13:59:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:54 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/10/30-wcag2ict-irc
13:59:54 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:59:55 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:59:55 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
13:59:56 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:00:00 <maryjom> chair:  Mary Jo Mueller
14:00:05 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
14:00:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/10/30-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
14:00:13 <maryjom> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
14:00:13 <Zakim> ok, maryjom
14:00:21 <maryjom> agenda+ Announcements
14:00:26 <maryjom> agenda+ 2.4.2 Page Titled
14:00:31 <maryjom> agenda+ 2.4.4 Link Purpose
14:01:19 <maryjom> agenda+Issue #527 – Is 3-finger zoom AT?
14:01:21 <Phil_Day> Phil_Day has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:24 <Phil_Day> present+
14:01:27 <maryjom> agenda+ Level AAA Criteria
14:01:33 <maryjom> regrets:  Loïc Martínez Normand
14:01:46 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:02 <maryjom> present+
14:02:06 <Phil_Day> present+
14:02:07 <bbailey> present+
14:02:08 <maryjom> agenda?
14:02:11 <Phil_Day> scribe+ Phil_Day
14:02:26 <Phil_Day> zakim, next item
14:02:26 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:04:00 <Phil_Day> GreggVan: EN 301 549 - last few changes are in to the latest version.
14:04:29 <Phil_Day> ... Mike P will retire from any standards bodies on January 2026.
14:06:00 <Phil_Day> Section 12.3 has been removed in the latest draft
14:06:44 <Phil_Day> ... (the contentious part was a requirement to list all the ways that you did not meet - which was overly onerous)
14:07:56 <Phil_Day> Daniel: If this (12.3) requirement remains deleted - it may come back as there is a requirement in EAA for product information
14:09:17 <Phil_Day> maryjom: Let's move onto WCAG2ICT
14:09:27 <Daniel> present+
14:10:48 <Phil_Day> maryjom: Next steps for WCAG2ICT - once we agree these last few minor things.
14:11:12 <Phil_Day> ... TF review the diff file, then call for consensus, then would be sent to Accessibility Guidelines working group to review & then publish
14:11:33 <Phil_Day> TF will have 5 working days to review, then it will be sent to AG WG
14:12:20 <bbailey> q+
14:12:30 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:12:34 <Phil_Day> Daniel: TPAC is on 2nd week of Nov, Thanksgiving is on 4th week of Nov, so we may be able to get it published 3rd week of Nov
14:12:52 <Phil_Day> bbailey: AG WG thinks they will get WCAG3 next version out before the end of the year as well
14:13:15 <Phil_Day> maryjom: found some extra issues that will be discussed later today
14:13:27 <Phil_Day> zakim, next item
14:13:27 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- 2.4.2 Page Titled -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:13:57 <bbailey> Thank you Phil!
14:15:16 <maryjom> Link to comment: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/793#issuecomment-3467374801
14:15:19 <Phil_Day> Daniel had a comment in the CfC
14:15:45 <Phil_Day> [maryjom sharing screen - displaying above link]
14:16:50 <Phil_Day> Last week we discussed page oriented, and removed from this phrase from one part of the verbiage, but it remains in the preamble.
14:17:08 <Phil_Day> Daniel proposed either a minor edit to remove this phrase, or rewrite to remove the examples entirely
14:17:17 <GreggVan> q+
14:17:21 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:17:51 <Phil_Day> GreggVan: The reason it was included originally was to get us away from movies and pictures. Deleting could be a problem
14:18:10 <Phil_Day> ... If page oriented is not the right term, then we should replace with a better term
14:18:29 <Phil_Day> Full text from Daniel's comments:
14:18:29 <Phil_Day> When re-reviewing this for approval I still found an occurrence of "page-oriented", which I assumed we agreed to remove completely from all WCAG2ICT prose.
14:18:29 <Phil_Day> At a minimum, I would suggest:
14:18:29 <Phil_Day> However, where the document authoring tool or technology provides the capability to supply a title or name for a document, such as page-oriented publishing tools and word processing applications, when the non-web document utilizes the “Title” attribute to provide a unique title or name inside of each document, and/or when a meaningful file name
14:18:31 <Phil_Day> can be supplied, [...]
14:18:31 <Phil_Day> And ideally, to make this cohesive with the below word substitution, I would suggest:
14:18:31 <Phil_Day> However, where the document authoring tool or technology provides the capability to supply a title or name for a document, such as page-oriented publishing tools and word processing applications, when the non-web document utilizes the “Title” attribute to provide a unique title or name inside of each document, and/or when a meaningful file name
14:18:32 <Phil_Day> can be supplied, [...]
