17:59:50 RRSAgent has joined #aria-apg 17:59:55 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/09/26-aria-apg-irc 17:59:55 RRSAgent, make logs Public 17:59:56 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Matt_King 18:00:09 MEETING: ARIA Authoring Practices Task Force 18:00:23 rrsagent, make minutes 18:00:24 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/26-aria-apg-minutes.html Matt_King 18:01:04 present+ 18:01:12 arigilmore has joined #aria-apg 18:02:20 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/wiki/September-26%2C-2023-Agenda 18:02:27 howard-e has joined #aria-apg 18:02:34 present+ 18:02:47 present+ Daniel 18:02:52 present+ jugglinmike 18:02:57 scribe+ jugglinmike 18:03:05 jongund has joined #aria-apg 18:03:51 Topic: APG community group discussion 18:04:06 present+ Daniel_Montalvo 18:04:53 Daniel_Montalvo: Matt_King and I have been thinking about setting up a Community Group to attract a wider group of people--including folks who may not be W3C members 18:05:07 Daniel_Montalvo: The separation between this Task Force and a new CG needs to be clear, of course 18:05:25 q+ 18:06:06 siri has joined #aria-apg 18:06:18 present+ Matt_King 18:06:38 Matt_King: This would be similar to the structure we have in other parts of WAI 18:07:18 Matt_King: It would also bring in people within W3C member organizations who don't want to commit to the Task Force 18:07:38 Matt_King: Hopefully that would inspire those folks to join the Task Force eventually, too 18:07:46 q? 18:08:06 ack me 18:08:11 Matt_King: We'd make a new GitHub Group for the CG--one whose access would be limited to the APG repositor 18:08:20 s/repositor/repository/ 18:08:36 jamesn: Would we envision this working something like the ACT? 18:08:49 James, do you mean ACT or AT group? 18:09:13 Matt_King: Yes, it would be a partnership. I'd like to hold the Task Force meeting and Community Group meeting together at some regular cadence 18:09:37 jamesn: What's the task of the CG versus what's the task of the Task Force? 18:09:58 CurtBellew has joined #aria-apg 18:10:02 Matt_King: They have the same task. Everything that comes out of the community group would go through the Task Force 18:10:20 Matt_King: But I'd try to focus on tasks with "lighter lift" for folks in the Community Group 18:10:38 q+ 18:10:44 present+ 18:10:59 Matt_King: We already review pull requests from members of the public. The community group would just let them signal a little more commitment and receive a little more support 18:11:16 q+ 18:11:41 Matt_King: Over time, I want to experiment with different ways of onboarding people and training people and generally getting more members of the public to contribute high-quality pull requests 18:12:10 q+ 18:12:12 Matt_King: There are several people at Meta Platforms Inc and elsewhere who have expressed interest in a lower-commitment group like this 18:12:34 Jem: We have the AT Community Group because it doesn't have a Task Force 18:12:54 Jem: I fully agree with Matt_King about having an APG Community Group, and that having such a group removes some barriers 18:13:18 Jem: But to rephrase jamesn's question: what distinguishes the two groups? 18:13:55 Matt_King: Community Group members won't be making a commitment to join the ARIA working group or attend this meeting on a regular basis. CG members are free to come and go as they choose 18:14:31 Matt_King: This is an experiment. It might fall flat on its face, but it might work! 18:14:57 Matt_King: It's kinda hard to plan everything out in advance. A lot of what happens in situations like this depends on the specific participation 18:15:35 jongund: Is the group going to meet on a regular basis? Or will it meet on an ad-hoc schedule? 18:16:09 Matt_King: Once we have it in place, I would like to set up a schedule and a plan that involves having some Community Group events whose purpose is to introduce a variety of opportunities for people to get involved 18:16:16 Matt_King: i.e. specific GitHub issues 18:16:37 Matt_King: That's probably something for 2024. At first, I'm interested in getting the infrastructure set up 18:17:10 q? 18:17:15 jongund: Couldn't folks at Meta and other W3C organizations just join the Task Force temporarily 18:17:15 ack me 18:17:27 ack domntalvo 18:17:31 ack jongund 18:17:31 ack me 18:17:34 q? 18:17:35 Matt_King: I suppose so, but that seems like the wrong signal to send. I don't want to encourage it 18:18:02 jamesn: And it's a bit cumbersome--you still have to ask your representative to add you 18:18:09 Matt_King: And it's churn for the chairs, as well 18:19:01 q+ 18:19:04 Matt_King: I'm thinking of calling it "ARIA Authoring Practices Community Group". I don't know if anyone else has other ideas for names 18:20:46 q+ 18:22:22 q- 18:22:44 jongund: What about relationships with OpenUI or other folks developing widgets? 18:23:14 Matt_King: They produce examples, but I don't think they're a library 18:23:41 jongund: Well, the people who do develop UI libraries may be good candidates for inclusion in this Community Group 18:24:07 Daniel_Montalvo: I would leave "Guide" out of the CG name since it may be taken as "guidance" 18:24:13 Matt_King: Good point! 18:24:23 Topic:Status of Site Updates 18:24:43 Matt_King: I listed the things that we have ready 18:25:11 +1 to Daniel's suggestion, leaving out the word, "guidance". 