IRC log of aria on 2016-07-07
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 16:28:00 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #aria
- 16:28:00 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/07-aria-irc
- 16:28:02 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs world
- 16:28:02 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #aria
- 16:28:04 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be
- 16:28:04 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
- 16:28:05 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference
- 16:28:05 [trackbot]
- Date: 07 July 2016
- 16:28:27 [MichaelC]
- present+ Rich, Jemma, MichaelC
- 16:29:35 [fesch]
- fesch has joined #aria
- 16:29:47 [JemmaKu]
- JemmaKu has joined #aria
- 16:30:17 [joanie]
- present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
- 16:30:26 [janina]
- present+ Janina
- 16:30:55 [jamesn]
- jamesn has joined #aria
- 16:31:11 [JemmaKu]
- present+ JaeunJemma_Ku
- 16:33:05 [LJWatson]
- LJWatson has joined #aria
- 16:33:18 [LJWatson]
- present+ LJWatson
- 16:33:21 [Stefan]
- Stefan has joined #aria
- 16:34:01 [mck]
- mck has joined #aria
- 16:34:19 [MichaelC]
- scribe: MichaelC
- 16:34:37 [MichaelC]
- agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jul/0032.html
- 16:34:39 [MichaelC]
- chair: Rich
- 16:34:53 [MichaelC]
- topic: CfC Results
- 16:34:57 [clown]
- clown has joined #aria
- 16:35:00 [MichaelC]
- - Move Password Role to ARIA 2.0 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016Jun/0068.html
- 16:35:00 [MichaelC]
- - Approve changes to the separator role https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016Jun/0069.html
- 16:35:00 [MichaelC]
- - Approve changes to the spin button role https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria-admin/2016Jun/0074.html
- 16:35:07 [MichaelC]
- rs: no objections, these can go forward
- 16:35:21 [MichaelC]
- topic: Current Survey Results: aria-roledescription, role=static/text
- 16:35:29 [MichaelC]
- https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/83726/2016-07-07_roledescription/results
- 16:35:41 [MichaelC]
- rs: no clear consensus
- 16:35:57 [Rich]
- https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/83726/2016-07-07_roledescription/results
- 16:35:57 [clown]
- present+ Joseph_Scheuhammer
- 16:36:20 [MichaelC]
- opinions are all over the map
- 16:36:37 [MichaelC]
- Cyns doesn´t want to deal with text / static in 1.1
- 16:37:00 [MichaelC]
- Edge just finished implementing text pattern, which is no small task
- 16:37:07 [MichaelC]
- so they may not want to open up rightnow
- 16:37:23 [MichaelC]
- JamesC thinks roledescription is doable but a hack
- 16:37:27 [MichaelC]
- which everyone agrees with I think
- 16:37:38 [MichaelC]
- he´d prefer a role, but willing to move to ARIA 2 if we have the hack for now
- 16:37:51 [MichaelC]
- SteveF and JamesN wanted this
- 16:38:01 [MichaelC]
- (the role)
- 16:38:11 [MichaelC]
- role=text implemented in Webkit
- 16:38:24 [MichaelC]
- I don´t want misuse of roledescription
- 16:38:45 [MichaelC]
- use cases for it were primarily education industry
- 16:39:09 [MichaelC]
- so you could change a functional listbox to e.g., slices of pizza
- 16:39:11 [jongund]
- jongund has joined #aria
- 16:39:27 [MichaelC]
- just a way of exposing author presentation intent
- 16:39:28 [Stefan]
- +q
- 16:39:39 [MichaelC]
- so APG would need to speak about misuse
- 16:39:41 [MichaelC]
- ack s
- 16:39:42 [jamesn]
- q+
- 16:40:05 [MichaelC]
- ss: there are many specialized uses of options and listitems
- 16:40:29 [jongund]
- present+ jongund
- 16:40:34 [MichaelC]
- supplemental role string saying look at documentation very helpful
- 16:40:35 [Rich]
- q?