14:19:20 <Daniel> We have also "where the document authoring tool or technology provides the capability to supply a title or name for a document"
14:20:02 <Phil_Day> Problematic sentence from the current PR:
14:20:02 <Phil_Day> However, where the document authoring tool or technology provides the capability to supply a title or name for a document, such as page-oriented publishing tools and word processing applications, when the non-web document utilizes the “Title” attribute to provide a unique title or name inside of each document, and/or when a meaningful file name
14:20:02 <Phil_Day> can be supplied, the user can more easily find it or understand its purpose.
14:20:05 <Daniel> q+
14:20:11 <Phil_Day> ack Daniel
14:20:12 <maryjom> ack Daniel
14:20:54 <Phil_Day> Daniel: 2nd suggestion might have gone too far - so happy to drop this and just suggest we remove "page oriented" as it doesn't really help - we already exclude movies and images.
14:21:03 <Phil_Day> GreggVan: Just remove the "such as..." phrase
14:21:49 <bbailey> +1 to removing "such as" phrase
14:22:01 <Phil_Day> Suggested change from Gregg & Daniel:
14:22:01 <Phil_Day> However, where the document authoring tool or technology provides the capability to supply a title or name for a document, when the non-web document utilizes the “Title” attribute to provide a unique title or name inside of each document, and/or when a meaningful file name can be supplied, the user can more easily find it or understand its
14:22:01 <Phil_Day> purpose.
14:23:04 <Phil_Day> Latest edit from Gregg: However, where the document authoring tool or technology provides the capability to supply a title or name for a document, and the non-web document utilizes the “Title” attribute to provide a unique title or name inside of each document, and/or when a meaningful file name can be supplied, the user can more easily find it
14:23:04 <Phil_Day> or understand its purpose.
14:23:45 <Phil_Day> Gregg: could stay as when.
14:23:45 <Phil_Day> However, where the document authoring tool or technology provides the capability to supply a title or name for a document, when the non-web document utilizes the “Title” attribute to provide a unique title or name inside of each document, and/or when a meaningful file name can be supplied, the user can more easily find it or understand its
14:23:45 <Phil_Day> purpose.
14:24:39 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: For SC 2.4.2, remove "such as page-oriented publishing tools and word processing applications," from the introductory text
14:24:44 <Daniel> +1
14:24:51 <Phil_Day> +1
14:24:55 <GreggVan> +1
14:24:56 <bbailey> +1
14:25:07 <Phil_Day> agenda?
14:25:56 <maryjom> s/text/text, and merge PR 793 into the editor's draft/
14:26:09 <GreggVan> +1
14:26:25 <Phil_Day> +1
14:26:29 <bbailey> +1
14:26:34 <Daniel> +1
14:27:04 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: For SC 2.4.2, remove "such as page-oriented publishing tools and word processing applications," from the introductory text, and merge PR 793 into the editor's draft
14:27:09 <Phil_Day> zakim, next item
14:27:09 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- 2.4.4 Link Purpose -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:27:24 <maryjom> Link to Issue 790: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/790
14:27:34 <maryjom> Link to editor’s draft section on 2.4.4 Link Purpose: https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#link-purpose-in-context
14:27:52 <Phil_Day> We talked about this but never documented a decision
14:28:29 <bbailey> q+
14:28:37 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:28:38 <Phil_Day> ack bbailey
14:28:42 <GreggVan> +1
14:28:49 <Phil_Day> bbailey: Think we talked about it 2 weeks ago
14:29:23 <Phil_Day> bbailey: My recollection was that we were not going to make changes.
