16:56:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:56:07 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/05/28-aria-irc
16:56:07 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:56:08 <Zakim> Meeting: ARIA WG
16:56:09 <jamesn> Agendabot, find agenda
16:56:10 <agendabot> jamesn, OK. This may take a minute...
16:56:10 <agendabot> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/690d057f-db6d-4169-b13f-68d7f1336b59/20260528T130000/
16:56:10 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:56:10 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New PR Triage https://github.com/search?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+created:%3E=2026-05-21+repo:w3c/aria&type=Issues
16:56:10 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New Issue Triage https://is.gd/r0kAyP
16:56:13 <agendabot> agenda+ -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y
16:56:15 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Deep Dive planning https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates
16:56:18 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Reviews for Android Mappings https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/2682
16:56:21 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Simplify aside mappings https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/607
16:56:24 <agendabot> agenda+ -> feat: aria-actions addition to the ARIA spec https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1805
16:56:26 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Publishing 1.3 https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2795
16:56:49 <jamesn> agenda?
16:58:36 <Matt_King> Matt_King has joined #aria
16:59:12 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #aria
16:59:40 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_ has joined #aria
17:00:06 <Francis_Storr> Francis_Storr has joined #aria
17:00:12 <smockle> present+
17:01:10 <scott> scott has joined #aria
17:01:11 <sarah> sarah has joined #aria
17:01:19 <scott> present+
17:01:20 <sarah> present+
17:01:32 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #aria
17:01:33 <Francis_Storr> present+
17:01:34 <giacomo-petri> present+
17:01:53 <Rahim> present+
17:02:15 <spectranaut_> agenda?
17:02:15 <Adam> present+
17:02:17 <aardrian> aardrian has joined #aria
17:02:18 <filippo-zorzi> present+
17:02:21 <aardrian> present+
17:02:44 <jamesn> Zakim, order is 1,2,3,4,8,5,6,7
17:02:44 <Zakim> sorry, jamesn, I do not recognize a party named 'order'
17:03:06 <katez> katez has joined #aria
17:03:11 <katez> present+
17:03:25 <jamesn> Zakim, agenda order is 1,2,3,4,8,5,6,7
17:03:25 <Zakim> ok, jamesn
17:03:27 <aardrian> scribe+
17:03:35 <jamesn> agenda?
17:03:52 <aardrian> zakim next item
17:04:10 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:04:10 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- -> New PR Triage https://github.com/search?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+created:%3E=2026-05-21+repo:w3c/aria&type=Issues -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:04:10 <github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
17:04:16 <Daniel> present+ Daniel
17:04:38 <aardrian> jamesn: editorial for the first one
17:04:54 <aardrian> daniel: i'll fix it
17:05:11 <aardrian> jamesn: fix role attr definition. Mostly editorial, but would appreciate reviews.
17:05:36 <aardrian> jamesn: long-standing issue about who defines role attribute (maybe a bit of concept)
17:05:46 <jcraig> jcraig has joined #aria
17:05:50 <Jacques> Jacques has joined #aria
17:05:55 <jcraig> present+
17:06:03 <aardrian> jamesn: If you have both attribute and concept in the same spec, the references go to the attribute, which isn't what we always want.
17:06:07 <jcraig> agenda?
17:06:15 <Rahim> q+
17:06:16 <Jacques> present+
17:06:16 <aardrian> jamesn: reviewers?
17:06:28 <aardrian> spectranaut: I'll review
17:06:49 <aardrian> adam: I'll review
17:07:04 <aardrian> rahim: I thought role was a separate spec at some point. Any history?
17:07:14 <aardrian> jamesn: It was an ARIA precursor, but ancient history.
17:07:26 <aardrian> jcraig: Was mostly tied to XML before ARIA.
17:07:35 <aardrian> jcraig: something about hair
17:07:52 <aardrian> jamesn: Two chores, so we can skip the next two.
17:08:05 <aardrian> jamesn: Without meeting last week, may have... nothing else.
17:08:08 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:08:08 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, aardrian
17:08:14 <jamesn> ack Rahim
17:08:16 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:08:16 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- -> New Issue Triage https://is.gd/r0kAyP -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:08:16 <github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
17:08:31 <aardrian> jamesn: A long issue triage since it's been a month.
