13:52:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag-act
13:52:30 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/01/05-wcag-act-irc
13:52:30 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:52:31 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Wilco
13:52:50 <Wilco> agenda+ ACT Standup
13:52:53 <Wilco> agenda+ secondary requirements & Editors draft
13:52:55 <Wilco> agenda+ Role attribute has valid value
13:52:57 <Wilco> agenda+ ARIA state or property has valid value
13:52:59 <Wilco> agenda+ Technical complexity of rules
13:53:01 <Wilco> agenda+ Decide if we want to continue using "test cases" as a term, along with examples
13:54:21 <thbrunet> thbrunet has joined #wcag-act
13:57:35 <kathy> kathy has joined #wcag-act
13:59:00 <kathy> agenda?
13:59:08 <ToddL> ToddL has joined #wcag-act
14:00:47 <Will_C> Will_C has joined #wcag-act
14:01:19 <trevor> trevor has joined #wcag-act
14:01:24 <Helen> Helen has joined #wcag-act
14:04:04 <Helen> present+
14:04:10 <Helen> scribe+
14:04:10 <Wilco> present+
14:04:12 <kathy> present+
14:04:12 <trevor> present+
14:04:13 <thbrunet> present+
14:04:16 <Will_C> present+
14:04:19 <ToddL> present+
14:04:32 <Helen> zakim, take up next
14:04:32 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- ACT Standup -- taken up [from Wilco]
14:05:12 <Helen> Wilco: I have been doing stuff and working with AG on the rules put forward to them
14:06:00 <Helen> Tom: Worked on the surveys and the results are not behaving in the 2nd rule  - I want to chat to you about it Wilco
14:06:10 <Helen> ... I have a todo on one of the rules
14:06:41 <Helen> Kathy: I did the surveys and I reached out to Jean-Yves on one of the rules I am working on and will share it
14:07:04 <Helen> ... I also sent an email to ACT-Rules and it seems we have more people in it than we want
14:07:59 <ToddL> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1926
14:08:01 <Helen> Todd: I have to work on my PR and I will ping you Wilco on my questions - making the examples work - 1926
14:08:54 <Helen> Trevor: I have 2 PR open and I got approvals on the captions and I have one on the text change and I need to hash it out but been busy, and I did the surveys
14:08:58 <Helen> ... I have a long list
14:09:45 <Helen> Will: I did the 2 surveys and I made a PR for a typo and I asked a question and feel proud. I also need to catch up on my PR
14:09:58 <Helen> Wilco: Or ask Trevor?
14:10:21 <Wilco> scribe+
14:10:41 <Wilco> Helen: Working with Jean-Yves on templates
14:11:02 <Wilco> ... Worked on a new rule, but didn't get far.
14:11:15 <Wilco> ... Changed jobs, and filled in the survey
14:11:58 <Helen> zakim, take up next
14:11:58 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- secondary requirements & Editors draft -- taken up [from Wilco]
14:12:02 <Helen> scribe+
14:12:31 <Helen> Kathy: I can share the PR but no changes since last year (last week)
14:13:14 <Helen> ... We are looking at the notes and Wilco has added a few best he explains
14:13:25 <Helen> Wilco: It is missing a comment!
14:14:15 <Helen> ... Ok so last time we talked about this, it needs more work, and we need to get comments from the public and I must fix that typo"
14:15:01 <Helen> ... Typo is fixed, lets add a note we need feedback and Jean-Yves also left a note we are trying to encapsulate in the editors' notes
14:15:33 <Helen> ... I want preious contributors to give this a read and some suggestions please
14:15:46 <Helen> s/preious/previous
14:16:02 <Helen> ... How do you feel about this note?
14:16:23 <Helen> Kathy: I think this will help people to understand the document better
14:16:46 <Helen> Wilco: Yes we can point AG to it to prevent questions so an editors draft would be good
14:17:07 <Helen> Tom: Looks good to me
14:17:35 <Helen> Wilco: Yes - we want to capture what feedback we want from contributors
14:17:54 <Helen> ... But it has been a while - are we all happy to do this with this note?
