IRC log of aria on 2015-12-10
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 17:32:29 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #aria
- 17:32:29 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/12/10-aria-irc
- 17:32:31 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 17:32:31 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #aria
- 17:32:33 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be WAI_PF
- 17:32:33 [Zakim]
- I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
- 17:32:34 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
- 17:32:34 [trackbot]
- Date: 10 December 2015
- 17:32:36 [MichaelC]
- agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Dec/0093.html
- 17:32:45 [joanie]
- present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
- 17:32:47 [MichaelC]
- meeting: ARIA
- 17:32:47 [MichaelC]
- chair: MichaelC
- 17:32:50 [MichaelC]
- regrets: Rich, Léonie
- 17:33:01 [MichaelC]
- present+ MichaelC, Janina, Suman, Fred
- 17:33:12 [MichaelC]
- rrsagent, make log final
- 17:33:27 [MichaelC]
- scribeOptions: -final
- 17:34:05 [MichaelC]
- agenda+ Publications update
- 17:34:05 [MichaelC]
- agenda+ Working Group transition update
- 17:34:05 [MichaelC]
- agenda+ Mailing list subscription policy update
- 17:34:05 [MichaelC]
- agenda+ Test planning (major topic for this call)
- 17:34:05 [MichaelC]
- agenda+ Continue issue scrubbing
- 17:34:07 [MichaelC]
- agenda+ Upcoming meeting schedule
- 17:34:52 [MichaelC]
- present+ Cynthia
- 17:35:13 [MichaelC]
- present+ Michiel
- 17:35:29 [jamesn]
- present+ JamesNurthen
- 17:35:35 [cyns]
- cyns has joined #aria
- 17:36:12 [jamesn]
- scribe: jamesn
- 17:36:15 [mck]
- mck has joined #aria
- 17:36:19 [jamesn]
- agenda?
- 17:37:20 [jamesn]
- agenda+ aria-primaryaction discussion
- 17:38:34 [mck]
- present+ matt_king
- 17:38:54 [MichaelC]
- present+ Matt
- 17:39:01 [MichaelC]
- present+ Joseph
- 17:39:07 [clown]
- clown has joined #aria
- 17:39:14 [MichaelC]
- agenda order 1, 2, 3, 7
- 17:39:15 [clown]
- present+ Joseph_Scheuhammer
- 17:39:19 [MichaelC]
- zakim, next item
- 17:39:19 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Publications update" taken up [from MichaelC]
- 17:39:33 [jamesn]
- MC: main thing is that make sure everyone knows
- 17:39:40 [jamesn]
- everythign published recently
- 17:39:47 [jamesn]
- FPWD of some
- 17:39:54 [jamesn]
- updated of all the rest...
- 17:40:26 [jamesn]
- talking timeline with Rich think would like to do an updated WD of 1.1 (pseudo last call)
- 17:40:31 [jamesn]
- early feb for that
- 17:40:43 [jamesn]
- close out remainder of issues between now and then
- 17:40:51 [jamesn]
- if we stick to timeline CR early april
- 17:40:54 [jamesn]
- just after CSUN
- 17:41:17 [jamesn]
- some of the other specs may advance to CR at same time. Core may but others may not
- 17:41:28 [jamesn]
- push to get 1.1 done is there. want to shift focus to 2.0
- 17:41:56 [jamesn]
- one of the issues is the piece of the puzzle for extended descriptions. nexts weeks call will focus on thaty
- 17:42:16 [jamesn]
- want to get this done b4 the holidays so people working over holidays can do stuff
- 17:42:25 [jamesn]
- zakim, next item
- 17:42:25 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "Working Group transition update" taken up [from MichaelC]
- 17:43:00 [jamesn]
- MC: reminders. ARIA group exists. IEs can now join. nearly everyone here as member org has joined or is talking
- 17:43:18 [jamesn]
- PF mailing list will be for rest of this month. will be migrating tracker issues
- 17:43:25 [jamesn]
- there will be a tracker cutoff too
- 17:43:58 [jamesn]
- PF tracker needs to split issues and actions between apa and aria
- 17:44:12 [jamesn]
- if issues appear in new tracker b4 migration then may make it harder
- 17:44:22 [jamesn]
- try to avoid using them until january
- 17:44:29 [MichaelC]
- present+ Bryan
- 17:44:49 [jamesn]
- zakim, next item
- 17:44:49 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "Mailing list subscription policy update" taken up [from MichaelC]
- 17:45:11 [MichaelC]
- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2015Dec/0000.html