14:29:42 <bbailey> Minutes:  https://www.w3.org/2025/10/16-wcag2ict-minutes.html#4d1d
14:29:45 <Phil_Day> GreggVan: Make note "non web documents or software..." instead of the rather ambiguous "content"
14:30:10 <Phil_Day> ... Then remove the tag and it works for both non-web software and non-web documents
14:30:56 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: For 2.4.4 change "non-web software" to "non-web documents or software" and remove the “for non-web software” notation from Note 1
14:31:03 <Phil_Day> +1
14:31:09 <bbailey> +1
14:31:15 <Daniel> +1
14:31:34 <GreggVan> +1
14:31:38 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: For 2.4.4 change "non-web software" to "non-web documents or software" and remove the “for non-web software” notation from Note 1
14:31:42 <Phil_Day> zakim, next item
14:31:42 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Issue #527 – Is 3-finger zoom AT? -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:32:03 <Phil_Day> Issue: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/527
14:32:04 <maryjom> Link to issue 527: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/527
14:32:16 <Phil_Day> Lots of discussion on this one in the past, but never documented a decision
14:32:46 <Daniel> q+
14:33:52 <maryjom> ack Daniel
14:33:53 <Phil_Day> Original issue talked about 3-finger zoom, then pinch zoom
14:34:06 <Phil_Day> Daniel: May warrant input from the mobile task force
14:34:21 <Phil_Day> maryjom: Suggest we don't close this issue in this version
14:35:11 <Phil_Day> maryjom: Recollection was that the same problem occurs in WCAG - and therefore it should be fixed in WCAG as you have the same problem in web browsers
14:35:55 <Phil_Day> GreggVan: Need to ensure that 1 finger fall back is possible, and that pinch is not the only way of achieving zoom
14:36:23 <Phil_Day> ... At least on iPhone - pinch zoom is not the only way of achieving this
14:37:33 <Phil_Day> GreggVan: There is a problem with the definition of "assistive technology" - a screen reader is AT, but is it still AT if it is built-in? It gets confusing. What we are really talking about is without having to add 3rd party AT
14:37:49 <Phil_Day> ... But this should also be fixed in WCAG
14:38:11 <Phil_Day> q+ to suggest we add something to the issue
14:38:58 <Phil_Day> Phil_Day: Suggest we add a note to the issue to say that we are not going to address this in the current draft of WCAG2ICT.
14:39:40 <maryjom> ack Phil_Day
14:39:40 <Zakim> Phil_Day, you wanted to suggest we add something to the issue
14:40:05 <Phil_Day> GreggVan: Suggest we mention "we are not addressing sufficient techniques, we are talking about the rules"
14:40:07 <Daniel> zakim, agenda?
14:40:07 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
14:40:07 <Zakim> 4. Issue #527 – Is 3-finger zoom AT? [from maryjom]
14:40:07 <Zakim> 5. Level AAA Criteria [from maryjom]
14:40:16 <Daniel> ack me
14:45:22 <Phil_Day> Daniel: Propose that we transfer this to the WCAG repository.
14:45:54 <Phil_Day> (WCAG 2.2 backlog)
14:47:25 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Answer issue 527 as drafted in the comment during our meeting
14:47:28 <Phil_Day> +1
14:47:30 <bbailey> +1
14:47:49 <Daniel> +1
14:47:52 <GreggVan> +1
14:48:10 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Answer issue 527 as drafted in the comment during our meeting
14:48:22 <Phil_Day> zakim, next item
14:48:24 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Level AAA Criteria -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:48:38 <Phil_Day> We have 12 minutes left - so will just get started on AAA
14:49:06 <Phil_Day> This will happen after we publish - proposed changes will be held in PRs
14:49:16 <maryjom> Link to issue 791: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/791
14:49:47 <Phil_Day> This is a master issue to track all AAA SCs
14:50:06 <Phil_Day> ... along with the questions to be answered by the TF
14:50:39 <Phil_Day> This master issue contains links to the individual issues that propose content for each SC
14:50:55 <Phil_Day> If you agree with the proposal, leave it a thumbs up.
14:51:21 <Phil_Day> If you think that notes need to be added, don't add thumbs up - just add a comment containing the proposed additional note.
14:51:30 <Phil_Day> (We may need to do this for closed functionality for example)
14:53:57 <Phil_Day> Any concerns about this approach?
14:54:07 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:55:21 <Phil_Day> maryjom: Will try and get all PRs in and completed
14:55:44 <Phil_Day> ... CfC hopefully to be completed by next Thursday
14:56:17 <Phil_Day> maryjom: Will warn AG WG that this is coming
14:56:34 <bbailey> q+
14:56:41 <maryjom> ack bbailey
14:57:00 <Phil_Day> bbailey: Have been adding WCAG 2.2 issues to the agenda as well.
14:57:13 <Phil_Day> maryjom: Be on the lookout for the email call for consensus
14:57:35 <Phil_Day> Thanks all
14:58:12 <Phil_Day> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:58:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/10/30-wcag2ict-minutes.html Phil_Day
14:58:41 <Phil_Day> zakim, bye
14:58:41 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been Phil_Day, maryjom, bbailey, Daniel
14:58:41 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
14:59:07 <maryjom> present+ Gregg
14:59:18 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
14:59:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/10/30-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
14:59:37 <maryjom> rrsagent, bye
14:59:37 <RRSAgent> I see no action items