IRC log of aria on 2022-01-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:00:14 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #aria
18:00:14 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/01/06-aria-irc
18:00:18 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
18:00:18 [Zakim]
please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jamesn
18:00:27 [jamesn]
agendabot, find agenda
18:00:27 [agendabot]
jamesn, OK. This may take a minute...
18:00:27 [agendabot]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/1d223877-730c-446f-bfa9-2e9222902112/20220106T130000
18:00:27 [agendabot]
clear agenda
18:00:27 [agendabot]
agenda+ Happy New Year πŸŽ‰
18:00:27 [agendabot]
agenda+ New Issue Triage 🐜
18:00:30 [agendabot]
agenda+ New PR Triage 🎁
18:00:32 [agendabot]
agenda+ Deep Dive planning πŸ€ΏπŸ“†
18:00:35 [agendabot]
agenda+ Clarify usage of aria-haspopup πŸ₯€πŸ†™
18:00:37 [agendabot]
agenda+ Inconsistency between native and ARIA listboxes when implicit aria-selected is provided πŸ•΅πŸ»
18:00:40 [agendabot]
agenda+ summary element role mapping β˜€οΈπŸ—Ί
18:00:44 [joanie]
present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
18:04:07 [aaronlev]
aaronlev has joined #aria
18:05:23 [spectranaut]
present+ valerie young
18:06:35 [sarah_higley]
sarah_higley has joined #aria
18:06:44 [jcraig]
scribe: jcraig
18:06:46 [sarah_higley]
present+
18:06:53 [sohara]
sohara has joined #aria
18:06:55 [jcraig]
zakim, take up item 1
18:06:55 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- Happy New Year πŸŽ‰ -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:06:59 [jcraig]
zakim, close item 1
18:06:59 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Happy New Year πŸŽ‰, closed
18:07:00 [Zakim]
I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:07:00 [Zakim]
2. New Issue Triage 🐜 [from agendabot]
18:07:03 [jcraig]
zakim, take up item 2
18:07:03 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- New Issue Triage 🐜 -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:07:54 [sohara]
present+
18:07:57 [jcraig]
https://bit.ly/3qN2bcz
18:08:34 [harris]
harris has joined #aria
18:08:42 [harris]
present+
18:08:50 [jcraig]
asociationlist has a long name https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1662
18:09:33 [jcraig]
Requesting extended review period of ARIA 1.2 CR2 https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1664
18:10:09 [jcraig]
previous already addressed
18:10:21 [jcraig]
Listitem in a list as a possible aria-activedescendant ID reference target for combo box role https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1668
18:10:29 [jcraig]
jamesn: Scott?
18:10:43 [jcraig]
Scott: need to talk through this with Stefan
18:11:01 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: seems similar to secondary actions
18:11:11 [jcraig]
jamesn: Sarah, will you follow up in issue?
18:11:18 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: will do
18:11:27 [jcraig]
jamesn: leaving unmilestoned
18:11:45 [jcraig]
A role specifically for pagination https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1669
18:12:39 [jcraig]
Scott: argument from the WICG discourse is for consistency and i18n...
18:13:24 [jcraig]
jamesn: from thread, this could be an attribute rather than a role
18:14:06 [jcraig]
Scott: someone thought HTML should implement... type=something for navigation?
18:14:42 [jcraig]
s/asociationlist has a long name/associationlist and related roles have tediously long names/
18:15:39 [jcraig]
jamesn: can we push this back? convo has stalled... role="navigation" aria-label="pagination" may do enough already unless more specific suggestion provided
18:15:46 [jcraig]
Scott to comment in issue
18:16:06 [jcraig]
New role for splitbuttons https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1670
18:16:31 [jcraig]
s/New role for splitbuttons/Topic: New role for splitbuttons/
18:16:44 [jcraig]
s/associationlist/Topic: associationlist/
18:18:49 [jcraig]
jamesn: no opposition... can be grouped buttons, but maybe not necessary
18:19:37 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: Microsoft moving away from grouping buttons as a single tab stop
18:20:45 [jcraig]
jcraig: Mac never has combined grouped button (Segmented Controls) as a single tab stop unless it's used as a mutually exclusive selection like radio group or tabgroup
18:21:10 [jcraig]
jamesn: milestoned to 1.4 for further discussion
18:21:20 [sohara]
potentially related to secondary actions rather than needing a new role
18:21:23 [jcraig]
zakim, close item 2
18:21:23 [Zakim]
agendum 2, New Issue Triage 🐜, closed
18:21:24 [Zakim]
I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:21:24 [Zakim]
3. New PR Triage 🎁 [from agendabot]
18:21:32 [jcraig]
zakim, take up item 3
18:21:32 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- New PR Triage 🎁 -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:21:53 [jcraig]
New PR Triage 🎁 https://bit.ly/3EUy9Jc
18:22:40 [jcraig]
Topic: abstract roles remove 'name from' https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1667
18:23:06 [jcraig]
Scott: noticed inconsistencies
18:23:18 [jcraig]
jamesn: do folks approve? care?
