IRC log of ag on 2026-04-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:49:23 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ag
14:49:28 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/04/14-ag-irc
14:49:28 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:49:29 [Zakim]
Meeting: AGWG Teleconference
14:49:34 [Rachael]
agenda?
14:49:47 [Rachael]
agenda+ introductions
14:49:51 [Rachael]
agenda+ announcements
14:50:52 [kevin]
Present: kevin, Rachael
14:51:07 [Rachael]
agenda+ Essential Exception https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Vov5k9XXlQSy7AtVuBVQvhSMDIOPA0kj69xJoq71BSQ/edit?slide=id.g3d616ce2730_2_5#slide=id.g3d616ce2730_2_5
14:51:22 [Rachael]
agenda+ Scope of WCAG 3 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BkgIVS8ODwokDPXJd91ChHfN7-WuaZdGcvK3Ru-hc_Y/edit?usp=sharing
14:54:19 [kevin]
Chair: Rachael
14:55:03 [Rachael]
regrets: Jaunita, Bruce, Alastair
14:55:26 [Rachael]
agenda?
14:55:27 [kevin]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:55:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/14-ag-minutes.html kevin
14:57:50 [laura]
laura has joined #ag
14:58:35 [laura]
present+ Laura_Carlson
14:58:41 [laura]
Scribe: laura
14:59:55 [Heather]
Heather has joined #ag
14:59:58 [Charles]
Charles has joined #ag
15:00:33 [Charles]
present+
15:00:36 [GreggVan]
GreggVan has joined #ag
15:00:36 [filippo-zorzi]
filippo-zorzi has joined #ag
15:00:37 [Heather]
present+
15:00:38 [Adam]
present+
15:00:38 [Rachael]
present+ Steve F
15:00:39 [AWK]
AWK has joined #ag
15:00:44 [AWK]
present+
15:00:47 [filippo-zorzi]
present+
15:00:48 [JeroenH]
present+
15:01:22 [laura]
RM: Welcome everyone.
15:01:46 [shadi]
shadi has joined #ag
15:01:52 [shadi]
present+
15:01:55 [MGaines]
MGaines has joined #AG
15:02:06 [MGaines]
+present
15:02:18 [kevin]
s/+present//
15:02:25 [kevin]
present+ MGaines
15:02:41 [Makoto_U]
Makoto_U has joined #ag
15:02:49 [Makoto_U]
present+
15:02:52 [BrianE]
BrianE has joined #ag
15:02:58 [SydneyColeman]
SydneyColeman has joined #ag
15:03:00 [giacomo-petri]
giacomo-petri has joined #ag
15:03:02 [SydneyColeman]
present+
15:03:04 [giacomo-petri]
present+
15:03:21 [BrianE]
present+
15:03:45 [Rachael]
zakim, take up item 1
15:03:45 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- introductions -- taken up [from Rachael]
15:04:19 [Wilco]
Wilco has joined #ag
15:04:33 [laura]
RM: First of all, is there anyone here who is new?
15:05:09 [stevekerr]
stevekerr has joined #ag
15:05:20 [Detlev]
Detlev has joined #ag
15:05:30 [sam-estoesta]
sam-estoesta has joined #ag
15:05:49 [scott]
scott has joined #ag
15:05:49 [laura]
Sam: I'm here on behalf of Level Access. I've spent the better part of a decade focusing on emerging technologies and the intersection with accessibility, so happy to be here.
15:05:57 [scott]
present+
15:06:01 [Rachael]
zakim, take up next item
15:06:01 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- announcements -- taken up [from Rachael]
15:06:03 [stevekerr]
present+
15:06:06 [tayef]
tayef has joined #ag
15:06:32 [Adam]
[Policy subgroup participation survey](https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/policy_subgroup_26/)
15:06:34 [laura]
Heather: I am rejoining. this group is an invited expert.
15:06:38 [Glenda]
Glenda has joined #ag
15:06:40 [tayef]
present+
15:06:52 [Glenda]
present+
15:07:11 [julierawe]
julierawe has joined #ag
15:07:13 [janina]
janina has joined #ag
15:07:18 [julierawe]
present+
15:07:20 [janina]
present+
15:07:20 [Ben_Tillyer]
Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag
15:07:25 [laura]
Adam: have one announcement. We will be starting up a new subgroup in late May to begin work on the policy explainer for WCAG 3.
15:07:29 [kevin]
https://www.w3.org/news-events/w3c-ac/ac-2026/
15:07:39 [AWK]
q+
15:07:42 [laura]
... will have a New survey to gather interest in that
15:07:44 [jtoles]
jtoles has joined #ag
15:07:49 [Ben_Tillyer]
1am to 11am Monday+Tuesday for us staying in the UK and dialing in... Red Bull will be procured. :D
15:07:51 [Rachael]
ack awk
15:07:55 [jtoles]
present+
15:07:55 [Ben_Tillyer]
present+
15:08:08 [laura]
Kevin: there is an AC meeting next week, which is a general meeting for the AC representatives and others to meet up.
15:09:22 [laura]
AWK: related to the charter update. Any part of the AC meetings that are happening?
15:10:01 [Rachael]
zakim, take up next item
15:10:01 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- Essential Exception https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Vov5k9XXlQSy7AtVuBVQvhSMDIOPA0kj69xJoq71BSQ/edit?slide=id.g3d616ce2730_2_5#slide=id.g3d616ce2730_2_5 --
15:10:05 [Zakim]
... taken up [from Rachael]
15:10:19 [kirkwood]
present+
15:10:25 [laura]
kevin: advisory committee meetings, kind of a general meeting. The any charter progress happens through other channels, so mostly directly to AC members via email and survey.
