15:40:59 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
15:40:59 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/12/06-ag-irc
15:41:02 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:41:03 <Zakim> Meeting: AGWG Teleconference
15:43:16 <Chuck> agenda?
15:44:29 <Chuck_> Chuck_ has joined #ag
15:44:42 <Chuck_> test
15:45:07 <Chuck_> rrsagent, make logs world
15:45:14 <Chuck_> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:45:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/06-ag-minutes.html Chuck_
15:45:27 <Chuck_> chair:  alastairc
15:45:37 <Chuck_> Zakim, start meeting
15:45:37 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:45:39 <Zakim> Meeting: AGWG Teleconference
15:45:43 <Chuck_> meeting:  AGWG-2022-12-06
15:45:55 <Chuck_> agenda+ Chaals status check in
15:46:03 <Chuck_> agenda+ Test requirements subgroup report
15:46:10 <Chuck_> agenda+ WCAG 2 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc-normative/
15:54:59 <alastairc> agenda?
15:56:17 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
15:59:21 <JustineP> JustineP has joined #ag
15:59:22 <Ben_Tillyer> Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag
15:59:38 <Jason_Khurdan> Jason_Khurdan has joined #ag
16:00:00 <Ben_Tillyer> present+
16:00:15 <mikayla> mikayla has joined #ag
16:00:18 <Lauriat> Lauriat has joined #ag
16:00:20 <Lauriat> Present+
16:00:28 <mikayla> present+
16:00:32 <alastairc> present+
16:00:36 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #ag
16:00:39 <JustineP> present+
16:00:42 <Jason_Khurdan> present+
16:00:43 <bruce_bailey> present+
16:00:55 <ShawnT> present+
16:01:44 <Makoto> Makoto has joined #ag
16:01:48 <Rachael> present+
16:01:56 <Makoto> present+
16:02:22 <tzviya> present+
16:02:26 <JenStrickland_> JenStrickland_ has joined #ag
16:02:26 <jaunita_george> jaunita_george has joined #ag
16:02:30 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #ag
16:02:30 <jaunita_george> Present+
16:02:34 <Wilco> present+
16:02:35 <sarahhorton> sarahhorton has joined #ag
16:03:16 <sarahhorton> present+
16:03:24 <Ben_Tillyer> Should be on the exemption list
16:03:31 <wendyreid> present+
16:04:29 <JenStrickland_> present+
16:04:44 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #ag
16:04:46 <cwilso> cwilso has joined #ag
16:04:49 <mbgower> present+
16:04:57 <sarahhorton> scribe: sarahhorton
16:05:08 <Poornima> Poornima has joined #ag
16:05:16 <Poornima> present+
16:05:38 <sarahhorton> alastairc: Waiting for Charles, get report from test requirements while waiting
16:05:42 <alastairc> zakim, take up item 2
16:05:42 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Test requirements subgroup report -- taken up [from Chuck_]
16:06:30 <sarahhorton> Juanita: test requirements as methods subgroup
16:06:36 <cwilso> present+
16:06:37 <GN015> GN015 has joined #ag
16:06:51 <sarahhorton> ... write methods from other subbroups
16:07:18 <Rachael> slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/13PpTY3IkfurJhkRGwrP7QeIqqgkexPdwrCVXI-NDLOs/edit#slide=id.g18808674c26_0_56
16:07:19 <sarahhorton> ... split into sub subgroups and came up with examples
16:07:41 <sarahhorton> wendyreid: Prescriptive requirements [reviews slides]
16:07:41 <jeanne> present+
16:07:56 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
16:08:03 <sarahhorton> ... results pass or fail
16:08:23 <Raf> Raf has joined #ag
16:08:23 <sarahhorton> ... image with non-empty accessible name and flashing
16:08:23 <MarcJohlic> MarcJohlic has joined #ag
16:08:46 <sarahhorton> ... broke into test sets, focus on binary pass/fail procedure
16:09:11 <sarahhorton> ... trying to apply to different technologies, think about how to break down to apply to techs and use cases
16:09:38 <sarahhorton> ... [reads procedures]
16:10:20 <sarahhorton> ... first pass, very pass/fail scenario, should apply to different scenarios
16:10:35 <laura> laura has joined #ag
16:10:48 <sarahhorton> Poornima: Adaptive requirements [reads procedures]
16:10:51 <laura> present+ Laura_Carlson
16:11:17 <Ryladogg> Ryladogg has joined #ag
16:11:38 <sarahhorton> ... examples, contrast, how user wants to adjust based on needs
16:11:49 <sarahhorton> ... different input modes
16:12:07 <Ryladogg> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
16:12:10 <sarahhorton> ... understandable color contrast [reads slides]
16:13:24 <sarahhorton> ... computational and quantitative methods
16:13:44 <sarahhorton> ... how to define, need research to define
16:14:10 <alastairc> Any questions, please get on q, we can ask  between presenters or at the end.
