IRC log of aria on 2021-05-27
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 16:16:28 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #aria
- 16:16:28 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/05/27-aria-irc
- 16:16:32 [Zakim]
- RRSAgent, make logs Public
- 16:16:32 [Zakim]
- please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jamesn
- 16:16:38 [jamesn]
- chair: JamesNurthen
- 16:16:42 [jamesn]
- meeting: ARIA WG
- 16:17:20 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [New Issue Triage](https://bit.ly/34gp5hL)
- 16:17:20 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [New PR Triage](https://bit.ly/3cboD95)
- 16:17:20 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [Meaty topic for next week](https://bit.ly/3oOnOYI)
- 16:17:20 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [Exit Criteria Testing: Need test cases and results for Authors MUST/MUST NOT statements in ARIA 1.2](https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1492)
- 16:17:21 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [Problematic User Agents MUST NOT statement needs to be qualified](https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1476)
- 16:17:21 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [When is hidden content taken into calculation of name and description?](https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/57)
- 16:17:22 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [2C "where the user can adjust the embedded control's value" is misleading](https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/106)
- 16:17:22 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [Trim whitespace from computed accessible name/description](https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/95)
- 16:17:22 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [Update to Condition for step 2C](https://github.com/w3c/accname/pull/90)
- 16:17:22 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [Support aria-description](https://github.com/w3c/accname/pull/69)
- 16:17:22 [jamesn]
- agenda+ [Attribute with natural language but no language metadata](https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1365)
- 16:18:59 [jamesn]
- regrets+ JamesCraig
- 16:19:19 [jamesn]
- regrets+ CarolynMacLeod
- 16:21:05 [jamesn]
- present+
- 16:57:07 [Greta]
- Greta has joined #aria
- 16:58:11 [Greta]
- +present
- 16:58:28 [joanie]
- present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
- 17:02:03 [harris]
- harris has joined #aria
- 17:02:14 [MarkMcCarthy]
- MarkMcCarthy has joined #aria
- 17:02:19 [MarkMcCarthy]
- present+
- 17:02:22 [pkra]
- pkra has joined #aria
- 17:02:26 [harris]
- present+
- 17:02:28 [pkra]
- present+
- 17:02:31 [pkra]
- scribe pkra
- 17:02:36 [sarah_higley]
- sarah_higley has joined #aria
- 17:02:37 [msumner]
- msumner has joined #aria
- 17:02:39 [pkra]
- scribe: pkra
- 17:02:47 [pkra]
- zakim, next item
- 17:02:47 [Zakim]
- agendum 1 -- [New Issue Triage](https://bit.ly/34gp5hL) -- taken up [from jamesn]
- 17:02:48 [msumner]
- present+
- 17:02:50 [Greta]
- present+
- 17:03:18 [siri]
- siri has joined #aria
- 17:03:49 [pkra]
- jnurthen: 1489 from wilco. Seems to have a point. Is it 1.3?
- 17:04:54 [pkra]
- ... can we punt to 1.4?
- 17:05:11 [pkra]
- siri: is it false by default?
- 17:05:41 [Jory]
- Jory has joined #aria
- 17:05:51 [pkra]
- brian: originally, was intended to expose it to AT but not visually.
- 17:06:00 [pkra]
- ... and false would expose it.
- 17:06:18 [pkra]
- jnurthen: but this is about role=presentation.
- 17:06:47 [pkra]
- ... button with role=presentation would become a button again with aria-hidden false.
- 17:06:58 [pkra]
- ... doesn't seem intentional from user.
- 17:07:02 [pkra]
- ... is it 1.4?
- 17:07:10 [pkra]
- mattking: 1.4.
- 17:07:14 [pkra]
- brian: validators should flag this
- 17:07:20 [pkra]
- jnurthen: 1.4 it is.
- 17:07:32 [pkra]
- ... issue 1488
- 17:07:59 [pkra]
- ... I tend disagree with the proposal.
- 17:08:16 [pkra]
- ... any takers?
- 17:08:44 [pkra]
- melanie: I'll take a look.
