17:39:51 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
17:39:51 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/11/17-aria-irc
17:39:53 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
17:39:54 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jamesn
17:40:00 <jamesn> meeting: ARIA WG
17:40:08 <jamesn> chair: JamesNurthen
17:40:16 <jamesn> regrets+ ValerieYoung
17:40:23 <jamesn> agendabot, find agenda
17:40:23 <agendabot> jamesn, OK. This may take a minute...
17:40:24 <agendabot> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/2b92a902-1365-4ea0-8c68-9f8ae2106fe3/20221117T130000
17:40:24 <agendabot> clear agenda
17:40:24 <agendabot> agenda+  -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/3UGgP31
17:40:24 <agendabot> agenda+  -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3OaLCT7
17:40:26 <agendabot> agenda+  -> Deep Dive planning https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates
17:40:29 <agendabot> agenda+  -> Support aria-description https://github.com/w3c/accname/pull/69  - can this be merged? It will unblock a lot.
17:40:32 <agendabot> agenda+  -> AccName Role Traversal Proposal https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1821
17:40:35 <agendabot> agenda+  -> ARIAMixin and ElementInternals https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1843  - Feedback requested by Anne
17:40:38 <agendabot> agenda+  -> Define how custom elements are exposed to AT https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/175
17:40:41 <agendabot> agenda+  -> 1.3 blocking issues https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A%22ARIA+1.3%22+sort%3Acreated-asc+label%3A1.3-Blocking+
18:00:14 <Adam_Page> Adam_Page has joined #aria
18:01:29 <pkra> pkra has joined #aria
18:02:31 <scotto> scotto has joined #aria
18:03:56 <Adam_Page> present+
18:04:04 <scotto> present+
18:04:18 <pkra> present+
18:04:45 <scotto> mark is a wonderful person and i hope good things happen to him
18:04:47 <MarkMcCarthy> MarkMcCarthy has joined #aria
18:04:54 <MarkMcCarthy> scribe+
18:05:10 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, next item
18:05:10 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/3UGgP31 -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:05:49 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: no new issues today? wow
18:05:57 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: lets peek in one more place
18:06:07 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: okay, cool!
18:06:11 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, next item
18:06:11 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3OaLCT7 -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:06:28 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: no new PRs? wow! holidays...
18:06:40 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: maybe ARIA just works now
18:06:42 <MarkMcCarthy> [laughter]
18:06:48 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, new item
18:06:48 <Zakim> I don't understand 'new item', MarkMcCarthy
18:06:53 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, next item
18:06:53 <Zakim> agendum 2 was just opened, MarkMcCarthy
18:07:01 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, close this item
18:07:01 <Zakim> agendum 2 closed
18:07:02 <Zakim> I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:07:02 <Zakim> 3. -> Deep Dive planning https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates [from agendabot]
18:07:04 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, take up item 3
18:07:04 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- -> Deep Dive planning https://bit.ly/aria-meaty-topic-candidates -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:07:18 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: anyone want to plan a deep dive? we have one on Dec 8
18:07:37 <BGaraventa> BGaraventa has joined #aria
18:07:46 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: aria-flowto is scheduled for Dec 8. only slots we have are Dec 1 and 15
18:07:52 <BGaraventa> present+ bgaraventa
18:08:02 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: hearing none, moving on
18:08:05 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, next item
18:08:05 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- -> Support aria-description https://github.com/w3c/accname/pull/69  - can this be merged? It will unblock a lot. -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:08:39 <MarkMcCarthy> s/moving on/moving on. I cancelled lots of upcoming meetings, so make sure to check your calendars. Nothing between Dec 15 and Jan 5
18:09:01 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: where are we on this one? waiting on the accname editors?
18:09:16 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: it's fine with me, i just need to mark it as approved
18:09:20 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: i fixed the merge conflict
18:09:34 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: hoping for Melanie to check it out, too
18:10:10 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: i'm okay with it, but i need reviewers on #444
18:10:43 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: jcraig, aaron, and BGaraventa have been assigned
18:11:12 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: it's essentially all the same stuff, but in a different spec
18:11:19 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: i'll take a look this afternoon
18:11:41 <MarkMcCarthy> Aaron: I can check it out too
18:11:49 <aaronlev> aaronlev has joined #aria
18:11:58 <jaunita_george> jaunita_george has joined #aria
18:12:03 <jaunita_george> Present+
18:12:11 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: once that's done, all the other PRs will have to be rebased on that, since it changes accname a lot
18:13:39 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, next item
18:13:39 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- -> AccName Role Traversal Proposal https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1821 -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:14:05 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: james teh and BGaraventa have been having some discussions. where are we BGaraventa?