15:11:05 [CClaire]
CClaire has joined #ag
15:11:09 [CClaire]
present+
15:11:29 [laura]
RM: We weren't able to get enough participation to make it make sense for us to have a meeting at AccessU., so instead we are looking at holding a two-day. virtual meeting in May, with the topics being the charter and creating an outline for the policy document.
15:11:45 [laura]
... will have a survey.
15:12:01 [ShawnT]
ShawnT has joined #ag
15:12:07 [ShawnT]
present+
15:12:19 [GreggVan]
q=
15:12:23 [GreggVan]
Q+
15:12:35 [Jen_G]
Jen_G has joined #ag
15:12:42 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
15:12:49 [Jen_G]
Present+
15:12:58 [laura]
... So the question for discussion today, is about whether we should pursue a universal essential exception, or just leave it on a requirement-by-requirement basis.
15:13:35 [ljoakley]
ljoakley has joined #ag
15:13:51 [ljoakley]
Present+
15:14:02 [laura]
Gregg: are you talking about essential exceptions to? we already have one that you can have an alternate page. are you saying that if it's essential to not have an alternate page, or are you talking about essential exceptions to individual provisions?
15:15:03 [laura]
RM: I'm talking about what is currently in the provisions themselves as an exception when something is essential.
15:15:17 [GreggVan]
Q+
15:15:24 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
15:16:06 [kirkwood]
I’d rather see terminology “functional exception” because of how loaded in policy that term is
15:16:11 [laura]
... (Slide 30)
15:16:29 [kirkwood]
q+
15:17:14 [laura]
Gregg: We shouldn't be putting in things like exceptions for testing or this or that, because we should also put them in for airplane pilots, and for fighter jets, etc. I mean, that's all policy.
15:17:34 [Rachael]
ack kirkwood
15:17:52 [laura]
... But putting a blanket one on it sounds very dangerous to me. If we can't think of any reason why it would be essential.
15:18:06 [Charles]
q+
15:18:12 [Rachael]
ack Charles
15:18:48 [AWK]
q+ to ask if people agree to any essential exceptions. For example logotypes not needing to meet contrast
15:18:50 [GreggVan]
q+
15:19:00 [laura]
JK: I have a problem with the terminology essential exception, because it is so wrapped in policy, and so used I would much rather see something more like functional exception.
15:19:04 [Wilco]
Wilco has joined #ag
15:19:40 [Ben_Tillyer]
q+
15:19:55 [laura]
CH: but I could see the value of a global level... are a universal essential exception. That is its purpose. And and I'm I'm not sure how best to explain this, but in the context of like harm, for example.
15:20:01 [stevekerr]
q+
15:20:07 [julierawe]
Adding to Charles suggestion: Such as a tool designed to demonstrate, analyze, and test for the photosensitive epilepsy flashing threshold (WCAG 2.3.1) like the Trace Center Photosensitive Epilepsy Analysis Tool (PEAT): https://trace.umd.edu/peat/
15:20:14 [laura]
... if the content is known to cause harm.
15:20:14 [laura]
like flashing content
15:20:20 [AWK]
q later
15:20:35 [kirkwood]
defining as “essential to the purpose of page” is clearer, well said
15:20:39 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
15:20:45 [AWK]
q- later
15:20:54 [kevin]
s/q later//
15:21:09 [Heather]
q+
15:21:59 [laura]
Gregg: I think CH meant to demonstrate the content that would cause harm. But that, again, turns into the same thing as a test. That's an example of something that's not accessible. So you don't put it in there saying, this page is accessible.
15:22:16 [kirkwood]
“essential (to the purpose of the page) exception”
15:23:15 [Ben_Tillyer]
q-
15:23:25 [laura]
RM: I'm going to try to pivot here for a minute.
15:23:25 [laura]
And restate this exercise, because I do want it to just be a brainstorming exercise.
15:23:26 [Rachael]
ack stevekerr
15:23:32 [SydneyColeman]
q+
15:23:34 [GreggVan]
q+ to say here are some examples of places we do need it
15:23:35 [Charles]
q+
15:24:04 [kevin]
"exception for content that is already an alternative for other content"
15:24:06 [laura]
RM: Let's just come up with a list and it doesn't even have to be a list from a universal standpoint. What are the kinds of exceptions?
15:24:06 [laura]
that we have within WCAG 2 or may have within WCAG 2.
15:24:30 [Rachael]
ack awk
15:24:30 [Zakim]
AWK, you wanted to ask if people agree to any essential exceptions. For example logotypes not needing to meet contrast
15:24:53 [scott]
q+
15:24:59 [Ben_Tillyer]
q+
15:25:19 [laura]
SK: one that comes to mind is if you had a page that was its purpose was something like the Ishihara test for color perception. Where test for like different color deficiencies in perception that would wear providing an accessible alternative to it would seemingly defeat the purpose of that exercise.
15:25:50 [Rachael]
ack heather
15:26:15 [laura]
awk: One of the examples that we have as logotype exception. One of the things that's considered essential.
15:26:35 [Rachael]
ack SydneyColeman
15:26:40 [laura]
...another one is talking about a piano, which is for orientation
15:26:51 [Rachael]
ack gregg
15:26:51 [Zakim]
GreggVan, you wanted to say here are some examples of places we do need it
15:27:29 [Anton]
Anton has joined #ag
15:27:39 [laura]
Heather: external Factor constraint like something, legalize, or security-wise.
15:27:40 [laura]
But then if there's an outside factor, that would
15:27:40 [laura]
make that not attainable, then that would be an exception.
15:27:48 [kevin]
q+ to suggest exception for content that is an alternative and labelled as such
15:28:16 [laura]
SC: I was thinking about an exception, potentially, for third party or user-generated content.
15:28:53 [kirkwood]
AR, VR?