- 16:40:38 [MichaelC]
- ack j
- 16:40:41 [Rich]
- ack jamesn
- 16:40:54 [MichaelC]
- jn: charts and graphs also benefit from this
- 16:40:55 [MichaelC]
- q+
- 16:41:04 [LJWatson]
- q+
- 16:41:05 [bgaraventa1979]
- bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria
- 16:41:09 [MichaelC]
- ack me
- 16:41:18 [mck]
- q+
- 16:41:27 [bgaraventa1979]
- present+ Bryan_Garaventa
- 16:41:30 [fesch]
- q+ to say - I never used roledescription in charts
- 16:41:39 [mck]
- present+ matt_king
- 16:41:49 [MichaelC]
- mc: these are use cases for roledescription, right? would null roledescription impair those?
- 16:41:54 [MichaelC]
- rs: no
- 16:41:58 [MichaelC]
- we just don´t want people abusing it
- 16:41:59 [MichaelC]
- ack l
- 16:42:00 [Stefan]
- q+
- 16:42:02 [Rich]
- ack ljwatson
- 16:42:09 [MichaelC]
- lw: use cases focus on interactive component
- 16:42:20 [MichaelC]
- yet spec specifically advises against that
- 16:42:28 [MichaelC]
- yet @@ lost interaction
- 16:42:51 [MichaelC]
- jd: initially expected stronger language
- 16:43:09 [mck]
- q?
- 16:43:11 [MichaelC]
- but would have made such uses author error
- 16:43:20 [MichaelC]
- so we went to ¨discourage¨
- 16:43:23 [MichaelC]
- because of user interaction implication
- 16:43:28 [MichaelC]
- *if people really know what they´re doing*
- 16:43:39 [MichaelC]
- lw: that´s clearer, but it´s still terrifying
- 16:44:09 [MichaelC]
- as BG said, what about reverse where author implies nonexistent interactivity?
- 16:44:16 [mck]
- q?
- 16:44:18 [MichaelC]
- jn: more likely than misuse of button?
- 16:44:33 [MichaelC]
- lw: that´s a case in point that they´ll do stuff like that
- 16:44:39 [MichaelC]
- jn: authors can break ARIA today
- 16:44:45 [MichaelC]
- lw: still don´t want to give them another way
- 16:44:58 [MichaelC]
- rs: clearly authoring practices needed
- 16:44:59 [LJWatson]
- ack me
- 16:45:00 [Rich]
- ack mck
- 16:46:00 [MichaelC]
- mk: the third option I proposed focuses on the use cases originally proposed for roledescription
- 16:46:06 [clown]
- third option: https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action2092option3/aria/aria.html#aria-roledescription
- 16:46:08 [MichaelC]
- think suppressing role is unneccesasry and high risk
- 16:46:13 [bgaraventa1979]
- +q
- 16:46:23 [MichaelC]
- so I think option 3 is a good compromise
- 16:46:33 [MichaelC]
- ack next
- 16:46:34 [Zakim]
- fesch, you wanted to say - I never used roledescription in charts
- 16:46:40 [mck]
- ack me
- 16:46:47 [MichaelC]
- fe: I don´t like hacks
- 16:46:54 [MichaelC]
- 10 people in the universe will use it well
- 16:47:02 [MichaelC]
- yet it will live forever because can´t remove a hack
- 16:47:08 [LJWatson]
- +1 to Fred
- 16:47:24 [MichaelC]
- not sure pie chart is a good example; SVG is another language and will develop a separate taxonomy for chart a11y
- 16:47:38 [MichaelC]
- don´t want a HTML hack to intrude on that
- 16:47:42 [Rich]
- q?
- 16:47:49 [MichaelC]
- ack s
- 16:48:09 [MichaelC]
- ss: there are good examples of beneifts of roledescription
- 16:48:40 [MichaelC]
- maybe should consider restricting roles it can be used on
- 16:48:50 [MichaelC]
- with some roles, there could be conflicts if using it
- 16:49:02 [MichaelC]
- just saying ¨be careful¨ may not be enough
- 16:49:08 [MichaelC]
- ack b
- 16:49:08 [LJWatson]
- q+ to suggest roledescription supplements the role announcement, then if isn't present defaults back only to role announcement.
- 16:49:10 [Rich]
- q?
- 16:49:21 [mck]
- +1 to Stefan's statement that we need to tighten up roledesc text in the spec and possibly limit use.
