Meeting minutes
matatk There's news today, developments on things we've filed.
Agenda Review & Announcements
RQTF Gaming CfC
Janina: We're using a term called "intentional friction"
Jen raised needs for transcription and not interruptions due to her disabilities.
<matatk> https://
@janina's point is that it exists, it's a hornet's next, RNIB is very interested, willing to be lead authors.
… please read the proposal carefully and provide actual comments. Not just +1, we need real comments to make sure this ends up being approved.
… we need to scope it right.
<Fazio> David Fazio will deliver a Digital Transformation for a Disability Inclusive Economy to Ministers of all 21 Caribbean nations in 2 weeks https://
Fazio In 2 weeks the Caribbean Telecommunications Union is bringing him out to French Guyana to deliver a digital transformation for a disability inclusive economy to the ministers of 21 Caribbean countries.
Accessibility podcast
stevef I appeared on a podcast last week with Mark Miller.
<stevef> https://
matatk running through a few notes, regarding things to discuss.
… linked web storage working group is about data sovereignty, having control of your own data, hosting your own, etc.
… the mission is to develop the dev of web apps where data storage, auth, access control, and provider are loosely coupled.
… decentralizing the different parts of sign-in data storage, instead of one org hosting all your data, making it difficult to switch providers, for example.
… it's an offshoot of Solid WG, trying to determine the right approach.
… deliverables: authentication protocols, low-level open ID, SAML, etc.
… use case documents, non-normative… lots of changes, actually.
… it's pretty low-level, don't see any particular accessibility concerns, apart from making sure authentication meets WCAG.
… have lots of related groups.
… I don't see any reason we'd object to this. It's interesting development if you're into IndieWeb, decentralization.
New charters
Linked Web Storage WG
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> Diff view: https://
@janina massive social implications, political, economic.
… to the work I've seen out of solid, we don't have a need for a specific APA question. If we're just looking at a charter, I think we can go.
matatk any questions? Hearing none, mark it as happy with this.
Spec review requests
Digital Credentials (update)
<matatk> w3c/
<matatk> https://
<matatk> We apparently did discuss wallet accessibility before (just found this following another search): https://
@janina we want the pipe to not get in the way of a taxonomic understanding of how data fits together. That way we have a better oppty to impact APIs.
… wallets are prob the best place we have to succeed at that.
PaulG There is no UI that the author of the page is going to be responsible for. What I'm worried about is nefarious authors spoofing the UA'S UI for a request, then harvesting credentials.
… since the UA is taking control of the UI for this.
@janina Is there an accessibility angle?
<matatk> Apropos PaulG's point, this article may be of interest: https://
PaulG Let's say that the UA has a watermark that can't be recreated, it's visual, then someone who's blind or low vision may not see it. Section 13 a11y considerations.
matatk I'll make sure we follow up on that. Included link to an article that relates.
… a lot of security & privacy is built on the assumption that there is the browser's trusted UI, and people don't know where that line is.
… as I posted this 16 hours ago, I don't see any reaction to it yet.
Issue Tracking
Proposed comment for [css-forms-1] Use empty alt text for ::picker-icon and ::checkmark
<matatk> w3c/
PaulG This is basically what I was saying last week, so thank you for putting that together.
matatk I propose that it's posted and folks thumbs up or object, we'll review. Then I'll ping the ARIA WG.
… we went through all of these registries last week, though most were low-level, except one with mention of human face segmentation in the video frame metadata.
… is this the right layer to put info that might help people know who's speaking, etc.
Proposed comment for Registries developed by the Media WG
<matatk> w3c/
WebMCP Accessibility
<matatk> Define accessibility requirements for WebMCP user-agent UI: w3c/
<matatk> WebMCP accessibility review checklist: w3c/
<matatk> This is the thread on which we developed our original comment: WebMCP accessibility considerations
<matatk> - w3c/
PaulG Things may be going in the right direction. If there is a tendency to move forward with imperative and make it their leader, then the UA should treat it like SSL, being off. It doesn't meet human reviewable requirements. Putting a big warning on that is the only way that I see imperative moving forward.
… happy to get involved as I think it's important.
matatk What's the next step. They're trying to address the concerns we raised. One is more UA UI, the other is the whole thing. Anyone want to help me with this?
… I think Marcello would, he already follows these threads. I'll look at over the week and flag people who I think would be able to provide further inputs.
… already mentioned to WAI leadership.
JenStrickland I volunteer to take a look.
matatk We may need to create some extra time for people to do help with CSS and Open UI issues.
@janina I'll pay more attention that the AI a11y document and RQDF. Mgmt reminded me that it is my #1 responsibility.