15:01:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag-act
15:01:49 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/01/15-wcag-act-irc
15:01:49 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:01:50 <Zakim> Meeting: Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference
15:02:12 <dmontalvo> agenda+ Accessibility Compat Data
15:02:38 <dmontalvo> agenda+ WCAG3 testing procedures review
15:02:43 <dmontalvo> zakim, agenda?
15:02:43 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
15:02:44 <Zakim> 1. Accessibility Compat Data [from dmontalvo]
15:02:44 <Zakim> 2. WCAG3 testing procedures review [from dmontalvo]
15:03:21 <Sage> Sage has joined #wcag-act
15:04:12 <Kathy> present+
15:05:37 <Dan_Tripp> Dan_Tripp has joined #wcag-act
15:05:47 <Dan_Tripp> present+
15:05:56 <lola> lola has joined #wcag-act
15:05:58 <dmontalvo> present+
15:06:02 <lola> present+
15:06:05 <dmontalvo> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:06:05 <Zakim> Present: Kathy, Dan_Tripp, dmontalvo, lola
15:06:47 <Sage> present+
15:07:08 <Jean-Yves> Jean-Yves has joined #wcag-act
15:07:12 <dmontalvo> present+ Helen, Wilco, Godwin, Filippo, Sage
15:07:17 <dmontalvo> scribe+
15:07:20 <Jean-Yves> present+
15:07:22 <dmontalvo> zakim, take up next
15:07:22 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Accessibility Compat Data -- taken up [from dmontalvo]
15:08:49 <dmontalvo> [[Lola shares screen]
15:10:22 <dmontalvo> Lola: Accessibility Compat Data. First time meeting most of you
15:11:35 <dmontalvo> Lola: Adrian Roselli opened a bunch of issues to the BCD related to mark, delete, insertion, and strike through
15:12:08 <dmontalvo> ... VO in Safari didn't read the preceeding elements
15:12:58 <dmontalvo> ... As a developer, I'd check CanIUse, which says all of these elements are supported, or I'd check the MDN table, where it says de delete element has been supported for a while
15:13:12 <dmontalvo> ... O I may look at Baseline, with similar information
15:13:51 <dmontalvo> ... So where would we submit these kinds of issues?
15:14:02 <dmontalvo> ... He submitted against browser, but they closed them as out of scope
15:14:38 <dmontalvo> ... He was able to file and issue with the WebKit team. However, if it was a different browser combo or developer had less experience, where would they go?
15:14:51 <dmontalvo> ... This introduces ACD (Accessibility Compat Data)
15:15:09 <dmontalvo> Lola: Objective -- Define machine readable data sets to inform accessibility support.
15:15:23 <dmontalvo> ... Different from ACT, which defines rules to test accessibility compliance
15:15:30 <dmontalvo> ... ACD is about the specific web feature
15:15:40 <dmontalvo> s/feature/features/
15:16:07 <dmontalvo> Lola: I'd like to integrate this information where they are already use to look for this info: MDN, Baseline, CanIUse, etc
15:16:18 <dmontalvo> ... I'd like to make it easier to create accessible content
15:16:49 <dmontalvo> ... I worked previously for Bocoup, specifically on ARIA-AT
15:17:29 <dmontalvo> Lola: Currently developers don't have an integrated way to tell if something that works on the browser would also work on AT
15:18:00 <dmontalvo> ... When BCD shows something as supported, it's only looking at what's in the DOM tree, not even the accessibility tree
15:18:29 <dmontalvo> ... Something can be OK DOM-wise but fail somewhere else down the pipeline (accessibility tree, AT rendering, etc)
15:18:55 <dmontalvo> ... The current data sets for AT support are not integrated either
15:20:29 <dmontalvo> Lola: It's unclear how to let these tool vendors know when there are issues, and also some projects have different objectives
15:20:44 <dmontalvo> Lola: We want to write tests to track how features work across browsers and ATs
15:21:04 <dmontalvo> ... And then present the data across developer-friendly tools to help spread the data
15:21:20 <dmontalvo> Lola: A recent survey shows that accessibility is the greatest gap developers want to cover.