- 17:45:27 [jamesn]
- was a CFC on the aria and PF lists to change the policy for the public-aria list
- 17:45:47 [bgaraventa1979]
- bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria
- 17:45:51 [jamesn]
- already the case that members can post but if they want to subscribe they can do so and agree to the same process requirements that others accept
- 17:46:08 [bgaraventa1979]
- present+ Bryan_Garaventa
- 17:46:11 [jamesn]
- there was dicsussion on the PF list that looked like it was diverging from consensus
- 17:46:22 [jamesn]
- looks like that has moved so that we now have consensus
- 17:46:40 [jamesn]
- want to make it official so the chair needs to ratify the consensus on list
- 17:46:55 [jamesn]
- zakim, next item
- 17:46:55 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "aria-primaryaction discussion" taken up [from jamesn]
- 17:47:18 [MichaelC]
- scribe: MichaelC
- 17:47:46 [MichaelC]
- JN: discussion on list, implementers seem to not support
- 17:47:51 [MichaelC]
- want it to work differently
- 17:47:51 [jongund]
- jongund has joined #aria
- 17:48:04 [MichaelC]
- my concern is the proposed changes move the difficulty to frameworks and authors
- 17:48:10 [MichaelC]
- rather than have the browser address
- 17:48:57 [MichaelC]
- js: primary button on @@
- 17:49:08 [MichaelC]
- jn: problem is it just points to @@
- 17:49:19 [MichaelC]
- js: AXAPI might have problem
- 17:49:25 [MichaelC]
- because have to search up the tree to find the button
- 17:49:31 [MichaelC]
- the others might not have a problem
- 17:49:35 [MichaelC]
- jn: worried this is hard for authros
- 17:49:45 [MichaelC]
- s/authros/authors/
- 17:50:00 [MichaelC]
- js: I´m ok either way
- 17:50:02 [clown]
- clown has left #aria
- 17:50:05 [MichaelC]
- others might object to non idref version
- 17:50:11 [clown]
- clown has joined #aria
- 17:50:11 [MichaelC]
- mb: agree shouldn´t be idref
- 17:50:16 [MichaelC]
- developers don´t want to bother with idrefs
- 17:50:25 [MichaelC]
- eventually this should be in browser
- 17:50:30 [MichaelC]
- so shouldn´t bother developers now
- 17:50:47 [MichaelC]
- jn: discussion moves too quickly
- 17:51:15 [MichaelC]
- mk: some value for dialogs only
- 17:51:23 [MichaelC]
- not sure as important for other contexts
- 17:51:54 [MichaelC]
- jn: wizard isn´t always in a dialog
- 17:51:59 [MichaelC]
- js: they don´t have roles...
- 17:52:19 [MichaelC]
- mk: unsure of value of that for screen reader users anyway
- 17:52:39 [MichaelC]
- I don´t trust default button, so I look around
- 17:52:49 [MichaelC]
- jn: because it doesn´t tell you, but if it did you might trust it
- 17:53:04 [MichaelC]
- present+ Jon
- 17:53:36 [MichaelC]
- mk: even so, not as high value for me
- 17:54:06 [MichaelC]
- jn: mostly agree
- 17:54:09 [MichaelC]
- it´s just a button attribute
- 17:54:21 [MichaelC]
- mk: could be boolean on button, forget about context
- 17:54:33 [MichaelC]
- then would need to drop language about author error
- 17:54:57 [joanie]
- q+ To say the value of the context in the case of the web is limiting the tree dive. That said, I don't see it as must-have.
- 17:55:12 [MichaelC]
- mc: there was some confusion, would a rephrasing on list help?
- 17:55:26 [MichaelC]
- mk: need clearer statement of goals for screen readers
- 17:55:51 [MichaelC]
- js: AX has a dialog, with a default button
- 17:56:06 [MichaelC]
- though the button itself doesn´t have anything to make it the default
- 17:56:24 [MichaelC]
- if you put aria-default on the button, the browser has to figure out what the context is that it´s the default for
- 17:56:46 [MichaelC]
- that´s a pattern they have opposed elsewhere, for aria-current
- 17:57:16 [joanie]
- q-
- 17:57:58 [MichaelC]
- mc: so now there are two things with similar problems
- 17:58:20 [MichaelC]
- js: difference is that with default button you need more information about what´s gonna get dismissed
- 17:58:44 [MichaelC]
- mk: @@
- 17:59:26 [MichaelC]
- mc: for aria-current, we considered aria-currentfor, but rejected it
- 17:59:50 [MichaelC]
- mk: is there a way of not having to go up the tree?
