14:02:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
14:02:32 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-irc
14:02:34 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:02:35 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jamesn
14:02:41 <MURATA> present+
14:03:13 <kzms2> kzms2 has joined #aria
14:03:19 <jamesn> meeting: proposed two ARIA roles for ruby
14:03:24 <jamesn> chair: JamesNurthen
14:04:43 <Breixo_Pastoriza> Breixo_Pastoriza has joined #aria
14:05:02 <cyns> cyns has joined #aria
14:06:33 <jamesn> recording the presentation portion of the meeting so no scribing for this part
14:07:17 <plh> plh has joined #aria
14:07:35 <plh> present+
14:08:24 <aaronlev> present+
14:08:29 <jamesn> present+
14:09:02 <cyns> present+
14:09:12 <jcraig> present+
14:10:18 <jcraig> link for the two GitHub issues mentioned?
14:11:22 <jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1619
14:11:35 <jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1620
14:15:50 <melsumner> melsumner has joined #aria
14:20:06 <jcraig> q+
14:21:56 <jamesn> scribe: aaronlev
14:22:40 <jcraig> aaronlev: chrome 89 reads base text.
14:22:52 <aaronlev> aaronlev: Are there any cases where you would want to just read the base text?
14:23:55 <aaronlev> murata: 20% of the time (for interlinear nodes), read both
14:24:05 <aaronlev> murata: other 80% read only base text
14:24:19 <aaronlev> aaronlev: why not text above, <rt>, if it has more pronunciation info?
14:24:34 <jamesn> link to slides - https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=4106E423DCEF597E!284274&ithint=file%2cpptx&authkey=!AILL3MjWadzvv9I
14:24:56 <aaronlev> murata: reading phonetic ruby can be dangerous
14:25:37 <jamesn> q+
14:27:44 <aaronlev> jcraig: agrees with fantasai about exploring native html attribute, e.g. rt="phonetics"
14:28:05 <aaronlev> jcraig: would missing attribute be sufficient to assume the inverse value?
14:28:23 <aaronlev> jcraig: or should missing me undefined, and a guess would be best
14:28:39 <aaronlev> MURATA: have not analyzed best approach
14:29:05 <aaronlev> MURATA: do not yet have opinion on this question
14:29:09 <aaronlev> q+
14:29:11 <jamesn> ack jcraig
14:30:10 <aaronlev> jcraig: in ARIA this might be something like aria-use-for-pronunciation
14:30:40 <aaronlev> jcraig: it feels like it should be a native attribute
14:31:21 <aaronlev> jamesn: would you expect something different to be exposed to ATs based on the semantic?
14:31:25 <aaronlev> jamesn: how is Braille affected
14:31:47 <aaronlev> MURATA: in the case of non-phonetic ruby, the AX tree should have both texts
14:32:28 <aaronlev> jamesn: the primary use is for different TTS rather than different meaning
14:32:34 <jcraig> q+ to respond to "accessibility tree should display the phonetic difference"
14:32:55 <aaronlev> MURATA: i just need a standard mechanism
14:33:04 <aaronlev> jamesn: not sure role is correct, i recommend an html attribute
14:33:09 <jcraig> ack jamesn
14:33:10 <cyns> +1 to html attribute
14:35:17 <aaronlev> aaronlev: chrome uses aria-details, which puts control in users hands today
14:35:44 <aaronlev> aaronlev: we could use role="note" on <rt> to indicate it's non-phonetic, and this seems to be sensible in a semantic sense
14:36:09 <jamesn> ack aaronlev
14:36:42 <jamesn> q+ to ask if there is ever a case to ONLY read the ruby
14:36:47 <jcraig> Ruby for the speaker https://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/
14:36:58 <aaronlev> juanita: joining late, gets description of the different types of ruby, asks about how the role="note" markup would work
14:37:18 <MURATA> +q
14:38:07 <aaronlev> jcraig: wanted to clarify that all the content should be somewhere in the a11y tree?
14:38:10 <aaronlev> jcraig: wanted to clarify that all the content should be somewhere in the a11y tree
14:38:19 <aaronlev> (jcraig do i have that right?)
