17:54:59 RRSAgent has joined #openui 17:54:59 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/10/21-openui-irc 17:55:06 Zakim, start meeting 17:55:06 RRSAgent, make logs Public 17:55:07 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), gregwhitworth 17:55:14 meeting: Open UI Telecon 17:59:03 iopopesc has joined #openui 18:00:56 present+ 18:01:16 present+ 18:01:18 present+ 18:01:45 present+ 18:02:29 chrisdholt has joined #openui 18:02:35 flackr has joined #openui 18:02:35 present+ 18:02:37 present+ 18:02:38 una has joined #openui 18:02:44 present+ 18:02:45 present+ 18:02:57 andrico1234 has joined #openui 18:02:59 ScribeNick una 18:03:14 ScribeNick: una 18:03:26 present+ 18:03:31 present+ 18:03:39 github-url: https://github.com/openui/open-ui/issues/410 18:03:50 github: https://github.com/openui/open-ui/issues/410 18:03:54 topic: https://github.com/openui/open-ui/issues/410 18:04:09 github-url: https://github.com/openui/open-ui/issues/410 18:04:19 Github topic: https://github.com/openui/open-ui/issues/410 18:04:20 topic: semantics for popup 18:04:59 eugene has joined #openui 18:05:02 github: https://github.com/openui/open-ui/issues/410 18:05:16 mason: one of the things we have is position: top-layer that lets you put any element into the top layer, the other is lightdismiss so what takes you out of it. These can concievably both be CSS props 18:05:19 tantek has joined #openui 18:05:52 mason: the way the discussion is very much brainstorming at this point 18:06:22 q+ 18:06:31 mason: in the popup spec there are a few things that are harder to make into seperate APIs (i.e. anchor, popup attribute that lets you declaratively open a popup) 18:06:40 ack gregwhitworth 18:06:42 masonf has joined #openui 18:06:48 present+ 18:07:11 q+ 18:07:14 gregwhitworth: are you looking for opinions? concrete element vs. primitives 18:07:42 masonf: q started as what is the semantic role for popup, need to find something that satisfies standards and a11y 18:07:45 q+ 18:07:57 masonf: need general feedback 18:08:17 gregwhitworth: we talked about this 3 years ago RE: what are the primary goals 18:08:18 q+ 18:08:31 gregwhitworth: primitives or elements 18:08:49 gregwhitworth: primitives can be an implementation detail at the end of the day 18:09:10 gregwhitworth: the way I view the popup is that in and of itself it doesnt have that semantic meaning. it takes on semantic meaning when its utilized within something else 18:09:14 q+ to say popup has semantics (I think they are menu semantics)... but maybe the name is too generic 18:09:24 gregwhitworth: so im all for having as many of the primitives put together as possible 18:09:36 gregwhitworth: but i dont want to backtrack where we're working on primitives consistently 18:10:03 masonf: agree would love to get these things out, the idea is that shippign primitives willmake it easier to get the semantic things out 18:10:13 +1 18:10:19 masonf: would become easier to implement and spec bc they're based on things that already exist 18:10:24 ack chrisdholt 18:10:25 +1 to masonf 18:10:57 chrisdholt: i would prefer to have a primitive bc I thihnk that attaching a role lets me ship elements tomorrow 18:11:06 chrisdholt: the same time, underlying apis is core to our needs 18:11:33 chrisdholt: independent elements seems to create a lot of overhead 18:11:50 q? 18:11:59 ack melanierichards 18:12:32 q+ 18:12:33 melanierichards: we also lose things w/primitives: autofocus behavior 18:12:54 melanierichards: do we have enough for select menu and controller code to apply semantics to listbox portion 18:13:06 melanierichards: open to moving to CSS primitves that could unlock more scenarios 18:13:21 melanierichards: as the need arises, add more semantics to UA stylesheet 18:13:36 melanierichards: it was nice to have an element that comes packaged with all of these behaviors 18:13:52 melanierichards: it will prob be very generic as listed in this issue 18:14:04 melanierichards: its not like semantically the element is super interesting, but theres prior art in html 18:14:14 melanierichards: not every html element