18:24:01 [jcraig]
Scott: alternative I saw would be to match what inherits those, but that's not always a 1:1 match, like nameform:author
18:25:02 [jcraig]
jamesn: currently I recall nameFrom defined on all (even if defined as prohibited or n/a)
18:26:34 [jcraig]
s/Listitem in a list as /Topic: Listitem in a list as /
18:26:57 [jcraig]
s/A role specifically for pagination/Topic: A role specifically for pagination/
18:27:38 [jcraig]
jamesn: joanie any problem with removing? this seems editorial. No objections. Will remove after Peter and I review.
18:27:58 [jcraig]
Topic: add note to aria-roledescription https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1666
18:28:49 [jcraig]
jamesn: needs reviewers, jcraig and sarah_higley
18:29:29 [jcraig]
jamesn: next two editorial. done... Will merge
18:29:37 [jcraig]
zakim, close item 3
18:29:37 [Zakim]
agendum 3, New PR Triage 🎁, closed
18:29:38 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:29:38 [Zakim]
4. Deep Dive planning πŸ€ΏπŸ“† [from agendabot]
18:29:47 [jcraig]
zakim, take up item 4
18:29:47 [Zakim]
agendum 4 -- Deep Dive planning πŸ€ΏπŸ“† -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:30:02 [jcraig]
Deep Dive planning πŸ€ΏπŸ“†](https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates)
18:30:10 [jamesn]
https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/f0174998-3f13-4942-904a-8a3881741cda
18:31:30 [jcraig]
Is this related to User Actions https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/762
18:31:47 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: a little different. would expose visible buttons
18:31:59 [jcraig]
s/Is this related/jcraig: Is this related/
18:32:17 [jcraig]
Zakim, close item 4
18:32:17 [Zakim]
agendum 4, Deep Dive planning πŸ€ΏπŸ“†, closed
18:32:18 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:32:18 [Zakim]
5. Clarify usage of aria-haspopup πŸ₯€πŸ†™ [from agendabot]
18:32:25 [jcraig]
zakim, take up item 5
18:32:25 [Zakim]
agendum 5 -- Clarify usage of aria-haspopup πŸ₯€πŸ†™ -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:32:26 [jcraig]
[Clarify usage of aria-haspopup πŸ₯€πŸ†™](https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1024)
18:33:18 [jcraig]
Scott: come up recently b/c of related work in OpenUI
18:33:53 [jcraig]
in those cases, any sort of thing could "pop up" but the value set is limited
18:35:58 [jcraig]
IA2 mappings are awkward... why do we need the limited value set? do we need to specify what type of thing may popup? if it's almost but not quite a menu or dialog, does ARIA need to be the bottleneck, or can the author just aria-haspopup="freeform text?"
18:36:06 [jcraig]
q+
18:36:43 [aaronlev]
q+
18:36:51 [jcraig]
Scott: people are using this in new ways... authors are confused, for excample list of links is not a menu
18:36:54 [jcraig]
ack me
18:38:08 [sarah_higley]
from experience, sighted users don't even understand the difference between a menu popup and listbox popup after having seen them and interacted with them
18:38:36 [jcraig]
s/aria-haspopup="freeform text?"/aria-haspopup="bikeshed" (some unspecified)/
18:39:10 [jcraig]
ack aaronlev
18:39:15 [jamesn]
q+
18:39:36 [jamesn]
ack me
18:40:17 [jcraig]
aaronlev: historically ARIA had values mapped to the MSAA values, may no longer be necessary
18:40:30 [sarah_higley]
q+
18:41:38 [jcraig]
spreading (unnecessarily?) this legacy complexity to HTML element proposal
18:41:43 [jcraig]
ack sarah_higley
18:43:07 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: In theory, I'm not opposed to generalizing the use case, but what is the effect if we "lose" existing AT behavior popup menu?