16:14:21 <sarahhorton> ... input modality requirement [reads slide]
16:14:55 <sarahhorton> ... adaptations for input modality, keyboard, switch device
16:15:31 <sarahhorton> ... qualitative tests, computational tests [reads slides]
16:16:34 <sarahhorton> Rachael: extensible requirements, multiple ways to measure [reviews slides]
16:17:22 <sarahhorton> ... color contrast requirements example
16:17:40 <sarahhorton> ... reading level examples
16:18:20 <sarahhorton> ... extensible requirements supports new methods, e.g., AI-based testing
16:19:08 <sarahhorton> Jason_Khurdan: protocol requirements
16:19:12 <Chuck_> There's a LOT of excellent work here!
16:19:31 <Ryladogg> Agreed
16:19:31 <sarahhorton> ... example abbreviations [reads slide]
16:19:58 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #ag
16:20:16 <GreggVan> present+
16:20:43 <GreggVan> Can someone repost the link to the powerpoint?  my IRC was dicconnected
16:20:58 <Chuck_> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/13PpTY3IkfurJhkRGwrP7QeIqqgkexPdwrCVXI-NDLOs/edit#slide=id.g18808674c26_0_56
16:21:05 <sarahhorton> Juanita: Issues for discussion
16:21:48 <sarahhorton> ... [reads slide]
16:21:58 <GreggVan> q+
16:22:27 <mbgower> q+ to say great work and I have comments to strengthen
16:22:30 <jeanne> q+
16:22:38 <sarahhorton> ... structure of guidelines, where to go from here
16:22:48 <Wilco> q+
16:22:57 <alastairc> ack GreggVan
16:23:36 <sarahhorton> GreggVan: Adaptive, relate to different needs, e.g., contrast, how to turn into requirement? Need high, low, whatever someone needs
16:23:53 <sarahhorton> ... what is the requirement if it changes for different peopl
16:24:01 <Poornima> q+
16:24:15 <alastairc> ack Poornima
16:24:41 <sarahhorton> Poornima: Baseline idea, bring out methods to define contrast ratio for context of elements
16:25:11 <alastairc> q+ to ask if we should collapse to 2 types.
16:25:42 <sarahhorton> ... adaptive requirements related to context, bring out what works for variations, research needed to bring out equations that satisfies most adaptations
16:26:12 <sarahhorton> GreggVan: Sounds like when create, need to keep broad range of needs in mind
16:26:14 <Rachael> q+
16:26:31 <sarahhorton> ... requirements that change with users, example of wording of requirement that's adaptive
16:27:04 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
16:27:07 <sarahhorton> ... sounds like, need to develop web page that meets user needs for color contrast, does that mean need a control? That would be requirement
16:27:16 <alastairc> ack mbgower
16:27:16 <Zakim> mbgower, you wanted to say great work and I have comments to strengthen
16:27:31 <GreggVan> q+
16:27:35 <Chuck_> +1 to mbgower, helps me too!
16:27:40 <sarahhorton> mbgower: Really useful, feedback on all, what's best way to provide?
16:28:06 <sarahhorton> ... specific, wants really good examples, make sure relevant to discussion, writing, share deck?
16:28:15 <alastairc> ack jeanne
16:28:20 <kirkwood> present+
16:28:53 <sarahhorton> jeanne: Great to have example, grateful for all work to have example, a lot more clear, can build out better
16:29:09 <sarahhorton> ... concerned about adaptive, different direction from prior group
16:29:22 <sarahhorton> ... may need to adjust back or work through comparing examples
16:29:36 <sarahhorton> ... also protocols, seems like different direction, 3rd proposal
16:29:52 <sarahhorton> ... discuss what proposal to follow, how they work together
16:30:11 <sarahhorton> ... groups have worked on what's in a method, would want that to come forward
16:30:23 <alastairc> ack Wilco
16:30:23 <sarahhorton> alastairc: Join meeting and brief on previous work?
16:31:01 <sarahhorton> Wilco: Really likes, appreciates, not sure about next steps but WG chairs need to decide how to get feedback
16:31:14 <sarahhorton> ... hoping every group would have PRs but not panning out
16:31:35 <jaunita_george> We plan to have a pull request, but that's a couple of weeks out.
16:31:41 <sarahhorton> ... requirement term, intended as placeholder until decided whether methods or outcomes
16:31:49 <sarahhorton> ... explore whether should be methods
16:32:00 <alastairc> q?
16:32:03 <Rachael> +1 to these being methods
16:32:05 <alastairc> ack alastairc
16:32:05 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to ask if we should collapse to 2 types.
