Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Announcements
Fredrik: I will need to fall back from my w3c commitments for the immediate future.
janina: you will be missed, keep us informed
TPAC 2026
janina: TPAC: it's coming ~6 months to go. What do we want to accomplish? We typically get a lot done. October 26, Dublin
<Zakim> Fredrik, you wanted to react to Fredrik
Fredrik: Coralee posted a funding plan for invited experts and it may apply to TPAC. The deadline for applications is mid May.
<matatk> Funding application: https://
<matatk> Deadline is 19th of May
matatk: this is different from previous years
… please apply. We haven't encouraged people enough in the past.
<chiace7> I’m currently researching this at work, so I’m happy to help :)
matatk: we had a call in ADAPT discussing ML and customizing for the user. We explored use cases that overlapped accessibility and COGA and RQTF. We have a positive and negative overlap.
<janina> Slide deck at: https://
matatk: we've agreed to keep in touch about these opportunities to coordinate.
<matatk> https://
matatk: TPAC will be a venue for continuing the work.
Well-known Accessibility Reporting
<matatk> PaulG: Still looking for a home for this. TPAC? Any suggestions?
<matatk> janina: I hope we can move on this before TPAC
<matatk> ... would like to see it in WCAG 3; that will be hard by the end of the year; doable by this point.
janina: We need to have conversation in Adapt. We definitely want to be working on it ASAP and talking about it at TPAC
matatk: we haven't forgotten about this, I will at least informally ask around about the well-known pattern.
… I suspect the advice will be the same but I'll get to it soon. In the meantime we can think about next steps.
… we have to convince folks to include the rel value on their site then update the microformats wiki with useage information
… I will also double-check the minutes of our previous meeting and file issues. If you're ok with ADAPT including it, we can help move it forward.
… TAG and WHATWG would be separate threads.
<mpaiva> w3c/
WCAG Content API
mpaiva: this was about creating a public API for the wcag content. I've use this for plugins and presentations. Not sure if this would be a good thing to present at TPAC.
janina: I think so.
See proposal from Marcelo w3c/
janina: a breakout would work well.
I wonder if something like that already exists, as it could've been useful to implement https://
mpaiva: let me know if you want to team up on this.
matatk: I think it's a great idea. But something like this may already exist.
matatk: you can run a breakout session even if you're not at TPAC physically
New charters review
New on TR
Four First Public Working Drafts for the Linked Web Storage (LWS) 1.0 Authentication Suite
<Roy_Ruoxi> - LWS 1.0 Authentication Suite: OpenID Connect
<Roy_Ruoxi> - LWS 1.0 Authentication Suite: SAML 2.0
<Roy_Ruoxi> - LWS 1.0 Authentication Suite: Self-signed Identity using Controlled Identifiers ->
<Roy_Ruoxi> https://
<Roy_Ruoxi> - LWS 1.0 Authentication Suite: Self-signed Identity using did:key
matatk: this is about having control over your own data
… I think it will be too low level for us but Janina, Roy, and I should make sure they're familiar with the accessibility requirements for authentication.
First Public Working Draft: CBOR-LD 1.0
<Roy_Ruoxi> - CBOR-LD 1.0
matatk: it's a binary encoding for json-ld so I think it will be too low-level and Manu is involved so we can ask the group to include accessibility information
First Public Working Draft: Long Animation Frames API
<Roy_Ruoxi> - Long Animation Frames API
matatk: I think this is more about long-running tasks.
PaulG: I think this is tangential right now to CSS. It talks about long script monitoring. It's focused on threads, particularly ones that don't get a chance to GC. Just looking at the spec. Some examples around performance observer. I think it's about fine-tuning performance stuff. It doesn't call out CSS directly; there are some notes
about terms used, which come from CSS. I'd have to read through it.
Spec review requests
matatk: the first thing I want to discuss is tracking
HTML in Canvans - tracking the tracking
matatk: I want to make sure we're looking at the right thing
HTML in Canvas PR (the main one?): whatwg/
HTML in Canvas issue (one of many?): whatwg/
<Fredrik> rrsagent. make minutes
TAG Design Review: w3ctag/
matatk: makes note to look in ARIA and CSS repos
PaulG: There's an interesting discussion on Mozilla's standards-positions repo too
PaulG: And from ARIA in their meetings
https://
matatk: this is a good rallying cry to pull all of the a11y groups together.
… identify the key issues. Janina, Roy, and I need to triage the issues. We can highlight concerns.
PaulG: This is going to be big. They need to address accessibility sooner rather than later. Frameworks will spring up to support people making canvas-based sites.
PaulG: With GPU shaders and AI writing things, this is going to be so important that we get this right.
PaulG: If we don't there will be a flood of inaccessible, beautiful-looking slop.
<chiace> From after 15 May, things should be calmer for me at work, so I’d be happy to help. You would just need to let me know what to do, and maybe share an example, so I can make sure I do everything correctly :)
matatk: APA's strength is talking about the use cases. It's important for us to keep track of issues.
RDF 1.2 Syntaxes
tracking: w3c/
Fredrik's suggestion: The RDF/XML format is used to express arbitrary application data, which, in accordance with foundational W3C principles, should adhere to the organisation’s accessibility guidelines including Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) as well as other related, pertinent documents. Authors publishing such information are
also advised to carefully consider the needs and use of publishing such information, as well as the applicable regulations for the regions where the data is expected to be consumed and potentially revealed (e.g., EAA, CAA).
matatk: I don't think it's multi-modal, primarily for machines to read, all text. Do you think there's a subset of WCAG that would apply?
Fredrik: I'll think about it. 1.3.1 and 1.3.2 are the likely candidates. It's a meta format.
… 2.4.6 and 4.1.2 for good measure
matatk: we can tell them what we'd like to see, get a draft issue and have folks review it async. I'm happy to go through that process for you.