- 17:09:21 [pkra]
- jnurthen: issue 1486.
- 17:09:39 [pkra]
- ... will be in 1.3
- 17:09:47 [pkra]
- ... others are on the agenda
- 17:09:51 [pkra]
- zakim, next item
- 17:09:51 [Zakim]
- agendum 2 -- [New PR Triage](https://bit.ly/3cboD95) -- taken up [from jamesn]
- 17:10:30 [Matt_King]
- Matt_King has joined #aria
- 17:10:31 [pkra]
- jnurthen: issue 1491 as discussed previously. Needs more reviewers.
- 17:11:24 [pkra]
- mattking: did we document the decision that aria-labelledby provides equivalent to HTML labels, so we do not need additional role=label?
- 17:11:37 [StefanS]
- StefanS has joined #aria
- 17:11:40 [pkra]
- jnurthen: yes. unless implementors ask us.
- 17:11:44 [StefanS]
- present+
- 17:11:54 [pkra]
- mattking: right. this is a coding convenience
- 17:11:55 [Matt_King]
- present+
- 17:12:10 [pkra]
- jnurthen: right. In a space with plenty of complexity.
- 17:12:32 [pkra]
- ... but noted only in minutes. This was never in the stable branch.
- 17:12:56 [pkra]
- mattking: it would be good to make this easier to find for future reference..
- 17:13:32 [pkra]
- ... worth it as we (in particular Jon) put a lot of effort into it.
- 17:13:56 [Jory]
- present +
- 17:14:01 [pkra]
- jnurthen: right. the main point is that this doesn't seem anything right now.
- 17:15:07 [pkra]
- ... accname PRs.
- 17:15:22 [pkra]
- melanie: I added implementors and Brian as reviewers.
- 17:15:42 [pkra]
- brian: looked through them and will approve them.
- 17:16:19 [pkra]
- jnurthen: PR 1484. I had some comments but forgot to post them.
- 17:16:50 [pkra]
- ... as the group, we need to work out how we want to deprecate things.
- 17:17:16 [pkra]
- ... in the past, I think we've just removed things. Is that about right?
- 17:19:24 [pkra]
- mattking: going straight for remove seems bad. Deprecate first.
- 17:19:51 [pkra]
- ... deprecating globalness was different (and difficult).
- 17:20:45 [pkra]
- jnurthen: this case seems different.
- 17:21:17 [pkra]
- joanie: is it prohibited?
- 17:21:27 [pkra]
- jnurthen: no. just proposing to remove support.
- 17:21:36 [pkra]
- ... prohibiting was just for global
- 17:21:46 [pkra]
- joanie: do we expect user agent's to stop supporting it?
- 17:21:48 [pkra]
- jnurthen: yes.
- 17:21:58 [pkra]
- joanie: then I'd remove it.
- 17:22:45 [pkra]
- jnurthen: @william this should make the PR actually simpler. Ping me and we can coordinate.
- 17:23:43 [pkra]
- william: will do.
- 17:24:14 [pkra]
- zakim, next item
- 17:24:14 [Zakim]
- agendum 3 -- [Meaty topic for next week](https://bit.ly/3oOnOYI) -- taken up [from jamesn]
- 17:24:46 [pkra]
- jnurthen: would like to propose accname.
- 17:25:03 [pkra]
- 17:25:20 [pkra]
- ... melanie, brian, would next week work?
- 17:25:25 [pkra]
- brian: I'm out.
- 17:25:32 [pkra]
- jnurthen: ok. any other topics?
- 17:26:11 [jamesn]
- Secondary actions on items in composite widget roles #1440
- 17:26:21 [pkra]
- sarah: Secondary actions on items in composite widget roles #1440 ?
- 17:26:25 [pkra]
- jnurthen: great. Will do.
- 17:26:33 [pkra]
- sarah: I had a partial PR for this.