18:15:09 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: james teh would like the 'always' and 'never' speced out, and elements that receive focus. he seems against adding that in, based on the github comments. what does the group think?
18:15:42 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: i'll give it a read through
18:16:16 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: his example of a listbox inside a link... seems like a legitimately weird use case.
18:16:21 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: not sure that's a good example
18:16:45 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: essentially what he's saying is correct - it never makes sense to traverse inside certain roles (like a <select>)
18:16:59 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: when select-size=1, we take the value of the object to put it in the name
18:17:09 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: but you wouldn't traverse into its children, right?
18:17:28 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: we do have examples like that, or like a listbox in a label
18:17:59 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: the precedent should be if the thing has a value
18:18:15 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: could result in getting something without an accessible name, if there's no value though, right?
18:18:32 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: if that's the only thing you had, sure
18:19:03 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: if the aim of this is to make sure everything gets an accname, we'd want to avoid something like that. but that's not the goal here right?
18:19:05 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: yeah
18:19:15 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: i wouldn't want to complicate the algorithm any more than necessary
18:19:46 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: an option is that if a focusable element doesn't have a name, then it's an author error
18:19:57 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: yes AND we can state browsers MAY correct that if they want to
18:20:07 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: what do you think scotto ?
18:20:28 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: i'd rather we go with the least complicated option, and we could take another look at what needs to be done
18:21:02 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: we should look into what common situations come up where an accessible name should be returned and isn't
18:21:20 <chlane> chlane has joined #aria
18:21:54 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: having it completely reliant on focusability - what does that do with virtual cursors and other forms of non-focusing navigation?
18:22:05 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: i'd rathre keep it simple for now and check into the rest later
18:22:05 <chlane> present+
18:22:34 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: i'd like to suggest that naming is never dependent on focus, that seems like an inconsistency that could only have negative impact for screen reader users
18:23:07 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: the one counterpoint I have is where generics get named by contents, if they have tabindex=-1, resulting in the entirey of an ENTIRE div's contents being the name for a container
18:23:27 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: other than that, i totally agree with you Matt
18:23:55 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: that's a situation where i would argue that, if it does get focused, it's a generic, so it shouldn't be named by content ANYWAY
18:23:55 <jamesn> q+
18:24:33 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: if we give the browser some wiggle room to do some kind of processing to decide if SOMETHING is better than NOTHING, then that can exist in the spec too
18:25:04 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: want to make sure that visually hidden things don't get broken by things like that too, in case they have tabindex=-1 (not that they always have that)
18:25:28 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: if it's offscreen for the purpose of helping screenreaders, they should be giving it an accname
18:25:41 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: yes they SHOULD be, but historically hasn't always been the case
18:25:59 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: can we agree that if tabindex shouldn't effect this?
18:26:14 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: if something has tabindex=0 though, that might be a case where we want to
18:26:54 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: what i have the biggest problem with is something GAINING an accname ONLY when it's focused. that mismatches the reading and focus experiences
18:27:11 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: if it COULD be tabbed to (not tabindex=-1), we assign names proactively
18:27:32 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: so when doing that, if you inspect those elements in the dev tools, what does it say about the accname calculation?
18:27:46 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: i don't think we have something saying it's been repaired, probably just says "named from contents"
18:28:13 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: that's part of our concern - language around that needs to be fairly consistent in Firefox and Chrome
18:28:41 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: even a junior engineer might find problems otherwise ("Oh, Chrome is doing a repair - what's firefox doing?")
18:28:59 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: a good feature add might be to say where the name is from, and something like "repaired" included
18:29:11 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: would you be happy if the accname doesn't include that? or should it be?
18:29:21 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: I don't have a specific opinion
18:29:33 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: i do see the benefit of cross browser consistency
18:29:54 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: could you point to the code for the repair, so those interested could see what it's doing?
