16:58:41 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:58:45 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/03/12-aria-irc
16:58:45 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:58:46 <Zakim> Meeting: ARIA WG
16:58:57 <jamesn> Agendabot, find agenda
16:58:57 <agendabot> jamesn, OK. This may take a minute...
16:58:58 <agendabot> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/690d057f-db6d-4169-b13f-68d7f1336b59/20260312T130000/
16:58:58 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:58:58 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New PR Triage https://github.com/search?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+created:%3E=2026-03-05+repo:w3c/aria&type=Issues
16:58:58 <agendabot> agenda+ -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y
16:59:01 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Deep Dive planning https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates
16:59:03 <agendabot> agenda+ -> authoring errors, name-from-author, and exposure https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2739
16:59:06 <agendabot> agenda+ -> aria-busy="true" with descendant invalid ARIA structure https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2737
16:59:49 <np-at> np-at has joined #aria
17:00:23 <dgrogan> dgrogan has joined #aria
17:00:41 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
17:00:58 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #aria
17:01:26 <Francis_Storr> Francis_Storr has joined #aria
17:02:37 <willkil> willkil has joined #aria
17:03:45 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #aria
17:03:54 <pkra> pkra has joined #aria
17:03:58 <giacomo-petri> present+
17:03:59 <pkra> present+
17:04:01 <pkra> scribe+
17:04:09 <pkra> zakim, next item
17:04:09 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- -> New PR Triage https://github.com/search?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+created:%3E=2026-03-05+repo:w3c/aria&type=Issues -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:04:09 <github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
17:04:25 <np-at> present+
17:04:29 <dgrogan> present+
17:05:02 <katez> katez has joined #aria
17:05:09 <katez> present+
17:06:26 <willkil> present+
17:06:37 <pkra> jamesn: first up #2749. just something I created just now. It's for the editors' meeting.
17:06:50 <pkra> ... then #2744 from spectranaut_
17:07:14 <pkra> spectranaut_: just an experiment I did. This idea comes up once in a while. But I'm not sure if it's worth it.
17:07:31 <pkra> ... maybe other AAMs could benefit but not sure.
17:07:55 <np-at> I'd be potentially interested; not sure how much time I'll have though
17:08:18 <pkra> jamesn: next #2742 from James Craig. A document on heuristics.
17:09:10 <pkra> ... this is about known heuristics.
17:09:59 <scott> scott has joined #aria
17:10:19 <pkra> ... I think we can merge this and continue there.
17:11:01 <pkra> ... feel free to add.
17:11:15 <pkra> zakim, next item
17:11:15 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:11:15 <github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
17:11:25 <Daniel> present+ Daniel
17:11:42 <scott> present+
17:11:48 <pkra> jamesn: anything we should discuss?
17:12:05 <pkra> spectranaut_: I'd like review on my PRs
17:12:30 <pkra> ... PR 2744
17:12:42 <pkra> ... would love for scotto to take a look
17:13:09 <spectranaut_> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/57696
17:13:31 <pkra> ... correction: PR 57696  in WPT
17:14:01 <pkra> jamesn: anyone specific?
17:14:11 <pkra> spectranaut_: anyone who might write AAM tests
17:14:22 <pkra> ... this is getting close to merge. The RFC is almost done.
17:15:05 <pkra> cyns: I'll take a look
17:15:49 <pkra> jcraig: note that the invitations need accepting (and are easy to miss)
17:17:16 <jamesn> q?
17:17:58 <pkra> zakim, next item
17:17:58 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- -> Deep Dive planning https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:17:58 <github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
17:19:06 <pkra> jamesn: any idea?
17:19:39 <pkra> pkra: issue 2748 on dev tools. From the editors' call.
17:19:54 <pkra> jamesn: yes, but needs the right people.
17:19:58 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
17:20:48 <pkra> ... maybe a F2F is better.
17:21:00 <pkra> ... e.g. TPAC Dublin
17:22:04 <pkra> jcraig: it's a small group.
17:22:12 <pkra> dgrogan: ours is all open source.
17:22:22 <pkra> jcraig: I think that's true for most browsers.
17:22:30 <pkra> ... review time is easier, too.
17:22:46 <pkra> jamesn: maybe some of these are feasible to prototype.
