14:56:10 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #act-r
14:56:14 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-act-r-irc
14:56:14 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:56:15 <Zakim> Meeting: ACT Rules Community Group Teleconference
14:56:19 <Jean-Yves> agenda?
14:56:42 <Jean-Yves> agenda+ Which projects should the CG work on?
14:57:00 <Jean-Yves> zakim, clear agenda
14:57:00 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:57:14 <Jean-Yves> agenda+ ACT-R status check
14:57:24 <Jean-Yves> agenda+ Which projects should the CG work on?
14:57:46 <Jean-Yves> agenda+ aria-required-owned-element should not allow invalid children for having aria-busy – https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2387
14:57:53 <Daniel> Daniel has joined #act-r
14:58:04 <Jean-Yves> agenda+ Add merge and publication policy – https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2363
14:58:10 <Daniel> zakim, agenda?
14:58:10 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
14:58:11 <Zakim> 1. ACT-R status check [from Jean-Yves]
14:58:11 <Zakim> 2. Which projects should the CG work on? [from Jean-Yves]
14:58:11 <Zakim> 3. aria-required-owned-element should not allow invalid children for having aria-busy – https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2387 [from Jean-Yves]
14:58:12 <Zakim> 4. Add merge and publication policy – https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2363 [from Jean-Yves]
15:00:13 <Dan_Tripp> Dan_Tripp has joined #act-r
15:00:16 <Dan_Tripp> present+
15:00:27 <Jean-Yves> present+
15:01:05 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #act-r
15:01:12 <Wilco> present+
15:01:15 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:01:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-act-r-minutes.html Daniel
15:01:44 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #act-r
15:01:51 <giacomo-petri> present+
15:02:27 <Helen> Helen has joined #act-r
15:03:00 <Daniel> s/–/->/g
15:03:09 <Helen> present+
15:03:11 <Daniel> present+ Daniel
15:03:16 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #act-r
15:05:36 <Wilco> scribe+
15:05:47 <Wilco> zakim, take up next
15:05:47 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- ACT-R status check -- taken up [from Jean-Yves]
15:05:53 <Kathy> present+
15:06:11 <Wilco> JYM: Contacted AGWG subgroup, haven't had an answer
15:06:31 <Wilco> Wilco: Liaison organizing
15:06:42 <Wilco> Dan: Worked on label in name PR, 275
15:06:57 <Wilco> Daniel: Reviewed ARIA / ACT stuff that's piling up
15:07:36 <Wilco> Gaicomo: We worked on the page title rule, which aligns with the ACT rule we have. Some interesting questions for the future
15:07:53 <Wilco> Kathy: Heard back from subgroup, waiting for an invite to the meeting
15:08:05 <Wilco> ... About the AG meeting, did we do the exersieze
15:08:24 <Wilco> Helen: Yes, wilco said he trusts me to do everything
15:08:45 <Wilco> ... lot of discussion in AGWG
15:09:07 <Wilco> ... I reached out to both subgroups, meeting on Monday. I had lots of questions. There have been a lot of emails
15:09:35 <Wilco> ... One person has been pushing back on using ACT. Meeting with JY about this tomorrow
15:09:54 <Wilco> ... The exercise got a derailed. We got stuck on a definition
15:09:59 <Shunguo> Shunguo has joined #act-r
15:10:01 <Wilco> Wilco: Yes
15:10:29 <giacomo-petri> +1 Helen
15:10:56 <Wilco> Wilco: Wasn't recorded. I don't think that would have been useful anyway
15:11:16 <Wilco> Helen: The contention point was that a test doesn't cover the whole requirement, how do you break it down, why test something that doesn't cover everything?
15:11:40 <giacomo-petri> s/+1 Helen//me +1 Helen
15:12:07 <Daniel> q+ to say framing rules as testing techniques could help remediate some of the concerns
15:12:14 <Wilco> Godwin: Got some catching up to do
15:13:07 <Wilco> Shunguo: Attended subgroup meeting yesterday. Was a tough 30 mins about why we are using ACT rules, but it seemed to settle down as it was decided already to use ACT rules for WCAG 3.
15:13:53 <Wilco> ... I suggested the group look at existing rules to see if things were covered already, and if there are additions needed.
15:14:28 <Remi> Remi has joined #act-r
15:14:46 <Wilco> ... The expectations seems a little high, they seem to look at the rule to do everything
15:15:08 <Wilco> ... Things are getting started I can see
15:16:11 <Wilco> Daniel: There was a comment on AGWG that rules could be framed as testing techniques
15:17:00 <Remi> present+
15:17:58 <Wilco> JYM: I suggest we leave the conversation about liaisons for the TF call next week
15:18:01 <Wilco> zakim, take up next
15:18:01 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Wilco
15:18:11 <Daniel> ack me
15:18:12 <Zakim> Daniel, you wanted to say framing rules as testing techniques could help remediate some of the concerns
15:18:14 <Wilco> zakim, take up next
15:18:14 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Which projects should the CG work on? -- taken up [from Jean-Yves]
15:18:53 <Wilco> JYM: We wanted to switch to a project-based approach, rather than having 50 open PRs that aren't moving. The question is, which one(s) should we work on, and who?
