19:01:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria-at
19:01:35 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/05/02-aria-at-irc
19:01:37 <jugglinmike> rrsagent, make log public
19:01:46 <jugglinmike> Zakim, start the meeting
19:01:46 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
19:01:48 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jugglinmike
19:01:55 <jugglinmike> present+ jugglinmike
19:02:01 <Joe_Humbert> Joe_Humbert has joined #aria-at
19:02:03 <jugglinmike> scribe+ jugglinmike
19:02:25 <jugglinmike> Meeting: ARIA and Assistive Technologies Community Group Weekly Teleconference
19:04:32 <Joe_Humbert> present+
19:05:19 <Matt_King> Matt_King has joined #aria-at
19:05:34 <jugglinmike> Topic: Review agenda and next meeting dates
19:05:38 <Sam> Sam has joined #aria-at
19:05:41 <jugglinmike> https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/wiki/May-2%2C-2024-Agenda
19:05:43 <Sam> present+
19:06:08 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Would anyone like to add any other topics?
19:06:16 <jugglinmike> present+ IsaDC
19:06:31 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: Will we talk about James Craig's feedback on action button?
19:06:37 <jugglinmike> present+ Matt_King
19:07:03 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I wasn't planning on it talking about it today because we still have to tell James that his comments are in regards to an old test plan
19:07:18 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: Some of the assertions will remain, though
19:08:01 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That's true. I want to point him to one of the new test plans which has similar results. If his issues still stand, then we could make a meaningful topic for next meeting's agenda
19:08:09 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Next community group meeting: Wednesday May 8
19:08:16 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Next AT Driver Subgroup meeting: Monday May 13
19:09:22 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I won't be able to attend the AT Driver subgroup meeting on Monday. I might be able to listen since I will be traveling, but I definitely won't be able to speak
19:09:32 <jugglinmike> Topic: Current status
19:09:38 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Goal: 6 recommended plans by June 30
19:09:47 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We have 5 test plans in candidate review!
19:10:18 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We've made changes in an attempt to address all open issues. It remains to be seen whether the changes actually address the issues, but it's good progress nonetheless
19:10:51 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Next up are modal dialog and action menu button
19:10:56 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Any questions about any of this?
19:11:02 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Hearing none, we'll move on
19:11:10 <jugglinmike> Topic: Enhancements to APG support tables
19:11:20 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Last year, we launched support tables in APG
19:11:32 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We got a little critical feedback--people weren't sure how to use the data
19:11:39 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We're making two changes to address that
19:11:54 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The link in the agenda leads to a preview page which demonstrates what the new support table will look like
19:13:48 <jugglinmike> https://deploy-preview-317--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/patterns/radio/examples/radio-activedescendant/
19:14:56 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: On the new APG example page, after the "about this example" heading (and a bunch of level-2 headings), you'll find the "assistive technology support table"
19:15:08 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We also discussed this table on Tuesday in the Authoring Practices Guide call
19:15:29 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: There were two bits of feedback. Nobody had problems with the design of the table itself--the feedback was on the content
19:15:45 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: howard-e is taking care of those changes
19:16:33 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: the big change with what's currently in production is that this adds a column for "SHOULD HAVE assertions" as well as "MUST HAVE assertions"
19:17:13 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: It also gets rid of the problem with the current table which has "n/a" entries for invalid AT/browser combinations like Safari and JAWS
19:18:33 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: In the APG Task Force meeting, we agreed to further modify this patch to change the column titles (e.g. from "MUST behaviors" to "MUST HAVE behaviors"). We also agreed to sort the rows of the table alphabetically (they seem kind of randomly arranged right now)
19:18:47 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Does anyone here have any further suggestions for changes?
19:19:03 <jugglinmike> present+ Michael_Fairchild
19:19:14 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: I really like it
19:19:28 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: The very first cell is empty; I think it should include a column header
19:20:00 <howard-e> howard-e has joined #aria-at
19:20:11 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That sounds good. "Assistive Technology / Browser" might be a bit cumbersome, visually. Do you think it should say "AT/Browser", instead
19:20:48 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Currently, due to the contents of the other cells in that column, the very first cell could accommodate the full text "Assistive Technology / Browser"
19:21:05 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: I concur; the longer version ought to fit
19:21:42 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: the word "supported" is repeated in all of the cells, and it's also implied by the heading above and the context of the table. I wonder if we could remove it--if that would make things less noisy
19:21:48 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I would support that
19:22:12 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Have you been getting questions about the difference between "MUST" and "SHOULD"?
19:22:39 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Yes, and we have a plan for that, but let's consider Michael_Fairchild's feedback before discussing that
19:23:28 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Should we use "support for MUST HAVE behaviors" as the column heading?