17:09:16 <aardrian> jamesn: 2797: "headings should not be labeled by author" has some feedback
17:09:27 <aardrian> jamesn: should we close it?
17:09:49 <aardrian> scott: I appreciate it brings up issues from the past that have gone nowhere.
17:10:02 <aardrian> jamesn: We have duplicate issues.
17:10:46 <aardrian> scott: Maybe not the landmark part.
17:11:04 <aardrian> scott: Though he may have meant exposing the heading when navigating to a landmark.
17:11:25 <HaTheo> HaTheo has joined #ARIA
17:11:31 <HaTheo> present+
17:11:35 <aardrian> jamesn: Do we need to talk about this? It seems like a duplicate.
17:11:48 <Rahim> Curious how this interacts with nameFromHeading as well
17:11:49 <aardrian> spectranaut_: We should agenda this.
17:12:55 <aardrian> jamesn: 2796: Imapact of AI tech... should we agenda this?
17:13:06 <aardrian> jamesn: You can also add stuff
17:13:14 <aardrian> spectranaut_: The intent was to collect thoughts
17:13:57 <aardrian> Daniel: We can set aside time for discussion and bring it back to the issue.
17:14:20 <aardrian> jamesn: CSSAAM 20: reorg repo labels
17:14:25 <aardrian> Daniel: I'll look
17:14:46 <aardrian> jamesn: CSS-AAM #19, we can skip that for now but leave comments.
17:14:59 <aardrian> jamesn: ARIA 1.3 WD is for later
17:15:25 <aardrian> jamesn: 2791: posinset, asking for a deep dive. Matt, do you think it's needed?
17:15:39 <aardrian> Matt_King: Or you can handle it in a regular meeting and then see if it warrants a deep dive.
17:15:50 <aardrian> jamesn: I'll agenda for next week.
17:16:07 <aardrian> Matt_King: I just remembered -- we need specific people for the discussion. SR reps.
17:16:33 <aardrian> jamesn: 607 simply aside mappings; it's on today's agenda
17:16:48 <aardrian> jamesn: 2785: overscroll, deep dive last week
17:17:13 <aardrian> jamesn: html-aam 606, for HTML spec with readonly attr on fieldset.
17:17:38 <Stefan> Stefan has joined #aria
17:18:05 <Stefan> present+
17:18:10 <aardrian> scott: I provided questions, but it's not a perfect analogue. Nothing to do right now.
17:18:22 <aardrian> scott: I can ask the mappings for the proposal.
17:19:08 <aardrian> jamesn: html-aam 605: whitespace-only alt attribute
17:19:27 <aardrian> jamesn: Just adding tests.
17:19:45 <aardrian> giacomo-petri: Yes, and maybe a question for ARIA in HTML
17:20:06 <aardrian> giacomo-petri: For an empty image alt or one with white space
17:20:15 <aardrian> jamesn: Can you file against ARIA in HTML?
17:20:19 <aardrian> giacomo-petri: Yes.
17:20:44 <aardrian> giacomo-petri: I suggested a change to a PR to mention the examples to discuss how browsers expose them.
17:21:01 <aardrian> jamesn: Yeah, that's inconsistent and we should have test, suggest how they should be implemented.
17:21:07 <aardrian> jamesn: Are we agreed on implementation?
17:21:16 <Rahim> q+
17:21:25 <jamesn> Ack ra
17:21:29 <aardrian> giacomo-petri: The PR says empty alt should have the same as alt with white space.
17:21:39 <Rahim> https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#ascii-whitespace
17:21:45 <aardrian> Rahim: HTML spec has a definition of white space, is that what you want to use Giacomo?
17:22:33 <dgrogan> dgrogan has joined #aria
17:22:45 <aardrian> jamesn: This would also need... in HTML-AAM?
17:23:05 <aardrian> scott: We already have this in HTML AAM, but this addresses a gap.
17:23:11 <aardrian> jamesn: So it says white space?
17:23:21 <smockle> https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aam-1.0/#el-img-empty-alt
17:23:28 <aardrian> scott: We aligned on this a while ago to address how aria-label behaves.
17:23:41 <aardrian> scott: We didn't have tests to cover it. Giacomo found that.
17:23:51 <aardrian> Rahim: Did we decide where the tests live?
