
14:06:11 <bbailey> RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:06:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/25-wcag2ict-minutes.html bbailey
14:06:42 <bbailey> q+
14:06:56 <PhilDay> Planning to deliver EN final draft v20 by end of September
14:07:10 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
14:07:11 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:07:20 <PhilDay> bbailey: Minutes are not generating correctly.
14:07:27 <maryjom> agenda?
14:08:10 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:08:10 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- 1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus - Note 3 (Issue 773) -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:08:30 <maryjom> Link to issue 773: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/773
14:08:30 <maryjom> Link to PR 778: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/778
14:08:49 <GreggVan> present+
14:09:06 <PhilDay> [Mary Jo sharing screen]
14:09:21 <PhilDay> ... sharing PR 778
14:10:07 <maryjom> q?
14:10:20 <bbailey> q+
14:11:02 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:11:03 <PhilDay> Is language currently proposed in PR 778 OK, or should we use the same language "links or other UI controls that behave like links"
14:11:31 <PhilDay> bbailey: Careful to not use quotation marks unless it really is a word substitution.
14:11:51 <PhilDay> maryjom to create new PR to make this change
14:12:00 <PhilDay> q?
14:12:42 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: For SC 1.4.13 Note 3, and the word subtitution language, use "links or other UI controls that behave like links"
14:12:55 <PhilDay> +1
14:12:58 <loicmn> +1
14:13:05 <bbailey> +1
14:13:23 <GreggVan> +1
14:13:40 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:13:42 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: For SC 1.4.13 Note 3, and the word subtitution language, use "links or other UI controls that behave like links"
14:13:44 <bbailey> q+ to ask if we have always, so far, been able to do a word substitution (and not resort to description of the change)?
14:13:53 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:13:54 <Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to ask if we have always, so far, been able to do a word substitution (and not resort to description of the change)?
14:14:17 <bbailey> Have we always, so far, been able to do a word substitution (and not resort to description of the change)?
14:14:21 <PhilDay> bbailey: Refresh memory - have we always done word substitution - thought there was one time that we described the change
14:15:02 <PhilDay> ... This one is OK as a word substitution - recollection is that we had at least 1 SC where we described what it should be rather than doing word substitution.
14:15:20 <PhilDay> maryjom: This was where we were suggesting possible language to the SC
14:15:28 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:15:28 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- 1.3.4 Orientation - Note 1 (Issue 779) -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:15:44 <maryjom> Link to issue 779: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/779
14:15:44 <maryjom> Link to PR 780: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/780
14:16:47 <bbailey> q_
14:16:51 <bbailey> q+
14:17:10 <bbailey> s/q_/s/
14:17:29 <bbailey> ack me
14:17:34 <PhilDay> bbailey: Thought we had closed this one out
14:17:56 <bbailey> q+
14:18:52 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:18:54 <maryjom> q?
14:21:20 <bbailey> q+ to suggest "electronic building directory" (INS electronic)
14:21:29 <bbailey> ack me
14:21:29 <Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to suggest "electronic building directory" (INS electronic)
14:22:49 <maryjom> q?
14:24:23 <PhilDay> [minor wordsmithing on example for non-web documents]
14:25:40 <bbailey> q+
14:26:21 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:26:25 <PhilDay> Suggestion is to have the same note for non-web docs and software
14:26:46 <PhilDay> bbailey: Example is more useful for non-web software only, not also for non-web docs
14:27:57 <PhilDay> q+ to clarify if we are talking about the note or example
14:28:46 <PhilDay> q
14:28:52 <PhilDay> q-
14:31:32 <PhilDay> ... Continued discussion about exception and whether it should be specific to non-web software only, or should also include non-web documents
14:33:26 <PhilDay> Discussion regarding whether latest EN had changes to notes or examples for software
14:33:34 <maryjom> EXAMPLES: 	Calculators and watches would not be expected to support two orientations.  Nor would building directory software written to ONLY be used on tablet devices bolted to the wall, all in the same orientation, be expected to support two orientations.
14:34:10 <PhilDay> Mike to paste in what is currently in v19
14:34:23 <Mike_Pluke> Calculators and watches would not be expected to support two orientations.  Nor would building directory software written to ONLY be used on tablet devices bolted to the wall, all in the same orientation, be expected to support two orientations.
14:36:29 <PhilDay> Note is different in the EN
14:36:41 <maryjom> EN's note for software: Non-web software that is only used on hardware that supports a single display orientation, or where it is an application that is run only on hardware that is physically fixed in one orientation (e.g. a building directory) is covered under the essential exception and therefore does not need to provide support for orientation
14:36:41 <maryjom> changes
14:38:55 <PhilDay> Consensus - both EN and WCAG2ICT versions of the note for software need updating
14:41:03 <PhilDay> ... And need to include the example from EN v19 (watches etc)
14:41:43 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:41:43 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Font size items in the EN 301 549 including (4.2.2, 5.1.4, 9, 10, 11.1.4.4) -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:41:53 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 3
14:41:53 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- 1.3.4 Orientation - Note 1 (Issue 779) -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:42:03 <PhilDay> Does anyone have a problem with adding the example?