18:29:57 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: i'll post a link
18:30:21 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: instead of writing something normative, could just be a note that "some browsers may provide error correction" or similar
18:30:29 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: we COULD detail how browsers should do that
18:31:01 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: i'd like to see dev tools getting better, at least where the browser is actively correcting author errors
18:31:06 <aaronlev> In Chrome, the code that decides whether we should traverse an object for it's accessible name computation is called AXObject::SupportsNameFromContents() at https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/renderer/modules/accessibility/ax_object.cc;l=6306
18:31:14 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: it would have make it clear that there's a mistake
18:31:25 <MarkMcCarthy> s/would have make/would make
18:31:31 <aaronlev> It takes a boolean argument, |recursive|, which is true when it's in the middle of computing the name of an ancestor
18:31:48 <aaronlev> there are lots of comments in there -- please let me know if there are areas you see that need clarification
18:32:05 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: this sounds similar to what James Teh wants to do for a title on an image - the author needs to be aware they did something wrong. if dev tools can expose that, great, rather than "I guess it works fine, great, ship it"
18:32:20 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: could we make this an issue so we could pass it along to those that can do it?
18:32:38 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: no urgency, but it'd be helpful to have
18:32:59 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: where could I file it?
18:33:11 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: cr-bug, cr-featurerequest? against Chrome
18:33:31 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: could this be a deep dive topic? With James Teh? He works with Firefox so it'd be good to have Google and Mozilla convos
18:33:37 <MarkMcCarthy> q?
18:33:49 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: before the holidays?
18:33:52 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: no [laughter]
18:33:56 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: january would be great
18:34:04 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: i'll find some folks to join us, too
18:34:21 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: how should we get James to reply/come?
18:34:27 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: pretty responsive via github
18:34:29 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: and email
18:34:38 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: can we summarize this proposal?
18:35:04 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: we would allow browsers to repair things as they like, but WHEN repaired, we want them to flag it as such, so authors don't have a false sense of correctness
18:35:31 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: to make it clear in dev tools that it works because it was repaired, not because it was correct. not visible to the average user
18:35:47 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: support for adding a note to accname spec, that this repair might happen?
18:35:54 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: that seems a natural place to put it
18:36:08 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: might even be a MAY, not a note
18:36:38 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: another good thing might be to say browsers need to document what repairs were done so we can compare results
18:36:45 <MarkMcCarthy> s/results/results as testers
18:36:50 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: browsers must?
18:37:21 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: it'd be hard to get through CR without checking on that
18:37:31 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: browsers SHOULD, might work
18:37:38 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: i like SHOULD over MAY
18:38:06 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: in some cases, it might be do nothing and don't repair, with good cause
18:38:34 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: documenting what repairs are done sounds good. a requirement to reveal a repair could be a SHOULD
18:38:41 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: maybe a MUST if we can get the browsers to agree
18:38:55 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: that might be a separate issue then
18:39:02 <MarkMcCarthy> q?
18:39:09 <jamesn> q-
18:39:20 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: i'd need help with the actual wording of that from the implementers
18:39:36 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: but i'll make a comment of all this to james teh, and let jcraig know about this
18:40:00 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: two actions - 1) browsers SHOULD repair ... 2) an issue about adding "browsers MUST document repairs" or similar
18:40:12 <MarkMcCarthy> scotto: is that to be done here or in ARIA proper?
18:40:19 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: we'll figure that out later
18:40:36 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: why would we change browsers MAY repair to browsers SHOULD repair? not sure we entirely want them to
18:41:11 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: when authors do something incorrect, having inconsistency across browsers can be advantageous to give authors incentive to correct things
18:41:27 <jamesn> we have may, should and must in the correcting author errors section
18:41:28 <jamesn> https://w3c.github.io/aria/#document-handling_author-errors_states-properties
18:41:33 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: assuming peopel test a11y cross browser
18:41:38 <MarkMcCarthy> s/peopel/people
18:41:59 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: assuming that people don't just use what they're comfortable with, rather than checking everywhere
18:42:09 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: i'm fine with MAY or SHOULD
18:42:30 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: in that section about repairs, Matt, we have MAYs, SHOULDs, and MUST NOTs
18:42:48 <MarkMcCarthy> mck: sounds like we need a MUST [laughs] "MUST reveal repairs"
18:43:26 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: there's the other side of the spec change, always traverse or never traverse, what do people think?
18:43:45 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: if we can infer it without having something split it, great. if it's not there, we can add it.
18:44:13 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: james teh is in agreement to adding traversal property to spec
18:44:41 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: what's NOT in agreement is what roles should ALWAYS be traversed, and getting that agreement might be difficult
18:45:26 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: i'm not exactly sure what everyone wants, we've seen what i suggest, and if people could change that/modify to what they think, so we can get a proposal together, that'd be helpful
18:45:55 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: has anyone gone through what you wrote BGaraventa to see if that's what Mozilla or Google do?