16:32:06 <sarahhorton> ... ideas fit as methods, maybe should start calling types of methods
16:32:49 <sarahhorton> alastairc: chair hat off, might not need all different types, adaptive might be way of coming up with requirements that become prescriptive
16:33:05 <alastairc> ack Rachael
16:33:08 <sarahhorton> ... overlaps, might all collapse down to two
16:33:41 <sarahhorton> Rachael: hat on, email AG group with feedback, subgroup take into account, could do survey
16:34:02 <sarahhorton> ... hat off, question about context, user context or different context
16:34:29 <bruce_bailey> q+ to ask how many more meetings subgroup has scheduled ?
16:34:29 <sarahhorton> ... yes, user context, another way to do with if/then, prefers "conditional"
16:34:42 <alastairc> q?
16:34:46 <alastairc> ack GreggVan
16:34:46 <sarahhorton> ... merge adaptive and extensible that's conditional but not user centered
16:35:08 <sarahhorton> GreggVan: +1 to several people, thank you for doing critical work
16:35:36 <sarahhorton> ... also definition of terms clarity, have 2–3 example SCs for each
16:35:51 <sarahhorton> ... some come down to conditional
16:36:13 <Chuck_> ... and "guidelines"
16:36:26 <alastairc> ack bruce_bailey
16:36:26 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask how many more meetings subgroup has scheduled ?
16:36:27 <sarahhorton> ... contrast example, 2 ways of measuring with different result, which do I design to? Both? Every? Must be answer to whether passed
16:36:36 <sarahhorton> bruce_bailey: Tough and valuable, thank you
16:36:49 <sarahhorton> ... how many more meetings for group?
16:37:20 <sarahhorton> Juanita: At least 2, asked for 2-week extension, take into account holiday season
16:37:25 <Chuck_> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/13PpTY3IkfurJhkRGwrP7QeIqqgkexPdwrCVXI-NDLOs/edit#slide=id.g18808674c26_0_56
16:37:39 <sarahhorton> alastairc: Look through, email group with feedback, subgroup take into account
16:38:10 <alastairc> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/culture_check_in/results
16:38:11 <sarahhorton> alastairc: Checkin about culture, trying to keep checkins on regular cadence, Charles isn't here
16:38:15 <GreggVan> q+ to ask if there is an address to email the group directly or if all comments should go to the full group
16:38:36 <Chuck_> Chaals' email is in the survey
16:38:43 <sarahhorton> ... will reopen survey, can email Charles, interested in feedback, working through feedback for better ways of working
16:38:50 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
16:38:53 <sarahhorton> ... come back when Charles is available
16:39:00 <GreggVan> thx
16:39:03 <alastairc> ack GreggVan `
16:39:05 <alastairc> ack GreggVan
16:39:05 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to ask if there is an address to email the group directly or if all comments should go to the full group
16:39:15 <Chuck_> zakim, take up item 3
16:39:15 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- WCAG 2 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc-normative/ -- taken up [from Chuck_]
16:39:48 <alastairc> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc-normative/results
16:39:51 <Chuck_> TOPIC:  Question 1 - Difficulties with inconsistency of Target Size (Minimum) #2695
16:40:00 <Chuck_> Chuck_ has changed the topic to: Question 1 - Difficulties with inconsistency of Target Size (Minimum) #2695
16:40:26 <sarahhorton> Chuck_: [reads survey question]
16:41:51 <sarahhorton> ... [reviews responses]
16:43:39 <GreggVan> q+
16:44:02 <sarahhorton> mbgower: [reviews response]
16:44:36 <sarahhorton> ... increases possibility of increase in density of controls
16:44:48 <bruce_bailey> q+ to change vote from survey -- because of problem MG just describe
16:45:08 <sarahhorton> Chuck_: [reads responses]
16:45:44 <sarahhorton> bruce_bailey: Troubled by what mgower's point
16:46:07 <sarahhorton> Chuck_: [reads responses]
16:46:50 <bruce_bailey> s/Troubled by what mgower's point/Troubled by the defect mgower's describes
16:47:13 <Chuck_> q?
16:47:15 <JStrickland> JStrickland has joined #ag
16:47:18 <Chuck_> ack gregg
16:48:03 <sarahhorton> GreggVan: Proposal for "x" pixels and thought would be 24, target size next to each other as long as large enough, also allows small buttons spaced
16:48:10 <alastairc> q+ to talk to size chosen
16:48:36 <Chuck_> ack bru
16:48:36 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to change vote from survey -- because of problem MG just describe
16:48:42 <mbgower> q+ to say I have a bit more info on possible numbers to plug in, and a possible suggestion
16:48:47 <Chuck_> ack ala
16:48:47 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to talk to size chosen
16:49:00 <JStrickland> should sizing be relative with minimums specified?
