" element 19:28:21 Matt_King: My question for jongund is: was that change intentional? 19:29:10 jongund: It was. To me, the "" element wasn't doing anything. I thought a "" element with an associated event handler might be misleading for folks reading to code 19:31:42 Matt_King: In the past, we've advocated for using semantic HTML even in the presense of ARIA because the semantic HTML could act as a sort of fallback for browsers/ATs that don't recognize the ARIA 19:32:00 Matt_King: But your thinking is kind of the opposite of that 19:32:26 Matt_King: It's a more pedagogical case 19:32:31 Matt_King: I could see it either way 19:33:13 Jem: As a developer, I'm accustomed to using the semantic elements whenever possible 19:33:59 Matt_King: Right, but jongund's point is that the "" doesn't do anything in this case. The "click" handler could be confusing to readers. This is example code that we're considering, after all 19:34:55 howard-e: From what I've seen, there are more instances of "

" elements being modified to support "click" handlers 19:37:11 Jem: I typically write code from a "semantics-first" mindset 19:39:15 jugglinmike: I'm thinking about graceful degradation. Are there any implications to this distinction in cases where there is no event handler (because the JavaScript has not executed, for whatever reason) 19:39:37 dmontalvo: I'm not convinced that this should be changed from "" to "

" 19:39:50 jongund: "" is a special thing--it does something when used correctly 19:40:17 jongund: In the ARIA spec, the group decided not to have a role named "label" because it wouldn't do anything. 19:40:29 jongund_ has joined #aria-apg 19:42:14 jongund: If we say that you should use the "" element here, then all our examples that used "aria-labeledby" had better point to an HTML "" element 19:42:42 q+ 19:43:08 Matt_King: I'll have to do some analysis, but I think jongund's making a pretty solid argument (because I don't think a change like the one he's just described would be an improvement) 19:44:22 dmontalvo: Thanks jongund, I wasn't seeing the "aria-labeledby" attribute on the "

" element. That's an important aspect! 19:44:33 dmontalvo: I withdraw my earlier comment 19:45:13 s/labeledby/labelledby/g 19:45:57 Jem: Since we're using "aria-labelledby", using a "" element doesn't add any value 19:46:26 Jem: Could we maybe add a note as a comment? 19:46:40 Matt_King: This is covered by the ARIA documentation 19:47:03 Matt_King: So I think jongund is helping us to be more consistent with what's already been done in other examples 19:47:27 Matt_King: It sounds like we have consensus 19:47:35 Matt_King: We need reviewers on this patch 19:47:51 Matt_King: We want a code reviewer and a functional review, and that's it 19:48:12 Matt_King: We don't need a test reviewer because this doesn't impact the tests 19:49:42 siri: I can perform a functional review with Android 19:50:07 Matt_King: Great! 19:50:49 Matt_King: And I will re-review based on this conversation today 19:50:57 Matt_King: I guess that's enough 19:52:05 Topic: Triage new issues 19:53:42 https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/wiki/Issue-Triage-Process 19:54:44 jongund has joined #aria-apg 19:54:59 Subtopic: Failing dialog-modal_datepicker.js test 19:55:25 Matt_King: This is coming from within the Task Force, so we don't need the "feedback" label 19:56:00 Matt_King: Maybe I should change the definition of "bug" because this is related to the testing of the example, and that means the "bug" label is appropriate 19:56:59 Matt_King: We need to generally extend the language in the process documentation around "pages" to include "site design" and "infrastructure" 19:57:15 Jem: I'll add the label named "regression-testing" for now 19:58:06 Matt_King: howard-e provided excellent "steps to reproduce" in this case, but we should still assign someone to verify 19:58:43 Jem: I will assign myself 19:58:48 Matt_King: Great! 19:59:06 Matt_King: Just from triaging a single issue, we've already found several changes that need to be made to the wiki page 19:59:13 Matt_King: We'll get there bit by bit 19:59:26 Jem: The documentation is already good--it just needs a little more detail 19:59:59 jongund has joined #aria-apg 20:00:40 Zakim, end the meeting 20:00:40 As of this point the attendees have been jugglinmike, jongund, Jem, Daniel, howard-e, siri 20:00:42 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 20:00:43 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/27-aria-apg-minutes.html Zakim 20:00:49 I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 20:00:50 Zakim has left #aria-apg 20:00:55 RRSAgent, leave 20:00:55 I see no action items