15:19:25 <Wilco> ... I would suggest that the project could be to finish label in name rewrite?
15:20:18 <Daniel> q+
15:20:54 <Helen> q+
15:21:17 <Wilco> Wilco: I also think the all rules page redesign is one, and target size
15:21:25 <Wilco> JYM: I think label in name has momentum
15:21:34 <Wilco> ack d
15:21:58 <Wilco> Daniel: +1 for the design page
15:22:20 <Wilco> ... we should take a look at those last issues and merge as soon as those are done
15:22:32 <Wilco> ... Another project is to bring rules that are ready to AGWG
15:22:48 <Wilco> ack h
15:22:54 <Helen> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2022
15:23:10 <Wilco> Helen: Since we have Dan her, there is a PR that are waiting for code examples
15:23:18 <Wilco> ... that might also be a good example for AG
15:25:12 <Wilco> JYM: We have 5 project proposals, the question is who leads a project
15:26:01 <Helen2> Helen2 has joined #act-r
15:26:38 <Wilco> Dan: Yes I can lead
15:26:47 <Wilco> JYM: I can help review
15:27:30 <Wilco> ... one project, do we have another?
15:29:05 <Wilco> Godwin: I can lead on the rebuild of the all rules page
15:29:12 <Wilco> Wilco: I'll help review that
15:29:15 <Wilco> Remi: Me too
15:29:58 <Wilco> Kathy: Another project suggestion. We have to update the video transcript rules showing the transcript doesn't need to be visible. There are some related rules that need to be updated as well
15:30:52 <Wilco> JYM: Great, we have six project ideas, that'll keep us going for a while
15:31:16 <Wilco> Shunguo: I've got a lot to do as a liaison at the moment, but I can help with some reviews
15:32:32 <Wilco> https://deploy-preview-330--wai-wcag-act-rules.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/act/rules/
15:32:40 <Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act-rules/pull/330
15:33:14 <Wilco> zakim, take up item 4
15:33:14 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Add merge and publication policy – https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/2363 -- taken up [from Jean-Yves]
15:33:41 <Daniel> scribe+
15:34:32 <Daniel> Wilco: Problem is that there's a potential risk that a change may get merged and published to the W3C site without enough time for testing tools to update their implementations
15:34:52 <Daniel> ... Timing is inconsistent, we don't have moratoria, release candidates, etc
15:35:30 <Remi> q+
15:35:39 <Daniel> .... PRs cannot be merged on Friday, Saturday or Sunday, so that if the tool runs on Friday or over the weekend it ensure it can get the most recent results
15:36:00 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: From an imlementer's perspective that means we'll have to do our updates during the weekends or on Friday
15:36:27 <Daniel> Remi: 2 questions. Do implementers update their data before changes are published? And if so, what do they use?
15:36:45 <Daniel> Wilco: We pull them directly from github, the json file is updated every week
15:36:56 <Daniel> Remi: Main branch?
15:37:03 <Daniel> Wilco: Yes
15:37:23 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: I pick them from the json file on the W3C website, quite certainly I can change my approach
15:37:52 <Daniel> Remi: You'r trying to give implementers sufficient time. How much time? 2-3 days or more?
15:37:58 <Daniel> Wilco: And hour is probably enough
15:38:18 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: Depends on the changes. Mostly it's just about grabbing the test cases and running them on our side
15:38:41 <Daniel> ... More involve changes imply updating the tools, which may mean weeks, though
15:39:00 <giacomo-petri> q+
15:39:11 <Jean-Yves> ack r
15:39:15 <Daniel> Kathy: If there's another manual methodology that needs to update their results that will take more than half an hour
15:39:22 <Wilco> ack g
15:39:49 <Daniel> giacomo-petri: For automation there is no issue. For the rest (which may require manual activity) it may take longer
15:40:06 <Daniel> ... It may be related to the amount of time we define for merging the pull request
15:40:15 <Jean-Yves> q+
15:40:26 <Daniel> ... We have two weeks for the Call for Review, so that may be sufficient, but that's before merging
15:40:29 <Wilco> ack j
15:41:22 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: We do have the Call for Review period (2-week) for significant changes, but during the call for review periods the new updated test cases are not in the same bucket, because the PR is not merged yet
15:41:37 <Daniel> ... And if we update early that could be problematic
15:41:39 <Wilco> q+
15:42:28 <Daniel> Wilco: Is this a real problem? Are people having issues because of this?
15:42:41 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: I'm OK with the current situation, but I see how it could be an issue
15:43:03 <Daniel> Wilco: Giacomo, do you need more than a day?