- 18:01:51 [MichaelC]
- just say we care about the button, is a default, less important to know what it´s for
- 18:02:24 [MichaelC]
- jn: sighted user doesn´t know, they infer
- 18:02:37 [MichaelC]
- mc: they infer pretty strongly
- 18:03:08 [MichaelC]
- jd: for end user, context isn´t that important
- 18:03:32 [MichaelC]
- but for AT, on some platforms, there´s a ¨tell me the default button¨ command
- 18:03:49 [MichaelC]
- having to go up the hierarchy isn´t so bad
- 18:03:58 [MichaelC]
- but having to go *down* the hierarchy is much more expensive
- 18:04:44 [MichaelC]
- user knows they´re in a dialog etc.
- 18:04:51 [MichaelC]
- but the application has a much wider context
- 18:05:01 [jamesn]
- q+
- 18:05:13 [MichaelC]
- mb: there are only so many things the default button could be in
- 18:05:36 [MichaelC]
- q+
- 18:05:53 [MichaelC]
- ack j
- 18:06:04 [MichaelC]
- jn: maybe this can be solved in ARIA 2.0 with selectors
- 18:06:23 [MichaelC]
- q+ to say take advantage of API
- 18:06:37 [MichaelC]
- js: author has to know what to select
- 18:06:40 [MichaelC]
- jn: they will know
- 18:06:42 [joanie]
- q+ To say that Matt's suggestion works *if* we say the primary button MUST be in the context of a dialog
- 18:06:49 [MichaelC]
- ack me
- 18:06:49 [Zakim]
- MichaelC, you wanted to say take advantage of API
- 18:08:16 [MichaelC]
- mc: even if we´re not as concerned about what AXAPI offers, is nice to support the greater richness where available
- 18:08:17 [MichaelC]
- ack j
- 18:08:17 [Zakim]
- joanie, you wanted to say that Matt's suggestion works *if* we say the primary button MUST be in the context of a dialog
- 18:08:28 [MichaelC]
- jd: Matt's suggestion works *if* we say the primary button MUST be in the context of a dialog
- 18:08:37 [jamesn]
- q+ to say wizards dont have role=dialog and cannot
- 18:08:58 [MichaelC]
- ack j
- 18:08:58 [Zakim]
- jamesn, you wanted to say wizards dont have role=dialog and cannot
- 18:09:09 [MichaelC]
- jn: can´t have wizards have role=dialog
- 18:09:25 [MichaelC]
- they have differences
- 18:09:32 [MichaelC]
- you can leave them etc.
- 18:10:35 [joanie]
- +1 to getting it right in 2.0
- 18:11:24 [MichaelC]
- mc: to summarize, sounds like support for doing well in ARIA 2.0 rather than badly in ARIA 1.1
- 18:11:30 [MichaelC]
- so adjust issues accordingly
- 18:13:00 [MichaelC]
- and inform the thread of this
- 18:13:18 [jamesn]
- zakim, next item
- 18:13:18 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "Test planning (major topic for this call)" taken up [from MichaelC]
- 18:13:26 [MichaelC]
- scribe: jamesn
- 18:14:55 [jamesn]
- MC: Rich wanted in particular for MC to lead this discussion.
- 18:15:03 [jamesn]
- due to role in aria test harness
- 18:15:15 [jamesn]
- has been discussion in various other groups.