- 16:49:22 [MichaelC]
- bg: my concerns increase
- 16:49:34 [MichaelC]
- sounds like this could alter semantics even of implict roles
- 16:49:42 [MichaelC]
- could easily start to break stuff
- 16:49:45 [Rich]
- q+
- 16:49:53 [MichaelC]
- AT users really rely on roles not being broken
- 16:50:03 [MichaelC]
- e.g., if headings get broken, can´t navigate by heading
- 16:50:20 [MichaelC]
- jd: that wouldn´t happen
- 16:50:38 [MichaelC]
- mk: there´s an AT should that roledescription shouldn´t affect any behavior besides speaking role name
- 16:50:39 [Rich]
- q?
- 16:50:51 [jamesn]
- q+
- 16:50:57 [joanie]
- q+ To say that roledescription is not parsable so option 3 has no impact
- 16:51:08 [MichaelC]
- bg: that would be hidden functionality
- 16:51:17 [MichaelC]
- because you wouldn´t know what are the headings that you can navigate
- 16:51:23 [MichaelC]
- mk: option 3 has wording to address that
- 16:51:36 [MichaelC]
- should only extend description of role
- 16:51:47 [MichaelC]
- can put guidance in APG
- 16:51:53 [MichaelC]
- not claiming this solves entire problem
- 16:52:31 [MichaelC]
- bg: heard, but for the record think roledescription is dangerous
- 16:52:53 [MichaelC]
- e.g., consider the pizza slices, how does user know they can navigate as a list box?
- 16:52:55 [MichaelC]
- ack l
- 16:52:55 [Zakim]
- LJWatson, you wanted to suggest roledescription supplements the role announcement, then if isn't present defaults back only to role announcement.
- 16:52:59 [MichaelC]
- lw: +1
- 16:53:01 [Rich]
- ack LJWatson
- 16:53:23 [MichaelC]
- what if roledescription supplemented rather than replaced?
- 16:53:27 [Stefan]
- q+
- 16:53:34 [MichaelC]
- rs: +1
- 16:53:50 [MichaelC]
- q+ to say supplement means can´t have meaningful null value, which is what started all this
- 16:54:16 [MichaelC]
- bg: some things could be weird
- 16:54:28 [MichaelC]
- lw: but if don´t do, users won´t know how to interact
- 16:54:41 [MichaelC]
- jn: author needs to describe the interaction pattern
- 16:54:50 [MichaelC]
- ss: the thing must be known to user
- 16:54:51 [LJWatson]
- ack me
- 16:54:58 [joanie]
- q-
- 16:54:58 [MichaelC]
- so documentation
- 16:55:17 [MichaelC]
- mk: saw example of that
- 16:55:32 [MichaelC]
- but you could also put roledescription on span
- 16:55:38 [MichaelC]
- jn: then have to code a lot
- 16:55:53 [MichaelC]
- mk: expect that would be the base use for this
- 16:56:09 [MichaelC]
- still push towards option 3 because of the guidance
- 16:56:23 [MichaelC]
- jn: option 3 seems not to address null roledescription
- 16:56:39 [MichaelC]
- mk: it says null = absent
- 16:57:21 [MichaelC]
- jn: really we´re looking at options 1 and 2; could add language to either from option 3
- 16:57:39 [MichaelC]
- mk: really think it´s between 2 and 3, not 1 and 2
- 16:57:56 [MichaelC]
- though wording for option 2 hard
- 16:57:57 [MichaelC]
- ack r
- 16:58:05 [jamesn]
- q-
- 16:58:17 [MichaelC]
- rs: this started as addressing use case for text / static role
- 16:58:36 [MichaelC]
- certainly issues if null roledescription could in theory wipe everything out
- 16:58:45 [MichaelC]
- what if we just do it for img role?
- 16:59:18 [MichaelC]
- recommend suppress role on null roledescription in just that case, but otherwise take matt´s preference
- 16:59:18 [MichaelC]
- q-
- 16:59:41 [mck]
- -1 to allowing null on image; unnecessary.
- 16:59:54 [jamesn]
- +1 to allowing "" on img
- 16:59:55 [clown]
- q+ is SVG considered an image on some cases?
- 17:00:00 [LJWatson]
- -1 would strongly want to know when an image was an image, even when it contains only text.