14:38:50 <JG> JG has joined #aria
14:39:00 <aaronlev> jcraig: would the semantic only be useful for accessibility? that's a key difference between ARIA and native markup -- ARIA is for stuff that's only useful for a11y
14:39:36 <aaronlev> jcraig: if it's useful for anything else I think it would be clear that it shouldn't be ARIA
14:39:46 <jamesn> ack jc
14:39:46 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to respond to "accessibility tree should display the phonetic difference"
14:39:48 <aaronlev> MURATA: have not thought of or found any non-a11y use for the semantic
14:40:25 <aaronlev> MURATA: planning to publish wiki article as a W3C note
14:40:36 <aaronlev> q+
14:40:38 <cyns> q+ to ask if color coding of phonetic vs. non-phonetic for language learners might be a use case
14:42:05 <jamesn> ack me
14:42:05 <Zakim> jamesn, you wanted to ask if there is ever a case to ONLY read the ruby
14:43:19 <MURATA> GIKUN
14:43:37 <jamesn> https://github.com/Japan-Daisy-Consortium/documents/wiki/Text-to-Speech-of-Electronic-Documents-Containing-Ruby:-User-Requirements#4-interlinear-notes-2
14:45:23 <aaronlev> jamesn: obviously there are missing semantics, maybe there should be a different element, or an attribute
14:45:32 <aaronlev> jcraig: i don't think it needs to be a different element
14:46:12 <cyns> <rt type="para"> (default), <rt type="gikun">, <rt type="general">
14:46:15 <aaronlev> jamesn: if it's native it has a much higher likelihood of author use
14:46:18 <aaronlev> jcraig: agree
14:46:33 <jamesn> q- MURATA
14:46:39 <jamesn> ack aaronlev
14:48:11 <jcraig> aaronlev: user can decide in chrome whether to speak ruby base, ruby annotations, or both
14:49:08 <jcraig> aaronlev: exposing the semantics for user choice should be the first priority, right?
14:49:19 <jamesn> ack cyns
14:49:19 <Zakim> cyns, you wanted to ask if color coding of phonetic vs. non-phonetic for language learners might be a use case
14:49:35 <jcraig> q+ to clarify 1619 vs 1620
14:50:00 <aaronlev> cyns: i put some suggestions above
14:50:02 <jcraig> q+ to respond to aaron's comment
14:50:50 <JG> q+
14:51:12 <jcraig> q+ to consider in the context of the ssml/pronunciation topics earlier
14:51:14 <aaronlev> cyns: agree screen reader should have heuristics to be able to try to guess which to use, as a repair
14:51:43 <jcraig> ack me
14:51:43 <Zakim> jcraig, you wanted to clarify 1619 vs 1620 and to respond to aaron's comment and to consider in the context of the ssml/pronunciation topics earlier
14:51:43 <JG> scribe: jg
14:51:44 <jamesn> ack jcraig
14:53:57 <aaronlev> pronunciation, pronunciation-advanced, note
14:54:15 <aaronlev> pronunciation-learners, pronunciation-advanced, note
14:54:22 <JG> James: We have this ongoing pronunciation conversation. Someone suggested we use Ruby for this. To clarify 16.20 to 16.19 this is effectively one issue. We need more semantics in Ruby because there are multiple meanings. Some our pronunciation-related and some are accessibility related.
14:54:31 <jamesn> q+ to respond as to why they are different issues
14:54:54 <JG> ...16.19 is about displaying those two cases
14:54:59 <jamesn> ack jamesn
14:54:59 <Zakim> jamesn, you wanted to respond as to why they are different issues
14:55:47 <JG> James: I believe is purely for visual display changes. You should not read the pronunciation hint. The other is which meaning to read -- or both
14:56:26 <cyns> q+ to ask if there might be a case where a tts doesn't know the katakana and would need to use the phonetic ruby as a fallback?
14:56:31 <JG> ...if we do something in HTML, we'll need to provide something in ARIA
14:57:08 <JG> James: Ruby is for phonetics, but this usage is not phonetic. Both are phonetics, but one is not displayed.
14:57:48 <aaronlev> type="phonetics-learners" | "phonetics-advanced" | "note"
14:58:11 <JG> JamesN: If you pronounce the phonetics, you get an incorrect pronunciation.
14:58:27 <jamesn> ack JG
14:58:52 <jcraig> ruby rendering is well supported
14:59:35 <JG> JamesC: Ruby is reasonably supported in browsers and really common in Japanese books. Ruby accessibility is not as well supported
15:00:32 <jcraig> q?
15:00:35 <JG> cyns: There may be a fallback use case as well
15:00:37 <jcraig> ack cyns
15:00:37 <Zakim> cyns, you wanted to ask if there might be a case where a tts doesn't know the katakana and would need to use the phonetic ruby as a fallback?