16:49:16 <sarahhorton> alastairc: picked 12, minimum of 24 divided by 2 = 12
16:49:17 <Wilco> q+
16:49:33 <JStrickland> Present+
16:49:33 <Chuck_> ack mb
16:49:33 <Zakim> mbgower, you wanted to say I have a bit more info on possible numbers to plug in, and a possible suggestion
16:49:33 <sarahhorton> ... concern is how interacts with size and spacing
16:49:46 <GreggVan> q+
16:49:57 <kirkwood> If I could still vote per the previous survey timing, I would vote “Switch to the suggestion above in PR 2825”
16:50:17 <sarahhorton> mbgower: start increasing size from 12, further spacing between smaller targets, creates targets approaching 24, increase space around them
16:50:29 <sarahhorton> ... calculation bumps it up
16:50:52 <sarahhorton> ... points between centers of targets
16:51:15 <sarahhorton> ... also none address diagonal targets
16:51:49 <Chuck_> q?
16:51:52 <Chuck_> ack Wil
16:52:11 <sarahhorton> Wilco: Current approach better than PR, had approach in earlier version
16:52:44 <sarahhorton> ... encourages small components and maximize space between as proposed in PR, harmful
16:52:59 <bruce_bailey> q+ to say we are close
16:53:05 <sarahhorton> ... figure out how to do with measure horizonal and vertical
16:53:59 <sarahhorton> ... very unintuitive as written
16:54:00 <alastairc> q+
16:54:02 <Chuck_> ack Greg
16:54:25 <sarahhorton> GreggVan: Earlier one has problems, proposed one doesn't
16:55:01 <sarahhorton> ... need 24 pixel area for finger, 12px distance between point in this thing and others, have 24px circle
16:55:04 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
16:55:32 <sarahhorton> ... not from corners, point in link to every other thing
16:55:52 <sarahhorton> ... always have 24pt circle around thing
16:56:35 <mbgower> q+
16:56:49 <sarahhorton> ... trying to create clear space, doesn't increase density, always the same thing, always 24px
16:57:12 <GN015> q+
16:57:12 <Chuck_> ack Br
16:57:13 <sarahhorton> ... don't want small controls, HCI issue
16:57:15 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to say we are close
16:57:46 <sarahhorton> bruce_bailey: So close, important SC, agree closer previously
16:57:58 <Chuck_> q?
16:58:00 <Chuck_> ack ala
16:58:00 <sarahhorton> ... if 24px, does that address density?
16:58:03 <sarahhorton> al
16:58:04 <bruce_bailey> scribe+ bruce_bailey
16:58:17 <alastairc> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2798/files
16:58:21 <Wilco> No, the SC becomes even stranger with 24 px
16:58:53 <bruce_bailey> Alistair to Wilco:  I think we tried earlier draft that was close.  What needed change?
16:59:08 <GreggVan> q+
16:59:15 <Chuck_> ack mb
16:59:16 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  Would like to get to a decision or path to decision.
17:00:01 <bruce_bailey> MikeGower:  Proposal today versus existing one, consider nightmare 1 px target and 24 css spacing
17:00:36 <bruce_bailey> ... with current proposal, that drops down to 12 -- targets can be much too dense
17:00:38 <Chuck_> ack GN
17:01:21 <bruce_bailey> ... result is probably we will see much smaller widely spaced targets with this proposal.
17:01:39 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:02:21 <bruce_bailey> Gundala:  Consider example of letters being different targets , this language encourages those being densely packed together
17:03:19 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  Issue thread gives lots of example with counter intuitive and inaccessible results
17:03:57 <bruce_bailey> ... tenstion between UI which works for finger and mouse...
17:04:50 <mbgower> Establishing a minimum size for a button would be useful; do we have research that can back up what we set?
17:04:50 <bruce_bailey> ... single pixel targets should always fail... there should be a minimum size PLUS the min distance
17:05:06 <Chuck_> q?
17:05:10 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  I think solution is to have minimum size
17:05:12 <bruce_bailey> q+
17:05:17 <alastairc> q+
17:05:41 <Chuck_> bruce:  I would like to hear what happens if it's a naive 24 pixel space from target and any other edge of any other target.
17:05:44 <mbgower> it would double the space between targets
17:05:45 <Chuck_> q?
17:05:49 <Chuck_> ack bru
17:05:51 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:06:09 <GreggVan> q+
17:06:32 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  If you pick one point from 24 css pixel from every other target, so then that doubles the size.
17:07:05 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  I think we are closer with Wilco's previous suggestion.
17:07:05 <Chuck_> q+ to ask if we are trying to work and modify Wilco's proposal?
17:07:09 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:07:42 <alastairc> q+
17:07:52 <mbgower> I think practically a 24 pixel 'square' is an easy way to test for correct; it just doesn't work for our language
17:08:12 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  at 12 px finger can easily hit two targets.