- 18:15:43 [MichaelC]
- -> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/CR-pub/aria/aria.html#sotd Draft exit criteria
- 18:16:27 [jamesn]
- for MUSTs in 1.0 needed a testable statement
- 18:16:35 [jamesn]
- for most part was role, states and properties
- 18:16:57 [jamesn]
- what we care about is that is makes its way to the API so we depended on the UAIG - now the core and other mappings
- 18:17:05 [jamesn]
- says for the feature - how it should look in the apis
- 18:17:17 [jamesn]
- sometimes simple, sometimes more complex
- 18:17:39 [Stefan]
- Stefan has joined #aria
- 18:17:47 [jamesn]
- so for ARIA testing means we need to test the mapping guides - then set some sontraints that need to find 2 implelmentations of each feature
- 18:18:08 [jamesn]
- for the mappings there may only be 1 implementation of a mapping - sometimes there is only 1 mapping for an API
- 18:18:16 [jamesn]
- yes - fred also test that
- 18:18:43 [jamesn]
- so find 2 instances of some mapping. so if find 1 on windows and 1 on mac then these are the 2 mappings
- 18:18:57 [jamesn]
- if cant find 2 on 2 platforms then look for 2 browsers on the same platform
- 18:19:11 [jamesn]
- that is a less preferred approach but did that for about 20 of the tests
- 18:19:39 [jamesn]
- so for a given role what you need is a testable statement which says here is a test of this role and says what you see in the AAPI
- 18:19:46 [MichaelC]
- present+ Stefan
- 18:20:07 [jamesn]
- and then need to test it. created minimal html files which had just enough to be valid
- 18:20:20 [jamesn]
- then the aria feature, put an id of test on it so could find easily
- 18:20:23 [jamesn]
- then look for the mapping
- 18:20:36 [jamesn]
- for 1.0 was entirely manual. that is where the test harmess comes in
- 18:21:00 [jamesn]
- the test harness gives the statement, the result and the file. would open, then use your inspector to look for the result
- 18:21:21 [jamesn]
- we have talked about automating. we believe the majority are automateable, but dont have a platofrm for it
- 18:21:46 [jamesn]
- we do know the different vendors have platforms but hey are not public. there are some tools that can be scripted
- 18:22:02 [jamesn]
- Joanie has done some experimentation with automation. she is hopeful
- 18:22:21 [jamesn]
- Q - how much do we invest in the manual testing and how much do we invest in the automation
- 18:22:28 [jamesn]
- want to come back to that too
- 18:23:28 [jamesn]
- mostly either roles states and properties table or MUST statements - acc name is part of that
- 18:23:32 [fesch]
- q+
- 18:24:10 [jamesn]
- "WAI-ARIA 1.1 builds upon WAI-ARIA 1.0, which met its implementation requirements in February 2014. Only features that are new or changed in WAI-ARIA 1.1 need be tested, as the WAI-ARIA 1.0 implementation report provides implementatibility and interoperability evidence for the remaining features. Features that will be tested for WAI-ARIA 1.1 include:"
- 18:24:38 [jamesn]
- Parts of the name computation algorithm may need to be tested but maybe not all of it
- 18:25:05 [jamesn]
- for if statements sometimes need a test file to test every one of them. also sometimes some negative test cases
- 18:25:19 [jamesn]
- if A+B then sometimes need failures
- 18:25:43 [jamesn]
- for key cases where a failure would represent an incorrect implementation then may need some failures too
- 18:25:47 [jamesn]
- q?
- 18:26:05 [jamesn]
- FE: how do you test something that is not supposed to be in the tree
- 18:26:18 [jamesn]
- MC: you say the a11y tree does not have such and such
- 18:26:41 [jamesn]
- FE: in SVG have xyz does not get into the tree
- 18:27:05 [jamesn]
- MC: id they element with id test should not show in the tree then the expected result is that id test doesn't appear
- 18:27:51 [jamesn]
- would suggest putting something that should not appear in the tree with a certain idref
- 18:27:55 [jamesn]
- FE: is there an automarted way?
- 18:28:00 [mck]
- q+
- 18:28:04 [jamesn]
- MC: I would think it could be automateable
- 18:28:07 [MichaelC]
- ack f
- 18:28:08 [MichaelC]
- ack m
- 18:28:14 [jamesn]
- MK: I missed which doc
- 18:28:24 [jamesn]
- MC: https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/CR-pub/aria/aria.html#sotd
- 18:28:53 [mck]
- ack me
- 18:29:04 [jamesn]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 18:29:04 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/10-aria-minutes.html jamesn
- 18:29:18 [cyns]
- q+
- 18:29:18 [jamesn]
- topic: automation
- 18:29:44 [jamesn]
- JD: in terms of automating have talked in terms of webdriver and DOM. not going to happen.
- 18:29:55 [jamesn]
- have a POC hackaround by which i can run my tests
- 18:30:07 [jamesn]
- as an aside - the way the hack works is that it does a tree dive
- 18:31:05 [MichaelC]
- NVDA has a python-based tool to poke at IA2
- 18:31:28 [MichaelC]
- I might be able to hack that to test IA12
- 18:31:35 [MichaelC]
- s/IA12/IA2/
- 18:31:53 [MichaelC]
- ack c
- 18:32:33 [jamesn]
- CS: so we are going to be automating our own implementation
- 18:32:47 [jamesn]
- I can share the results - but not certain about the code
- 18:33:21 [joanie]
- q+ to ask the obvious, if it's UI *Automation*, there is surely public/open code we could use to create our own testing on top of the MS testing.