15:29:27 [Rachael]
q?
15:29:30 [Rachael]
ack Charles
15:29:47 [Anton]
present+
15:29:50 [AWK]
q+ to raise target size essential exception
15:29:53 [laura]
Gregg: Financial, legal is one. Another one is timing.
15:30:05 [laura]
... playing a key, uh, piano is a good one.
15:30:14 [laura]
... All sorts of authentication
15:30:19 [GreggVan]
q+
15:30:28 [Rachael]
ack scott
15:30:29 [laura]
... If you're trying to authenticate a signature
15:30:53 [laura]
... there's also authentication of with face, with, with, um...
15:30:53 [laura]
Facial movement,
15:31:06 [ShawnT]
+1 to the language exception
15:31:22 [stevekerr]
q+
15:31:33 [ljoakley]
q+
15:31:40 [laura]
CH: All of these examples that we now have bulleted out in this thought exercise are examples of the statement I was trying to make. Each one of those examples, the reason it is an exception is that is its purpose.
15:31:41 [Rachael]
ack Ben_Tillyer
15:32:03 [Rachael]
ack kevin
15:32:03 [Zakim]
kevin, you wanted to suggest exception for content that is an alternative and labelled as such
15:32:03 [kevin]
ack
15:32:18 [Francis_Storr]
Francis_Storr has joined #ag
15:32:24 [laura]
SO: two-dimensional layout that conveys meaning or functionality exception for things like reflow.
15:32:27 [Francis_Storr]
present+
15:32:28 [Rachael]
ack awk
15:32:28 [Zakim]
AWK, you wanted to raise target size essential exception
15:32:35 [AWK]
demonstration or test of physical or sensory limits
15:32:36 [laura]
... when you have words from a different language that have become known in, you know, the primary language.
15:32:56 [laura]
...playing a game or performing a test to measure reaction time.
15:33:27 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
15:33:29 [laura]
... pointer cancellation, because if the point is to measures someone's reaction time. You shouldn't allow them to un do their reaction time.
15:34:19 [laura]
Ben: pages designed to be read by machines, whether that's an APl or whether it's agentic Al.
15:34:21 [jkatherman]
jkatherman has joined #ag
15:34:26 [jkatherman]
present+
15:34:31 [laura]
Kevin: exception around about content that is actually an alternative.
15:34:43 [joryc]
joryc has joined #ag
15:35:41 [laura]
AWK: Reaction time. Physical or sensory limits.
15:35:47 [Rachael]
ack stevekerr
15:36:13 [AWK]
We aren't calling it "accessible" we are calling it "conforming"
15:36:19 [Rachael]
q?
15:36:24 [laura]
Gregg: I think purpose is too vague.
15:36:31 [GreggVan]
q+
15:36:33 [Rachael]
ack laura
15:36:36 [Rachael]
ack ljoakley
15:36:44 [kevin]
+1 AWK
15:37:45 [laura]
SK: I just wanted to provide an example to the one that is content that is itself an alternative, because I personally find it helpful is when you have a sign language video that is serving as an alternative to the text that is on the page.
15:37:50 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
15:38:00 [joryc]
q+ to say that might be essential (timing)
15:38:26 [laura]
LO: a combination of both trying to get authenticated and timing.
15:39:09 [Rachael]
ack joryc
15:39:09 [Zakim]
joryc, you wanted to say that might be essential (timing)
15:39:12 [laura]
Gregg: We have a timing provision. that would have applied there, so that would have been not accessible, because you didn't have timing.
15:39:17 [Rachael]
(Last one for this)
15:40:38 [ljoakley]
+1
15:40:55 [laura]
Gregg: I think we had in 2 and have in 3, the alternatives do not have to have alternatives, because they are already alternatives.
15:41:09 [kevin]
-> https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/#dfn-essential-exception Current definition of 'essential exception'
15:41:54 [laura]
Jory: essential is slippery here. security person might argue that . having, you know, sort of authentication token that was starting to get created, timeout would be, essential for their security.
15:42:02 [Charles]
q+
15:42:21 [Rachael]
ack Charles
15:42:59 [laura]
RM: 3 purposes to this list in this exercise.
15:42:59 [laura]
1 we want to look through this. Step one is to look through this, and is there anything?
15:43:14 [Rachael]
TOPIC: Do any of these fit well at a univeral level?
15:43:17 [laura]
... The second question would be, are there things like the security or other areas that we should have a section in WCAG 3 that is separate
15:43:37 [Francis_Storr]
q+
15:43:43 [Heather]
q+
15:43:43 [Ben_Tillyer]
the bot one?
15:43:48 [Rachael]
ack Francis_Storr
15:43:49 [GreggVan]
q+
15:43:54 [Atya]
Atya has joined #ag
15:44:20 [laura]
... Then for everybody who's working in subgroups,
15:44:20 [laura]
This is a great list to come back to and ask yourself, does any of these apply to my
15:44:20 [laura]
particular SC.
15:44:20 [kevin]
s/univeral level/universal level/
15:45:09 [laura]
CH: questions, I'm wondering if we missed one in this list, which is when the input modality is limited by the device itself.
15:45:18 [giacomo-petri]
q+
15:45:20 [jtoles]
q+
15:45:57 [laura]
FS: I'm looking at logo exception
15:46:12 [Charles]
q+
15:46:19 [Rachael]
ack Heather
15:46:32 [scott]
is it worth noting that even with what's been written on the slide, that it does not necessarily represent an exhaustive list? i'm sure there'll be things that could be added / were forgotten
15:46:56 [kevin]
q+
15:47:12 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
15:47:25 [laura]
Heather: I would take the third party and user-generated and put those on two lines. I think user-generated could be considered potentially universal if the user is doing something that makes it not accessible, then that's on them.