15:21:38 <dmontalvo> ... MDN has long received request from developers to help understand accessibility support
15:22:18 <dmontalvo> ... There's also compliance presure, the EU has laws that came into place last year for web and mobile apps, the UK has a similar ecosystem
15:22:50 <dmontalvo> ... The infrastructure is almost ready. We are trying to use resources that already exist, such as WPT
15:22:58 <dmontalvo> ... They are actively maintained
15:23:13 <dmontalvo> ... They contain a large test suite already
15:23:34 <dmontalvo> ... Also add with Tetralogical and AT tests suites design to more specifically test screen reader support
15:24:47 <dmontalvo> Lola: ACD is neither a test tool nor an evaluation tool. It's here to identify accessibility gaps and help developers, as well as show these gaps to developer and AT vendors to hopefully close them
15:25:15 <dmontalvo> ... We want to clearly indicate if screen reader supports an element and if there are gaps
15:25:45 <dmontalvo> ... The browser speakas to the operating system, there you have accessibility APIs and then there's the AT, which speaks to the user
15:26:15 <dmontalvo> ... We are experimenting with bringing this data from WPT and ARIA-AT
15:26:34 <dmontalvo> ... The tool I created is automated for WPT and ARIA-AT is added manually at the moment
15:26:55 <dmontalvo> ... We're looking to include this in MDN so that it's easier to use from IDEs
15:27:42 <dmontalvo> Lola: Web users who rely on ATs would benefit from this, as well as web developers and browser and AT vendors
15:28:24 <dmontalvo> Lola: WPT is missing a number of key tests, so we'll work towards including those
15:28:46 <dmontalvo> ... As new web features become standardized we'll make sure they are covered
15:29:15 <dmontalvo> ... We also need to improve the filtering so that data is more understandable and easier to present
15:29:47 <dmontalvo> ... ACD will try to be an implementer for the autoomation that ARIA-AT has been working on
15:30:18 <dmontalvo> Lola: We need funds. We already have some funders but need more to continue the project
15:31:46 <dmontalvo> Wilco: If people are interested, how could they contribute?
15:32:04 <dmontalvo> Lola: We are in a transition phase at the moment. For now, if you can drop me an email that'll be the best way
15:32:09 <lola> lola has joined #wcag-act
15:32:15 <lola> lola@lolaslab.co
15:32:44 <dmontalvo> ... There's a slack channel
15:32:57 <sashanichols9> sashanichols9 has joined #wcag-act
15:33:01 <dmontalvo> zakim, take up next
15:33:01 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- WCAG3 testing procedures review -- taken up [from dmontalvo]
15:34:06 <dmontalvo> [[Rachael introduces herself and shares screen]]
15:35:11 <dmontalvo> Rachael: WCAG3 -- we are working to get a draft out late Jan / early Feb
15:36:07 <dmontalvo> https://deploy-preview-414--wcag3.netlify.app/guidelines/
15:36:28 <dmontalvo> Rachael: We have a set of requirements. A and AA, and then supplemental (linked to AAA)
15:36:44 <dmontalvo> ... Assertions are not specifically related to ACT, requirements are.
15:37:07 <dmontalvo> ... WCAG structure -- Guidelines, assertions, and requirements
15:37:40 <dmontalvo> ... Aim is to write tecnology agnostic requirements for WCAG3
15:37:52 <dmontalvo> ... Methods are where things would apply to a specific technology
15:38:24 <dmontalvo> ... Some requirements are going to have to be devided up into several methods, others may do with just a generic method
15:38:39 <dmontalvo> ... ACT-style tests would fall under methods
15:38:51 <dmontalvo> ... We'd like to use the writing of ACT to drive and refine the requirements
15:40:10 <dmontalvo> [[Example of WCAG3 draft requirement]]
15:40:43 <dmontalvo> Rachael: We can pull pieces of existing test rules that would map to this specific requirement
15:41:23 <dmontalvo> Rachael: An example of a new rule may be in abbreviation
15:42:19 <dmontalvo> ... Requirement format: top-level statement, applies when, and except when
15:43:10 <dmontalvo> Rachael: We'd love you for you to come  to AG to provide training
15:43:47 <dmontalvo> ... We have sub groups who will be doing the bulk of the rule writing
15:44:11 <dmontalvo> ... We are aiming to get a draft for new rules of approximately 20 provisions a month
15:44:41 <dmontalvo> ... Then we'd like for you to help the editors, work with them by reviewing the draft rules and providing feedback
15:44:58 <dmontalvo> s/feedback/feedback back to the subgroup/
15:45:16 <dmontalvo> ... Aim is to have at least one for each requirement by the end of 2026
15:46:21 <dmontalvo> Kathy: Perhaps ACT Rules are too technical for what you are looking to achieve here? Do we need to modify our rules for what we are looking for?
15:46:36 <dmontalvo> Rachael: I think these are appropriate for the HTML method
15:47:07 <dmontalvo> ... I think we are going to have requirements that need to be more generic and may not be as technical. I wouldn't expect as technical of a rule for the abbreviation example.
15:47:57 <dmontalvo> ... Do you think the rules can serve for this?
15:48:39 <dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: I think the ACT Rules Format can work for these less technical, but current expectation for us is to write heavily technical rules, maybe due to the background of most of our contributors
15:49:24 <dmontalvo> ... We also have a lot of expertise in writing for HTML, we also may want rules for other technologies as well, and we have less expertise for these other ones
15:49:32 <Wilco> q+
15:50:09 <dmontalvo> ... Agressive timeline though, as you just said
15:50:37 <dmontalvo> Rachael: The expectation for the next few years is to focus on generic and HTML
15:50:47 <dmontalvo> ... After those, then others may come
15:50:57 <dmontalvo> ... The expertise portion is less of a concern.
15:51:23 <dmontalvo> ... My hope is that this group gets a boost because most editors will be working on this
15:52:26 <dmontalvo> Helen: When I started with the manual test rules, I wanted it to be more agnostic but we struggled because we were advised to look for more of an HTML-centric approach
15:52:51 <dmontalvo> ... Would like to aim for the less technical, but sometimes it can all get fuzzy when considering several scenarios at once
15:53:13 <dmontalvo> Wilco: Do you have an idea of a minimum time commitment for whoever wants to participate?
15:53:46 <dmontalvo> Rachael: I think it's a bit flexible. If you feel you have limited time, then I'd prefer for you to work with the editors to get them trained
15:54:25 <dmontalvo> ... If you'd have a acouple hours, we'd be grateful because you could help them writing, guide them, etc
15:54:41 <dmontalvo> Wilco: Please think about what you may be able to provide
15:55:07 <dmontalvo> Wilco: Another thought. One of the most difficult parts is to be able to write the code examples. Do we have editors that could do this work?
15:56:14 <dmontalvo> Rachael: Yes, we have editors who could. If a rule was  written, and all of the pieces except for the coding was done, would it be considered as a complete draft? We need to think about it? For the rules the coding is the informaitve part, we need that to be there for the rule to be finished
15:56:54 <dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: Agree, but I think when reviewing the rule, the examples are extremely important and can help under certain conditions
15:57:19 <dmontalvo> Rachael: What's example?
15:57:33 <dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: For me it's a bit the same
15:57:49 <dmontalvo> q+ to say Format calls it Examples now
15:58:28 <dmontalvo> Jean-Yves: It will probably be just a matter of how we work
15:59:11 <dmontalvo> Wilco: We write a couple of rules a year at this point. When we were full-speed, we would be writing one rule a month
15:59:42 <dmontalvo> ... We'd have to change how we do things, maybe by reducing the number of examples needed. Still we need some example and definitions
16:00:05 <dmontalvo> Rachael: We could use the maturity level for exmples and definitions. I don't want a loose sub groups exploring edge cases with fewer examples
16:00:21 <dmontalvo> Wilco: We could have examples without code, that's better than no examples at all
16:00:23 <dmontalvo> q-
16:00:29 <dmontalvo> ack Wilco
16:00:54 <dmontalvo> Rachael: It may be helpful to know what the levels are
16:01:18 <dmontalvo> ... Because the sub groups are steeped in their expertise it may beome easier for them to write examples
16:01:31 <dmontalvo> Wilco: I wouldn't expect that
16:02:30 <dmontalvo> Kathy: It really scrutinizes sometimes the wording of the requirements. For example we've ended up having to create our own definitions
16:03:10 <dmontalvo> Rachael: This is exciting because it makes ACT work be included at the early stages and we don't have to it as an afterthought.
16:03:22 <dmontalvo> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:03:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/15-wcag-act-minutes.html dmontalvo
16:04:12 <dmontalvo> present+ Rachael
16:04:14 <dmontalvo> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:04:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/15-wcag-act-minutes.html dmontalvo
16:04:36 <dmontalvo> Chair: Wilco
16:04:38 <dmontalvo> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:04:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/01/15-wcag-act-minutes.html dmontalvo
16:09:16 <Dan_Tripp> Dan_Tripp has joined #wcag-act
16:09:16 <Sage> Sage has joined #wcag-act
16:09:16 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #wcag-act
16:09:16 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #wcag-act
16:09:16 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #wcag-act
17:00:04 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_ has joined #wcag-act
17:22:29 <dmontalvo> -join ·aria'dive end meeting
18:01:26 <Godwin> Godwin has joined #wcag-act