17:24:08 <aardrian> scott: Randomly into WPT folder [something about shooting from a cannon]
17:24:30 <aardrian> Rahim: Giacomo you proposed roles.html?
17:24:53 <aardrian> giacomo-petri: Yes. And to match previous test cases. I'm happy to add more.
17:24:59 <aardrian> jamesn: Why is the ED old?
17:25:29 <aardrian> jamesn: Is this not the correct ED? Why does the URL point to it?
17:25:53 <aardrian> jamesn: I'm looking at the aria-slash URL.
17:26:11 <aardrian> scott: I've never once put "ARIA" into that URL. I thought it just redirected.
17:26:21 <aardrian> jcraig: CLicking the latest ED shows correct URL
17:26:55 <aardrian> jamesn: 2782: draft menu element proposal, for deep dive.
17:26:58 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:26:58 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:26:58 <github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
17:27:34 <aardrian> jcraig: The newish ones have active comments and review threads.
17:27:52 <aardrian> spectranaut_: Did you see my more recent comment about adding tests to AAM for role?
17:28:15 <aardrian> jcraig: I see them. From two weeks ago.
17:28:25 <aardrian> spectranaut_: Oops, might be a draft comment, unpublished.
17:28:38 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:28:38 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- -> Deep Dive planning https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:28:38 <github-bot> I can't comment on that because it doesn't look like a github issue to me.
17:29:00 <aardrian> jamesn: Do we want to schedule posinset / setsize?
17:29:10 <aardrian> jamesn: Would need afternoon meeting?
17:29:28 <aardrian> Matt_King: Yes, if we want to include Jamie or someone from NVDA.
17:29:44 <aardrian> Matt_King: SHould reach out to as many as possible.
17:29:57 <aardrian> jamesn: Put in the thread who you want to get in the meeting, then we can request times.
17:30:03 <aardrian> Matt_King: Ok
17:30:27 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:30:27 <Zakim> agendum 8 -- -> Publishing 1.3 https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2795 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:30:41 <aardrian> jamesn: Daniel?
17:30:58 <aardrian> Daniel: We published FPWD in 2024, with a bunch of PRs merged, some with normative changes.
17:31:15 <aardrian> Daniel: In order to finish charter year, we should publish WD as soon as possible.
17:31:27 <aardrian> Daniel: I know ARIA Actions is not ready, but we can publish what we have now.
17:31:46 <aardrian> Daniel: If we reach consensus with ARIA Actions before CR, we can still point reviewers there.
17:31:53 <jcraig> q+
17:32:00 <jamesn> ack jc
17:32:02 <aardrian> Daniel: To move ARIA to REC by end of year, need to do soon.
17:32:19 <aardrian> jcraig: ARIA Actions is implemented behind runtime flag in Safari Tech PReview.
17:32:31 <aardrian> jcraig: I think we need second implementation
17:32:45 <Daniel> q+
17:32:46 <aardrian> Jacques: I'mw working on Chromium implementations.
17:32:57 <jamesn> Ack da
17:33:04 <aardrian> jcraig: We shouldn't move unless we know there's an active implementation during CR
17:33:20 <aardrian> Daniel: Yes, it should be on the calendar to avoid it being at risk.
17:33:31 <aardrian> Daniel: If second implementation doesn't happen, we can withdraw feature.
17:33:42 <aardrian> Daniel: But it's still not in the ED.
17:34:01 <aardrian> jcraig: I thoujght you said you _Were_ going to merge
17:34:16 <aardrian> Daniel: No, I want a publish WD with what we have, without ARIA Actions.
17:34:30 <aardrian> jcraig: It would be nice to have ARIA actions.
17:34:45 <aardrian> jcraig: CR isn't the final month-long review?
17:35:23 <aardrian> Daniel: No. CR gets you 10 months, and then we ask for move to REC (for another month.)
17:35:34 <aardrian> jcraig: Are you far enough along, JAcques?
17:35:34 <spectranaut_> q+
17:35:49 <aardrian> Jacques: My goal is to get this done within 2 months and then origin trial.
17:35:58 <aardrian> spectranaut_: Runtime flag is fine
17:36:17 <aardrian> Jacques: I think implementation works in most platforms. But two months.
17:36:41 <aardrian> Matt_King: We should address Daniel's question as posed given outstanding questions that can impact timelines.
