example you’ve written in the issue, are you suggesting that implementations should be able to account for that? And change the role to `group`, or recognize the author’s intent somehow? 18:28:10 scott: I put that in there just to illustrate using ARIA 18:28:23 ... but this will be an HTML feature, so there’s nothing an author should have to do 18:28:48 ... the question is “what would we want the implementation to be?” 18:29:07 q+ 18:29:08 ... so that screen readers, etc., don’t also need to be updated 18:29:28 Ack gi 18:29:51 giacomo-petri: when you navigate an image, you don’t expect content inside 18:30:25 ... if you have a “group image”, how can you determine that it is just a group of related images inside, or if it’s because there are controls inside 18:30:45 willkil has joined #aria 18:30:53 q+ to say I think we could align on the same behavior for the native example as well as your ARIA example

text goes here

18:30:59 Ack mat 18:31:44 Matt_King: how do we learn more about the use cases for this controls attribute? 18:31:53 scott: this is a proposal in HTML 18:32:10 ... for a controls attribute 18:32:37 Matt_King: what problem is the proposal solving? 18:33:00 q+ to mention WebKit's similar precedence with the button for playing animated GIFs when "reduce motion" is enabled. 18:33:08 q+ 18:33:25 scott: I don’t have an answer for that 18:34:02 ... the suggestion was essentially to just copy what the video and audio elements already do 18:34:11 ... but this isn’t the same as those elements, since they are already serve as a group 18:34:38 Matt_King: okay, I’ll review and leave some feedback 18:34:49 ... also, big +1 to your mindset that we shouldn’t break anything 18:34:52 Ack jcraig 18:34:52 jcraig, you wanted to say I think we could align on the same behavior for the native example as well as your ARIA example

text goes here 18:34:55 ...

