17:07:33 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria-editors
17:07:37 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/11/27-aria-editors-irc
17:07:37 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
17:07:38 <Zakim> Meeting: ARIA Editors
17:07:53 <spectranaut_> scribe: spectranaut_
17:08:02 <spectranaut_> topic: synonyms
17:09:07 <spectranaut_> summary of discussion so far: we should link from one role section to the other
17:09:27 <spectranaut_> summary of current discussion: how easy/hard should it be to find the synonym we don't want used?
17:11:14 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #aria-editors
17:12:02 <spectranaut_> issue for this topic: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2073
17:12:55 <spectranaut_> mcking: the non-preferred section links to the other
17:13:38 <spectranaut_> mcking: in characteristics table, where name is prohibited on role `none`, do we also role `presentation`?
17:15:26 <spectranaut_> mcking: how does this effect aria.js
17:15:51 <spectranaut_> jamesn: would the easier way to do this by adding an extra script to post process
17:15:57 <spectranaut_> jamesn: to fix the few links
17:18:24 <spectranaut_> mcking: role reference to synonym to instead of PR
17:19:34 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_: if you link to the synonym, if will just redirect you to the other role
17:19:45 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_: so it doesn't seem like a problem to me
17:20:33 <pkra> pkra has joined #aria-editors
17:20:39 <spectranaut_> topic: PR/Merge process - next steps after deep dive?
17:21:41 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_: I was  going to update the process document with more clarity on the process, re james craig's confusion
17:22:02 <spectranaut_> mcking: also we need to discuss next steps for the monorepo, so resolve james craig's concerns
17:23:07 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_: anyone have experience with monorepos
17:23:13 <spectranaut_> (resounding silence)
17:23:23 <spectranaut_> s/monorepos/combining git repos/
17:23:46 <spectranaut_> mcking: but we don't want to combine issues, also, there is the challenge with the history
17:25:19 <spectranaut_> peter: you can merge repos and keep the histories
17:25:32 <spectranaut_> peter: they are working on different files/subfolders
17:26:32 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_: we were discussing keeping the other repos open for issue tracking, alone
17:26:44 <spectranaut_> peter: you can have a PR that closes issues in a different repo
17:28:20 <spectranaut_> peter: I'm worried that we have repos that we don't officially maintain, like svg-aam and dpub-aria
17:28:45 <spectranaut_> peter: we can't just put those into our monorepo
17:28:59 <spectranaut_> mcking: most of our issues are only related to core-aam and html-aam and accname
17:29:52 <spectranaut_> peter: james wants everything done in one PR
17:32:38 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_: if we build a pr-preview for a PR that has changes to core-aam and aria, will the links between the two of them be links to the pr-preview? I think not
17:33:04 <spectranaut_> peter: right, interlinks won't work, but PR preview will link to all of the specs revised by the PR
17:33:14 <spectranaut_> mcking: sounds feasible to make those links work
17:33:24 <spectranaut_> jamesn: maybe, but it might be too hard
17:33:54 <spectranaut_> mcking: right now we uses classes for those links to accname. so if you are linking something in accname in the ARIA spec... it depends on how you build the preview
17:34:16 <spectranaut_> jamesn: we don't build it, we use pr-preview, respec runs, and the code to generate links happens in there
17:34:51 <spectranaut_> james: we want to remove the special linking that we do, the way we link between specs, there is a ton of code to make sure the editor drafts link to editors draft
17:35:22 <spectranaut_> jamesn: those concepts don't exist. maybe we should just use xref, and export our definitions, we can use standard respec
17:35:35 <spectranaut_> jamesn: if we use xref, the standard, then we have no way to interlink the specs
17:36:07 <spectranaut_> peter: is there agreement that if we at least have preview links, that would be a sufficient first step?
17:36:44 <spectranaut_> mcking:  I don't know if it would resolve the issue james craig has for implementors
17:37:01 <spectranaut_> mcking: you can't just send the implementor this one link to this preview
17:37:52 <spectranaut_> mking: if that aria actions preview has a link to core-aam in it... you can't use the link to core-aam, you have to hunt down the relevant information using this preview. it sounds very complicated.
17:39:02 <spectranaut_> jamesn: it sounds like need to talk to james and see if it will solve his problem, if it doesn't, we need to investigate more
17:39:28 <spectranaut_> mcking: doesn't seem like there is a ton of value in a mono repo other than having a single PR, doesn't add any value other than that
17:39:56 <spectranaut_> jamesn: it allows someone to review the PR with all the changes in one place. I think it makes the review and maintenance processes easier.
17:40:10 <spectranaut_> mcking: so there is a huge advantage to us, the working group members
17:40:23 <spectranaut_> mcking: maybe some advantage to the implementor
17:40:51 <spectranaut_> topic: roll out prettier setup - tracked via aria-common#99
17:41:13 <spectranaut_> peter: should i merge these?
17:41:22 <spectranaut_> jamesn: yeah it is scary
17:41:32 <spectranaut_> issue: https://github.com/w3c/aria-common/issues/99
17:43:37 <spectranaut_> peter will open a PR on aria-html
17:43:48 <spectranaut_> jamesn will review the change on svg-aam
17:43:58 <spectranaut_> topic:  retiring contributors.md across specs - tracked via aria-common#103)
17:44:06 <pkra> https://github.com/w3c/aria-common/issues/103
17:44:48 <spectranaut_> matt garish doesn't like it for dpub
17:44:56 <spectranaut_> jamesn: he is welcome to maintain his own
17:45:25 <spectranaut_> peter: it's fine if they don't want to use our automated stuff....
17:45:45 <spectranaut_> jamesn: I think it's possible to only add stuff after a certain date... I could make an enhancement to respect to do that
17:45:56 <spectranaut_> jamesn: for example, you would want, from this version forward
17:48:05 <spectranaut_> topic: spec markup for advice for AT (jnurthen)
17:48:14 <spectranaut_> to bug james :)
17:48:31 <spectranaut_> topic:  modernizing aria.js (aria-common#104)
17:49:00 <spectranaut_> peter: after talking to james, I created the issue... I thought I'd make some progress but I haven't
17:49:27 <spectranaut_> peter: I'm going to start refactoring just to make it more readable.. so intertwined... hard to understand how things work
17:49:53 <spectranaut_> issue: https://github.com/w3c/aria-common/issues/104
17:49:59 <spectranaut_> peter made notes in the issue
17:50:14 <spectranaut_> peter: I have a dream where we have less of this data extraction and html stuff
17:50:34 <spectranaut_> peter: cleaner more understandable code
17:51:59 <spectranaut_> jamen: we know what the logic should be
17:52:41 <spectranaut_> jamesn: we start with list of roles, a hierarchy, assign states and properties as we go down the hierarchy
17:53:38 <spectranaut_> peter: some things like alert, there are no local props, it gets them through parental properties -- on structure and role type, its hard to compare whats currently in the role info.js info file and what the spec would generate...
17:53:44 <spectranaut_> (scribe is not really catching this)
17:54:17 <spectranaut_> peter: it is fun!
17:56:58 <spectranaut_> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:56:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/27-aria-editors-minutes.html spectranaut_
17:57:15 <spectranaut_> zakim, end meeting
17:57:15 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been (no one)
17:57:16 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
17:57:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/27-aria-editors-minutes.html Zakim
17:57:52 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, spectranaut_; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:57:52 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria-editors