17:08:45 <bruce_bailey> ... previous versions were complex and led to some unexpected results...
17:09:02 <alastairc> q+ to say where the spacing came from
17:09:05 <bruce_bailey> ... cannot have only target size and not spacing
17:09:12 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:09:12 <Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to ask if we are trying to work and modify Wilco's proposal?
17:09:30 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:09:30 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to say where the spacing came from
17:09:35 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  Is path forward to put more effort to Wilco's approach?
17:10:31 <bruce_bailey> Alastar:  The reason for the spacing exception is that orginaly we had 44 px minimum target size and that was too much...
17:11:00 <bruce_bailey> ... we consequently dropped down to 24 px minimum size as nominal requirement...
17:11:29 <bruce_bailey> ... but one can also have smaller button so long as there is enough spacing between targets.
17:11:43 <Chuck_> q+
17:11:45 <bruce_bailey> [alastair screen sharing illustration]
17:12:55 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  for button in row, designers can have medium sized buttons spaced out in the row...
17:12:59 <GreggVan> q+  to say that you made an excellent point about on screen vs  real buttons.   With real buttons you need to allow for fat fingers -- to not press the button next to it.  With touch screens all touches are reduced to a point
17:12:59 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:13:16 <Chuck_> ack Greg
17:13:16 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say that you made an excellent point about on screen vs  real buttons.   With real buttons you need to allow for fat fingers -- to not press the button next
17:13:19 <Zakim> ... to it.  With touch screens all touches are reduced to a point
17:13:22 <bruce_bailey> ... using only spacing the temptation is jus to make buttons smaller to pass the SC.
17:13:44 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  How much time do want today Alastair?
17:14:15 <alastairc> Running out of points, suggest stopping now. IDeally someone (Wilco, mbgower ?) might check the issue with the previous suggestion
17:14:26 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  With touchscreen, targets are essentially all reduced to single px target...
17:15:14 <GN015> q+ to remind on coordination issues and tremor
17:15:20 <bruce_bailey> ... touchscreens look at all px touched -- the touchscreen find middle of your touch and decides the single exact point...
17:15:34 <Chuck_> ack GN
17:15:34 <Zakim> GN, you wanted to remind on coordination issues and tremor
17:16:11 <bruce_bailey> ... I really think we only need to set minimum size because that is the way touch screen work.  Spacing is a red herring
17:16:49 <GreggVan> q+ to say that those Gns comments are all good -- but they have to do with target size not spacing.   so they speak infavor of size
17:16:53 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:16:53 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say that those Gns comments are all good -- but they have to do with target size not spacing.   so they speak infavor of size
17:16:59 <bruce_bailey> Gundala:  I don't think just target size and not spacing does not address people who have tremors or use alternative pointing devices.
17:17:11 <Chuck_> q+ to end conversation and move on to question 2.
17:17:11 <alastairc> q+
17:17:14 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:17:23 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  I agree with barrier -- but it can be solved with spacing and not spacing.
17:17:25 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:17:25 <Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to end conversation and move on to question 2.
17:17:35 <Chuck_> q?
17:17:41 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  Have we just dropped the spacing exception then?
17:17:50 <GN015> q+
17:17:56 <Chuck_> ack Gn
17:18:04 <alastairc> q+
17:18:08 <mbgower> That seems pretty rash at this point in the game
17:18:18 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:18:23 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  As reminder, core requirement is 24 x 24 square.
17:18:52 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  Spacing is there because we started with 44 pixel...
17:19:12 <GreggVan> q+  it might be best to say   "minimum of 16 px and the button plus spacing must be 24 x 24"
17:19:22 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:19:27 <bruce_bailey> ... as we dropped that number down, we added spacing exception to improve size.
17:20:01 <Chuck_> q+
17:20:03 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  I think something like 16 px min size and requirement for 24 px spacing could work
17:20:13 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:20:17 <alastairc> move on
17:20:17 <bruce_bailey> ... it is easy to understand and can eliminate exception
17:20:38 <Chuck_> TOPIC:  Question 2 - Better clarity on inline targets for Target Size #2767
17:20:39 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  we will leave this unresolved , keep on survey
17:20:46 <Chuck_> Chuck_ has changed the topic to: Question 2 - Better clarity on inline targets for Target Size #2767
17:21:12 <bruce_bailey> [chuck reads survey Q]
17:21:37 <GreggVan> s /  16 px min size and requirement for 24 px spacing   / "minimum of 16 px and the button plus spacing must be 24 x 24"
17:21:39 <bruce_bailey> In Issue 2767 we discussioned the inline exception of target size.  The preferred option from a WCAG 2.x meeting was:  Inline: The target is a text link dependent on the line-height of non-link text.  This narrows the exception to text links, and is clearer about whether something is in scope or not. It is implemented as PR 2824.  Please see the working document of suggestions and examples, which shows what would be included / not-include[CUT]
17:21:58 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  of those who agreed and commented...