- 17:00:16 [MichaelC]
- mk: think this is a way to control screen reader verbosity, which seems not domain of aria
- 17:00:18 [clown]
- q+ to ask if SVG is considered an image on some cases?
- 17:00:26 [MichielBijl]
- -1, images that only have text fail WCAG.
- 17:00:59 [MichaelC]
- don´t think needed
- 17:01:08 [MichaelC]
- jn: gave use case last week
- 17:01:37 [MichaelC]
- with current ARIA, you lose the decimal that´s in the visual version
- 17:01:44 [MichaelC]
- so needed static role with a label
- 17:01:46 [fesch]
- @clown in all other ways to bring SVG in a browser (as a file, inline, iframe, embed...) you get children in the DOM
- 17:01:53 [Rich]
- q?
- 17:02:04 [MichaelC]
- mk: could do without null roledescription
- 17:02:34 [MichaelC]
- lw: ??
- 17:02:38 [fesch]
- @clown it is easy to do <img alt='' so I don't see how it solves anything
- 17:02:40 [MichaelC]
- jn: it´s not an image, it´s text
- 17:02:57 [MichaelC]
- some of characters missing
- 17:03:01 [MichaelC]
- need to override text presentation
- 17:03:07 [clown]
- ack me
- 17:03:07 [Zakim]
- clown, you wanted to ask if SVG is considered an image on some cases?
- 17:03:08 [MichaelC]
- lw: use aria-label
- 17:03:36 [MichaelC]
- lw: need to have a role to use label
- 17:03:58 [MichaelC]
- mk: could use roledescription with some other role e.g., ¨price¨
- 17:04:09 [MichaelC]
- in that example, decimal is the only thing missing
- 17:04:12 [MichaelC]
- jn: it´s important
- 17:04:23 [MichaelC]
- I didn´t write this, I found it on the web on a major site
- 17:04:35 [MichaelC]
- mk: why hack ARIA when there are other approaches?
- 17:04:56 [MichaelC]
- lw: @@
- 17:05:09 [MichaelC]
- mk: is a high risk hack worth it
- 17:05:19 [MichaelC]
- jn: I also dislike null roledescription
- 17:05:25 [MichaelC]
- really want text / static role
- 17:05:33 [MichaelC]
- but feel forced into this direction
- 17:05:39 [MichaelC]
- rs: we already have text / static written up
- 17:05:47 [MichaelC]
- but MC won´t implement right now
- 17:05:55 [MichaelC]
- s/MC/MS/
- 17:06:08 [MichaelC]
- looking for an interim approach
- 17:06:34 [MichaelC]
- jn: suppressing @@
- 17:06:45 [MichaelC]
- mk: can solve other ways
- 17:06:51 [MichaelC]
- jn: can always find another way
- 17:07:02 [MichaelC]
- every role in ARIA is a way of working around something
- 17:07:26 [MichaelC]
- mk: e.g., tree can´t be done
- 17:07:31 [MichaelC]
- jn: but still most things
- 17:08:03 [MichaelC]
- mk: still not clear why one more way needed?
- 17:08:12 [MichaelC]
- jn: many other places this would be useful
- 17:08:15 [Rich]
- q?
- 17:08:22 [Rich]
- ack Stefan
- 17:08:25 [MichaelC]
- don´t have examples right now, probably worked around in suboptimal ways
- 17:08:26 [MichaelC]
- ss:
- 17:08:45 [MichaelC]
- I think AT should always expose original role
- 17:08:52 [MichaelC]
- that you could access via special function
- 17:09:07 [MichaelC]
- mappings should not disable that
- 17:10:20 [MichaelC]
- rs: on some APIs the original role is still available
- 17:10:25 [MichaelC]
- not sure if all
- 17:10:34 [MichaelC]
- agree original role shouldn´t be overwritten
- 17:10:57 [MichaelC]
- think that´s generally agreed in AT vendor community
- 17:11:04 [MichaelC]
- maybe need to state that in APG
- 17:11:28 [MichaelC]
- for now, will the hack work, or do we just provide original role
- 17:11:29 [JF]
- JF has joined #aria
- 17:11:35 [MichaelC]
- right now, several say they have an issue
- 17:12:02 [MichaelC]
- I´m ok either way, just want to meet the issue
- 17:12:06 [MichaelC]
- right now, there is not consensus
- 17:12:16 [MichaelC]
- note if we don´t agree, then nothing happen
- 17:12:33 [MichaelC]
- mk: set roledescription to the text label you want
- 17:12:52 [MichaelC]
- that´s seamless and doesn´t require null
- 17:12:58 [bgaraventa1979]
- I'm okay if a null value is only used on an image for this purpose, just not as a global attribute
- 17:13:03 [MichaelC]
- so don´t need aria-label then
- 17:13:07 [jamesn]
- that is an even more cheesy hack
- 17:13:10 [joanie]
- q+ To say that is a horrible hack
- 17:13:52 [mck]
- <img roledescription="hi">
- 17:14:20 [LJWatson]
- Why not use an alt to do the same thing?