15:47:45 [laura]
... A third party could alter an entire system, which makes something inaccessible
15:48:23 [kevin]
+1 to Gregg that UGC being a policy issue
15:48:29 [kevin]
q-
15:48:59 [laura]
Gregg: I don't think user-generated should be on here, because the user-generated is a policy issue
15:49:30 [laura]
Gregg: Alternatives don't have themselves to be accessible sounds funny. What you really mean is we shouldn't be using the word accessible, we should say conformant.
15:50:01 [Rachael]
ack giacomo-petri
15:50:09 [julierawe]
q+
15:50:12 [kevin]
q+
15:50:38 [GreggVan]
q+
15:50:59 [laura]
Giacomo: One consideration. Basically, all of these exceptions are somehow atomic. I mean, they are also universal, but they rely on specific functionalities.
15:51:07 [Rachael]
ack jtoles
15:51:58 [laura]
RM: That's probably more in the conformance and policy issues section than in the Exceptions section.
15:52:29 [kirkwood]
art?
15:52:38 [laura]
JT: On the content that is an alternative.
15:52:38 [laura]
I think we're assuming that the only way that the alternative is not conforming.
15:52:59 [Rachael]
ack Charles
15:53:34 [laura]
RM: What I want to do here is just identify the ones we want to talk about more, not actually talk about each of them individually. I'll open a discussion on WCAG discussion board, WCAG 3 discussion board on GitHub.
15:54:05 [kirkwood]
q+
15:54:06 [Rachael]
ack julierawe
15:54:29 [laura]
CH: I agree with Gregg that purpose isn't quite the right word here to replace information and functionality, but that also doesn't quite.
15:54:29 [laura]
capture the concept
15:54:55 [laura]
...But still think that one is a good potential for being universal because it could apply to a scenario where the purpose or the reason the entire page exists is to demonstrate an inaccessible page.
15:55:08 [Rachael]
ack kevin
15:55:11 [laura]
...so it wouldn't have atomic exceptions within it. The whole reason the whole thing exists.
15:55:47 [laura]
JR: I think we definitely need more discussion about things like financial, legal, security and authentication
15:56:54 [laura]
Kevin: So I would be hesitant to suggest that user-generated content would be something that would be a universal issue.
15:57:08 [laura]
... think it's certainly an issue that needs to be considered as part of
15:57:08 [laura]
policy making.
15:57:10 [Rachael]
ack gregg
15:57:52 [stevekerr]
q+
15:58:14 [laura]
Gregg: Somebody talked about types of products that wouldn't have to meet this, or should be exceptions. That's policy. That has nothing to do with us.
15:59:14 [Heather]
Heather has joined #ag
15:59:55 [laura]
Gregg: I don't think we need to have an exception for examples of things that are not accessible.
16:00:05 [Adam]
q+
16:00:12 [Heather]
present+
16:00:30 [Ben_Tillyer]
q+
16:00:34 [Adam]
qq+
16:01:27 [Heather]
scribe+
16:01:32 [Adam]
ack Adam
16:01:32 [Zakim]
Adam, you wanted to react to GreggVan
16:01:38 [Adam]
ack Adam
16:01:43 [laura]
Gregg: user-generated content, and if it doesn't conform, it doesn't conform. User-generated content should not be in any way an exception of any kind.
16:02:00 [laura]
... We want WCAG to be a measure of what that user needs to do if they're going to be sending that content.
16:02:35 [Heather]
Rachael: Anything in the universal exceptions list for defining the universal exception question, please put yourself upfront in the queue. Do we want to continue to considering if there is a universal exception definition?
16:02:56 [GreggVan]
s/of any kind/of any kind. that is up to policy to say that user generated content is the responsibility of the user not the app used./
16:03:14 [Heather]
kirkwood: Was thinking about art, art creation, art experience, expression, experiential. Example: Captions on video.
16:03:19 [Rachael]
ack kirkwood
16:03:22 [Rachael]
ack stevekerr
16:03:33 [kirkwood]
art abstract immersive creative art experience. much like signature
16:04:29 [GreggVan]
s/ not the app used/ not the app used. but WCAG should still be used to see if user generated content (e.g. email) that is sent to a whole org is conforming to WCAG/
16:04:56 [Heather]
Rachael: [Verbalized the bold items on slide 32 to consider for a universal exception definition]. Turning queue back over for concerns about the current list, or comments to support.
16:05:24 [Charles]
point of clarity: i interpret the word exception in this exercise as an exception to the entirety of conformance since it is at a universal level. so my thoughts were at conceptual level versus atomic.
16:05:26 [GreggVan]
q+
16:05:27 [Heather]
stevekerr: Clarification question, when things have been discussed, there are comments about policy and the difference about the exceptions. Are these intended to be exceptions to conformance?
16:06:34 [Heather]
Rachael: Is it actually a conformance thing, which is very centered on the standards and access and the ability to meet those standards versus is it a compliance thing, which is the larger question, should the standard themselves even apply to the situation? which is a subtle distinction.
16:06:50 [kevin]
q+ to respond to 'we don't have a conformance model'
16:07:13 [AWK]
+100 to\ Steve
16:07:22 [Heather]
stevekerr: Don't have a fleshed-out conformance model yet, this is a policy question or if we don't have a conformance model yet, and we're determining exceptions to conformance without that model it's a difficult thing to dismiss these concerns until we have that defined.
16:07:24 [Rachael]
ack Ben_Tillyer
16:07:25 [kevin]
q-
16:07:54 [Heather]
Rachael We do have a conformance model, we're continuing to iterate and come up with alternatives to a conformance model, and it's an ongoing process.