17:22:30 <bruce_bailey> Chuck reads Bruce comment:  Similar exception for AAA Success Criterion 2.5.5 Target Size should also be updated or renamed (assuming this gets consensus).
17:22:54 <bruce_bailey> Chuck reads Wilco comment...
17:23:32 <bruce_bailey> [chuck moving on to agreement-with-adjustment comments]
17:23:46 <bruce_bailey> [chuck reads GreggV comment]
17:24:04 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  needs works, I did not suggest text
17:24:31 <alastairc> q+
17:24:36 <bruce_bailey> Chuck invites Wilco to expand on his survey comment.
17:24:37 <alastairc> q+ to summarise examples
17:25:05 <bruce_bailey> Wilco:  definition is missing some situations which should be covered
17:25:18 <bruce_bailey> [chuck read Gundal's comment]
17:26:10 <bruce_bailey> [chuck reads other comments]
17:26:23 <mbgower> q+
17:26:32 <bruce_bailey> [chuck invites other comments before open Q]
17:26:37 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:26:37 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to summarise examples
17:26:42 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  can we just use text height ?
17:27:46 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  i want to +1 mike comment in survey, that it is better and good enough , helps with consistent and easily provided rule ...
17:27:58 <bruce_bailey> ... should help with inter rater reliability
17:28:21 <GreggVan> q+  to say  Exception  "it is a text link and is at least  xx point text"
17:28:48 <Chuck_> q+ to mention Gregg's suggestion, does that refer to AWK's "line-height of text"?
17:28:48 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  Wikipedia provided rich test cases -- lots of text in various kinds of list, sometimes single words
17:29:09 <Chuck_> ack mb
17:29:11 <GreggVan>  [09:28:21]  GreggVan: q+  to say  Exception  "it is a text link/target and is at least  xx point text"
17:29:22 <bruce_bailey> MikeGower:  This exception was primariliy target to link text and list of links...
17:29:28 <GreggVan>  q+  to say  Exception  "it is a text link/target and is at least  xx point text"
17:29:39 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:29:39 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say  Exception  "it is a text link and is at least  xx point text" and to say  Exception  "it is a text link/target and is at least  xx point text"
17:29:56 <bruce_bailey> ... when button is in line with line of text it can be a little sketchy
17:30:02 <Chuck_> q?
17:30:05 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:30:05 <Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to mention Gregg's suggestion, does that refer to AWK's "line-height of text"?
17:30:08 <mbgower> we have never prescribed text size in WCAG
17:30:20 <Chuck_> q?
17:30:22 <AWK> q+
17:30:26 <Chuck_> ack AWK
17:30:50 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  I would like that we not exempt when text gets too small.  For example 4 point is just too small and should not be afforded the flexibility we imply here.
17:30:58 <alastairc> q+
17:31:09 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:31:18 <bruce_bailey> AWK:  We have never prescribed text height / size in wcag
17:31:46 <AWK> I had the same comment as Mike Gower
17:32:06 <AWK> All text, even links need to meet the resize requirements
17:32:24 <GreggVan> q+
17:32:34 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:32:39 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  I don't think miminum text size is feasible, which is why we propose using lineheight of text , we might use "target size"
17:33:02 <alastairc> q+ on "determined by"
17:33:38 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  I concure, someone can always expand text size.  But would that not also apply to text in a pull down which might still just be text -- but needs a minimum target size.
17:33:43 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:33:43 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to comment on "determined by"
17:34:49 <Wilco> q+
17:34:54 <Chuck_> ack Wil
17:34:57 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  I do not think drop down gets the exception because it might be effect by browser zoom, menu spacing not determined by text line height.
17:35:23 <alastairc> The target size is determined by the line-height of non-link text.
17:35:34 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  There were some questions in survey around phrasing "determined by line height".  Wilco?
17:35:49 <kirkwood> Curious, wouldn’t Zoom by a user agent exception for all of these topics today?
17:35:53 <alastairc> The target size is contrained by the line-height of non-link text.
17:35:53 <GreggVan> +1 to "constrained by line height"
17:36:03 <Chuck_> +1
17:36:16 <bruce_bailey> Wilco:  The height is "constrained by line height"?  I really do not think "determined by" is technically correct
17:36:28 <alastairc> kirkwood - it is defined in CSS pixels, so not affected.
