18:02:34 RRSAgent has joined #aria-apg 18:02:38 logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/09/30-aria-apg-irc 18:02:38 RRSAgent, make logs Public 18:02:39 Meeting: ARIA Authoring Practices Task Force 18:02:45 present+ jugglinmike 18:02:47 scribe+ jugglinmike 18:02:49 present+ Adam_Page 18:02:53 present+ arigilmore 18:02:56 present+ Jem 18:03:38 Jem has joined #aria-apg 18:03:41 present+ Matt_King 18:04:02 jongund has joined #aria-apg 18:04:08 present+ Jemma 18:04:51 CurtBellew has joined #aria-apg 18:04:54 present+ CurtBellew 18:05:00 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/wiki/September-30%2C-2025-Agenda 18:05:09 topic: Setup and Review Agenda 18:05:17 Jem: Next meeting: October 7 18:05:24 Jem: Any requests for change to agenda? 18:05:25 howard-e has joined #aria-apg 18:05:30 present+ howard-e 18:05:37 present+ jongund 18:06:13 Jem: Hearing none, we'll use the agenda as planned 18:06:22 Topic: Publication planning 18:06:33 Jem: I know Daniel and howard-e worked hard on this 18:06:59 Matt_King: The latest news I have regarding the publication is a question on the pull request which howard-e answered 18:07:21 Matt_King: I reviewed an editorial correction last night 18:07:56 howard-e: It's on the "main" branch, and once something reaches the "main" branch, then it will be included in the open publication pull request 18:08:12 Matt_King: Ah, so the pull request is to merge "main" into "publication" 18:08:20 howard-e: That's right. We're just waiting on the merge, now 18:08:39 howard-e: There shouldn't be anything else. I'll be monitoring for further questions, just in case 18:08:57 Matt_King: Once it's merged, we'll need some folks to go out and take a look and verify that everything went through properly 18:09:06 Matt_King: I should be able to help with that 18:09:08 Jem: Me, too 18:10:09 Matt_King: We don't know when it's going to get merged. It seems like it's ready to go, so we're just waiting for Remi to merge. It could get merged as early as today or tomorrow morning 18:10:12 present+ 18:10:33 Matt_King: I made another milestone for the next publication, perhaps at the end of October 18:10:48 Matt_King: I wonder if there are any items that we want to land before TPAC and that we can land before TPAC 18:11:05 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/milestone/40 18:11:19 Matt_King: I'm also wondering about a couple patches from jongund. One regards skipTo.js 18:11:29 jongund: I'm working on that one, now 18:12:04 Jem: So we'll add more items for the next publication as we finish them 18:12:06 Topic: Issue 3193: Next aria-actions example 18:12:14 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3193 18:12:18 Jem: This sounds exciting! 18:12:35 Matt_King: This was an issue that Aaron raised last year after TPAC 18:12:49 Matt_King: At that time, we had the example which Adam_Page worked on--I think it was "tabs with manual activation" 18:13:28 Matt_King: In the ARIA-AT group, we're beginning the work of a JAWS test plan for that pattern. I would like to share it at TPAC, but I think Aaron was requesting a different specific example because it includes some features that we can't really model in the "tabs" example 18:13:49 Matt_King: He's talking about adding tabs in something like a listbox or a tree--where you have buttons that appear as you navigate through the list 18:14:26 Matt_King: ...unlike tabs where the visibility of the buttons is commonly persistent. In this case, though, the visibility wouldn't be persistent. It could be based on hover (but gosh, how do you make that work with touch...? It's not really described here) 18:14:55 Matt_King: So I guess there are some things to work out in terms of how this would behave, but is there anyone who is excited to work on it? 18:15:33 https://a11y-screenreader-demos.netlify.app/studies/secondary-actions/ 18:16:09 Adam_Page: Sarah put together a page of examples when she initially proposed aria-actions. None of them use aria-actions; they are just patterns that she thought aria-actions could solve 18:16:31 Adam_Page: I just reviewed them, though, and I don't think they relate exactly to what Aaron is describing? 18:16:45 Matt_King: The question is: what aspects of actions are we NOT demonstrating with the "tabs" example? 18:16:57 Matt_King: One, I think, is visibility, since all tabs are visible at all times 18:17:19 Adam_Page: If not for Aaron mentioning the listbox role specifically, I would have suggested forking the "tabs" example and add that reveal 18:17:27 Matt_King: Is that an authentic use, though 18:17:34 s/though/though?