- 17:14:23 [MichaelC]
- js: would there be alt on this example?
- 17:14:27 [MichaelC]
- mk: no
- 17:14:36 [MichaelC]
- put alt=¨¨
- 17:14:46 [MichaelC]
- js: that indicates it´s presentational
- 17:14:57 [jamesn]
- <div class="plan_cost" role="img" aria-roledescription="US$19.99/mo"><span class="superscript">US$</span>19<span class="superscript cents">99</span><span class="per_month">/mo</span></div>
- 17:14:58 [MichaelC]
- lw: why suppress image?
- 17:15:07 [MichaelC]
- mk: exactly
- 17:15:07 [clown]
- <img alt="" aria-roledescription="hi">
- 17:15:12 [JF]
- Q?
- 17:15:20 [JF]
- ack joa
- 17:15:20 [Zakim]
- joanie, you wanted to say that is a horrible hack
- 17:15:38 [MichaelC]
- jd: is user comes across a renamed role, they have to navigate to it and query to figure out how to interact with it
- 17:15:46 [Rich]
- q?
- 17:15:51 [MichaelC]
- only to discover in this example that they can´t interact after all that effort
- 17:16:06 [jamesn]
- +1 to Joanie.... this hack is too horrible
- 17:16:38 [jamesn]
- <div class="plan_cost" role="img" aria-roledescription="US$19.99/mo"><span class="superscript">US$</span>19<span class="superscript cents">99</span><span class="per_month">/mo</span></div>
- 17:16:45 [MichaelC]
- jn, jd: this is worse than null roledescription
- 17:16:47 [MichaelC]
- lw: no
- 17:17:00 [MichaelC]
- rs: label in roledescription - that seems quite wrong
- 17:17:23 [MichaelC]
- mk: this supports more temporary nature of the hack
- 17:17:30 [MichielBijl]
- <div role="link" aria-label="submit button">Submit</div>
- 17:18:16 [MichaelC]
- jn: with @@ can still determine it´s an image
- 17:18:59 [LJWatson]
- Rich:Q+ to say this feels like a hack to solve a minor use case, with the potential to break far more than it will ever mend.
- 17:19:01 [MichaelC]
- mk: this is all about suppressing one word - ¨graphic¨
- 17:19:15 [LJWatson]
- Q+ to say this feels like a hack to solve a minor use case, with the potential to break far more than it will ever mend.
- 17:19:15 [Rich]
- q?
- 17:19:17 [MichaelC]
- all the AT users here don´t care about having it suppressed
- 17:19:22 [MichaelC]
- jn: but it´s not a graphic
- 17:19:31 [MichaelC]
- mk: a different technique would be better
- 17:19:37 [MichaelC]
- jn: that´s not always possible quickly
- 17:20:07 [MichaelC]
- lw, mb: <overlapping>
- 17:20:24 [MichaelC]
- jn: there´s a lot of QA to fix something
- 17:20:31 [MichaelC]
- lw: why use img?
- 17:20:43 [MichaelC]
- jn: it´s all we have. I wanted text / static, but that´s been punted
- 17:20:44 [Stefan]
- <span><span role="img" aria-roledescription="Multi-Dollar ">$$$</span> World</span> should announce "graphic Multi-Dollar World" ?
- 17:20:55 [MichaelC]
- ack l
- 17:20:55 [Zakim]
- LJWatson, you wanted to say this feels like a hack to solve a minor use case, with the potential to break far more than it will ever mend.
