scribe+
Helen: busy, created some reflow test that I want to put in ACT rules
Wilco: we should create it as a
project
... bring it to the CG next week
Helen: and on the image and media
alternatives, they haven't give me any rule to check
... sign language subgroup, I've been on a couple of subgroup
meetings; I've been assigned tasks because some tests are too
subjective. It's doable but I want to finish the reflow ones
first
Wilco: we are in charge of
helping, not writing rules for subgroup
... we wanna help to enable them in writing act rules
Helen: for the sign language subgroup, I want to show an example for those rules that are "more subjective"
Godwin: busy here, not really
much updates
... I've been attending subgroup meetings, missed some, last
one nobody shown up
Adam: inputs subgroup with Francis, I worked on my first ACT Rule, custom key documented
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/wcag3-provision-survey-03/
Wilco: new survey opened (link
shared)
... new provisions that include ACT work, but not all of them
(it seems like)
... for those who have time please review these
... survey due date is June 30th
... if you are not too busy, please review
giacomo-petri: I went through the survey, and there is a bit of confusion in terms of applicability/inapplicable examples (highlighted current scenario - last one)
Adam: is there any link we can use to help the subgroup understanding the difference between failing and inapplicable
Helen: did you guys check any
existing rule, like "zoom" which is a composite rule
... for reflow, we have exception (e.g., map) that's
inapplicable becuase it's an exception for the rule
Wilco: generally the way we are
going, if it's an exception in the requirement, you would like
it to be a pass
... the inapplicable is related to the rule
... e.g., hidden images are inapplicable
... another example, is an "X" for close; this is not intended
to be text, so it's inapplicable
Adam: we do that beacuse we know the tester might be inclined to mark it as a failure?
Wilco: yes, there might be edge cases, but this is usally the distintion we draw
Adam: is it expected that every rule has inapplicable examples? is ok to omit them?
Wilco: I think it's probably ok for this stage of things
Adam: last question,
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18RDQH1piGOCjae1RTymHaP-M_2RXHoXF0WDHqYvw14w/edit?tab=t.t6majvyytcnc#heading=h.h0qqy6fg8f1y
this is going to the act I wrote a bunch of time ago: if you
are an author and you offer custom keyboard for controls you
have to document them
... I got this inapplicable example: A button reveals a tooltip
of “Press Space to activate” on focus and hover. The
documentation is not necessary since it is describing a
standard platform keyboard command.
... is it ok?
Wilco: yes.
Adam: I think we've lost the importance of the applicability
Helen: we have the ACT guide, and
the rule template is basic
... rule name, applicability, expectation examples
Helen screensharing
Helen: out template is more complex, applicability, expectations 1,2,3..., backgorund, assumptions, accessibility support, related rules, other resources. This is much more detailed compared with what we gave to AGWG
Wilco: the reason why we
simplified this was to avoid scaring people
... maybe we can provide a basic and complete templates, so
they can start with basic, and if they need more maybe they can
check the complete one
Giacomo: might be helpful but at the same time could be confusing. ACT members should help in that the subgroups maybe; anyway giving the ability to review the full template might be helpful if people is not able to complete their rules due to some missing piece
Wilco: I can add a template for the complete scenarios
This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Default Present: giacomo-petri, Wilco, Helen, Godwin Present: giacomo-petri, Wilco, Helen, Godwin No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: giacomo-petri Inferring Scribes: giacomo-petri WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]