18:25:38 Matt_King: I'm hoping to do a publication next week or possibly the week after 18:26:17 q+ 18:26:32 howard-e: I won't be available on October 9, so October 2 would be better 18:26:49 ack jongund 18:26:52 Matt_King: Okay, let's plan on publishing on October 2nd 18:27:46 dmontalvo: Shawn also won't be available on the week of October 9th 18:27:49 shawn henry 18:28:00 she is the owner of Wai tempate repo and publication 18:28:01 Matt_King: All the more reason to target October 2nd 18:28:01 ack me 18:28:27 Matt_King: At a minimum, we'll have all of the things listed in today's agenda under "status of site updates" 18:28:39 Jem: I just finished the review for skipTo.js 18:29:03 Matt_King: But we need to coordinate that change with WAI ARIA Practices, and I haven't seen anything on that, yet 18:29:55 Matt_King: But since it doesn't change the user experience, I don't think we need to rush to get it into this coming publication. It's more of an invisible back-end kind of thing 18:29:57 Topic: New contributing page is ready for final review 18:30:02 Topic: New contributing page is ready for final review 18:30:17 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/2734 18:30:30 Matt_King: This was an issue that jongund raised and that we've been collaborating on 18:30:42 Matt_King: I recently changed it from "draft" to "Ready for review" 18:30:50 Matt_King: It's purely editorial 18:30:56 Jem: I'd like to review 18:31:29 dmontalvo: I'd like to take a look, too 18:31:43 Matt_King: It links to a WAI page about joining the Task Force 18:31:56 https://deploy-preview-236--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/about/contributing/ 18:32:01 Matt_King: Ideally, I would like to merge this in time for next week's publication. It's a pretty simple page 18:32:11 Matt_King: The primary change that I made was to the organization of the information 18:32:11 https://deploy-preview-236--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/about/ 18:32:26 Matt_King: I have a brief introduction that gives people a sense of what's on the page 18:32:51 Matt_King: Then, each of the sections after that are about how you do a different task 18:33:09 Matt_King: They're ordered in increasing levels of commitment, with the final section about joining the working group 18:34:01 Matt_King: The "readme" link is under the section titled "Making improvements to documentation or code" 18:34:04 https://deploy-preview-236--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/about/contributing/ 18:34:42 Matt_King: I pulled some of the content from the readme into this section in order to give a high-level overview of the process 18:35:11 Matt_King: I don't know if we will leave that content in the README. It doesn't hurt to have it in both places, but then again, maintenance is kind of a hassle 18:35:42 Jem: We had a question about how the APG workflow works. Should we give an overview for people who are trying to contribute? 18:36:19 Matt_King: Yes, but I think that goes in a different place. I think we need to extend the README with some information about how the repositories are structured and the process for checking your work 18:36:22 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/2781 18:37:00 present+ Andrea_Cardona 18:37:15 Andrea_Cardona: I'd like to review, as well 18:37:55 Matt_King: This page is all about, "if you're just getting started, here's where you find out where to go" 18:38:06 present+ siri 18:38:09 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices 18:38:19 siri: So you're just looking for feedback on text rather than accessibility issues? 18:38:52 Matt_King: It's really just copy, so if there are accessibility issues, they will likely pre-date the patch and extend across the entire site 18:39:00 Topic: PR 2775 feed example 18:39:02 Topic: PR 2775: Feed example changes 18:39:12 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/2775 18:40:08 arigilmore: We updated a few examples so it's inside the page, within an iframe 18:40:22 arigilmore: We updated the content so there aren't multiple H1 elements on the page 18:40:56 Example page in preview: https://deploy-preview-248--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/patterns/feed/examples/feed/ 18:41:18 arigilmore: We moved the select element which controls the simulated speed of loading. It's no longer displayed alongside the example--it's now outside of the iframe 18:41:48 Title is updated to "Infinite Scrolling Feed Example" 18:42:06 Matt_King: I see the title tag now says "Infinite Scrolling Feed Example". I remember discussing whether it should be "infinite" or "infinitely". I think the title you have here is fine 18:43:14 Matt_King: On the pages where we have example instructions or options, we had a dedicated section for those above the section labeled "example" (eg on "carousel" or "Tree grid") 18:43:36 arigilmore: Ah, I see--the sections titled "Example options" 18:43:49 arigilmore: Along with a little note about what the option does 18:45:07 Jem: When we change the timing option, do we need a reload native link? 18:45:20 Matt_King: JAWS handles the change gracefully 18:46:40 Jem: Is there any visual indication that more items are loading? 18:46:57 arigilmore: No, though you can see the size of the scrollbar change 18:49:33 Matt_King: This is awesome work! 18:50:01 arigilmore: The only other issue was that the tests weren't working 18:50:39 arigilmore: The tests fail because it can't find the page 18:51:35 I have to leave a little early today. 18:52:31 jugglinmike: this might be related to WebDriver, since you need to explicitly manage context when traversing between documents (e.g. into an iframe) 18:52:50 arigilmore: Ah, that sounds familiar. I'll try again and ping you on the issue if I'm still having trouble 18:53:58 Matt_King: Once we address these two issues, we can add reviewers in the next meeting 18:54:18 Topic: PR 2780: Fix for iOS Safari combobox bug 18:54:29 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/2780 18:55:34 Matt_King: We had a visual design review from Jem and a code review from jongund 18:56:01 Matt_King: If we can get those reviews done this week, I think we can land it in time for the deployment we're planning for next week 18:56:44 Matt_King: We don't need any other reviewers because this is a CSS fix 18:56:56 Matt_King: jongund has done his review, so it's up to Jem! 18:57:16 Matt_King: We're gonna have another great publication next week! 18:57:43 Zakim, end the meeting 18:57:43 As of this point the attendees have been Jem, howard-e, Daniel, jugglinmike, Daniel_Montalvo, Matt_King, CurtBellew, Andrea_Cardona, siri 18:57:46 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 18:58:17 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/26-aria-apg-minutes.html Zakim 18:58:23 I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 18:58:23 Zakim has left #aria-apg 19:04:59 jugglinmike has left #aria-apg