- 17:20:57 [Rich]
- ack LJWatson
- 17:21:23 [MichaelC]
- lw: this hack is for one very specific use case sometimes, but can do a lot of collateral damage
- 17:21:26 [Stefan]
- +q
- 17:21:34 [MichaelC]
- mk: @@ would fix the problem
- 17:21:40 [MichaelC]
- jn: changing DOM also fixes, but that´s harder
- 17:22:10 [MichaelC]
- this hack is so you don´t have to add nodes, just putting role on an existing node
- 17:22:19 [MichaelC]
- ack s
- 17:22:20 [Stefan]
- <span><span role="img" aria-roledescription="Multi-Dollar ">$$$</span> World</span> should announce "graphic Multi-Dollar World"
- 17:22:21 [LJWatson]
- ack me
- 17:22:53 [MichaelC]
- ss: what is AT announcement in above example?
- 17:23:06 [clown]
- <div class="plan_cost" role="img" aria-roledescription="text"><span class="superscript">US$</span>19<span class="superscript cents">99</span><span class="per_month">/mo</span></div>
- 17:23:34 [MichaelC]
- rs: the label in roledescription, that´s one of the most frustrating things I´ve had to deal with in APIs
- 17:24:02 [MichaelC]
- me, I don´t support label in roledescription, but don´t have strong preference on other approaches
- 17:24:16 [MichaelC]
- can only think of limiting to img for now
- 17:24:23 [MichaelC]
- until we can deal with more substantially in ARIA 2
- 17:24:32 [MichaelC]
- and get other implementers on board
- 17:25:06 [MichaelC]
- mk: ??
- 17:25:13 [MichaelC]
- rs: we don´t have consensus to include text / static in ARIA 1.1
- 17:25:28 [MichaelC]
- but want to meet the use case
- 17:25:41 [MichaelC]
- can we live with null roledescription just on img role?
- 17:25:47 [LJWatson]
- No
- 17:26:14 [MichaelC]
- mk: are we voting between that or nothing?
- 17:26:39 [MichaelC]
- remember the AT users aren´t concerned about the redundant ¨graphic¨ announcement
- 17:27:03 [MichaelC]
- alternative between that and not solving problem?
- 17:27:06 [MichaelC]
- rs: correct
- 17:27:11 [MichaelC]
- this is holding up other things
- 17:27:20 [MichaelC]
- trying to narrow scope
- 17:27:25 [MichaelC]
- very clear there isn´t consensus
- 17:27:40 [MichaelC]
- so exploring limiting to img, or doing nothing before ARIA 2
- 17:27:55 [MichaelC]
- think JamesC, SteveF, and @@ will object to doing nothing at all
- 17:28:10 [Stefan]
- q+
- 17:28:20 [MichaelC]
- this proposal is essentially a modification of option 3
- 17:28:34 [MichaelC]
- ss: is it analagous to alt=¨¨?
- 17:28:40 [MichaelC]
- does it make the img presentational?
- 17:28:58 [MichaelC]
- rs: similar, but providing a label
- 17:28:59 [MichaelC]
- ack ss
- 17:29:01 [MichaelC]
- ack s
- 17:29:15 [mck]
- Proposed resolution 1: Solve speaking of the word graphic by allowing null roledescription onelements with role img.
- 17:29:16 [mck]
- Proposed resolution: Push off the image role speaking problem to ARIA 2.0.
- 17:29:29 [MichaelC]
- rs: JamesN you could live with isolating to img?
- 17:29:31 [MichaelC]
- jn: yes
- 17:29:51 [LJWatson]
- +1 to pushing to ARIA 2.0
- 17:29:53 [MichielBijl]
- 💩
- 17:30:03 [fesch]
- +1 to pushing to ARIA 2.0
- 17:30:50 [MichaelC]
- rs: can people not live with proposal 1?
- 17:31:00 [mck]
- mk: can not live with #1; when push comes to shove.
- 17:31:09 [mck]
- mk: would rather wait.
- 17:31:20 [MichaelC]
- lw: really prefer not; to be binary, I can´t live with it
- 17:31:36 [MichaelC]
- rs: can people live with proposal 2?
