W3C

– DRAFT –
ARIA And Assistive Technologies Community Group

10 March 2022

Attendees

Present
JoeHumbert, jongund, Matt_King, Rich_Noah, Sam
Regrets
-
Chair
Matt King
Scribe
jongund

Meeting minutes

AT Version Collection Experience

MK: Two things to talk about

MK: We are expected to start building the experience in the next spirit on March 21st

MK: Rich?

RN: One issue is having a good design by the 17th

MK: This is a blocking feature for getting SR companies on board, ASYNC review

ST: Isaac has been working on a design based on discussions in this group, there are some edge cases that need to be worked out

ST: There are a few issues we could discuss here

MK: Issues would be availabel early next week

ST: That is the plan

MK: We might not have a qourm next week

ST: Hopefully get to a good place next week

MK: We will encourage participation next week

MK: Open issues we can discuss?

ST: Publishing the results on the ARIA AT reports page

ST: We need to be on the same on browser versions

ST: We don't want an Admin manual updating the list, and there are issues with people using a difference browser to input content

MK: The second requirement, we should not use as a blocking issue, we can get it out there with other this issue

ST: I don't think it will save us much time now

ST: The admins browser making edits it could be different of the test, so automating getting it has some issues

MK: We talked about have a prompt

ST: In the current prompt would be leave the current value or switch to what I am doing now

ST: So if we want to show a drop down, we could get an API on browser versions, maybe we care only about major versions

MK: There maybe near and long term questions about the detail of the version

MK: From a screen reader perspective will probably not need as much detail, where as browser developers will want more information

ST: We cannot open up the field to random edits

MK: We do not want manual editing at all

MK: If the other option is recording ..

ST: The user does not do anything about the browser and AT because that is part of the test

ST: We have two ways of showing how may test pass, there are more than on person running a test and some people might change their browser version half way through a test

MK: I have been thinking about these things, go to the ARIA-AT page ...

MK: I am going to disclose menu, so I see from JAWS latest ..., choosing "complete results

MK: There are headings for ever single test

MK: These results are the same for every tester

MK: For every one of these 30 test, we have like a run history collapasable section, with submission date information with browser and screen reader

MK: We would have a place to see each test, when and who ran it, so a history of the page

ST: Our goal is make the summary page as simple as possible

ST: I agree knowing where the data comes from is useful, but the bigger issue is how to look the dependencies right now and in future test

MK: You could make the run history to show prior tests

ST: We can punt on it right now, but this is an important longer term issues on looking at time history, let's look at it sooner rather than later

MK: When we are working with SR companies they will want information in a certain way

ST: Already we are using latest for the reports, we are not losing data, a report might not include from same screen reader

MK: SR developers want to make sure the data is from the most recent version, they care about recency

ST: It will be complicated with auto results, we will need some charts

MK: We are mostly focusing getting screen reader companies in action

ST: What do you need for reviewing the design, is it screen design or work flow, we need this for Issac to be able to provide the information needed

ST: There is a very verbose way to do this, .....

MK: That is good

MK: We will have 3-4 people who cannot see the wireframes

MK: Triaging remaining agenda items

Updates

MK: The sandbox will be changing through Tuesday next week, we need feedback by next Thursday

RN: Just put the changes in =, no review from MK

MK: I will look at the sandbox after the changes

RN: We are tracking for the 16th, and we can send out a message

MK: We might be able to deploy it quickly

SS: I day for review is pretty short, we should have at least 2-4 days

MK: Let's keep in mind that MK and JS are the primary people

RN: I did see a merge I will check on timing

When can report data be deleted?

MK: 637, how big of an issue is it

ST: It is pretty important, the issue is still relevant

MK: Let's not discuss 637 right now

Issue 638

<Matt_King> issue 638: https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/issues/638

MK: This is related to opening a select only combobox

MK: In a standard HTML select, NVDA announces it as a combobox, may not hear size and position information

MK: A standard SELECT doesn't have a separate list

JH: I said it failed since it did not say combobox

MF: List is close

JH: There is a difference between a list and comobox

MK: There is a technical difference

JH: If list is acceptable, then I can change my result

MK: This kind of flexibility, it conveys the concept of combobox, JAWS may say listbox and then NVDA says list, that is confusing

JH: I pose a question, is list fine?

MF: I am fine for this one, since it is consistent within NVDA for other similar situation

MF: But is this good in general for SR to usefdifferent terms for the same content

MK: If we feel like it could lead to user confusion

MK: ARIA has a 140 semantics

MK: They should not have to distinguish between all them, so SR are trying to simplified, since the announcements are describing the visual ..

JG: Developers also have expectations on what should be spoken

MK: We should be telling developers when things are good

JH: The consensus is that list is fine

MK: NVDA is being consistent with its self too

MK: This is going to happen alot, how does the issue title explain the issue

MK: I wonder if we need a record or a table of equivalence so people can see these issues

Discussion of why edited test are still failing

Discussion of the "selected" assertion in single select lists

MK: We need to make sure they can find out the state

rrasgent, make minutes

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 185 (Thu Dec 2 18:51:55 2021 UTC).

Diagnostics

Maybe present: JG, JH, MF, MK, RN, SS, ST