18:43:49 [jcraig]
Scott: baggage values: true, false, menu, other?
18:43:55 [jcraig]
q+
18:44:14 [sarah_higley]
ack me
18:44:17 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: would change long-standing AT experience
18:44:28 [jcraig]
ack me
18:45:14 [sarah_higley]
the "oh no we effed up, start over" approach πŸ˜„
18:47:15 [jcraig]
could deprecate aria-haspopup in favor of a new similar aria-popup=true? (still would have author confusion but allow legacy behavior)
18:48:17 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: I increasingly like the idea to deprecate and start over
18:49:19 [jcraig]
James Craig: ackno self
18:49:48 [jcraig]
s/ackno self /fully acknowledges self doubt on this suggestion/
18:50:52 [jcraig]
Scott: problem, any aria-haspopup value now makes it into a menu button (jc: I this limited to Windows AT?)
18:51:08 [jcraig]
[scribe missed some quick chatter]
18:51:17 [aaronlev]
q+
18:52:39 [jamesn]
agenda?
18:52:46 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: not just an forms mode issue, also it's a menu button
18:52:51 [jamesn]
zakim, drop item 7
18:52:51 [Zakim]
agendum 7, summary element role mapping β˜€οΈπŸ—Ί, dropped
18:53:02 [jamesn]
agenda?
18:53:44 [jcraig]
Sarah: preserve only the menu mapping, and changing mappings for other values to not map to menu button
18:54:32 [jcraig]
aaronlev: could include aria-controls to the element type in the DOM
18:54:40 [aaronlev]
q-
18:54:47 [jcraig]
jamesn: the controlled "popup" may not be in the DOM yet
18:54:55 [jcraig]
next steps?
18:55:12 [jcraig]
Scott: need to talk some more before proposal
18:55:26 [jcraig]
zakim, close item 5
18:55:26 [Zakim]
agendum 5, Clarify usage of aria-haspopup πŸ₯€πŸ†™, closed
18:55:27 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
18:55:27 [Zakim]
6. Inconsistency between native and ARIA listboxes when implicit aria-selected is provided πŸ•΅πŸ» [from agendabot]
18:55:32 [jcraig]
zakim, take up item 6
18:55:32 [Zakim]
agendum 6 -- Inconsistency between native and ARIA listboxes when implicit aria-selected is provided πŸ•΅πŸ» -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:55:46 [jcraig]
[Inconsistency between native and ARIA listboxes when implicit aria-selected is provided πŸ•΅πŸ»](https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1661)
18:56:37 [jamesn]
If a user agent provides an implicit aria-selected value for an option, the value SHOULD be true if the option has DOM focus or the listbox has DOM focus and the option is referenced by aria-activedescendant. Otherwise, if a user agent provides an implicit aria-selected value for an option, the value SHOULD be false.
18:57:43 [jcraig]
joanie: as long as the user is interacting with a listbox, AT can use internal selection, but if user not interacting, that no longer applies
19:01:00 [jcraig]
Scott: text was added due to awkwardness of allowing list boxes to have aria-checked=true
19:01:18 [jcraig]
Sarah: @@@
19:01:32 [jcraig]
Scott: purposeful divergence
19:01:47 [jcraig]
sarah_higley: default selection on focus already existed though
19:02:31 [jcraig]
topic: adjourned
19:02:55 [sarah_higley]
me: we were trying to have a difference in default behavior of checked vs. selected, and write text for selected that matched the already-existing behavior in browsers for selection in ARIA listboxes
19:03:18 [jamesn]
rrsagent, make minutes
19:03:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/01/06-aria-minutes.html jamesn
19:04:03 [bkardell_]
bkardell_ has joined #aria
19:04:50 [jamesn]
agenda?
19:44:22 [jongunderson]
jongunderson has joined #aria
20:23:20 [Laurence]
Laurence has joined #aria