17:23:11 <pkra> dgrogan: a lot of this stuff seems doable. And reviewing is definitely easier.
17:24:08 <pkra> jamesn: great to hear. Esp. the new IDL things would be important to get visible.
17:24:11 <pkra> zakim, next item
17:24:11 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- -> authoring errors, name-from-author, and exposure https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2739 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:24:44 <pkra> spectranaut_: let's keep that issue open, add F2F and continue to to gather ideas.
17:26:23 <pkra> pkra: this issue wasn't triaged. That's why I added agenda.
17:29:03 <pkra> ... I think at least we need to update aria claiming that form require a name. But I think there might be a discrepancy with implementations.
17:29:12 <pkra> jamesn: I agree that core-aam is confusing
17:29:17 <pkra> spectranaut_: agreed.
17:29:22 <scott> q+
17:29:34 <pkra> ack scott
17:29:54 <jcraig> jcraig has joined #aria
17:30:00 <pkra> scott: could we simplify it. Just have one mapping table and identify that if it has a name, expose it as a landmark.
17:30:03 <jcraig> present+
17:30:15 <pkra> spectranaut_: what does it mean to be a form but not a landmark?
17:30:16 <jcraig> agenda?
17:30:31 <jcraig> rrsagent, make minutes
17:30:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/03/12-aria-minutes.html jcraig
17:30:40 <pkra> scott: there is an XML property in some of the mappings where you can explicitly call something out as a landmark.
17:30:48 <pkra> ... that's roughly the intent.
17:31:10 <pkra> spectranaut_: right. but for AX API it's unclear.
17:32:05 <pkra> spectranaut_: I can take that on. Is that enough?
17:33:44 <pkra> pkra: right, the second part of my top card is a bit wider. Essentially if roles with only name-from-author and no name gets exposed.
17:34:28 <jamesn> q?
17:35:02 <scott> q+
17:35:25 <jamesn> Ack scott
17:36:04 <pkra> scott: we tried to make this change a few years back to expose forms without them needing to be landmarks. Maybe we didn't do enough in finishing the work.
17:36:34 <pkra> ... maybe we should consider reverting, going back to all forms being landmark.
17:37:13 <pkra> jamesn: I suppose browsers and AT might always have a choice. I don't understand why people have forms without name
17:37:17 <pkra> ... not that they don't exist.
17:37:46 <pkra> scott: I'd go as far as saying there's no reason to use the role directly.
17:38:24 <pkra> zakim, next item
17:38:24 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- -> aria-busy="true" with descendant invalid ARIA structure https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2737 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:39:12 <jamesn> q+
17:39:13 <giacomo-petri> q+
17:39:14 <np-at> q+
17:39:21 <pkra> jamesn: inside aria-busy, what are the rules for invalid aria markup?
17:39:21 <jamesn> q-
17:39:24 <jamesn> q+
17:39:43 <pkra> giacomo-petri: in ACT rules, we allowed everything inside aria-busy
17:39:58 <pkra> ... that seemed to make sense to us but re-reading the spec, it seems uncler.
17:40:06 <pkra> ... e.g. listbox.
17:40:16 <pkra> ... having the text "loading" inside
17:40:47 <pkra> ... in theory, AT should ignore what's inside.
17:41:04 <scott> q+
17:41:04 <pkra> ... but we see developers using the content in, say, a listbox.
17:41:07 <jamesn> Ack gia
17:41:11 <jamesn> Ack np
17:41:44 <jamesn> q-
17:41:46 <jamesn> q+
17:41:57 <pkra> noah: I don't think aria-busy is meant for a loading status, right? You'd still be expected to provide an accessible loader information.
17:42:14 <jamesn> Ack scott
17:42:23 <pkra> ... is it excluded though? If it is, then invalid markup seems fine.
17:43:30 <pkra> scott: I was discussing this with vispero. JAWS treats it like aria-hidden, which makes it pointless. Others don't.
17:43:34 <jcraig> q+ to mention it's intended to suppress required child validation errors during loading states, too. in practice, it varies. Should be testable in WPT soon, so we shouldn't change it until then... NNF™
17:43:44 <pkra> ... this ACT rule feels like a loophole for good and bad actors.