has super unique semantic meaning 18:14:37 q? 18:14:38 q+ 18:14:42 ack una 18:14:43 ack una 18:14:45 melanierichards: i dont think thats a reason not to introduce the element but woul dbe open to exploring if issues w/tag 18:15:09 una: I think I've always had the perspective, the more reusable the better, and the more declarative the better 18:15:44 una: it's been hard to do popups because it requires JS to create… some of the things we got that have come out of using this element were great for CSS. Having some of these primitives will make it easier to build and implement the semantic element 18:16:07 una: so I think we should focus on the primitives, and then it will be easier to get the HTML element out later 18:16:14 una: and be useful for other parts of the platform 18:16:25 una: we've broken out a number of things, like anchor and dismiss, we've thought that trough 18:16:42 una: going down the route of primivites provides most flexibility and easiest implementation 18:17:11 una: we also need to define primitive, HTML primivite and CSS primitive have different meanings how we're discussing them 18:17:15 ack BoCupp 18:17:15 BoCupp, you wanted to say popup has semantics (I think they are menu semantics)... but maybe the name is too generic 18:17:17 ack BoCupp 18:17:33 BoCupp: popup has semantics 18:18:06 BoCupp: if a modal dialog is displayed i would expect the popup disapear, but if a modal is displayed witha popup on top of it i would expect the modal to stay visible 18:18:14 BoCupp: set of behaviors UA can enforce in top layer 18:18:47 BoCupp: UA can coordinate the top layer 18:18:55 +1 to una's points about reusability, more declarative, and defining primitives 18:19:12 BoCupp: we want it to contain arbitrary content (context menu, teaching ui) 18:19:35 BoCupp: they appear at different times, popup can be the right level of semantics 18:19:56 BoCupp: dont have to take it so far as to declare details like menu and menuitems 18:20:05 BoCupp: makes the popup elment less generic 18:20:14 BoCupp: dont want to lose ability for browser to control top-layer interactions 18:20:23 +1 to what Bo just said, I don't want another z-index world 18:20:26 q? 18:20:45 ack hdv 18:21:01 q+ 18:21:10 hdv: ARIA notoriously hard for devs to get right 18:21:28 hdv: browsers are the only ones who can ensure different levels are correct 18:21:32 q+ 18:21:41 hdv: html would be super helpful for ensuring a11y 18:21:51 hdv: would make it harder for implementors to make mistakes 18:22:14 ack flackr 18:22:25 flackr: i dont think these 2 ideas are at odds w/each other 18:23:10 flackr: huge advantage i see here is not forcing us to define specific accesibility role for somethign that can be used on a lot of use cases 18:23:16 q+ 18:23:19 flackr: per-element can decide on the a11y role 18:23:34 gregwhitworth: my question is if you think theyre mutually exclusive 18:23:53 I think they're not mutually exclusive, I just dont think we should not implement primitives in leu of elements 18:24:02 ^ una 18:24:30 gregwhitworth: im not disagreeing if we have the primitives it would make it easier to implement, im worried primitives will slow down shipping/the magic 18:24:55 gregwhitworth:wed need to define every primitive fully and every usecase, leveraging that 18:25:05 gregwhitworth: would gate release of those elements 18:25:10 q+ 18:25:52 gregwhitworth: if we require primitives to be defined before elements, im concerned we're going to be 2-3 years out from shipping anything 18:26:02 gregwhitworth: is that truly needed 18:26:05 q+ 18:26:17 ack gregwhitworth 18:26:19 ack miriam 18:26:31 q? 18:26:45 miriam: keep hearing an assumption that if primitives are in CSS they cant trigger ARIA & a11y 18:26:58 miriam: in CSS overflow already does that: adds interactions an a11y features 18:27:24 miriam: i think we need to keep pushing on that: have primitives in css that are already have a11y tied in w/o needing the a11y to be re-stated in HTML 18:27:35 BoCupp: wanted to respond to flackr 18:27:36 ack BoCupp 18:27:51 BoCupp: if you have a primitive that says just show