14:42:11 <bbailey> +1 to adding example
14:42:16 <PhilDay> ... (from Mike / EN)
14:42:19 <GreggVan> +1
14:42:20 <PhilDay> +1 to adding example
14:42:21 <loicmn> +1
14:42:28 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 4
14:42:28 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Font size items in the EN 301 549 including (4.2.2, 5.1.4, 9, 10, 11.1.4.4) -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:42:30 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:43:10 <bbailey> my (potential) concern is for hardware oriented examples under any non-web document note
14:43:57 <PhilDay> EN team are also discussing text size in separate discussion
14:44:54 <PhilDay> q+
14:44:59 <bbailey> q+
14:46:15 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:46:32 <bbailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/776#issuecomment-3308578744
14:47:11 <maryjom> https://labs.etsi.org/rep/HF/en301549/-/issues/255#note_26984
14:47:13 <bbailey> In PR, I propose a tidy fix:  It is a good practice is for the default presentation of text to use a font with an x-height of at least 8 CSS px.
14:47:34 <maryjom> q?
14:47:38 <bbailey> s/tidy fix/what i think is a tidy fix/
14:47:39 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
14:48:38 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
14:48:56 <PhilDay> bbailey: suggested something neater in a comment
14:49:09 <PhilDay> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/776#issuecomment-3308578744
14:49:29 <PhilDay> This is the text of the comment: It is a good practice is for the default presentation of text to use a font with an x-height of at least 8 CSS px.
14:49:35 <PhilDay> q?
14:50:49 <maryjom> q?
14:51:00 <PhilDay> ack Mike_Pluke
14:51:05 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
14:51:28 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: What Gregg has proposed is different to what is expected - not sure if we can go with the proposal.
14:51:49 <PhilDay> ... think that proposed note 3 language is better
14:52:09 <PhilDay> ... don't think we will use this in EN
14:53:23 <GreggVan> q+
14:53:46 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: If we stick with CSS px as the measure - then the requirement is clear. We were trying to get consistency in 3 different places (software, web, documents). Also functional performance criteria has a similar note. Then requirement targeted at harmonising with Section 508.
14:54:04 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:54:06 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
14:54:44 <PhilDay> 5.1.4 is in pixels. 4.2.2 is in pts, but could be made in px. Then note can talk about pt equivalent.
14:55:24 <PhilDay> 1.4.4 is best practice - and also in CSS px, then only mentions font as an approximation. Only 4.2.2 didn't use CSS px
14:56:31 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: 16 and 32 CSS px which were in previous notes
14:56:56 <bbailey> I agree that it is odd for 508 to use a measurement based on height of capital letter i -- it is so because 508 wanted to use same language as appears in ADA, and ADA specification is for displays on ATMs and fair vending machines
14:58:04 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Think where we should end up - normal font is 12 pt, then zoomed to 2x that
14:58:31 <PhilDay> Detlev also mentioned being careful mentioning specific font size - as it depends on viewing distance
14:58:36 <bbailey> I think goal is not only 12 pt minimum but also not decorative -- hence focus on x-height
14:59:19 <PhilDay> We should also include "expected to be viewed at a viewing distance of ...."
14:59:32 <PhilDay> Not going to come to decision today
14:59:57 <PhilDay> agenda?
15:00:09 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 5
15:00:10 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- New notes from EN on 1.2.3 and 1.2.5 -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:00:41 <PhilDay> Brief discussion on x.1.2.3 and x.1.2.5
15:00:48 <GreggVan>  (that is not already in the audio), or if there are few or even zero gaps available during the video and during the credits (if any) before the video (since all gaps were utilized).
15:01:10 <GreggVan> Audio descriptions add descriptive information of important visual information, to the extent possible in the gaps of the audio track of the video. This is usually implemented by providing a second audio track for the audio-video media. However, this success criterion could also be satisfied by fully describing important visual information in the main audio track. Doing so eliminates the work of adding a second audio track and finding
15:01:10 <GreggVan>  appropriate gaps in the audio to add descriptions of visual information. This success criterion would also automatically be satisfied if there is no important visual information to be described in the audio (that is not already in the audio), or if there are few or even zero gaps available during the video and during the credits (if any) before the video (since all gaps were utilized).
15:01:53 <PhilDay> maryjom gave suggestion last night. Mike_Pluke then responded. Only change was to not mention SC but mention requirement (and met instead of satisfied)
15:02:06 <GreggVan> Audio descriptions add descriptive information of important visual information, to the extent possible in the gaps of the audio track of the video. This is usually implemented by providing a second audio track for the audio-video media. However, this requirement could also be met by fully describing important visual information in the main audio track. Doing so eliminates the work of adding a second audio track and finding appropriate gaps in
15:02:06 <GreggVan>  the audio to add descriptions of visual information. This success criterion would also automatically be satisfied if there is no important visual information to be described in the audio (that is not already in the audio), or if there are few or even zero gaps available during the video and during the credits (if any) before the video (since all gaps were utilized).
15:02:36 <bbailey> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-satisfies
15:02:45 <bbailey> the success criterion does not evaluate to 'false' when applied to the page
15:02:58 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:02:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/25-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
15:03:25 <PhilDay> Gregg explained some minor tweaks to the above
15:03:50 <maryjom> q?
15:04:16 <PhilDay> q?
15:04:28 <PhilDay> loicmn: Further discussion about audio descriptions and gaps
15:06:55 <loicmn> The success criterion for video with "no audio gaps" would be 1.2.7 extended audio description
15:07:27 <loicmn> * I'm not available tomorrow. Sorry
15:07:46 <PhilDay> maryjom: Because we still have 3 topics ongoing for discussion. Should we work on this tomorrow?
15:09:04 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:09:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/25-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
15:09:52 <loicmn> loicmn has left #wcag2ict