- 17:26:46 [pkra]
- ... I'll remake it and add it to the issue
- 17:26:56 [pkra]
- zakim, next item
- 17:26:56 [Zakim]
- agendum 4 -- [Exit Criteria Testing: Need test cases and results for Authors MUST/MUST NOT statements in ARIA 1.2](https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1492) -- taken up [from
- 17:26:59 [Zakim]
- ... jamesn]
- 17:27:22 [pkra]
- joanie: aria 1.2 is in CR and we want it to move forward.
- 17:27:33 [pkra]
- ... for normative changes, we need verification and documentation of two implementations.
- 17:27:51 [pkra]
- ... historically, user agent implementations were the focus.
- 17:28:14 [pkra]
- ... we probably should also focus on validators (and should have in the past)
- 17:28:35 [pkra]
- ... we also have author-only changes.
- 17:29:10 [joanie]
- https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1492
- 17:29:14 [pkra]
- ... we had a comment "the list of test results and implementations is small. Is combobox 1.2 really working out?"
- 17:29:25 [joanie]
- https://github.com/w3c/aria/wiki/Authors-MUST---MUST-NOT-inventory#12-only
- 17:29:25 [pkra]
- ... I've created issue 1492.
- 17:29:40 [pkra]
- ... pointing to the wiki page.
- 17:30:00 [pkra]
- jnurthen: "both" means 1.1 and 1.2
- 17:30:06 [pkra]
- ... some are very similar.
- 17:31:21 [pkra]
- joanie: e.g., aria-owns / aria-controls change in combobox change.
- 17:31:29 [pkra]
- ... figure out what do we need to do.
- 17:31:41 [pkra]
- mattking: they might be different from 1.1 MUST
- 17:32:04 [pkra]
- jnurthen: looks like my list is incomplete.
- 17:32:35 [pkra]
- joanie: so we need people to write tests, put them through validators, record results.
- 17:32:48 [pkra]
- ... the critical stuff (e.g., combobox) needs to be in the inventory.
- 17:32:55 [pkra]
- ... makes sense?
- 17:33:41 [pkra]
- jnurthen: the aria-controls was in 1.1 so maybe my list is ok.
- 17:33:59 [pkra]
- mattking: but is the wording the same?
- 17:34:22 [pkra]
- jnurthen: right, it has.
- 17:35:11 [pkra]
- mattking: this sounds like a real project.
- 17:35:43 [pkra]
- joanie: if you're a new member and have lots of experience with validators, this is for you. Write some HTML, push through validators, record on wiki. Done.
- 17:36:04 [pkra]
- mattking: the tricky part is looking at the author must and creating a failing test case.
- 17:36:36 [pkra]
- joanie: correct. I can help with generating something from the UA tests.
- 17:37:38 [pkra]
- jnurthen: sounds like validator people could help...
- 17:37:43 [pkra]
- harris: I'm happy to help.
- 17:38:18 [pkra]
- jory: I'm happy to help.
- 17:38:39 [pkra]
- joanie: I'll make volunteers assignees, organize yourselves, ping me with questions
- 17:38:51 [pkra]
- greta: I'm in.
- 17:40:50 [pkra]
- zakim, next item
- 17:40:50 [Zakim]
- agendum 5 -- [Problematic User Agents MUST NOT statement needs to be qualified](https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1476) -- taken up [from jamesn]
- 17:41:35 [joanie]
- https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1487
- 17:41:43 [pkra]
- jnurthen: related to issue 1487
- 17:42:36 [pkra]
- ... e.g., aria-label on div. If browsers are forbidden from doing error correction, that seems like a bad ida.
- 17:42:46 [pkra]
- ... we need to work out what to do in 1.3
- 17:42:51 [pkra]
- ... maybe "may expose them"
- 17:43:49 [pkra]
- joanie: I've been working on this for 6 weeks, huge commits, changing hundreds of (mostly test) files.
- 17:44:56 [pkra]
- ... finally got it far enough but now here
- 17:45:07 [pkra]
- mattking: what are the "counters"?
- 17:45:26 [pkra]
- joanie: google looking for content and potential AT that takes advantage of this.
- 17:45:48 [pkra]
- ... in retrospect, this was probably a mistake.