15:43:18 <Daniel> giacomo-petri: We are in the same situation as Jean-Yves
15:43:34 <Kathy> q+
15:43:37 <Daniel> Wilco: If you need an extension on this period you could request one, same goes for Call for Review
15:43:44 <Wilco> ack w
15:43:46 <Wilco> ack k
15:44:00 <Daniel> Kathy: Do implementers get any notification when their consistency changes?
15:44:12 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: No, it's up to us to build such a system if we think we want this
15:44:37 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: It'd be fairly easy
15:44:54 <giacomo-petri> q+
15:44:57 <Daniel> Kathy: Maybe for a future consideration, mainly for manual implementations
15:46:18 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: For semi automated or manual the decision would have to be made on whether we update the test cases, even if it's just for editorial changes
15:46:36 <Daniel> q+
15:47:02 <Remi> q+
15:47:04 <Daniel> giacomo-petri: Do we have a json preproduction environment? Can we build something like a preproduction?
15:47:29 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: We do have the preview, but if you have two pRs running at the same time you'll have to grab those as well
15:47:34 <Daniel> q-
15:47:56 <Jean-Yves> ack g
15:48:02 <Jean-Yves> ack r
15:48:28 <Daniel> Remi: The easiest way might be for implementers to check out a specific branch where the test cases would be
15:48:56 <Daniel> ... When we merge the test cases from main to publication, that doesn't get published automatically, there is an extra manual step
15:49:20 <Daniel> ... But in the meantime you can get the publication branch as the "new version" of the test cases that will be published to the WAI website
15:49:34 <giacomo-petri> q+
15:49:58 <Daniel> ... When there's new stuff to be published, we open a pr to publication, WAI review, and then I merge
15:50:14 <giacomo-petri> q-
15:50:30 <Daniel> ... After that PR is merged, you could deide to stop merging to main from the act-rules.github.io, especially for things that may affect implementations
15:51:19 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: If we do not know when that time frame starts, we cannot decide when to start these processes
15:51:23 <Remi> q+
15:51:55 <Jean-Yves> ack r
15:51:56 <Daniel> ... We could have the same thing, like mering a specific day and the publication will happen some days after for implementers to be able to run their scripts
15:52:11 <Daniel> Remi: Do you need a given day or just to know when the delay starts?
15:52:33 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: It'd be easier to run our weekly processes if it's a specific day, otherwise we'd need something else to trigger the workflows
15:53:18 <Daniel> Remi: In the option I introduced, the start would be when we merge from main to publication. That's where you'd stop merging updates coming from the act-rules.github.io to ensure nothing changes
15:53:27 <giacomo-petri> q+
15:53:34 <Jean-Yves> ack g
15:54:05 <Wilco> q+
15:54:25 <Daniel> giacomo-petri: Especially for the manual or semi-automated, why don't we freeze a preproduction for one week?
15:54:31 <Jean-Yves> ack w
15:54:56 <Daniel> Wilco: I think that's a reasonable idea, but it doesn't appear to be solving any problem
15:55:19 <Daniel> ... I suggest we propose a day. W3C already cuts off on Mondays, when the PR is open
15:55:47 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: Agree. Im hearing this is not a huge problem
15:56:18 <Daniel> ... I'd suggest we go with current proposal and see how things are going. IF one day we do find there are problems, we can continue to ellaborate on how to solve them
15:56:59 <Daniel> Shunguo: Good idea, but we have a reality challenges. If we have to release something, what would you include? Some of the items can take a long time to review
15:57:23 <Daniel> ... We really don't have a hard release deadline
15:58:14 <Remi> q+
15:58:15 <Daniel> Jean-Yves: Does anybody thing that the current proposal is going to make things worse? I'd suggest going with this an revisit later if more problems arise.
15:58:26 <Daniel> Shunguo: We can try to adjust
15:58:38 <Jean-Yves> ack r
15:58:46 <Daniel> Remi: There are open suggestions in the PR. It might be good to address them
15:59:03 <Daniel> RESOLUTION: Accept Wilco's proposal addressing the existing suggestions in the PR
15:59:18 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:59:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-act-r-minutes.html Daniel
16:01:17 <Daniel> Chair: Jean-Yves
16:01:19 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:01:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-act-r-minutes.html Daniel
16:01:57 <Daniel> s/Gaicomo/Giacomo/
16:03:08 <Daniel> s/exersieze/exercise
16:04:54 <Daniel> s/PR that are waiting/PR waiting/
16:05:45 <Daniel> s/Problem is/The problem is/
16:06:18 <Daniel> s/PRs cannot/The proposal indicates that PRs cannot/
16:06:46 <Daniel> s/imlementer/implementer/
16:07:21 <Daniel> s/And hour/An hour/
16:09:25 <Daniel> s/mering/merging/
16:10:11 <Daniel> s/Im hearing/I'm hearing/
16:10:45 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:10:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-act-r-minutes.html Daniel
16:33:00 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #act-r
16:34:39 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #act-r