- 18:33:23 [jamesn]
- if you can tell me what format can suck data in. In the ARIA 1.0 test harness could perhaps take data from elsewhere and put it into the harness
- 18:33:38 [jamesn]
- everything we are testing - i think the testable statements are the requirements
- 18:33:43 [jamesn]
- q+
- 18:34:06 [jamesn]
- MC: if we had a way of mapping tests to statements couold suck in the results
- 18:34:16 [jamesn]
- we can work on our preferred format
- 18:34:32 [jamesn]
- would you be using our test files or are you doing your own set
- 18:34:33 [fesch]
- q+ for asking about test file templates
- 18:34:49 [jamesn]
- CS: i suspect some of both
- 18:35:03 [jamesn]
- i suspect we will be doing a superset
- 18:35:18 [jamesn]
- MC: if your test files are different there is a potentially invalid situation
- 18:35:31 [jamesn]
- MC: my preference would be to use the same tests
- 18:35:54 [jamesn]
- MC: may mean among other things that joanie may want to look at other platforms than ui automation
- 18:36:20 [jamesn]
- in 1.0 decided needed to be HTML4 - likley need HTML5 and SVG files for 1.1
- 18:36:32 [jamesn]
- went to great pains than 1.1 tests were valid html4
- 18:36:59 [jamesn]
- still do need them to be well formed - minimize parsing artifacts. and that includes inline svg if needed
- 18:37:04 [MichaelC]
- ack next
- 18:37:05 [Zakim]
- joanie, you wanted to ask the obvious, if it's UI *Automation*, there is surely public/open code we could use to create our own testing on top of the MS testing.
- 18:37:38 [jamesn]
- JD: could use for edge perhaps
- 18:37:42 [jamesn]
- CS: yes that is true
- 18:37:59 [jamesn]
- CS: wasnt designed for web content
- 18:38:06 [jamesn]
- we will probably do that work
- 18:38:34 [jamesn]
- JD: if there is public stuff there i could use to hack on your platform using open stuff
- 18:38:52 [jamesn]
- JD: the ID attribute - on most platforms that is the case
- 18:39:05 [jamesn]
- CS: it is exposed if there is an implicit id on the platform
- 18:39:27 [MichaelC]
- ack next
- 18:40:04 [MichaelC]
- jn: in firefox you could build an extension that looks at the AAPI
- 18:40:09 [MichaelC]
- and should work on all its platforms
- 18:40:14 [MichaelC]
- and script that with selenium
- 18:40:38 [MichaelC]
- jd: we want to test what the AT sees
- 18:40:50 [MichaelC]
- not what the browser says it´s sending to the AAPI
- 18:41:11 [MichaelC]
- jn: it´s got an interface to the COM tree to show exactly what´s winding up in the AAPI
- 18:41:34 [MichaelC]
- jd: it´s talking to its own AAPI layer
- 18:41:43 [MichaelC]
- js: don´t know which it does
- 18:42:00 [MichaelC]
- jn: if I ask the role, it reports something different on different platforms
- 18:42:19 [MichaelC]
- jd: it says what it thinks it´s exposing, which varies by platform
- 18:43:18 [MichaelC]
- mc: should explore this separately...
- 18:43:25 [clown]
- s/an interface to the COM tree/an interface to the XPCOM information/
- 18:43:54 [MichaelC]
- jg: if you have sample extension, we could explore making something work
- 18:44:29 [MichaelC]
- jn: looks like it comes from accessibility retrieval interface
- 18:44:36 [MichaelC]
- ack next
- 18:44:37 [Zakim]
- fesch, you wanted to discuss asking about test file templates
- 18:44:51 [jamesn]
- FE: couple of questions about the template
- 18:45:03 [jamesn]
- can it be svg files or can it be html with svg inline
- 18:45:21 [jamesn]
- want to make sure that we have consistent test files which could introduce artifcats
- 18:45:41 [jamesn]
- s/want to make sure/MC: want to make sure/
- 18:45:51 [jamesn]
- MC: best to pick 1 approach or another
- 18:46:01 [clown]
- q+ to ask if a difference is expected between svg file and svg-in-html file?