14:18:04 <Helen> +1
14:18:12 <thbrunet> +1
14:18:14 <Will_C> +1
14:18:23 <trevor> +1
14:18:27 <kathy> +1
14:18:44 <Helen> ... Looks to be good to action
14:18:51 <ToddL> +1
14:18:58 <Wilco> RESOLUTION: Accept editors note, and put out editors draft for ACT rules format 1.1
14:19:31 <Helen> zakim, take up next
14:19:31 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Role attribute has valid value -- taken up [from Wilco]
14:20:03 <kathy> scribe+
14:20:37 <kathy> Wilco: first batch of rules to bring to aria wg
14:20:58 <kathy> ... 7 responses
14:21:30 <kathy> ... PR 1986 comment correction in note
14:22:05 <kathy> ... assumption should be removed
14:22:15 <kathy> Trevor: can they be moved to Background section?
14:22:25 <kathy> ... still relevant to the secondary requirements
14:23:22 <kathy> Wilco: In PR #1986 for this rule, text added in Background to explain the invalid role
14:24:34 <kathy> Trevor: Assumptions 2 and 3 are secondary requirement description, hesitant to delete them entirely
14:26:52 <kathy> Wilco: next comment Q5 from Tom, 1.3.1 added as secondary
14:27:18 <kathy> ... Q6 open PR 1986 should be closed soon
14:27:58 <kathy> ... Q8 Will fix typo
14:29:42 <kathy> ... other Q8 comments reviewed, conclusions updated in spreadsheet
14:30:18 <kathy> ... liaison for rule is Wilco
14:30:28 <kathy> zakim, take up next
14:30:28 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- ARIA state or property has valid value -- taken up [from Wilco]
14:30:58 <kathy> Wilco: also related to PR 1986
14:31:20 <kathy> ... Q2 comment from Trevor
14:32:03 <kathy> Trevor: explainer from Rules Format 4.4.3 Rules without Accessibility Requirements not in the rule
14:32:40 <kathy> ... sounds like we don't know what this rule is for
14:33:09 <kathy> Wilco: yes, use the standard text instead from 4.4.3.
14:33:41 <kathy> Trevor: will open a PR
14:35:22 <kathy> Wilco: BBailey comment on applicability, white space allowed for token list in this rule
14:36:30 <kathy> ... my comment for assumptions can be better, not sure it's needed
14:36:47 <kathy> ... no requirement mapping so no false positives
14:36:56 <kathy> Trevor: update background like previous rule
14:40:30 <kathy> Wilco: Q4 from Kathy about Inapp Ex
14:40:42 <kathy> Kathy: has a default value so it's not empty
14:40:56 <kathy> Trevor: tested and it returns empty. maybe a support problem?
14:43:10 <kathy> Wilco and Tom: getAttribute discussion
14:44:33 <kathy> Wilco: ARIA spec says it should be undefined, but it's empty in testing
14:45:30 <kathy> ... DOM spec has different term for property
14:46:20 <kathy> ... Tom's Q4 comment: Passed Ex 4 says valid ID reference but reference not there
14:46:49 <kathy> Trevor: there's an open issue
14:47:27 <kathy> Wilco: Expectation should not include existing ID
14:48:23 <kathy> Tom: our implementation results failed but the report shows it passed.
14:48:41 <kathy> ... not sure results are showing correctly
14:49:58 <kathy> ... we fail Pass Ex 4 because the reference isn't there
14:50:08 <kathy> Wilco: think it should pass
14:50:35 <kathy> Trevor: this example borders on stateful stuff
14:51:18 <kathy> Wilco: when error occurs the ID is added
14:51:46 <kathy> Tom: if AT ignores, it's ok. But, Example description is wrong
14:52:40 <kathy> Wilco: change rule to allow ID refs that aren't on page
14:54:32 <kathy> ... Q5 Tom comment for 4.1.2, PR 1986 adds it as secondary
14:55:12 <kathy> ... open PR 1849 about ID references
14:55:36 <kathy> ... my comment URI not used in ARIA 1.2
14:55:53 <kathy> ... can remove URI from Expectation
14:56:46 <kathy> ... Q7 comments Kathy editorial
14:58:41 <kathy> ... Conclusions section updated in spreadsheet. Liaison open for now.
15:00:34 <Wilco> zakim, end meeting
15:00:34 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Helen, Wilco, kathy, trevor, thbrunet, Will_C, ToddL
15:00:36 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:00:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/05-wcag-act-minutes.html Zakim
15:00:44 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Wilco; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:00:44 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag-act
15:02:01 <Wilco> RRSAgent, bye
15:02:01 <RRSAgent> I see no action items