- 17:31:41 [fesch]
- +1
- 17:31:48 [jamesn]
- so we can have this same discussion again in 2.0
- 17:31:48 [LJWatson]
- +1
- 17:32:20 [MichaelC]
- mc: some people not present can´t live with it, so this will come right back
- 17:32:28 [MichaelC]
- jn: punting to 2.0 just means the same objections there? Why wait?
- 17:32:35 [MichaelC]
- mk: could scope more carefully
- 17:33:08 [MichaelC]
- also I want to collect the killer use cases that justify the extra work
- 17:33:34 [JF]
- +1 to Leonie
- 17:33:39 [MichaelC]
- lw: I don´t see the use case as critical, and echo that once a hack is out there we can´t retract it
- 17:33:48 [joanie]
- +1 to LJWatson
- 17:33:48 [MichaelC]
- rs: I agree this is not critical for 1.1
- 17:34:54 [MichaelC]
- note in 2.0 we might even need host language restrictions, so even more complicated
- 17:35:07 [MichaelC]
- js: note we don´t need unanimity, we need preponderance
- 17:35:09 [MichaelC]
- q+
- 17:35:38 [jamesn]
- (text wasn't rushed - it was one of the first things in 1.1)
- 17:36:30 [MichaelC]
- mc: this is political not practical; if people feel outvoted they can take to FO
- 17:37:03 [MichaelC]
- can we avoid that by making people happy enough?
- 17:37:23 [MichaelC]
- mk: FtF discussion with JamesC might help
- 17:37:33 [MichaelC]
- rs: note role=text implemented all over ITunes
- 17:37:37 [MichaelC]
- really want to avoid FO
- 17:41:09 [MichaelC]
- <strategizing on a CfC that will deliver a clear result>
- 17:42:05 [mck]
- Proposed resolution: aria-roledescription="" will cause aria-roledescription to be ignored by user agents in all cases except for the implied or explicit img role where it would suppress speaking of the role by screen readers.
- 17:42:23 [Rich]
- http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action2092option3/aria/aria.html#aria-roledescription
- 17:42:26 [MichaelC]
- jn: not clear on option 3 yet
- 17:43:34 [mck]
- Proposed resolution: aria-roledescription="" will cause aria-roledescription to be ignored by user agents in all cases except for the implied or explicit img role where it would be mapped to the accessibility API and enable screen readers to supress speaking of the image role.
- 17:44:41 [mck]
- Proposed resolution: aria-roledescription="" will cause aria-roledescription to be ignored by user agents in all cases except when an element has an implied or explicit img role where it would be mapped to the accessibility API and enable screen readers to suppress speaking of the image role.
- 17:46:00 [MichaelC]
- fe: if role=img on span, would apply to span?
- 17:46:03 [MichaelC]
- ech
- 17:46:04 [clown]
- <span role="img" aria-roledescription="">image stuff here…</span>
- 17:46:44 [mck]
- Proposed resolution: aria-roledescription="" will cause aria-roledescription to be ignored by user agents in all cases except when an element has an implied or explicit img role. If the element has the img role the aria-roledescription property would be mapped to the accessibility API to enable screen readers to suppress speaking of the image role.
- 17:47:46 [Rich]
- <span role="img" aria-roledescription="">image stuff here…</span>
- 17:50:33 [MichielBijl]
- scribe: MichielBijl
- 17:50:49 [MichielBijl]
- MK: I like that approach
- 17:50:56 [MichielBijl]
- …bit different than normal CfC
- 17:51:11 [MichielBijl]
- RS: Pick one, and hopefully we do better than 50/50
- 17:51:36 [MichielBijl]
- …Matt, can you create branch with that text in it?
- 17:51:46 [MichielBijl]
- …We'll put that to CfC as a vote
- 17:52:01 [MichielBijl]
- MK: Just like option 3 except that it has the exception in it?
- 17:52:30 [MichielBijl]
- RS: Everyone okay with it being a vote?
- 17:52:35 [MichielBijl]
- JS: I'm okay with it
- 17:52:42 [MichielBijl]
- …Not sure it's the best way
- 17:52:51 [MichielBijl]
- RS: It gives everyone a chance to vote
- 17:52:55 [LJWatson]
- WFM
- 17:54:00 [MichielBijl]
- MC: Something about CR edits
- 17:54:11 [MichielBijl]
- LW: Would this be a substantive change?