16:09:48 [Heather]
Ben_Tillyer: User generated content and the user customizing the UI is something I do. I wonder if the user modification of the UI is within the scope of the callouts. Another point, I think I agree with Greg on most of this, I feel you should be able to confidently say, using frameworks that we give site owners, we should be confident in saying,
16:09:48 [Heather]
yes, this does not conform, this is not the best for people with disabilities, and this is the reason why and then list out the reasons why.
16:09:51 [Rachael]
ack greg
16:10:30 [shadi]
q+
16:10:32 [kirkwood]
WCAG is a specification, Complying with WCAG is a policy
16:10:55 [Rachael]
q+ to point to previous conversation on conformance and compliance
16:11:02 [laura]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:11:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/14-ag-minutes.html laura
16:11:35 [kirkwood]
+1 to Gregg
16:11:55 [Rachael]
previous conversations on conformance and compliance which may help clarify https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MXiAC90NJ6IA1j2HzjAJ5fJRe880hIoX9dxn2undmCU/edit?slide=id.p#slide=id.p
16:11:57 [Rachael]
q-
16:12:04 [kevin]
+1 to distinction between conformance/compliance
16:12:36 [Heather]
GreggVan: Regarding the question of what is policy and what is WCAG? WCAG is a measure of whether if something is or isn't accessibility, or does or doesn't meet a minimum accessibility standard. We do not define who must do it or what types of content. Policy requires what needs to be accessibility. We're not saying who needs to do it - this is
16:12:36 [Heather]
defined in policy. WCAG defines if something is accessible. Whether it's accessibility or not is what WCAG tells you. Whether or not you need to make it accessibility is policy. If it is an exception in WCAG, then it conforms to the standard. It shouldn't be an exception of any kind, global or otherwise.
16:13:05 [kirkwood]
+1
16:13:24 [kevin]
 Good example of policy distinction is the provision in EU Web Accessibility Directive for archived content
16:14:04 [shadi]
q-
16:14:06 [AWK]
Everything _could_ be policy. We can and should establish some constraints also.
16:15:31 [kirkwood]
should we have any exceptions at all? Can’t the individual sc be written differently?
16:15:32 [Charles]
Charles has joined #ag
16:15:34 [Heather]
GreggVan: User generated, you're saying if it's accessible or not, you're saying who needs to follow. Thinks user generated needs to be removed. Legal should be there. It should be a policy in our policy document that you never require that people don't violate the laws. Content itself is the alternative, and this is tricky. It should only be an
16:15:34 [Heather]
exception on an item-by-item basis. The alternative needs to be specific to provisions and not globally, and keep in mind multiple disabilities. For artistic creation expression, that goes into policy. Content only displayed on one single type of device, and the input can't do it - that's called technical feasibility, and it's already an exception.
16:15:36 [LenB]
LenB has joined #ag
16:15:38 [Charles]
present+
16:15:42 [Charles]
q+
16:15:44 [LenB]
present+
16:15:58 [laura]
+1 to Gregg.
16:16:03 [shadi]
[I disagree with "WCAG defines if something is accessible" -- rather, it defines levels of accessibility]
16:16:11 [Rachael]
ack Charles
16:16:15 [Heather]
GreggVan: of the entire list, I don't see anything that needs to be global. I only see individual ones and not global.
16:16:21 [kirkwood]
+1 to Greggg
16:16:23 [kevin]
+1 to Gregg
16:16:34 [Heather]
Rachael: Note that everything could be policy and we and should establish constraints.
16:16:35 [AWK]
q+
16:16:40 [stevekerr]
q+
16:16:53 [Heather]
Charles: Asks for clarification for an exception to conformance or an exception that is?
16:17:22 [Heather]
GreggVan: Isn't an exception to conformance? By definition, policy, whether something has to conform or not. Excpetions would be that it conforms that you fall into the exception.
16:17:40 [Heather]
Rachael: We are considering whether there are exceptions hat would all requirements to conform if they were not met.
16:17:41 [Rachael]
ack awk
16:17:50 [Heather]
Charles: Allow to conform.
16:18:26 [Charles]
doesn’t making it universal automatically mean not atomic or provision based?
16:18:59 [Heather]
AWK: When we have exceptions today, there's a success criterion. Which has words that need to be true or false for a given webpage. And by incorporating an exception, we're making it so there's a broader class of content that can meet a give criterion. Provides example with video with captions and provides exception.
16:19:24 [kirkwood]
if an exception is written into conformance, then it still WOULD conform. correct. (i don’t like ultimate frisby either)
16:19:25 [Rachael]
ack steve
16:19:32 [Heather]
AWK: We don't really have a conformance model, we've got an exploratory conformance model, but there's lots of work going on right now, and will be presenting back to the group.
16:20:53 [GreggVan]
q+
16:21:21 [kevin]
q+ to mention ATAG
16:21:40 [sam-estoesta]
As an ultimate frisbee wife (with a husband who is going to 2026 World Masters Ultimate Club Championship in the United Kingdom), I feel compelled to defend the sport.
16:22:13 [Heather]
stevekerr: If I have a theoretical product with the goal that the product publishes blog posts. I am a fully conforming product until someone tries to use it. The initial evaluation could claim that it is conformant because no one has used it yet. This scenario is not being considered in the work right now. Why are we not considering the
16:22:13 [Heather]
requirements that should be in place to allow products to be able to consider creating conforming content. We are signaling to policymakers that they need to be able to determine this very complicated and nuanced thing that we can do more work at the AG level. What needs to be left for a policy doc and what should be considered within the scope of
16:22:13 [Heather]
the conformance model.
16:22:38 [Charles]
this entire exercise is then part of the conformance model
16:23:16 [Heather]
Rachael: Clarification that user-generated content is considered its own topic. And a topic that we will both discuss in policy. Straw poll for continuing to define universal exception.