- 18:46:05 [jamesn]
- MC: dont want to go into too much detail about structure of the test files
- 18:46:12 [MichaelC]
- -> https://github.com/w3c/aria/tree/master/testfiles/1.0 ARIA 1.0 test files
- 18:46:18 [jamesn]
- the test files for 1.0 are in above
- 18:46:29 [jamesn]
- grouped into folders as 800 or so
- 18:46:36 [jamesn]
- lots are auto generated
- 18:46:59 [jamesn]
- testing a label when there is a menu role
- 18:47:44 [jamesn]
- the label should come out based on the combo box
- 18:47:52 [jamesn]
- in the test harness should see as correct
- 18:48:05 [jamesn]
- q+
- 18:48:15 [jamesn]
- would suggest the same with the svg
- 18:49:03 [jamesn]
- JN: shouldn't there be something in the file for what the result should be?
- 18:49:13 [jamesn]
- MK: think it should all be in 1 file
- 18:49:25 [jamesn]
- MC: there are 2 reasons they are not in the file
- 18:49:40 [jamesn]
- even in comments could perhaps influence the results - could make it hard to debug
- 18:49:58 [jamesn]
- another reason is that there are 5 or 6 different results according to the platform
- 18:50:11 [jamesn]
- JD proposal does have them in the test file - we may be exploring that
- 18:50:32 [jamesn]
- i am inclined to say we might want versions without and then with results in them for the automation tool
- 18:50:34 [jamesn]
- ack me
- 18:50:57 [jamesn]
- MK: certainly wouldn't hurt to have the textual description of the result in the file
- 18:51:11 [jamesn]
- clown: in some cases use the same test file for different cases
- 18:51:22 [jamesn]
- MK: would rather duplicate the file
- 18:51:27 [jamesn]
- MC: link to test harness
- 18:53:41 [jamesn]
- MC: the test harness where there is a ref to what are testing
- 18:53:52 [jamesn]
- MC: there is a single expected result on all platforms
- 18:54:02 [jamesn]
- sometimes different for different platforms
- 18:54:30 [jamesn]
- i think probably need to organize a training on the test harness - if havent used it before then lets do a training
- 18:54:40 [jamesn]
- should schedule supplementary training
- 18:56:34 [jamesn]
- MC: will do a poll will send to aria mailing list i think
- 18:57:09 [jamesn]
- will need to test dpub roles and graphics roles too
- 18:57:29 [jamesn]
- i think so - will discuss in the svg a11y group
- 18:57:43 [jamesn]
- s/i think so/FE: i think so/
- 18:58:13 [jamesn]
- MC: i know the a11y name computation has some host language stuff. some you might rely on existsing stuff - but others are svg specific
- 18:58:30 [jamesn]
- dont feel that have got enough on testing to add action items for over the holidays
- 18:58:45 [jamesn]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 18:58:45 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/10-aria-minutes.html jamesn
- 18:59:05 [jamesn]
- FE: we plan on using these files and this format of test harness and test files
- 18:59:32 [jamesn]
- MC: so want test statements and expected results. if we dont build the test cases etc we wont be wasting time
- 18:59:44 [jamesn]
- when to use the exact test harness is an open question
- 18:59:58 [jamesn]
- no one loves the harness but it has the advantage that it exists ;)
- 19:00:10 [jamesn]
- will be using for reporting
- 19:00:16 [MichaelC]
- -> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testreport?testsuite_id=1 ARIA 1.0 test report
- 19:00:38 [jamesn]
- will be a group for svg and others for 1.1
- 19:00:40 [jamesn]
- etc.
- 19:00:55 [jamesn]
- if import tests from other locations need the report
- 19:01:20 [clown]
- ack me
- 19:01:20 [Zakim]
- clown, you wanted to ask if a difference is expected between svg file and svg-in-html file?
- 19:01:57 [MichaelC]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 19:01:57 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/10-aria-minutes.html MichaelC
- 20:24:43 [clown]
- clown has joined #aria
- 20:50:47 [MichaelC]
- rrsagent, bye
- 20:50:47 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items
- 20:50:47 [MichaelC]
- zakim, bye
- 20:50:47 [Zakim]
- leaving. As of this point the attendees have been Joanmarie_Diggs, MichaelC, Janina, Suman, Fred, Cynthia, Michiel, JamesNurthen, matt_king, Joseph, Joseph_Scheuhammer, Bryan,
- 20:50:47 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #aria