- 17:54:14 [MichielBijl]
- MC: Well no
- 17:54:20 [MichielBijl]
- …No process requirements
- 17:54:25 [MichielBijl]
- LW: Ah okay
- 17:54:51 [MichielBijl]
- RRSAgent: makeminutes
- 17:54:51 [RRSAgent]
- I'm logging. I don't understand 'makeminutes', MichielBijl. Try /msg RRSAgent help
- 17:54:56 [MichielBijl]
- RRSAgentm, makeminutes
- 17:55:00 [MichielBijl]
- RRSAgent, makeminutes
- 17:55:00 [RRSAgent]
- I'm logging. I don't understand 'makeminutes', MichielBijl. Try /msg RRSAgent help
- 17:55:05 [MichielBijl]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 17:55:05 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/07-aria-minutes.html MichielBijl
- 17:55:09 [JemmaKu]
- RRSagent, make minutes
- 17:55:09 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/07-aria-minutes.html JemmaKu
- 17:55:58 [bgaraventa1979]
- got to head out guys, another meting
- 17:56:36 [MichielBijl]
- RS: Do we need a CfC for the straw poll?
- 17:56:42 [MichielBijl]
- MC: Not formally
- 17:57:10 [MichielBijl]
- …Is it a CfC survey?
- 17:57:40 [MichielBijl]
- JS: We've been misusing the word straw for a couple years now
- 17:57:59 [MichielBijl]
- LW: Can I thank the CfC senders for adding length and end date in the subject
- 17:58:02 [MichielBijl]
- +1
- 17:58:38 [Rich]
- RESOLUTION: Put up CFC survey for members to put in a special case of option 3 that tells ATs to suppress the the role when the role description has a null value and to move the text/static role to ARIA 2.0 or to accespt option 3 and move the text/static role to ARIA 2.0
- 17:59:14 [MichielBijl]
- s/+1/MB: +1/
- 17:59:40 [MichielBijl]
- s/RRSAgent: makeminutes//
- 17:59:47 [MichielBijl]
- s/RRSAgentm, makeminutes//
- 17:59:55 [MichielBijl]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 17:59:55 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/07-aria-minutes.html MichielBijl
- 18:00:56 [MichielBijl]
- *discussion about CfC about poll and survey*
- 18:01:04 [JF]
- no preference
- 18:01:08 [MichielBijl]
- RS and JS: I'm happy doing this parallel
- 18:01:29 [MichielBijl]
- RS: Michael can you start the process for last call draft?
- 18:01:35 [MichielBijl]
- …Let's see where we are next week
- 18:01:52 [MichielBijl]
- MC: Not much I can do process wise, except staging
- 18:02:12 [MichielBijl]
- JS: CfC goes out after the survey?
- 18:02:20 [MichielBijl]
- MC: Same time(?)
- 18:02:32 [JemmaKu]
- no objection with what Rich said
- 18:03:00 [MichielBijl]
- MC: We can send both simultaneous
- 18:03:14 [Rich]
- RESOLUTION: Begin process of publishing a pseudo last call version of ARIA 1.1 pending the survey
- 18:03:27 [MichielBijl]
- RS: Start looking at time lines next week
- 18:03:41 [JF]
- bye all
- 18:03:42 [MichielBijl]
- …Thank you everyone for working on this issue, it's not the easiest one
- 18:03:59 [JemmaKu]
- Thanks everybody
- 18:04:43 [MichielBijl]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 18:04:43 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/07-aria-minutes.html MichielBijl
- 18:05:00 [MichaelC]
- either way, you can just send that URI to the list
- 18:05:10 [MichielBijl]
- Okay
- 18:07:01 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
- 18:18:20 [clown]
- clown has joined #aria
- 18:37:17 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
- 19:10:06 [Rich]
- Rich has joined #aria
- 19:33:02 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
- 19:47:02 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #aria
- 19:57:06 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
- 20:05:06 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
- 20:11:14 [Rich]
- Rich has joined #aria
- 20:22:26 [Rich]
- Rich has joined #aria
- 22:36:54 [Rich]
- Rich has joined #aria
- 22:40:24 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- richardschwerdtfeger has joined #aria
- 22:40:51 [Rich]
- Rich has joined #aria