17:36:49 <aardrian> jcraig: Fair. I withdraw my rush.
17:37:02 <aardrian> spectranaut_: We cannot delay CR. We go with what we have.
17:37:04 <Jacques> that sounds good to me.
17:37:15 <aardrian> spectranaut_: Then we can ask others to review WD
17:37:40 <aardrian> jcraig: We shouldn't rush it. Go to CR without this hanging over us.
17:37:54 <aardrian> jamesn: THe question is publishing WD for wide review
17:38:01 <spectranaut_> s/We cannot delay CR/We cannot delay this WD publication/
17:38:05 <aardrian> jamesn: Go to CR as soon as wide review is done.
17:38:19 <jamesn> Ack spectranaut_
17:38:44 <aardrian> jamesn: Do we need a formal resolution?
17:38:50 <aardrian> Daniel: It would be nice.
17:38:59 <jamesn> scribe+
17:39:35 <jamesn> RESOLUTION: group agrees to publish a new Working Draft of ARIA for wide review
17:39:40 <jamesn> scribe-
17:40:12 <aardrian> scribe+
17:40:28 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:40:28 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- -> Reviews for Android Mappings https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/2682 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:40:43 <aardrian> spectranaut_: I snuck this in
17:41:07 <aardrian> spectranaut_: I want to get a resolution on Android mappings.
17:41:09 <Daniel> q+
17:41:15 <jamesn> Ack da
17:41:21 <aardrian> spectranaut_: Do I need a consensus to merge this?
17:41:34 <aardrian> jamesn: ANy objections?
17:41:55 <aardrian> resolution: to merge 2682
17:42:11 <aardrian> RESOLUTION: to merge 2682
17:42:21 <Daniel> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:42:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/05/28-aria-minutes.html Daniel
17:42:30 <Daniel> ack me
17:42:43 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:42:43 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- -> Simplify aside mappings https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/607 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:43:13 <spectranaut_> q+
17:43:14 <aardrian> Matt_King: This came up in APG TF a month or so agao.
17:43:28 <aardrian> Matt_King: Looked at updating guidance on complementary landmarks
17:43:39 <aardrian> Matt_King: It seemed more complex than needed.
17:44:12 <aardrian> Matt_King: The proposal is that an aside element only becomes a landmark when it's named or is context of body
17:44:31 <aardrian> Matt_King: So it would be closed to other HTML elements that map to landmark regions
17:44:46 <aardrian> Matt_King: Otherwise it's a far more complex algorithm.
17:45:19 <aardrian> scott: Part of the history is that I asked for help with browser bugs. We've already made changes in ARIA spec to align.
17:45:40 <aardrian> scott: I don't agree it's too complex. Only change seems to not restrict to main element.
17:45:55 <aardrian> scott: Feels like undoing work that's been decided but only partly implemented.
17:46:10 <aardrian> Matt_King: We some texts related to header and footer.
17:46:19 <aardrian> scott: I don't know what that's in reference too.
17:46:23 <aardrian> scott: I don't know what that's in reference to.
17:46:38 <jamesn> Ack spectranaut_
17:46:41 <aardrian> scott: But those are also partially resolved with section header/footer.
17:47:20 <aardrian> spectranaut_: We talked about this in the past and try not to go back too often on our previous decisions.
17:47:45 <aardrian> spectranaut_: THis is the last 10% taking 90% of the time because browsers are slow to implement.
17:48:03 <aardrian> q+
17:48:17 <jamesn> Ack aa
17:48:43 <aardrian> spectranaut_: I caution against changing past decisions.
17:49:01 <aardrian> aardrian: Was the proposal to expose regardless of where in DOM and unnamed?
17:49:13 <Jacques> I'm always happy to help folks contribute to chromium! Just reach out.
17:49:19 <aardrian> Matt_King: No, only if in context of body, otherwise it would require a name.
17:49:56 <aardrian> Matt_King: ARIA says you can have a complementary inside main. But this is closer to what we require for section to be named.
17:50:16 <aardrian> Matt_King: Every pull quote becomes a complementary region, because they use it wrong.
17:50:33 <aardrian> Matt_King: So we end up with tons of complementary regions.
17:50:43 <aardrian> aardrian: WOuldn't that be an implementation issue?