this in top layer, i do think they're mutually exclusiv 18:28:13 BoCupp: you can have even more metadata exposed w/the primitives 18:28:25 BoCupp: should it be modal, dismiss other dailogues, etc. 18:29:17 BoCupp: options felt unweildly, might have a higher level property that says 'it should have popup behvaior', once we do that - semantics through name of element 18:29:37 BoCupp: to make sure devs can get it right we want a packaged set of behaviors assigned to popup or menu 18:30:03 BoCupp: UA can make sure special behaviors are honored 18:30:14 ack una 18:30:16 +1 to packaged set of behaviors to not rely on authors specifying eveything correctly 18:30:54 una: not sure if implementing primitives will slow down implementing elements? we would need to figure out the primitives either way 18:31:00 scribenick: hdv 18:31:08 +1 una, will absolutely still need to figure out the primitives before launching the elements, otherwise the elements will be (even more) weird exceptions 18:31:39 una: so I feel it is still going to take a long time before we have a semantic element that will have all the primitives built in, don't think it would necessarily be slowed down by discussing primitives first 18:31:41 (we're *still* unwinding / backspecifying the legacy weird behaviors of HTML elements, e.g. in CSS etc.) 18:31:42 q+ 18:32:10 una: declarative styling can still be accessible, and it should be 18:32:43 ack masonf 18:33:10 masonf: one thing ive realized from this discussion is we still want to ship an element called popup based on these behaviors 18:33:27 masonf: still need to answer question on semantic roleof popup 18:33:39 masonf: need to define popup and its pieces 18:34:12 masonf: wanted to +1 we need to figure out pieces of toplayer interaction anyway to figure out popup, it might be easier to once we figure that out, isolate it 18:34:22 q+ 18:34:48 masonf: i think we still can and even should spec toplayer access and css prop that leaves UA in control of top layer (i.e. interactions bw full screen, modal dialogs, and this new prop) 18:35:11 masonf: we need to know what the interaction of these 3 things is - have some ideas for css property that gives this to you. Can set priority list 18:35:35 ack melanierichards 18:36:19 melanierichards: i'm not sure we're all talking about semantics and behaviors in the same way. Semantics = "what is this thing" & a11y mappings -- thats the core question from the thread 18:36:37 +1 melanierichards, yes semantics and behaviors are different things. semantics are definitely tightly connected to a11y mappings, which may happen to have default behaviors 18:36:39 melanierichards: definition will be generic like: window control w/ui automation 18:37:03 +1 to Melanie - I understood as the same which is where I found the sticking point. IE, we are getting an ask specifically around a11y mapping and our intent with popup as low-level is to support _many_ 18:37:26 melanierichards: resonate w/unas characterization of breaking down the problem into small chunks. Bo's point of certain things that arent resolved by focusing on primitives 18:37:57 melanierichards: theres no CSS A11y model right now and how the two are linked 18:38:22 gregwhitworth: just wanted to clarify im not opposed to primitives, i.e. anchor should exist on its own 18:38:44 gregwhitworth: if we want to break popup apart, thats fine but we need to get a resolution on the threads question 18:39:05 q? 18:39:07 q+ 18:39:18 gregwhitworth: we want a popup element to exist, standardize generic primitives, and make standardization of popup elements easier 18:39:44 gregwhitworth: i hear general support of primitives existance as well as the individual element 18:39:54 gregwhitworth: want to resolve on where the folks working on popup are spending their time 18:40:02 gregwhitworth: next discuss semantic role 18:40:15 ack gregwhitworth 18:40:30 masonf: ive seen/.heard a lot of +1s that we still want to ship popup element 18:40:43 masonf: it is a question of a11y modeling/semantics 18:41:03 masonf: then its just an ordering question 18:41:39 