16:23:17 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
16:24:05 [Rachael]
+1 that much of user generated content will fall as methods below requirements
16:25:06 [Heather]
GreggVan: Provides user generating content and authoring tools. We've talked about if an app needs to be conforming. An authoring tool needs to be both accessible and allow users to generate accessible content. The creator is responsible for determining if they are required to make something is responsible as it relates to the policy they fall
16:25:06 [Heather]
under. It's different for individuals or families or companies.
16:25:08 [Rachael]
ack kevin
16:25:08 [Zakim]
kevin, you wanted to mention ATAG
16:25:12 [giacomo-petri]
q+
16:25:28 [kevin]
https://www.w3.org/community/atag/
16:25:36 [Heather]
Kevin: We have a recommendation for authoring tools, and a community group for authoring tools and we're looking at developing this a little bit further. Link provided above.
16:26:07 [stevekerr]
q+
16:26:26 [giacomo-petri]
q-
16:26:46 [Rachael]
ack stevekerr
16:26:51 [Heather]
Kevin: There's a question of responsibility for the content, and on checking, it is non-conformant with WCAG. The question then becomes who is responsible for that if the functionality of that website is essential to me? That's the important bit and that's not for us to determine. Responsibility is within the competence of policymakers. The
16:26:51 [Heather]
policymakers determine who is responsible for the content.
16:27:07 [giacomo-petri]
q+
16:27:15 [kevin]
q+
16:27:16 [Rachael]
ack giacomo-petri
16:27:21 [Heather]
stevekerr: Within WCAG 2, we do make a statement for that live captions, the responsibility for providing them falls on the host caller, and not the application.
16:27:30 [Rachael]
zakim, close queue
16:27:30 [Zakim]
ok, Rachael, the speaker queue is closed
16:27:37 [kirkwood]
Live caption is a good example
16:28:34 [stevekerr]
+1 giacomo-petri
16:28:39 [Rachael]
ack kevin
16:28:43 [Heather]
giacomo-petri: We talked about in the past about the addition of assertions to make improvements and not just using levels. If vocab essentially provides a level, potentially the user generated content impacts the output of an evaluation. So how can companies understand where they are, and if it's influenced by the user-generated content. Because
16:28:43 [Heather]
at the end of the evaluation you are failing or passing, and it's a policymaker's choice.
16:29:57 [laura]
Example of policy: for Title II 3-Party Content Exception says that content posted by third parties does not need to meet accessibility standards, unless it is posted under a contract or agreement. This means that if the government entity does not control the content, they are not responsible for ensuring its accessibility.
16:30:01 [Heather]
Kevin: Cycling back on the live captions first - I don't disagree that there is mention of responsibility. We're not indicating who is responsible within the conformance model. It's within the intent, and outlines a little bit more about the intention of the success criteria. In terms of the guidance and support for giving people who are looking to
16:30:01 [Heather]
interpret, but it doesn't dictate what the conformance is, because that would be appropriate.
16:30:18 [Rachael]
Straw poll: Is there a benefit to continuing to explore creating universal exceptions or do we want to move forward with only provision-by-provision exceptions? Yes, we should continue conversations about universal exceptions or No, we should focus on provision-by-provision exceptions
16:30:20 [GreggVan]
no - there are no identified universal that are not policy so don't fit into WCAG
16:30:21 [kirkwood]
no
16:30:24 [Heather]
Rachael: Asks for responses to the straw poll.
16:30:31 [Charles]
no
16:30:32 [ljoakley]
q+
16:30:34 [Heather]
scribe-
16:30:34 [laura]
no
16:30:35 [Heather]
Yes
16:30:36 [ShawnT]
no
16:30:37 [MGaines]
no
16:30:39 [Heather]
scribe+
16:30:41 [Rachael]
zakim, open queue
16:30:41 [Zakim]
ok, Rachael, the speaker queue is open
16:30:45 [Ben_Tillyer]
yes - although we don't have anything for that category now, we might do later on.
16:31:02 [CClaire]
no
16:31:04 [julierawe]
julierawe has joined #ag
16:31:07 [julierawe]
present+
16:31:14 [GreggVan]
we can bring it up later -- if we discover somthing to dscuss
16:31:22 [ljoakley]
yes
16:31:23 [Heather]
ljoakley: We don't see something that's a combination of the two. There could be edge cases and very specific use cases to have an exception.
16:31:29 [Detlev]
shelve now, think about it later once we have an agreed conformance model
16:31:41 [AWK]
No, not because everything goes in policy but because we can create exception types that apply to individual criteria later also.
16:31:46 [jkatherman]
no
16:31:50 [julierawe]
No, I think provision by provision is the way to go
16:31:51 [BrianE]
no
16:31:54 [Makoto_U]
no
16:32:04 [LenB]
no
16:32:10 [jtoles]
No
16:32:12 [Rachael]
zakim, open queue
16:32:12 [Zakim]
ok, Rachael, the speaker queue is open
16:32:25 [Heather]
q+
16:32:27 [ljoakley]
q+
16:32:33 [Rachael]
ack Heather
16:33:26 [Rachael]
ack ljoakley
16:33:34 [Heather]
Heather: If one example exists, then a universal exceptions list should be defined.
16:33:53 [kevin]
No, provision level exceptions. There *might* be a universal exception in future but I can't see one on the list
16:34:11 [AWK]
Perhaps we agree to identify the shared exceptions whenever an exception needs to be re-used?
16:34:13 [SydneyColeman]
SydneyColeman has joined #ag
16:34:31 [Heather]
ljoakley: IMO, it's worth having overall exceptions, there needs to also be provision-by-provision exceptions.