15:01:22 <aaronlev> q+ to say that please consider having the mapping be a superset of what Chrome already does, since we already solved many of these problems
15:01:23 <JG> JamesC: We need to respond to the issue and close it
15:02:20 <JG> RRSAgent, make minutes
15:02:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html JG
15:03:37 <JG> JamesN: We need a way forward for 1.2.
15:04:27 <JG> RRSAgent, make minutes
15:04:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html JG
15:04:30 <jamesn> rrsagent, make minutes
15:04:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html jamesn
15:20:16 <jcraig> s/We need to respond to the issue and close it/We need to respond to the issue and ultimately close it once it's pointed to a new tracker in HTML or DPUB/
15:20:26 <jcraig> rrsagent, make minutes
15:20:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html jcraig
15:21:40 <jcraig> s/rt="phonetics"/<rt type="phonetic"> or similar/
15:23:42 <jcraig> s/wanted to clarify that all the content should be somewhere in the a11y tree?/wanted to respond to Murata's comment that the ruby phonetic distinction should be exposed in the accessibility tree/
15:25:19 <jcraig> s/wanted to clarify that all the content should be somewhere in the a11y tree/regardless of whether this is a native Ruby attribute or ARIA, it will need be exposed in the accessibility APIs/
15:25:48 <jcraig> s/would the semantic only be useful for accessibility?/so would the semantic *only* be useful for accessibility?/
15:27:50 <jcraig> s/ARIA is for stuff that's only useful for a11y/ARIA is only exposed to assistive technology, and is not used for mainstream display differences like Murata is suggesting such as hiding the "para" pronunciation hints by default/
15:27:54 <jcraig> rrsagent, make minutes
15:27:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html jcraig
15:31:42 <jcraig> s/We need a way forward for 1.2./(Topic change) Re: IDL we need a way forward for 1.2./
15:31:44 <jcraig> rrsagent, make minutes
15:31:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html jcraig
16:00:16 <gregwhitworth> gregwhitworth has joined #aria
16:05:12 <bkardell_> bkardell_ has joined #aria
16:05:32 <Jory> Jory has joined #aria
16:05:35 <bkardell_> present+
16:05:59 <jamesn> meeting: ARIA IDL meeting
16:06:17 <joanie> present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
16:06:28 <jamesn> zakim, pick a victim
16:06:28 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose plh
16:06:30 <jcraig> present+
16:06:41 <bkardell_> scribenick: bkardell_
16:07:33 <jcraig> Topic: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1598
16:08:02 <gregwhitworth> present+
16:08:38 <bkardell_> jamesn: when we published aria 1.2 draft, we published based on changes requested from various folks in HTML WG - that there was no such thing as nullable strings in HTML.  In testing we learned that there are nullable DOM strings and not vice versa... we believe that is actually what we want, so we are in a strange dilema
16:09:16 <bkardell_> jamesn: we're in a strange situation where we have reverted the spec and we have implementations that are different. We are at an impasse at where we should go to make everyone happy
16:09:17 <jamesn> q?
16:09:26 <aaronlev> q-
16:09:40 <bkardell_> jamesn: does anyone want to clarify more
16:11:11 <bkardell_> jcraig: Annvk and domenic dinicola were objecting to the pull request, we were hoping they would come today... cyns had reached out to domenic, and I'm not sure where that stands right now... unfortunately she's not able to discuss right now as she's in the car
16:11:13 <jamesn> “If a reflecting IDL attribute is a nullable DOMString attribute, then, on getting, if the corresponding content attribute is in its missing value default state then the IDL attribute must return null, otherwise, the IDL attribute must get the value in a transparent, case-preserving manner. On setting, if the new value is null, the content attribute must be removed, and otherwise, the content attribute must be set to the specified new value
16:11:13 <jamesn> in a transparent, case-preserving manner.”
16:11:57 <jamesn> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/common-dom-interfaces.html#reflect
16:12:28 <bkardell_> jamesn: this is where HTML defines how to reflect various kinds of values in attributes
16:13:10 <jcraig> s/dinicola/denicola/
16:13:30 <jcraig> s/we were hoping they would come today/and said they would attend today/
16:14:11 <bkardell_> jcraig: I'm unsure the experience of others on the call and their experience in IDL - anyone on who can help advise us here?