/ 18:17:37 Adam_Page: I'm not sure 18:17:57 Adam_Page: Also, Gmail came to mind--that UI pattern where you bring focus to a list of things, and you want to perform some action on that list 18:18:17 Adam_Page: I just looked at production GMail. They do reveal actions on hover, but they do not reveal them on focus 18:18:36 CurtBellew: I find this interesting, but I do have some questions. I can't think of a use-case involving options in a list with actions on them 18:18:46 Matt_King: I've experienced this in a lot of cases 18:19:05 Matt_King: Mobile versions of mail are all like that--they're all some kind of list with actions that don't show when you're just looking at the list 18:19:28 Adam_Page: Another (maybe contrived) example that came to mind is an ordered list that allows for resorting 18:19:55 Matt_King: We have an example like that: the listbox with rearrange-able options. We could make an aria-actions version of that 18:19:59 https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/apg/patterns/listbox/examples/listbox-rearrangeable/ 18:20:01 Matt_King: I think the simpler, the better 18:20:14 Matt_King: In my experience, this happens a lot 18:20:46 Matt_King: In 1password, you have a long list of different entries, and you can perform actions like "edit" and "delete" 18:20:51 Matt_King: It's like a contextual toolbar 18:21:09 CurtBellew: Ah, so as opposed to making a list of selections, these are actions with a list of sub-actions 18:21:24 Matt_King: Gmail is a grid, but we could make a much simpler list 18:21:42 Matt_King: The select-only combobox is "select your favorite fruit." That's a very simple list with some ready-to-go content. 18:22:03 Matt_King: We have a bunch of examples that provide content so we don't have to start from zero 18:22:14 Matt_King: What else did Sarah suggest as examples? 18:22:43 Adam_Page: She had trees where each tree could contain items like "files" which you could delete 18:22:51 Adam_Page: She had tabs, she also had listboxes 18:23:44 Matt_King: We have examples of both listbox and tree that are fairly straight-foward and either of which would satisfy Aaron's requirements 18:24:31 Matt_King: If you want to use aria-actions and just learn about the different ways of coding it, it seems to me that if you had an example of it applied to a listbox, that's sufficient. That you could use that example to figure out how to apply it to a terr 18:24:51 Matt_King: I think we would copy it an make a whole new example (to avoid complexity) 18:24:54 https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/apg/patterns/listbox/examples/listbox-grouped/ 18:25:30 Matt_King: The "re-arrangeable options listbox" is pretty complicated in the sense that it currently has two listboxes 18:26:26 Adam_Page: I don't know if it's necessary for this example to have a notion of one being selected 18:26:36 Matt_King: We just have selection following focus because they're all single-selects 18:26:52 Matt_King: If it was multiple select, that feels like it could make it a lot more complicated 18:27:40 Matt_King: I think "scrollable listbox" is the simplest example of them all 18:28:03 Jem: So we would add aria-action to each option? 18:28:07 Adam_Page: Yes 18:28:16 Jem: Because it's simpler than any other pattern? 18:28:44 Matt_King: Yeah. I don't know we need to bring in the complexity of the other examples in order to demonstrate the essential features of aria-actions 18:29:35 Matt_King: The other thing that would differentiate this from "tabs" is that we would reveal each of these individually. In tabs, it would be rare to see three buttons displayed when you hover on the tab. In a listbox, on the other hand, that would almost be the norm. You would never put another click in front of the actions 18:29:37 Adam_Page: Agreed 18:30:03 Matt_King: And three actions is probably sufficient. I kind of like "remove" for one because it shows how you have to respond to destructive options in terms of focus management 18:30:07 Adam_Page: Right, yes 18:30:28 Matt_King: All of those end up don't something that is focus-management-ish 18:30:43 Adam_Page: Maybe we have an action like "Favorite" 18:31:00 Matt_King: Yeah. That could add a little "favorite" star next to it. You could favorite as many as you like 18:31:27 Adam_Page: At first, I was tempted to overload aria-selected, but that doesn't make sense. But when you get to a listbox, how do you want it announced? I imagine you want it worked into the name 18:31:36 Matt_King: Yeah, it should be part of the name 18:31:56 Jem: "add" button and "trash" button are typical 18:32:19 Matt_King: Yeah.. "move up/down", "delete/trash", and "trash" 18:32:32 Matt_King: One changes the content of the current item without moving focus 18:32:54 Matt_King: If you move up, I think you would maintain focus (just like we do in the other ones) so that way when you move up, you're able to continuing moving up 18:33:15 Jem: Can you just go with "edit", "trash", and "favorite"? 18:33:26 Jem: But maybe we're ready to decide if we want to do this 18:34:40 Matt_King: I'm wondering if implementing this might help move some of the aria-actions discussions forward at TPAC 18:34:45 CurtBellew: That makes sense. 18:34:50 CurtBellew: I won't be at TPAC 18:35:11 CurtBellew: But I can devote some resources to it before TPAC. I have some time right now (though those things can change quickly) 18:35:45 Jem: What other discussion is needed to make this happen? Do we want to add this for the next agenda? 18:36:07 Matt_King: Adam_Page's recent experience demonstrated how so much nuance is unearthed as a result of implementation 18:36:19 Adam_Page: Right. Touch, for instance 18:37:04 Siri1 has joined #aria-apg 18:37:11 Matt_King: We don't have to worry about touch in the first iteration 18:37:17 CurtBellew: Yeah, I'd worry about that last 18:37:18 present+ 18:37:26 Matt_King: We can release without touch support and then add touch support later 18:37:37 Matt_King: I can cut a branch and set up the files for you, CurtBellew 18:37:46 CurtBellew: That would help me get started 18:37:54 Matt_King: I'll make a branch for you to work on 18:37:59 CurtBellew: Great! 