IRC log of ag on 2022-12-06
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 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