and to mention WebKit's similar precedence with the button for playing animated GIFs when "reduce motion" is enabled. 18:35:46 jcraig: little fuzzy on the details, but there’s a button that allows animated GIFs to stop playing 18:35:49 ... but wanted to respond to scott 18:35:57 q- 18:36:27 ... I think there’s a path forward that could satisfy the “don’t break things” principle 18:36:45 jamesn: please review and add comments 18:36:54 GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/601 18:37:18 github https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/601 18:37:37 github: https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/601 18:38:02 zakim, next item 18:38:02 agendum 6 -- -> Scoping focusgroup to scenarios defined by aria roles - 5 minutes for inital thoughts only https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2602 -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:38:42 s/little fuzzy on the details, but there’s a button that allows animated GIFs to stop playing/I don't recall offhand if this is tied to the Reduce Motion settings, but there’s a button to play animated GIFs if auto-play is disabled based on the RM preference/ 18:38:45 jamesn: we want a quick primer on this rather than a full discussion 18:38:50 ... people need to digest 18:39:08 ... maybe agenda or deep dive for future 18:39:08 Jacques: we’ve discussed in prior calls 18:39:20 ... applying a minimum role inference on generics 18:40:01 s/generics/buttons in a focus group/ 18:40:16 q+ 18:40:18 ... the first two examples in the ticket are what we discussed months ago, the third example is what I’m proposing 18:40:27 Matt_King: I have one knee jerk reaction 18:40:43 ... with aria-actions, we have buttons inside tablists, so if a button is referenced, so you might not want to convert its role 18:41:03 s/I think there’s a path forward that could satisfy the “don’t break things” principle/I think there’s a path forward that could satisfy the principle of not making additional work for the web author, and make the native attr proposal work, while also allowing your currently invalid ARIA example to work as the author intended. Hopefully with no changes needed to the AT clients that are slower to update./ 18:41:10 jamesn: in which case they could explicitly re-declare role="button", but that may not be desirable 18:41:45 Jacques: correct 18:42:06 jamesn: it sounds reasonable to me 18:42:16 ... in a lot of ways, it’s making ARIA roles “native” 18:43:09 Matt_King: in both cases, you’re saying ARIA is now affecting browser behavior? 18:43:21 Jacques: it wouldn’t actually change the keyboard behavior, just the ARIA role inference 18:43:34 Matt_King: I see, because ARIA already affects mappings 18:43:41 ... then I think you should consider incorporating aria-actions support 18:43:46 Jacques: I’ll have to look into that, great callout 18:43:57 jamesn: shall we schedule some time next week to talk about it? 18:44:02 Jacques: yes, please 18:44:07 ... there’s an explainer 18:44:16 ... and then I can update it again 18:44:17 zakim, next item 18:44:17 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Adam_Page 18:44:25 Q? 18:44:28 Ack me 18:44:34 zakim, next item 18:44:34 agendum 7 -- -> check mappings and a11y of HTMLButtonElement's declarative scroll commands https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/600 -- taken up [from agendabot] 18:45:08 jamesn: is anyone familiar with this? 18:45:14 sakhapov 18:45:30 sakhapov: please open the explainer 18:45:46 ... in the Example Usage section 18:45:49 ... there is an HTML button 18:45:52 ... we want to introduce new commands 18:46:06 ... that would allow scrolling 18:46:16 ... e.g., `page-inline-start`, `page-inline-end` 18:46:32 ... the a11y part is how to declare it to the user 18:46:44 ... browsers should mount it to `aria-controls` 18:47:49 ... if the scroller has an `aria-label`, we take that name to announce what the button does 18:48:10 ... e.g., “Next page, document preview, button” 18:48:14 ... this is the first part of the proposal 18:48:17 q+ 18:48:22 q+ 18:48:24 ... second part is button has state management 18:48:36 ... it becomes disabled when the scrolling position is at the corresponding end 18:48:49 Ack scott 18:49:07 scott: I read through this earlier today 18:49:07 ... and understand where this is coming from 18:49:08 ... having consulted on the CSS carousel proposal 18:49:17 ... the thing that struck me here was the explicit use of `aria-label` 18:49:30 ... and appending it to the button accname 18:50:00 ... for this use case, does it actually make sense to include them in the accessible name of the previous and next buttons 18:50:12 ... but I do agree it makes sense to announce when the new content has been revealed 18:50:18 ... so I see the intent 18:50:25 ... but a little unsure of it at this time 18:50:38 ... with the aria-controls mapping, if we could get that to be useful, then maybe it could apply here 18:50:45 ... that’s my initial feedback 18:51:08 ... focusing heavily on `aria-label`, but there are other ways to name a button 18:51:20 Act jamesn 18:52:01 sakhapov: how would the user know what the scroller does? 18:52:10 scott: no one looking at the page would know what it is either 18:53:23 jamesn: the aria-label in this proposal refers to the scrolling group, not one of the grouped items 18:53:52 sakhapov: correct, it’s the name of the scrolling group 18:54:37 ... it’s not possible to put the scrolling buttons inside the scrolling region 18:54:49 jamesn: this needs clarifying in the explainer 18:54:58 Ack jamesn 18:55:08 jamesn: what happens when the button is pressed? 18:55:17 ... what announcement will AT users get at that time? 18:56:15 ... we need some sort of announcement, and how would the author specify something custom if they didn’t want the default behavior? 18:56:50 Q? 18:57:03 Agenda? 18:57:08 sakhapov: makes sense 18:57:08 jcraig: I echo some of jamesn’s concerns 18:57:15 ... should be up to the web author what gets announced 18:57:34 Present+ 18:57:52 ... as one example, on the Mac side a button would confirm “pressed”, which would sometimes trample the thing that comes later 18:58:01 ... so we changed to an earcon 18:59:08 ... just want to make sure that we’re overspecifying in a way that the downstream AT can present to the user based on what the user wants 18:59:23 Present+ 18:59:45 spectranaut_: do we need more discussion on this? 18:59:54 jamesn: I think we need explainer clarifications first, then more discussion 19:00:02 Zakim, end meeting 19:00:02 As of this point the attendees have been Adam_Page, Jacques, Daniel, pkra, Francis_Storr, jcraig, scott, giacomo-petri, filippo-zorzi, Stefan, Matt_King, CurtBellew, Siri, dgrogan 19:00:05 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 19:00:07 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/26-aria-minutes.html Zakim 19:00:14 I am happy to have been of service, jamesn; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 19:00:14 Zakim has left #aria 19:00:47 melsumner has left #aria 19:01:42 masonf has joined #aria 19:22:27 Francis_Storr has joined #aria