17:36:33 <kirkwood> +1
17:36:33 <Wilco> +1 to constrained, -1 to non-link text
17:36:33 <ShawnT> +1
17:36:34 <GN015> -1
17:36:37 <mbgower> I think we all understand the concept; we just need language to convey
17:36:38 <laura> +1
17:36:45 <Makoto> +1
17:36:59 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
17:37:02 <AWK> Same as gregg I think?  line-height but not mentioning non-linked
17:37:03 <mbgower> +1 to constrained
17:37:05 <Detlev> present+
17:37:13 <bruce_bailey> [chuck echo's MG irc comment]
17:37:22 <mbgower> I'm fine taking out non-link text
17:37:31 <alastairc> Wilco - so what we it be constrained by?
17:37:39 <mbgower> q+
17:37:56 <Chuck_> ack mb
17:38:00 <bruce_bailey> Wilco:  As per my comment, somethings are text but not list of text.  Phrasing needs more deliberation.
17:38:04 <alastairc> q+
17:38:14 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:38:15 <mbgower> trying to unmute :)
17:38:23 <Chuck_> q+ mbgower
17:38:36 <bruce_bailey> Gundala:  Agree with Wilco, language does not seem quite finished
17:38:55 <mbgower> yeah, this is what I was going to say. We need soemthing other than the 'link' to constrain the link's height.
17:39:00 <mbgower> Otherwise they all pass!
17:39:26 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  Point of current phrasing that one needs something -- that is not hypertext -- to compare the link target size against.
17:40:02 <Chuck_> ack mbg
17:40:04 <mbgower> I guess not :)
17:40:08 <bruce_bailey> ... We are trying to draw the line, something better than "text in a sentence"  which is not good enough.
17:40:14 <Chuck_> q?
17:40:14 <GreggVan> q+
17:40:20 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:41:00 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  As MG notes, we can't say link text height -- because then linked text *always* pass
17:41:02 <mbgower> 'typical type' is a couple of pixels under 24px. it doesn't take much
17:41:09 <Wilco> Suggestion: Inline: The target is part of a <a>text<a>, and the size is constrained by the line height.
17:41:23 <Chuck_> q+ to read out mbgower's comment
17:41:31 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:41:31 <Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to read out mbgower's comment
17:41:56 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  please see examples from Doc -- what get the exception and what does not
17:42:18 <alastairc> Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BFNDFnbU9CizswP4oEICpFHeqt7qXg9kRt2QEDoUXSM/edit#
17:42:19 <mbgower> That still doesn't capture links that are left nav, for example
17:42:25 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  Wilco you note that hypertext links go back to the beginning of inter net
17:42:31 <GreggVan> when saying typical text is 24 pixels   almost ---  what point size is assumed?
17:42:37 <Chuck_> q?
17:42:43 <GreggVan> q+
17:42:44 <mbgower> They meet the defnitino of text
17:42:48 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  MG asks about left nav bars?
17:42:49 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:43:04 <Wilco> It's not, default font-size in browsers is 16px
17:43:11 <mbgower> 16 pt with 1.5 height
17:43:28 <Chuck_> q?
17:43:33 <mbgower> 12pt with 1.5= 18; 14 pt with 1.5 is 21
17:44:05 <bruce_bailey> [greg ask about nominal browser default.  alastair answer 16 css px]
17:44:53 <Chuck_> The target is part of a marked up anchor (i.e. <a>text<a>), and the size is constrained by the line height.
17:45:10 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  some comments about what would not ever be in scope?  Wilco notes inline exception seems very broad.
17:45:14 <Wilco> q+
17:45:17 <Chuck_> ack Wil
17:45:21 <mbgower> I'm not sure how descenders fit into the calculation for font size (ie. if the bottom of a lower case g going protruding into the 1.5 space?)
17:45:42 <alastairc> Inline: The size of the target is constrained by the line height of non-target text.
17:45:47 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  from survey, anchor text is this element A?
17:46:06 <Chuck_> q?
17:46:07 <mbgower> Yep, that works
17:46:12 <bruce_bailey> WIlco:  Survey comment is just about text.  Nothing about anchor element.
17:46:26 <Chuck_> The size of the target is constrained by the line height of non-target text.
17:46:47 <Chuck_> +1
17:46:50 <mbgower> it is L2R language specific though
17:46:56 <kirkwood> q+
17:47:01 <Chuck_> ack kirk
17:47:08 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  this is similar, but maybe less technology specific
17:47:40 <Chuck_> q+ to echo mbgower's comment
17:48:08 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:48:08 <Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to echo mbgower's comment
17:48:13 <bruce_bailey> JohnKirkwood:  I am not sure this is doing what we want.  Could be small text using larger line spacing.  Only the letters, not spacing above letters, is target.
17:48:28 <alastairc> q+
17:48:31 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:48:43 <GreggVan> inter line spacing  -- instead of  line height
17:48:59 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  I think we are okay with small text with larger line height -- because of the other exceptions -- there would still be good spacing between lines of text.
