Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Announcements
janina: Usual business.
matatk: We'll drop CSS updatews today. I have some updates, but they are incorporated into the rest of the agenda.
janina: Alerting everyone! CFC coming over the holidays! This is for poublication for COGA, it's a set of research modules that serve as background support for Content Usable and BG support for what we do on various specs and AGWG does primarily with the WCAG.
janina: Thisis the FPWD for that note seeking wide review and comment from the community.
janina: To be expected before week's end.
matatk: This is going to be high level because it is FPWD.
Eric_hind: We're trying to get a ttriggers paper out as ell.
zakim close this item
TPAC 2025 (Continued)
matatk: There a re a few more issues to go through.
matatk: We have an issue representing each meeting at TPAC.
matatk: The calendar entries all have minutes linked and any recordings linked.
IDREFs
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: We have talked about this before in APA.
matatk: This was a session about dewveloper pain points and what research may be needed to look at the solution.
matatk: One of the key questions we had was "What is thte thing that develoeprs specifically refer to when they say that IDRefs are causing pain?" One thing seems to be the generation of unieuq IDs and the otehr is sharing these unique IDs across different parts of the page.
matatk: There is a WiCG repo that contains a
matatk: There are some relly good use cases around SVG. Inline SVG is particularly prone to ID clashes.
matatk: Anyway. The discussion was perhaps not as successful as we had hoped. We didn't get to an agreement as to how to quantify the research.
matatk: There is a proposal that is in keeping witth the current platform in teh WICG repo.
matatk: If we want to make an APOA comment we can draft one.
matatk: We will keep working with this.
matatk: The purpose of going through these issues is to tell what went down in the meetings.
matatk: If anyone has extra actions they want to suggest or questions or whathaveyou, we can work on those and once we have a list of actiosnresulting from these meetings
WHATWG, I18n WG, APA
<matatk> https://
matatk: The next one was a joint meeting with WHATWG, i18n WG and APA.
matatk: There was actually a luncthime meeting that occurred during the wek about this as well.
matatk: A few issues were discussed. One in particular mostly of interest to a11y.
matatk: From our perspective, we have the ADAPT TF. One of the thigns tehy are working on is providing symbols to support people using symbols/AAC to work on the web.
matatk: It isn't like a complete replacements, but rather an aaugmentation.
matatk: The ruby element, speficied for CJK languages, si there to provide ancilliary/complimentary information for the content sitting below it when it's rendered.
matatk: Lots of people in WHATWG and other implementers suggested ruby for this, since it's already there.
matatk: There has been a discussion about a type attribute for the ruby tag whether the element is pronunciation, fi it is for something else.
matatk: There has bene extension discussions ongoing, whcih opens the door to another type of value which is symbol, whcih would acommodate this.
matatk: We could use a combination fo the type and lang attributes to indicate that htis is a symbol adn so browsers would figure this out on their own.
matatk: We will pass it to the i18n and WHATWG people after having looked at this.
matatk: There was also talk about dumb localisation (date formats, plurals, etc.) so that there is les talk between client and server.
matatk: Whilst they are not directly working on ruby, the Pronunciation TF is colecting use cases to work with in that TF.
Horizontal Review (Breakout)
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: Th e next one is Horizontal Review Breakout.
matatk: Thsi was an update for spec authors in general about a few dirfferent things, namely immprovements made to the HR provd3ewss form a spec author#s perspective (the intake forms, the TAG screener and the fAST checklist, into HTML versions as we've talked about before).
matatk: Also benefits of having a horizontal review.
matatk: We also talked about a mreo web spec authoring focused approach to a11y, namely FAST (yay!).
matatk: We also had quite a bit of suggestiosn and questions from spec authors who wanted to give us ffedback or ask whether to cater for x, y, or z.
matatk: Mostly, people echoed that they wanted the feedback to come earlier which is really good to hear.
matatk: The horizontal review process how it has worked so far doesn't work like that. This is the whole reason for the chagnes, really.
matatk: All we need to do is make it easier for them to ask questions.
matatk: Also for us to provide input and answers.
matatk: But we're getting there.
matatk: One of thte thigns we've noticed is that htere are a lot of proposals coming out, that seem to be perfectly logical within the platform they are working on, for instance CSS. Looking across the whole platform, however, it may introudce a lot fo risks in certain areas, where the proponent hasn't really thought about.
matatk: These risks and dealing with those and try to identify the areas of risks caused by any particular proposal and hopefully cause a higher bar of evidence that we need to make this change because it's riskier.
matatk: We are thinking about threat modelling for a11y. Seems quite compelling.