17:44:21 <pkra> ... in manual audits we found lots of aria-busy avoiding invalid markup to show up in automated tests
17:44:39 <pkra> jamesn: if they don't use busy, aria-hidden seems to do the job?
17:44:49 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
17:44:58 <pkra> noah: but it will throw other errors. I understand Scott's point.
17:45:21 <jamesn> Ack jamesn
17:45:22 <pkra> jamesn: right. But if you can tab to it, then it may or may not be in the tree
17:45:23 <jcraig> ack me
17:45:23 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to mention it's intended to suppress required child validation errors during loading states, too. in practice, it varies. Should be testable in WPT soon, so we
17:45:25 <jamesn> Act jcraig
17:45:26 <giacomo-petri> q+
17:45:27 <Zakim> ... shouldn't change it until then... NNF™
17:45:49 <pkra> jcraig: it is also intended to prevent required child errors.
17:45:58 <jamesn> q+ to say there are no required children any more right?
17:46:13 <pkra> ... in practice, it varies whether it's conveyed to the user.
17:46:50 <pkra> ... there were a number of things in ARIA 1.0 that didn't work out or proved not ideal.
17:47:30 <pkra> ... I don't think we should change much unless we can test them. But we have some changes coming that help with that.
17:48:18 <jamesn> Ack giacomo-petri
17:49:00 <pkra> giacomo-petri: by removing the required accessibility children, we alleviate some problems. We already allow no children.
17:49:37 <pkra> ... with aria-busy we have other use cases. E.g. on body.
17:50:07 <pkra> ... in our platform, we treat aria-busy as "everything inside needs manual check". E.g. in body this is obviously important.
17:50:23 <jcraig> https://w3c.github.io/aria/#aria-busy
17:50:26 <pkra> ... with the current ACT rule, we cannot expect any check.
17:50:29 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #aria
17:50:38 <jcraig> If changes to a rendered widget would create a state where the widget is modifying Allowed Accessibility Child Roles during script execution, authors MAY set aria-busy to true on the widget during the update process. For example, if a rendered tree grid required a set of simultaneous updates to multiple discontiguous branches, an alternative to replacing the complete tree element with a single update would be to mark the tree busy while each
17:50:38 <jcraig> of the branches are modified.
17:51:39 <pkra> jcraig: in the quote from the spec before the tables seems to handle some of this.
17:51:55 <pkra> jamesn: we'd need to look into the blame to check.
17:52:03 <pkra> jcraig: I think that was the context of that change.
17:52:47 <pkra> jamesn: we may find that it might be less useful nowadays.
17:53:15 <pkra> ... but as Scott pointed out this does get misused to suppress errors. Though I think developers may always find some way to do that.
17:54:46 <pkra> noah: we could also allow for an explicit naming when using aria-busy. That might help to identify misuse.
17:55:03 <giacomo-petri> q+
17:55:05 <pkra> jamesn: I'm not sure how useful testing is while there's an aria-busy state.
17:55:18 <giacomo-petri> q-
17:55:46 <jamesn> Ack me
17:55:46 <Zakim> jamesn, you wanted to say there are no required children any more right?
17:56:05 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
17:56:42 <jamesn> agenda?
17:57:09 <pkra> jamesn: if anyone wants to try a PR, feel free.
17:57:38 <pkra> ... perhaps the last paragraph can be improved.
17:58:37 <pkra> giacomo-petri: I can try but I would make it permissive, right?
17:58:55 <pkra> jamesn: right. And perhaps aria-busy is a problem if it persists.
17:58:58 <pkra> zakim, end meeting
17:58:58 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been giacomo-petri, pkra, np-at, dgrogan, katez, willkil, Daniel, scott, jcraig
17:59:01 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
17:59:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/03/12-aria-minutes.html Zakim
17:59:08 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, pkra; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:59:09 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
17:59:55 <masonf> masonf has joined #aria
18:04:39 <Stefan> Stefan has joined #aria
18:04:46 <Stefan> present+
18:05:22 <bkardell> bkardell has joined #aria
18:30:27 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
18:37:30 <Stefan> Stefan has joined #aria
19:03:18 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
19:28:21 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:00:50 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:45:17 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
21:01:56 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
21:10:10 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
21:49:06 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
22:16:42 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
22:49:23 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
23:33:08 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
23:56:14 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria