Meeting minutes
New PR Triage
<github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
spectranaut_: PR #2726 was reviewed last week.
Scott: this PR doesn't address his original issue. What is the use case here? Is it editable comboboxes
… aria-placeholder doesn't actually add a rendered placeholder
Sarah: when this is done with select-only, the placeholder is in the content. Should authors add the placeholder?
WPT Open PRs
<github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
no open WPT PRs, James Craig is not here, skip
Deep Dive planning
<github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
spectranaut_: no deep dives on list, no one asks for one
Add transparent generic definition and update accessibility parent and child defs
spectranaut_: this is just trying to make the spec more clear, no change to browsers
sarah: change to spec to align with what browsers already do
spectranaut_: what browser input is needed?
@sarah: jcraig and (I think someone from Chrome) didn't want a must for removing things from the a11y tree, and this should only define parent-child relationships. Moving to 7.1 would do that, so need input from browsers
pk: seems like spec and user agent sides are at odds. I find the definition and the whole section confusing. we could acknowledge that UA might leave nodes in, but the spec should be more clear to explain what parent-child relationships should be. Can we do that without forcing UA to do something they don't want to?
pk: almost seems contradictory, one section says to remove intermediate nodes, but this section assumes they're still there
sarah: may well be confusing!
pk: definition of accessibility object doesn't align with other definitions
benbeaudry: sarah can you remember who from Chromium objected? pls tag me so I can review more deeply
sarah: I remember james craig, I think someone from Chrome too
pk: gecko includes them
sarah: some browsers have the nodes, but they don't interfere with the tree. I remember from testing that browsers all handle it fine, but there can still be interviening generics
pk: want to meet up to hammer this out?
sarah: yes
spectranaut_: I think what peter is saying that it should be clear for developers reading it, because browser behavior is not going to change. It makes sense to me because I worked on child nodes before, but good argument that it's confusing. maybe something like generics shouldn't be included in a11y tree, but browsers can leave them
pk: spec should be talking about aria layer, not OS a11y tree
spectranaut_: developers will see the computed roles in browser dev tools, need to let them know to expect that. Does Ben need to review this?
sarah: I wanted to check my understanding that we don't want a browsers must, would still like that input, but don't need full review
daniel: we should clarify what counts as editorial. Does this modify a user agents must?
sarah: Peter's comment suggested a new browsers must, but it's not currently in the PR
aria-actions: handling focus when actions are synthetically triggered
spectranaut_: anything to review here?
sarah: no
spectranaut_: let's look at aria normative PR tracking board. Anything to call out?
<spectranaut_> board: https://
keithamus: has interop 26 been announced?
??: yes, announced today
Review PRs
keithamus: look at interop proposal 2717
<keithamus> w3c/
spectranaut_: this needs reviews by srah, adrian, scott and cookiecrook
keithamus: needs more attention from WebKit
keithamus: one browser copied another, assumed that's correct, need input from accessibility experts from everywhere
scott: this matches what I assumed after talking to Aaron and Mason from Chrome
mattking: are there test cases or sample code that can be contributed to APG? Demo examples that can be used to test with AT
keithamus: yes, will look for some
<keithamus> https://
spectranaut_: does this belong in APG since it's HTML?
<keithamus> https://
mattking: yes, we want to include HTML, especially open UI, has been on roadmap
mattking: can someone help explore this, so we can make sure we have tests
keithamus: popover=hint is mostly for tooltips, including rich tooltips
mattking: tooltip development examples is one of the oldest APG issues, no one has come up with a good one. maybe popover=hint will be it?
keithamus: there is also the interest for API, which may or may not ship, covers these interaction patterns
cyns: connect to old APG tooltip issue?
mattking: if we think that's right
keithamus: there are more coming
mattking: maybe this belongs in the tooltip example issue?
spectranaut_: assigning issue to keith to add popover examples
spectranaut_: sarah, still want to be a reviewer?
sarah: yes