- 17:46:10 [pkra]
- ... I'm working on a proposal for Google where we log something in the console.
- 17:46:37 [pkra]
- ... if authors don't use validators, they'll get this at least.
- 17:46:45 [pkra]
- ... if google likes it, this might be a good idea.
- 17:47:02 [pkra]
- mattking: to clarify: if author puts label on generic, there would be output on the console?
- 17:47:14 [pkra]
- joanie: only if something is actively asking for name calculation.
- 17:47:42 [pkra]
- ... if AT asks for name, that triggers a calculation in Chromium.
- 17:48:04 [pkra]
- ... if authors don't actively test for this, they won't see the warning.
- 17:48:17 [pkra]
- mattking: do validators test with AT?
- 17:48:17 [jamesn]
- q?
- 17:48:30 [pkra]
- joanie: yes.
- 17:48:52 [pkra]
- cynthia: but won't help developers who don't care about accessiblity?
- 17:49:02 [pkra]
- joanie: yes. but would google want to spam all authors?
- 17:49:07 [pkra]
- cynthia: probably no.
- 17:49:13 [pkra]
- ... but is the group large enough to make this useful?
- 17:49:23 [pkra]
- joanie: right.
- 17:50:30 [pkra]
- mattking: if we all the author must not parts are good for the ARIA-AT project, then we can help.
- 17:51:20 [pkra]
- joanie: we're not looking for aria-labels as ATs. User hits tab, screenreader says "foo". It doesn't know where foo comes from, how came to be.
- 17:51:37 [pkra]
- mattking: but if it didn't get a role or a generic role, we could spit it out?
- 17:51:52 [pkra]
- joanie: it might be a hint.
- 17:52:16 [pkra]
- mattking: currently, we're looking at VO with Chrome, if you put an aria-label on it, it creates an empty group.
- 17:53:10 [pkra]
- ... if it's a title, it's treated as an aria-label. So you end up with a lot of empty groups that shouldn't be there at all.
- 17:53:20 [pkra]
- jnurthen: sounds like a Chromium issue.
- 17:54:43 [pkra]
- mattking: if naming is not prohibited on generic. should we change the definition of prohibited to be only probibited for authors.
- 17:54:55 [pkra]
- jnurthen: that's what we had changed.
- 17:54:56 [msumner]
- I would prefer "should not" to removing it completely
- 17:55:18 [pkra]
- jnurthen: would encourage them not to expose it.
- 17:55:35 [pkra]
- mattking: I'm in favour of changing it.
- 17:55:49 [pkra]
- joanie: I'm ok with any consensus.
- 17:56:21 [pkra]
- cynthia: I suspect the concerns will persist.
- 17:57:01 [pkra]
- mattking: I spoke with James about this. Seemed like it could be solved with VoiceOver 2.
- 17:57:33 [jamesn]
- agenda?
- 17:57:37 [pkra]
- joanie: orca has logic that says what should have a name and what shouldn't. Text objects shouldn't have them so they're there but ignored.
- 17:58:26 [pkra]
- jnurthen: do we have a path forward?
- 17:58:45 [pkra]
- ... "should not" seems one path.
- 17:59:42 [pkra]
- jnurthen: let's jump to accname 57
- 17:59:51 [jamesn]
- zakim, next item
- 17:59:51 [Zakim]
- agendum 6 -- [When is hidden content taken into calculation of name and description?](https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/57) -- taken up [from jamesn]
- 17:59:55 [jamesn]
- https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/57#issuecomment-843282332
- 18:00:29 [pkra]
- ... this was a bit shocking but I think joanie is right.
- 18:00:42 [pkra]
- joanie: I'd suggest to read it from last comment up.
- 18:01:33 [pkra]
- RRSagent, make minutes
- 18:01:33 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/05/27-aria-minutes.html pkra
- 19:04:26 [jongund]
- jongund has joined #aria
- 20:58:06 [zcorpan_]
- zcorpan_ has joined #aria
- 22:18:59 [dcaro]
- dcaro has joined #aria