18:38:12 Topic: Issue 3315: Table naming guidance 18:38:32 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3315 18:39:12 Matt_King: ARIA 1.2 had specified that naming a table is required. In ARIA 1.3, the group has wisely removed the requirement to name the table 18:39:27 Matt_King: Our table-naming guidance still reflects the ARIA 1.2 requirement 18:39:50 I need to go a little early today 18:40:00 Matt_King: We can change this to match ARIA 1.3 18:40:21 Matt_King: The ARIA spec text, currently reads that "authors SHOULD" 18:40:24 jongund has joined #aria-apg 18:40:28 CurtBellew: I couldn't find this when I went looking 18:41:21 Matt_King: If you go to the "table" role in the ARIA 1.3 draft (and there is a link to that in this issue) 18:41:59 CurtBellew: This is a huge change for us! I can't believe I missed it 18:42:19 Adam_Page: We found instances in the real world where the name wasn't helpful 18:42:42 Matt_King: I thought we previously had a pull request that made all the necessary changes in APG. Maybe we should check the others, too 18:43:40 https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/2297 18:43:42 Matt_King: What this does is, it makes your job a little bit harder. You don't have strict guidance, anymore. The APG will say that something is "recommended" 18:44:19 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3244 18:45:28 Adam_Page: I just shared two URLs. The first is the ARIA spec pull request that made the spec change. And the second is the aria-practices counterpoint. It's just an issue that I created, and it's still open 18:45:39 present+ Hadi 18:45:54 s/counterpoint/counterpart/ 18:46:05 Hadi: Where is the guidance on aria-label? 18:46:27 Matt_King: It's in the table on the editor's draft of the ARIA spec 18:46:43 Hadi: I don't see anything about aria-label there 18:47:09 Matt_King: The "characteristics" table only includes normative-MUST requirements 18:47:26 Hadi: How can we understand this change by looking at the spec itself when it is not written anywhere? 18:49:36 Matt_King: I thought that we were supposed to go to "evergreen" at the beginning of the year. Maybe that's not actually happening until after 1.3 is done 18:49:46 Matt_King: That may be affecting the AXE core decision 18:50:02 Matt_King: Okay, so the question is, I think, what the APG guidance should be 18:50:13 Matt_King: We have two options 18:50:22 Matt_King: We can list it as "recommended" or "discretionary" 18:50:40 Matt_King: I think that because there is an "authors SHOULD" in the spec, the most appropriate guidance for APG is "recommended" 18:51:34 Matt_King: Since "discretionary" is "optional or in some cases discouraged" 18:52:11 Matt_King: If we look at the next row down after table (which has a "recommended" for tab list), the very first bullet of the "recommended" ones for the third column explains why we recommended 18:52:18 Matt_King: We don't do that for the required ones 18:52:33 Matt_King: We could almost copy the first bullet of the "tablist" one word-for-word 18:52:38 Adam_Page: I think that would work 18:52:57 Adam_Page: Do we want to update the others while we're at it? 18:53:03 Matt_King: Yeah, I think so 18:53:22 Adam_Page: The issue I raised is issue #3244 in aria-practices 18:53:28 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3244 18:53:58 Matt_King: I'm hesitant to put my name on it because I think it will be a long time before I can get to it. Probably that's the same reason everyone else is hesitating 18:54:23 Matt_King: We're definitely going to change what's in the APG from "required" to "recommended". And we'll make a similar change for the other roles, as well 18:55:24 Jem: I can do this. Adam_Page can you review my work? 18:55:27 Adam_Page: Sure 18:55:37 Matt_King: Awesome, thank you Jem! 18:56:09 Topic: Issue 3314: Potential infra bug? 18:56:15 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/3314 18:56:31 Matt_King: Someone has reported a method somewhere in our code that isn't working the way it ought to 18:56:49 Matt_King: It sounds like it might be in the link-checker code, but they didn't provide a code pointer. I didn't go searching for the function 18:57:00 Matt_King: a function called "indexLineNumbers" 18:57:14 Matt_King: I don't know if this is causing any problems, so I don't know how this person discovered it 18:57:23 howard-e: Yes, it is in the link checker 18:57:44 howard-e: What they're reported could happen, but I'd be very surprised if it did 18:58:41 Matt_King: Can you write a comment and close the issue, howard-e? 18:58:43 howard-e: Sure 18:58:48 Jem: I assigned it to howard-e 18:58:52 Matt_King: Thanks! 18:59:46 s/Hadi/Siri/g 19:00:12 Zakim, end the meeting 19:00:12 As of this point the attendees have been jugglinmike, Adam_Page, arigilmore, Jem, Matt_King, Jemma, CurtBellew, howard-e, jongund, Siri, Hadi 19:00:14 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 19:00:16 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/09/30-aria-apg-minutes.html Zakim 19:00:23 I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 19:00:23 Zakim has left #aria-apg 19:01:19 RRSAgent, leave 19:01:19 I see no action items