16:34:31 [GreggVan]
q+
16:34:46 [Charles]
+1 to defer as we may discover exceptions that are common across provisions
16:34:55 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
16:35:07 [Heather]
Rachael: People are also suggesting to come back to it later. Since we don't have full consensus, Rachel will put it in GitHub.
16:36:00 [Heather]
GreggVan: Once we close an issue, we try not to open it back up again. If somebody thinks of something new that we haven't thought of before, it can be brought up to the group again. We can always close it for now and open it up again in the future.
16:37:18 [Heather]
Rachael: Yes, we can have the conversation again with new information, and we can bring it back up here or on GitHub.
16:37:21 [Ben_Tillyer]
happy to move to no
16:37:48 [giacomo-petri]
q+
16:38:07 [GreggVan]
s/thought of before/thought of before however/
16:38:35 [Heather]
Rachael: Remember if you're not comfortable in meetings talking, and we move to asynchronous, GitHub is another place to voice your opinion.
16:38:53 [GreggVan]
q+ to comment on logos
16:39:10 [Heather]
giacomo-petri: Asks for clarification to understand the difference for exception (like logos for brand) and when it is a policy-maker decision.
16:39:24 [Rachael]
Key question: Better define the difference between exceptions and policy
16:39:26 [Rachael]
ack giacomo-petri
16:39:38 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
16:39:38 [Zakim]
GreggVan, you wanted to comment on logos
16:39:48 [Heather]
Rachael: Good question. Capturing that we have a key question we should add into this conversation. What is the limit to what we can decide and what policy makers need to decide.
16:40:58 [Heather]
GreggVan: The reason that logos were made an exception is that it doesn't mean anything, it's just a shape. It doesn't have any particular meaning. It can be seen by differently by different people. It just wasn't important for accessibility.
16:40:59 [kirkwood]
sounds like you are describing art ;)
16:41:05 [Heather]
q+
16:42:23 [Rachael]
zakim, take up next item
16:42:23 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Rachael
16:42:29 [Rachael]
ack Heather
16:42:31 [Rachael]
zakim, take up next item
16:42:31 [Zakim]
agendum 4 -- Scope of WCAG 3 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BkgIVS8ODwokDPXJd91ChHfN7-WuaZdGcvK3Ru-hc_Y/edit?usp=sharing -- taken up [from Rachael]
16:42:32 [Heather]
Heather: Branding is a great example for what could be important to WCAG vs company policy.
16:43:02 [Heather]
Rachael: For scope of WCAG 3, there's a specific document itself, and there's a link to the agenda item.
16:43:06 [Rachael]
current text https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/#about-wcag-3
16:43:52 [Heather]
Rachael: [Reading slide 2 content, which addresses the differences between WCAG 2 and WCAG 3.]
16:45:07 [Heather]
Rachael: On slide 3, there is proposed changes to start this discussion. Including *digital (replacing web), *kiosks and more, *artificial intelligence, *and AI. WCAG does not address hardware details or other physical aspects of the digital experience.
16:45:18 [GreggVan]
q+
16:45:27 [AWK]
q+ to ask why we are adding kiosks. Closed systems changes things a lot.
16:45:49 [Heather]
Rachael: Asks to craft this language during this meeting. Questions to guide this discussion are on Slide 4.
16:45:55 [Detlev]
present+
16:46:06 [joryc]
q+ to ask: why are we singling out AI content? Isn't that covered by the category of content the AI created?
16:46:09 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
16:46:23 [Charles]
q+
16:46:53 [Rachael]
q+ to respond to gregg
16:47:14 [kirkwood]
-1 to Gregg on kiosks
16:47:24 [Heather]
GreggVan: Thank you for highlighting the word 'digital.' Suggests removing the word 'kiosk.' Because the fundamental problem because our guidelines are based not he fact that there is a user agent (a browser). If we decide to broaden it, we have to go back and revisit all of them and write them differently.
16:48:02 [sam-estoesta]
q+ to ask about the use of augmented reality versus using extended realities
16:48:13 [Heather]
GreggVan: AI is fine because it's another way of generating, and you have to be responsible for that. WCAG does not address hardware details or other physical aspects. which means you shouldn't claim to cover it one place and then end up putting an exception.
16:48:14 [Rachael]
ack awk
16:48:14 [Zakim]
AWK, you wanted to ask why we are adding kiosks. Closed systems changes things a lot.
16:49:55 [Wilco]
q+
16:49:58 [Heather]
AWK: Chiming in about kiosks. Kiosks are an entire environment that are closed systems, most cases, the physical controls, interface ports like the headphone jack. it's such a different experience, and they are more intelligent now. Think about a soda machine or other vending machine. We should be restricting our focus to the content on devices.
16:49:58 [Heather]
I'm wary of saying digital instead of web. I suspect that we will also run into some challenges. Kiosks feels like it's just too much.
16:50:01 [GreggVan]
q+
16:50:03 [Ben_Tillyer]
q+ Steve
16:50:06 [Rachael]
ack joryc
16:50:06 [Zakim]
joryc, you wanted to ask: why are we singling out AI content? Isn't that covered by the category of content the AI created?
16:50:13 [Makoto_U]
+1 to AWK
16:50:56 [giacomo-petri]
+steve_faulkner
16:51:03 [giacomo-petri]
q+ steve_faulkner
16:51:12 [Rachael]
ack Charles
16:51:16 [Heather]
joryc: Don't know why we are talking about AI, it seems to be talking about types of content and use your agents to consume it, not author it. AI isn't a category of content. Who is the author and taking responsibilities, or what you create with AI? It seems like it's just kind of wedged in here.
16:51:22 [kirkwood]
+1 to AI not working here
16:51:42 [giacomo-petri]
q- steve_faulkner
16:51:59 [AWK]
maybe "content management systems and authoring tools (including generative AI), testing tools...