16:14:20 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: I haven't kept up with this unfortunately
16:15:31 <bkardell_> gc: we debated long and hard - we actually went back and forth between the two. I will go back and look more and we will comment on the issues...
16:15:58 <JG> JG has joined #aria
16:16:01 <bkardell_> gc: I forgot what we landed on, but I will try to dig up notes and add 2c
16:16:21 <bkardell_> jcraig: do you have an implemented nonnullable string?
16:16:43 <bkardell_> gc: we have .... something.
16:17:14 <jcraig> s/nonnullable/nullable reflected/
16:17:18 <bkardell_> gc: in lightning web components we do something - I remember hitting this issue and it leading to lots of discussion
16:17:35 <jcraig> s/something/something internal in salesforce/
16:18:00 <jcraig> q+
16:18:02 <bkardell_> jamesn: I guess we should wait for cyns on this and move on for now
16:19:29 <jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1598#issuecomment-954000170
16:20:31 <bkardell_> jamesn: apologies to folks, we were really hoping to get this unblocked because it is the issue that is holding us up... would be really happy to hear any other ideas about how we get past this, otherwise we can move on
16:22:14 <bkardell_> cyns: I have a draft in a google doc, I will share it here in the presentation but I dont want it minuted because it is temporary and won't continue to exist...
16:23:06 <bkardell_> cyns: I took the text from alice's pr and modified ita bit... it has gona on a whole lot
16:23:18 <bkardell_> cyns: I think there were _hundreds_ of comments on the issue, many meetings
16:23:36 <bkardell_> cyns: the majority were around reflected attributes...
16:25:01 <bkardell_> cyns: the concern with 'sprouting' is that if you were to say it sprouts an attribute, there were a lot of bad options. the least bad was to not reflect in that direction - to not change the DOM attribute. It's a little complicated - the main downside of this approach is that the DOM in the inspector could be out of sync in some cases
16:25:19 <jcraig> s/around reflected attributes.../around sprouting attributes.../
16:26:01 <bkardell_> (cyns presents)
16:27:04 <bkardell_> jcraig: just to make sure it is clear - when cyns described DOM as being out of sync -- nothing is really out of sync, but you can't see it as clearly by existing norms, as a content attribute... it's kind of "partial reflection" or "one way reflection" to some degree
16:27:45 <jcraig> s/but you can't see it /but web authors inspecting the DOM can't see it /
16:27:59 <bkardell_> cyns: indeed, it is a little complicated, but I dont think it is much of a problem in practice. we will probably have to provide author advice -- here we're focused on the HTML spec which is very implementer focused
16:28:52 <bkardell_> jamesn: it's complicated. I'm actually going to step back to the previous part... do you think this is what they are looking for - for the nullable thing?
16:29:01 <bkardell_> cyns: yes
16:29:24 <bkardell_> jamesn: where can I find that in the spec?
16:29:40 <gregwhitworth> q+
16:29:41 <bkardell_> cyns: this text would be added to section 2.6 of the specification
16:29:55 <jcraig> q-
16:30:16 <bkardell_> cyns: we would need to add something similar for how null behaves.
16:30:52 <JG_> JG_ has joined #aria
16:31:02 <bkardell_> cyns: I can take on writing that, but probably not until next month - if someone wants to volunteer because they want to move it sooner, they can
16:31:14 <bkardell_> jamesn: I don't see this for all of the standard types though?
16:31:20 <jamesn> ack gre
16:31:48 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: question about the 1-dimensional reflection... are there use cases that we lose besides the developer inspection of the dom
16:31:59 <leobalter> leobalter has joined #aria
16:31:59 <jcraig> q+
16:32:11 <bkardell_> cyns: not that I remember... triple equals doesn't work in some cases, but we decided together that was probably ok
16:32:37 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: but there aren't author use cases that we can think of that fall off the table...?
16:33:30 <bkardell_> jcraig: maybe we could step back and give an example of why this couldn't be reflected.  one of the main examples of this is we can't give an idref between documents, like pointed inward in a shadow dom context
16:33:46 <bkardell_> jcraig: so there's no way to reflect that in the DOM
16:33:59 <bkardell_> q+
16:34:07 <jcraig> ack me
16:34:24 <bkardell_> cyns: are there cases where you have labels inside of a shadow dom?