19:23:52 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: That would significantly expand the visual width of those columns. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's worth needing
19:24:30 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: I don't think the word "support" is really necessary there, even after removing it from the cells, given the context
19:25:07 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I like the idea of brevity
19:25:55 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'm also thinking about Joe_Humbert's feedback... The other change is that there's going to be a link just below the heading. That link will lead to a new page--the one I have linked in the agenda and for which I'm still drafting the content
19:26:04 <jugglinmike> https://deploy-preview-318--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/about/
19:26:14 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That will help people understand how to use this data
19:26:26 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: It's where we'll explain the difference between "MUST" and "SHOULD" behaviors
19:26:46 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'm thinking that the link could be something like "Learn about the meaning of the support tables shown below"
19:26:57 <jugglinmike> s/support tables/support levels/
19:27:11 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The term "support levels" would help emphasize that the meaning is the level of support
19:28:07 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: the column title "MUST HAVE behaviors" doesn't tell me what those behaviors are, but I also understand that there's probably too much to say about that to fit in this table
19:30:52 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: Could we have a deep-link from this page directly to the AT-specific results? Just because if I have to travel through the details page that summarizes ALL ATs, then the navigation is a bit cumbersome since it involves scrolling to the AT in which I'm interested
19:31:50 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: One thing we don't do in the reports is organize data by MUST and SHOULD. To be clear: we haven't put a lot of investment into the website for all the different possible use cases
19:32:06 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That's currently appropriate because we haven't had a lot of use of the data, yet
19:32:21 <jugglinmike> s/use of //
19:32:52 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That will make more sense (and we'll make more investment) over the next year as we start to publish more data
19:34:22 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: To summarize--the first column needs a header ("Assistive Technology / Browser"), and the word "supported" should be removed from the cells, and if that affects the visual layout, then consider putting the graphic and the percentage on the same line so that the cells can be shorter
19:34:33 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Those are in addition to the changes already discussed in the APG Task Force meeting
19:34:54 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: A sixth change which could come later would be to make the AT browser names themselves into links which go to the report site
19:37:18 <jugglinmike> jugglinmike: Maybe we could also add a link to the column headings themselves, e.g. a "question mark" character as a superscript, that directs to the same new page
19:37:26 <jongund> jongund has joined #aria-at
19:37:51 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: That might be tricky because it would appear inside the iframe
19:38:18 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: I don't think that's an issue
19:38:56 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: Separately, I'm wondering if the words "MUST" and "SHOULD" will have meaning to non-standards audiences
19:40:36 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think the common definitions of those words are close enough for those audiences
19:40:53 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: you're probably right
19:41:40 <jugglinmike> jugglinmike: Though there's also "required" and "recommended" if we really want alternatives
19:42:19 <jugglinmike> jugglinmike: To Michael_Fairchild's point, though, capitalizing the words "MUST" and "SHOULD", while typical in specification contexts, might look a little foreign or even off-putting to folks without that experience
19:42:29 <jugglinmike> Michael_Fairchild: That's a good point
19:42:46 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I agree. Let's use normal casing for those.
19:43:04 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Also, it seems as though the terms are surrounded in quotation marks. I don't think that's necessary, either
19:43:39 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: So, as an amendment to the change we were already considering, these headings should read "Must have behaviors" and "Should have behaviors"
19:44:12 <jugglinmike> Topic: Dialog test plan
19:44:28 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The R&D version is displayed as "n/a"
19:45:12 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: howard-e can you run the script now so that we can add it to the test queue in this meeting?
19:45:25 <jugglinmike> howard-e: it may have already done the work because I'm seeing it in the table, already
19:45:39 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Ah, there it is. Sorry, I was looking at radio, not dialog
19:46:33 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'm getting an error about data representation
19:47:00 <jugglinmike> howard-e: I'm seeing that, too. I will investigate; it should be a quick fix. In the mean time, you may have to use the link that is in the agenda
19:47:15 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'm going to advance it to "DRAFT"...
19:47:40 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'm getting the same error
19:47:55 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: but if we add it to the test queue, then people could look at it there
19:48:03 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Let's just walk through this from the link in the agenda
19:48:29 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'd like to draw folks' attention to a specific test: test number seven
19:48:44 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Test number seven is unlike any test we've had before. I hope it's clear to people
19:49:48 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: If you're looking at the instructions, they basically say that you're going to open the dialog, navigate to the top (in JAWS and NVDA with CTRL+Home), and then you're going to press the up arrow a couple of times (I wrote "two times" specifically to ensure that there isn't one extra line beyond the edge)
19:50:02 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: After that, you will read the current element
19:50:39 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: The one and only assertion is that (for JAWS) the position of the virtual cursor is the "add delivery" address heading.
19:51:07 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Does anybody have any questions about this test or concerns about the way it's worded or anything like that?
19:53:49 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Hearing none, it seems the construction of this test is acceptable!
19:54:40 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Okay, we need volunteers for this test plan!
19:54:55 <jugglinmike> IsaDC: I'm testing with all three screen readers
19:55:10 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: When do you need the testing done by?
19:55:43 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: It would be extremely helpful if we could get these all done in the next couple weeks so that, by mid-May, we have all the test plans we need to hit our target
19:55:58 <jugglinmike> Joe_Humbert: In that case, I volunteer for VoiceOver and NVDA
19:58:06 <jugglinmike> howard-e: I'm observing a bug that we've reported previously. I have a quick patch in mind, but I'd like to run it by my team at Bocoup, first. I'll have Carmen keep you posted on the progress there
19:58:18 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Would automated results collection fail in this state?
19:58:52 <jugglinmike> howard-e: I'm unsure of what would happen. I'd recommend waiting until we resolve the issue before initiating an automated AT results collection
19:59:08 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: Okay, it's in the test queue, now, so we should be able to add Joe_Humbert
20:00:14 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: We still need one JAWS tester. Maybe Alyssa or Hadi will be available for that
20:00:53 <jugglinmike> Matt_King: But we're out of time for now
20:01:28 <jugglinmike> Zakim, end the meeting
20:01:28 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been jugglinmike, Joe_Humbert, Sam, IsaDC, Matt_King, Michael_Fairchild
20:01:30 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
20:01:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/02-aria-at-minutes.html Zakim
20:01:38 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
20:01:38 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria-at
20:01:46 <jugglinmike> RRSAgent, leave
20:01:46 <RRSAgent> I see no action items