masonf: lets resolve that we think thre is a semantic role for popup 18:41:57 +1 masonf, agreed there are semantic roles here 18:42:11 q+ 18:42:18 ACTION: next week we will resolve on a semantic role defitinition 18:42:31 q+ 18:42:32 I believe popup has a semantic role 18:42:48 q+ 18:43:05 ack masonf 18:43:18 proposed resolution: has a semantic role, and deserves a place as an HTML element. TBD what the exact verbiage is for that semantic role. 18:43:40 +1 to mason's proposed resolution 18:43:46 +1 to hdv: we should get screenreader user input 18:43:50 q- 18:44:00 dandclark: still confused what this means practically 18:44:21 dandclark: theres a specific mapping for listbox, what does a new semantic mean 18:44:29 +1 with Dan, I don't think anything exists that wouldn't need to be overridden for a number of elements/usage 18:44:51 flackr: i think whether we define css properties for these mgiht affect how universal the semantic meaning of popup needs to be 18:44:55 ack flackr 18:44:59 ack dandclark 18:45:09 flackr: can create popup -like things w/other semantic props that might have different aria roles 18:45:11 q+ 18:45:45 ack chrisdholt 18:45:50 masonf: popup would be more generic, and selecmenu would override it as a more specific role 18:46:25 chrisdholt: is it acceptible to propose one and then override it in all these places?: 18:46:36 gregwhitworth: popup is a div with additional behaviors 18:47:11 chrisdholt: not sure semantic role adds value to popup 18:47:16 chrisdholt: might add more confusion 18:47:22 chrisdholt: +1 to div with behaviors 18:47:56 also disagree that popup is best described as a div with behaviors 18:48:06 it's ok to have "lightweight" or "broad" semantics rather than precise/narrow semantics 18:48:16 to Una's point: https://github.com/openui/open-ui/issues/329 18:48:52 +1 to tantek's "broad" semantics point 18:48:53 RE: Bo's disagreement, I think I'm specifically saying that an ARIA role doesn't fit here universally. Doesn't meant there aren't semantics, but I don't see an existing ARIA role that fits 18:48:58 +1 to lightweight semantics on the element itself 18:49:55 chrisdholt: my emphasis is there are semantics but i dont think there is a universal aria role that is applicable to popup 18:49:59 I'd prefer no more (even nearly) non-semantic elements, as we've seen that's more confusing that helpful e.g. section vs div has only been a timewaster IMO 18:50:04 davatron5000 has joined #openui 18:50:26 s/that helpful/than helpful 18:50:30 BoCupp: the mroe narrow we go the less useful the element is 18:50:56 q+ 18:51:24 Zakim, close the queue 18:51:24 ok, gregwhitworth, the speaker queue is closed 18:51:35 chrisdholt: if the ask isnt to provide an aria role, rather semantics for the interaction that seems reasonable 18:51:52 maybe a bad example as well - abbr? 18:52:01 melanierichards: role dialog mappings in chore AM, i imagine popup is going to be very similar 18:52:08 s/chore/core 18:52:10 has unique semantics based on context but I'm not sure it has an ARIA role, does it? 18:52:28 melanierichards: can also do an excersize in all the different subtypes of popup 18:52:48 +1 melanierichards 18:52:58 RRSAgent, generate minutes please 18:52:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/21-openui-minutes.html una 18:53:13 On generic, the popup could be useful for composition - IE I have a menu and I want to wrap it in the popup and delegate focus to it. No reason to add additional semantics there... 18:53:21 Zakim, end meeting 18:53:21 As of this point the attendees have been miriam, gregwhitworth, hdv, dandclark, chrisdholt, flackr, una, iopopesc, melanierichards, BoCupp, tantek 18:53:23 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 18:53:23 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/21-openui-minutes.html Zakim 18:53:26 I am happy to have been of service, gregwhitworth; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 18:53:30 Zakim has left #openui 20:04:20 Francis_Storr has joined #openui 21:31:24 Francis_Storr has joined #openui 23:14:38 Francis_Storr has joined #openui