16:35:03 <jcraig> aria-activedescendant etc too
16:35:20 <bkardell_> gc: labels inside a shadow dom... we're looking at this as a per-component basis, so far there is some element outside the shadow which will want to link into the button
16:36:01 <bkardell_> gc: we have things to figure out how to do it
16:36:03 <jamesn> q?
16:36:25 <bkardell_> cyns: something we've been talking about AOM discussions is whether we can have a name calculation that allows you to reference that
16:36:28 <bkardell_> q-
16:37:06 <bkardell_> gc: thinking outloud... like with slots, they aren't actually 'moved in', they continue to exist in the light dom, we just create linkage.... maybe we can draw inspiration from that
16:37:45 <bkardell_> cyns: another use case we talked about is being able to apply attributes to a custom element and determine which of those things that goes to, that is a lot more like slots
16:38:20 <bkardell_> cyns: but this is all "down"... we've not discussed how to go out of the shadow, if there is a reason to expose something on the container from inside
16:38:37 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: on that I dont know why we wouldn't just use name calculation rules
16:38:58 <bkardell_> cyns: those are pretty complicated, I'm not sure if someone on the call wants to comment
16:39:12 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: that's why I (?)
16:40:02 <gregwhitworth> s/that's why/that's why I don't want authors creating their own computed name due to its complexity. We should just have an API on shadowRoot or something that returns the computed name for the shadow
16:40:58 <bkardell_> cyns: how hard would it be to calculate the name of that shadow dom as if it were a whole document and present a way that the outside could use it
16:42:26 <bkardell_> jcraig: this is a topic we've discussed for many many hours in AOM meetings and in other places... I think we had talked about a way for the component owner to do that as a property of the shadow rather than have the engine try to ... I hesitate to try to dig into this more here and speculate at another solution during this call
16:42:48 <bkardell_> cyns: having the author do it is also not without downside
16:43:09 <jcraig> s/engine try to /engine try to infer what the label should be /
16:43:36 <bkardell_> aaronlev: was the question whether work this should be on the engine side or on the author side?
16:43:40 <jcraig> s/during this call/during this call since many of the engaged parties aren't in attendance/
16:44:04 <jcraig> s/engaged parties/engaged implementing engineers/
16:44:10 <bkardell_> jamesn: It seems we need to fix attname for shadow roots anyway... at that point, sure why wouldn't you expose it on the component... it seems like a reasonable thing to do
16:44:20 <jcraig> rrsagent, make minutes
16:44:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html jcraig
16:44:24 <bkardell_> cyns: I think we have been avoiding ti, because it is hard
16:44:40 <bkardell_> jamesn: it kind of works in browsers, we have to write down what we are doing
16:45:22 <bkardell_> aaronlev: are we talking about when is aria labelled by pointing from one side of the shadow to the other?  there is no format for ids that allow that
16:45:30 <bkardell_> q+
16:46:13 <bkardell_> aaronlev: random idea - there are chars that aren't allowed in IDs, we could use those maybe to make some way to do it
16:46:38 <bkardell_> jamesn: if I reference a component with an idref, then nothing gets returned?
16:46:49 <bkardell_> aaronlev: not inside the shadow content
16:47:01 <bkardell_> jamesn: but just the web component itself
16:47:15 <gregwhitworth> <div aria-labeledby="foo"></div><custom-element id="foo"></custom-element>
16:47:16 <bkardell_> cyns: the equivalent of pointing to an iframe element
16:47:25 <bkardell_> aaronlev: so can we walk in from there?
16:47:45 <bkardell_> jamesn: in dev tools, it does seem to walk down into the thing, I'm just not sure
16:48:09 <bkardell_> aaronlev: yes, it can walk down through the AX objects, if we have a computed name we expose it might be leaking information we probably shouldn't be
16:48:18 <gregwhitworth> <div aria-labeledby="foo"></div><custom-element><div id="foo"></div></custom-element>
16:48:18 <gregwhitworth> is what aaronlev is saying won't work
16:48:27 <gregwhitworth> q+
16:48:28 <bkardell_> cyns: it might accidentally work in a way that is breaking shadow boundaaries
16:48:44 <bkardell_> aaronlev: it's not the only use case though, right - we need to point both ways, right?