18:46:03 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: i haven't done the backend part yet
18:46:26 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: i'll ask james teh, he's got ideas of what should and shouldn't be included
18:46:46 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: jamie has strong opinions about it
18:47:06 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: in the issue, theres a list of what Chromium and Gecko do for their mappings
18:47:35 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: i pasted the link about Chrome's computation above. it's mainly a switch statement, should be pretty readable
18:47:36 <Matt_King> Matt_King has joined #aria
18:47:46 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: this is where i got the information for the spreadsheet
18:48:00 <Matt_King> present+
18:48:29 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: there's some rules for the body element that are kind of unique, is something tabbable just because scrollable, some pragmatic type of rules
18:48:39 <jamesn> agenda?
18:48:47 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: if something has lots of descendents, it's expensive to compute all of that, bad for performance
18:49:02 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: there's a max number of nodes with a named from contents calculation
18:49:15 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: there should be a character limit in that case, maybe
18:49:37 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: doing it by number of nodes is cheapr
18:49:43 <MarkMcCarthy> s/cheapr/cheaper
18:50:29 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: lets table this conversation about repair. it'd be nice to get info from devs about pain points re: browser differences and AT differences, what's making ARIA devs lives difficult, etc. Look at this as PMs rather than cleanup
18:50:32 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: +1
18:51:00 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: yes, tabling for later sounds good
18:51:15 <MarkMcCarthy> BGaraventa: i'll ask james teh if he can modify that list with his suggestions
18:51:29 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: sounds like a way forward
18:51:34 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, next item
18:51:34 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- -> ARIAMixin and ElementInternals https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1843  - Feedback requested by Anne -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:52:09 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: Anne is asking for feedback on his plan - i'm having trouble understanding it
18:52:23 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: is everyone good with the plan, or not understanding it?
18:52:37 <MarkMcCarthy> aaron: let's find someone who makes custom elements and makes them accessible for their opinion
18:52:54 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: i can find some salesforce people, maybe from the AOM meeting
18:53:37 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, next item
18:53:37 <Zakim> agendum 7 -- -> Define how custom elements are exposed to AT https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/175 -- taken up [from agendabot]
18:54:05 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: an associated issue, can we talk about this with AOM too?
18:54:07 <MarkMcCarthy> cyns: yes
18:54:19 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, close this item
18:54:19 <Zakim> agendum 7 closed
18:54:20 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
18:54:20 <Zakim> 8. -> 1.3 blocking issues https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A%22ARIA+1.3%22+sort%3Acreated-asc+label%3A1.3-Blocking+ [from agendabot]
18:54:22 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, take up item 8
18:54:22 <Zakim> agendum 8 -- -> 1.3 blocking issues https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A%22ARIA+1.3%22+sort%3Acreated-asc+label%3A1.3-Blocking+ -- taken up [from
18:54:25 <Zakim> ... agendabot]
18:54:35 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: anyone have updates on these? if not, this is your reminder to work on them
18:54:52 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: hearing none, have a great day everyone!
18:54:59 <zcorpan> zcorpan has joined #aria
18:55:10 <MarkMcCarthy> jamesn: no meeting next week - enjoy your holiday! next meeting is Dec 1
18:55:21 <MarkMcCarthy> zakim, who is here?
18:55:21 <Zakim> Present: Adam_Page, scotto, pkra, bgaraventa, jaunita_george, chlane, Matt_King
18:55:23 <Zakim> On IRC I see zcorpan, Matt_King, chlane, jaunita_george, aaronlev, BGaraventa, MarkMcCarthy, scotto, pkra, Adam_Page, RRSAgent, Zakim, jamesn, Mike5Matrix, leobalter, Jamie,
18:55:23 <Zakim> ... jcraig, joanie, cabanier, github-bot, MichaelC, daniel-montalvo, ada, JonathanNeal, chrishtr, ZoeBijl, timeless, Josh_Soref, bigbluehat, slightlyoff, gregwhitworth, trackbot,
18:55:23 <Zakim> ... agendabot
18:55:29 <MarkMcCarthy> present+ cyns
18:55:38 <MarkMcCarthy> RRSAgent, make minutes
18:55:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/11/17-aria-minutes.html MarkMcCarthy
19:38:32 <zcorpan> zcorpan has joined #aria
19:56:21 <zcorpan> zcorpan has joined #aria
20:08:26 <s3ththompson> s3ththompson has joined #aria
20:12:17 <zcorpan> zcorpan has joined #aria
20:24:11 <chlane> quit
22:03:37 <zcorpan> zcorpan has joined #aria