New Charters
Verifiable Credentials
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: Probably a number of you will have heard fo this group before.
matatk: It's pretty low level stuff.
matatk: Looking for changes to the deliverables.
matatk: There are a couple of things with possible a11y relevance.
matatk: Those with "render" in the title and also "barcodes".
matatk: Reasonably rendering-related reflections requested.
i18n WG
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: This one is i18n WG. They're quite a11y-aware.
matatk: There's a glossary that they ar e working on, and there is HTML ruby markup extensions (related to what we just discussed) and Ruby text to Speech.
matatk: We could just follow the development of this. The Pronunciation TF will certainly look at it from the sidelines at least.
Spec review requests
matatk: There is something that's quite old but has come up in discussions.
CSS Color Adjust
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> specifically: https://
matatk: That's a review request but I specifically highlighted:
matatk: Force Colour Adjust property.
<Roy_Ruoxi> tracking: w3c/
matatk: *s Forced
matatk: Two use cases: One where you ahve to have a specific colour that is psecified and the other, which is vaguely hinted at int he spec, which is when the app wants to provide high contrast colours but wants to do it its own way.
matatk: The reason I want to talk about thsi is because it was flagged for discussion this week with the AG chairs.
janinaq: Apps wantintg to do something their own way is a disability tax on the user. This is having to learn something new do redo all the work you have already done in your primary user interface, but perhaps possibly in a new and less friendly environment.
matatk: Thsi would be very rare but it woudl be interesting to ask the group where they envision it to happen.
Neha: Raising hand!
chiace: Raising hand!
matatk: Okay, Neha and Chiara will help me connect with the WG to work with them on this.
mike_beganyi: If i can offer a tertiary or quartary review, I'd be happy to as well.
<chiace> I'm in a very noisy place and can't talk, but I'm happy to help :)
RDF 1.2
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: There are three listed in this meta thread thingy.
matatk: Not much will have changed fomr an a11y perspective, just making certain.
Eric_hind: BTW: Lisa had no time to look at this RD-thingamabob.
matatk: Thanks!
Issue tracking
Suggestions for Enhancing Accessibility Clarity in the WSG Draft
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: This is what I was talikng about before. Glenda reviewed the WSG and came up with some feedback and is following the process by which we raise that feedback in their repo if we agree on it all.
matatk: The linked issue here is, if we all agree on it, the APA issue/feedback from this review.
Glenda: The WSG is a huge document and this is the first time I do a review. I know the people doing that guideline, that there are some veru astute a11y experts there, includign Jenn Strickland.
Glenda: Feedback was especially important in the conflict between sustainability and a11y.
matatk: This looks good to me. I would just want to have consensus before we post.
matatk: Just chagne things like "I" to "we" to maek it an APA comment.
matatk: Any concerns about this bein an APA comment?
matatk: Silent night.
matatk: Everyone can live with this.
matatk: It#s beginning to look a lot like comment!
matatk: Thanks a lot for the review, Glenda!
CSS and text selection
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: Paul noticed that we want to give some feedback for this.
matatk: CSS requested some help in identifying hwo text selection should work with AT.
matatk: If anyone of us has some speficic commetns on this, then do so in this comment thread.
matatk: Thanks everyone for all yoru input and looking at issues and so forth!
matatk: Have very good holidays and celebrations!
<mike_beganyi> Happy holidays, friends!
matatk: Here's to full documentations and enjoyment of downtimes!
janina: OUr next meeting is Wed, Jan 7.