16:52:08 [Rachael]
ack Rachael
16:52:08 [Zakim]
Rachael, you wanted to respond to gregg
16:52:09 [kirkwood]
good point
16:52:13 [Heather]
Charles: No opinion about if the kiosks should be removed. There are things to consider in that definition and there are newer and more capable devices. Wants to point out that these two things can't simultaneously be true, where it does include wearable devices, kiosks and more. At the end, it doesn't address other physical aspects.
16:52:36 [Heather]
Rachael: Responding with chair hat on. The question is here for to have this discussion.
16:52:57 [Ben_Tillyer]
q+
16:53:38 [Charles]
digital content requires all modalities whereas some hardware limits those
16:54:05 [Rachael]
ack sam
16:54:05 [Zakim]
sam-estoesta, you wanted to ask about the use of augmented reality versus using extended realities
16:54:14 [Heather]
Rachael: Chair hat off, I argue that this says digital content, the accessibility of digital content at the beginning, so that clarification is already there. The second to last sentence around physical is more of a clear clarification around the fact that this is just digital content, it is not about the entire object. Kiosks have digital content
16:54:15 [Heather]
and mobile devices present digital content. It's not always the web. Companies and evaluators are looking for guidance on this. different groups apply different standards differently. I think it might be appropriate here.
16:55:04 [Rachael]
ack Wilco
16:55:32 [Heather]
sam-estoesta: The use of the word digital does open up quite a few things. Wondering why we've limited it for the virtual and augmented reality side. It would make more sense to say extended realities, just because then we can get into a mixed or a variety of different elements within there. Like the digital experience, not just the physicality and
16:55:32 [Heather]
the accessibility of the glass itself.
16:56:53 [Rachael]
ack GreggVan
16:57:05 [AWK]
q+ to comment on the challenges of "content"
16:57:06 [joryc]
+1 to Wilco. AI is and will be a user agent and an assistive technology
16:57:09 [Heather]
Wilco: Very encouraged that we're having this conversation and the direction that's being proposed. It opens a million questions, including: How can you contain something like this because digital is wide open, huge scope. I'm not sure I disagree is the disconnect between physical and digital. I don't think it makes sense to talk one without
16:57:09 [Heather]
acknowledging the other. I think you need a separate approach to those kinds of products. and I like the inclusion of AI.
16:57:30 [Heather]
Rachael: Impresses me allows how one paragraph in this document can generate as many questions as this is about to.
16:57:36 [shadi]
[seems odd to be going ahead with a charter while we're still figuring out the scope of WCAG3]
16:57:47 [Rachael]
q+ to talk to kiosks and closed systems
16:58:00 [Rachael]
q-
16:58:02 [SydneyColeman]
noting that we have 2 minutes left and a large queue
16:58:11 [Rachael]
zakim, close queue
16:58:11 [Zakim]
ok, Rachael, the speaker queue is closed
16:58:13 [SydneyColeman]
and some had stops
16:58:15 [SydneyColeman]
*hard
16:58:21 [kirkwood]
kiosks must have screen reader t(of some sort) o be accessible
16:59:20 [AWK]
q-
17:00:31 [Rachael]
ack steve
17:00:42 [Heather]
GreggVan: Andrew called out if you put kiosks in here, then every place we have we have to re-explian how, and when it's not programmatically determinable. When the thing is closed, you have to do something different. You'd have to consider what is hardware-oriented. Does digital content mean platform? and if so, we need to revisit all the
17:00:42 [Heather]
provisions then too. To me, it means you want to move from being WCAG to being a fully in 301 549, and about the ones that do and don't work and the problems you would be moving outside. For AI agents, there are new and different AI agents built into them. AI agents are getting smarter with new types of AI. We shouldn't pretend like it's brand new.
17:00:42 [Rachael]
ack Ben_Tillyer
17:01:03 [joryc]
present+
17:02:26 [Heather]
Ben_Tillyer: Was confused of the word 'digital' because all my content which is shown to me on my laptop, wearable devices is digital. I don't know of any analog content that comes on those devices. I feel like it includes the source files. I feel like we want to get at the user agent to a user. Why do we have desktops, laptops, tablets, mobile
17:02:26 [Heather]
devices, when they are all personal computers of different sizes. We can consolidate that list with a catch-all word.
17:02:32 [ShawnT]
present+
17:02:38 [Heather]
Rachael: This is a rich discussion, thank you all.
17:02:42 [jkatherman]
jkatherman has left #ag
17:02:44 [Ben_Tillyer]
Thanks all
17:02:57 [Anton]
Anton has left #ag
17:03:15 [kevin]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:03:16 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/14-ag-minutes.html kevin
17:03:35 [Heather]
present+
17:03:38 [Heather]
scribe-
17:03:54 [Rachael]
zakim, end meeting
17:03:54 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been kevin, Rachael, Laura_Carlson, Charles, Heather, Adam, Steve, F, AWK, filippo-zorzi, JeroenH, shadi, present, MGaines, Makoto_U,
17:03:57 [Zakim]
... SydneyColeman, giacomo-petri, BrianE, scott, stevekerr, tayef, Glenda, julierawe, janina, jtoles, Ben_Tillyer, kirkwood, CClaire, ShawnT, Jen_G, ljoakley, Anton, Francis_Storr,
17:03:57 [Zakim]
... jkatherman, LenB, Detlev, steve_faulkner, joryc
17:03:57 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
17:03:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/04/14-ag-minutes.html Zakim
17:04:04 [Zakim]
I am happy to have been of service, Rachael; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye
17:04:04 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ag
17:05:59 [CClaire]
CClaire has left #ag
17:29:48 [GreggVan]
GreggVan has joined #ag
18:32:15 [Glenda]
Glenda has joined #ag