17:49:06 <mbgower> yep, so long as we address specifically
17:49:08 <Chuck_> q?
17:49:22 <Chuck_> The size of the target is constrained by the line height of non-target text.
17:49:38 <mbgower> +1
17:49:52 <bruce_bailey> Alastar:  [responding to question about L2R languages] yes, we have been keeping in mind phrasing is not limited to left to right languages.
17:49:53 <Detlev> +1
17:49:56 <Ryladogg> +1
17:49:59 <Makoto> +1
17:50:04 <alastairc> +1
17:50:09 <Wilco> -1 I think this exception should only apply to targets that are part of text
17:50:18 <GreggVan> 0  which text ?    where on page?    adjacent ?
17:50:20 <ShawnT> +1
17:50:25 <alastairc> q+
17:50:27 <GN015> -0.5 I still feel it can be miused, that is applied in unintended way
17:51:24 <Chuck_> q+ to read out mbgower's comment
17:51:41 <bruce_bailey> Wilco:  This should only apply to text near non-text targets.  Consider a bread crumb:  might be line of text and one single character at end...
17:51:55 <bruce_bailey> ... breadcrumbs should not warrent exception
17:51:56 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:52:11 <bruce_bailey> Gundala:  Still have my previous concerns.
17:52:37 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:52:37 <Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to read out mbgower's comment
17:52:40 <Wilco> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-text
17:53:06 <GreggVan> q+ to say -- if we require all pages to allow text enlargement without loss of function -- why are we so concerned about this since a size bump of the page would make text larger.    MAYBE  it should be   "except if it is a text link"
17:53:08 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  I am struggling with describing why hypertext is constrained by text is a reasonable lens for the exception.
17:53:50 <bruce_bailey> ... we want to support reflow and client zoom, going through the examples the key seemed to be if the target was text -- but that is circular
17:53:53 <Chuck_> q+ to ask GN and Wilco a question?
17:53:56 <Chuck_> ack Gregg
17:53:56 <Zakim> GreggVan, you wanted to say -- if we require all pages to allow text enlargement without loss of function -- why are we so concerned about this since a size bump of the page would
17:53:59 <Zakim> ... make text larger.    MAYBE  it should be   "except if it is a text link"
17:54:08 <Chuck_> ack Ch
17:54:08 <Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to ask GN and Wilco a question?
17:54:17 <bruce_bailey> ... so having target size constrained by line height is the sweat spot
17:54:29 <mbgower> been down that road, Gregg. Folks didn't link resize text (or zoom) as a solution for target size
17:54:32 <Chuck_> q?
17:54:38 <Wilco> q+
17:54:39 <bruce_bailey> GreggV:  Can we just say text that is link?
17:54:44 <mbgower> s/link resize/like resize
17:55:01 <Chuck_> ack Wil
17:55:15 <bruce_bailey> Gundala:  Can you demonstrate that using lineheight does not lead to exploits?
17:55:30 <Chuck_> q?
17:55:32 <alastairc> q+
17:55:33 <bruce_bailey> Wilco:  My concern is that this decision feels too rushed.
17:55:36 <Chuck_> ack ala
17:55:46 <mbgower> q+ to say the current wording will create HUGE inter-rater reliability
17:56:25 <Chuck_> ack Mb
17:56:25 <Zakim> mbgower, you wanted to say the current wording will create HUGE inter-rater reliability
17:56:33 <bruce_bailey> Alastair:  Wilco, and other, please look at examples.  The five of us really beat the present wording around and came to good inter-rater reliablity.
17:57:14 <bruce_bailey> MG:  It is impossible to get people to agree as to "What is a sentence"?  Using this odd phrasing is objective.
17:57:15 <Chuck_> q?
17:58:03 <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  no resolution
17:58:16 <GN015> present+
17:58:22 <alastairc> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:58:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/06-ag-minutes.html alastairc
18:00:03 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
18:02:58 <alastairc> Browser zoom does reflow, magnification doesn't.
18:08:07 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #ag
18:18:20 <Karen> Karen has joined #ag
18:19:18 <laura> laura has joined #ag
19:00:22 <Jem> Jem has joined #ag
19:11:08 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
19:20:06 <Karen> Karen has joined #ag
19:27:10 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
19:44:41 <Karen> Karen has joined #ag
19:50:44 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
20:19:08 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
20:30:42 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
20:37:54 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
20:51:10 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
21:19:04 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
21:36:27 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
21:40:46 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
21:53:43 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
22:05:29 <Karen> Karen has joined #ag
22:13:21 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
22:32:27 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
22:53:52 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
22:57:26 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #ag
23:12:57 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
23:34:21 <Seirdy> Seirdy has joined #ag
23:55:35 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #ag