16:49:00 <jcraig> ack bkardell
16:49:02 <jamesn> ack bkardell_
16:49:27 <gregwhitworth> bkardell_: I was on the queue a while back and I wanted to reiterate here that there have been a ton of discussions on these topics
16:49:37 <gregwhitworth> bkardell_: most people have trouble keeping up with where we are now
16:49:47 <gregwhitworth> bkardell_: we shouldn't try to solve here
16:50:07 <gregwhitworth> bkardell_: maybe some of us should produce a consumable summary and weigh in with what has already happened, been shot down, etc
16:50:10 <gregwhitworth> q-
16:50:25 <gregwhitworth> bkardell_: I recall there was a proposal and there was an import/export idea to express this
16:50:29 <gregwhitworth> bkardell_: a lot of idea
16:51:27 <bkardell_> cyns: yeah - so the two things we have concensus on are these two things in the agenda... not sprouting in these cases, and to allow you to put aria on the custom element and have a way to tie that to a paricular elemenet in a shadow root
16:51:48 <bkardell_> cyns: I think that one seems pretty straightfoward and uncontroversial
16:52:03 <bkardell_> cyns: how do people feel about the lack of content attribute synchronizing?
16:52:14 <jcraig> q+
16:52:17 <bkardell_> Jory: would this cause problems with testing tools?
16:53:21 <bkardell_> jcraig: it is available, testing tools can use it - but if they make assumptions that are only in the DOM that won't be accurate alone
16:53:36 <bkardell_> q+
16:53:50 <jcraig> ack me
16:54:19 <jcraig> s/DOM/DOM as content attributes/
16:54:33 <jcraig> bkardell_: is available, but as a new feature
16:54:59 <jcraig> bkardell_: none of the testing tools are perfect. they all have false positives and false negatives.
16:55:37 <bkardell_> cyns: some examples would be helpful I think
16:55:43 <jcraig> bkardell_: calling out the false results will help expose  the shortcomings of the testing tools and could help with the resolution
16:56:16 <bkardell_> cyns: are there other things that would be useful beyond seeing examples and what the input and output is
16:56:25 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: examples would be very helpful, yes
16:56:38 <bkardell_> jamesn: this code (on the screen) is destined for the HTML spec?
16:56:40 <bkardell_> cyns: yes
16:57:17 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: since I think ultimately the goal is to land - is what you are showing here the solution to bi-directional references?
16:57:32 <bkardell_> cyns: I think it is the best of all of the bad options
16:58:06 <bkardell_> gregwhitworth: our team at salesforce will review it if you send this to the list with examples, as you suggested, and get feedback
16:58:50 <jcraig> thanks for attending gregwhitworth
17:01:06 <jcraig> FTI Dominic just responded at https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1598#issuecomment-954027895
17:01:23 <jcraig> s/FTI/FYI/
17:07:21 <jamesn> revised proposal? "If a reflecting IDL attribute is a nullable DOMString attribute, then, on getting, if the corresponding content attribute is missing then the IDL attribute must return null, otherwise, the IDL attribute must get the value in a transparent, case-preserving manner. On setting, if the new value is null, the content attribute must be removed, and otherwise, the content attribute must be set to the specified new value in a
17:07:21 <jamesn> transparent, case-preserving manner.”
17:07:55 <jamesn> revised proposal? "If a reflecting IDL attribute is a nullable DOMString attribute, then, on getting, if the corresponding content attribute is not present then the IDL attribute must return null, otherwise, the IDL attribute must get the value in a transparent, case-preserving manner. On setting, if the new value is null, the content attribute must be removed, and otherwise, the content attribute must be set to the specified new value in a
17:07:55 <jamesn> transparent, case-preserving manner.”
17:12:37 <jcraig> q+
17:12:44 <bkardell_> q-
17:13:11 <gregwhitworth> q+
17:14:20 <jcraig> ack me
17:14:29 <cyns> cyns has joined #aria
17:14:32 <cyns> q?
17:15:49 <cyns> q+
17:17:18 <jcraig> ack cyns
17:17:28 <gregwhitworth> q-
17:19:55 <bkardell_> bkardell_: I laid that out in order to better understand whether you thought maybe we were doing things we shoudn't right now, or not doing things right now we should
17:21:52 <gregwhitworth> q+
17:22:56 <cyns> https://open-ui.org/
17:24:38 <jamesn> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1598
17:32:57 <jamesn> q+
17:33:10 <jamesn> q- gregwhitworth
17:51:21 <jamesn> rrsagent, make minutes
17:51:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/10/28-aria-minutes.html jamesn
17:51:25 <aaronlev> do we have another call in 10 minutes?
19:16:49 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria
20:31:07 <github-bot> github-bot has joined #aria