17:50:52 <aardrian> Matt_King: That would be an HTML AAM decision.
17:51:22 <aardrian> scott: The previous decision was that we would keep it mapped to complementary both scoped to body or main
17:51:38 <aardrian> jamesn: If we want to do this, then we need sufficient evidence.
17:51:40 <aardrian> +1
17:51:55 <aardrian> jamesn: Web sites where this would cause a problem and web sites where it would be better.
17:52:13 <aardrian> Matt_King: I don't know how you prove the case of degradation.
17:52:27 <aardrian> jamesn: Search for a bunch of sites with this pattern and test them.
17:52:42 <Rahim> q+
17:53:14 <aardrian> jamesn: If you'd expect them to be complementary, then you should investigate how it was done.
17:53:31 <jamesn> Ack rah
17:53:31 <spectranaut_> agenda?
17:53:53 <aardrian> Rahim: I'm curious why this wouldn't be an author requirement or best practice instead.
17:54:09 <aardrian> Matt_King: Authors don't know it will become complementary by default.
17:54:29 <aardrian> jamesn: If you want to move this forward, I think you need examples where it breaks things.
17:54:44 <aardrian> Matt_King: Ok. I think we can find some way to do that.
17:55:11 <aardrian> jamesn: Let's leave it until there's more evidence. Nobody seems to object if there's evidence.
17:55:15 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:55:15 <Zakim> agendum 7 -- -> feat: aria-actions addition to the ARIA spec https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1805 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:55:40 <aardrian> sarah: I'm curious what Matt meant that there's a bunch of open issues.
17:55:51 <aardrian> sarah: I found one, but things seem stable.
17:56:10 <aardrian> Matt_King: I submitted a review just before this meeting, but there may be 3 I raised.
17:56:26 <aardrian> sarah: Are you sure they aren't addressed? I fixed one and two before the meeting.
17:56:54 <aardrian> sarah: They were editorial and I added wording that was covered in the spec.
17:57:05 <aardrian> Matt_King: I'll re-review.
17:57:28 <aardrian> sarah: I left one because it's the focus question in 2691. It's already in Core AAM
17:57:40 <aardrian> Matt_King: Thank you, I will re-review.
17:57:56 <aardrian> Matt_King: Then our primary thing is to address 2691.
17:58:10 <aardrian> Matt_King: SHould there be language related to focusability of referencing element?
17:58:31 <aardrian> sarah: The referencing element needs to be focusable, not referenced.
17:58:43 <aardrian> Matt_King: We need an author MUST for the element.
17:58:52 <aardrian> sarah: It's heavily implied?
17:58:59 <aardrian> jamesn: Sounds like a review comment.
17:59:08 <aardrian> Matt_King: Yes, I'll leave that when I re-review.
17:59:33 <aardrian> sarah: For 2691, we don't define behaviors like focus movement in ARIA or Core AAM up until now.
17:59:50 <aardrian> sarah: We should nail this down, but I'm curious how it fits into our specs.
18:00:07 <aardrian> Matt_King: It's an extension of author's ability to manage focus.
18:00:16 <aardrian> Matt_King: When we first wrote managing focus, it was related.
18:00:42 <aardrian> sarah: We have wording about author focus management, but we lack browser-focused focus management behavior.
18:00:46 <aardrian> sar
18:01:03 <aardrian> jamesn: We're at time...
18:01:13 <Jacques> where can we continue this conversation?
18:01:17 <aardrian> sarah: If I were to draft wording, how would it look?
18:01:25 <aardrian> jamesn: Time.
18:01:53 <aardrian> jamesn: We've had ARIA Actions on agenda a lot, but we haven't had the people.
18:02:00 <aardrian> jamesn: Agenda it again.
18:02:10 <aardrian> jamesn: REviews are helpful outside of meeting.
18:02:21 <aardrian> zakim, end meeting
18:02:21 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been smockle, scott, sarah, Francis_Storr, giacomo-petri, Rahim, Adam, filippo-zorzi, aardrian, katez, Daniel, jcraig, Jacques, HaTheo, Stefan
18:02:24 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
18:02:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/05/28-aria-minutes.html Zakim
18:02:32 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, aardrian; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
18:02:32 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
21:59:21 <Matt_King> Matt_King has joined #aria
22:00:34 <Matt_King> Matt_King has left #aria