18:01:59 RRSAgent has joined #aria-apg 18:02:04 logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/05/21-aria-apg-irc 18:02:11 rrsagent, make log public 18:02:18 Zakim, start the meeting 18:02:18 RRSAgent, make logs Public 18:02:20 Meeting: ARIA Authoring Practices Task Force 18:02:44 Meeting: ARIA Authoring Practices Task Force Weekly Teleconference 18:03:30 present+ 18:04:32 CurtBellew has joined #aria-apg 18:05:44 present+ jugglinmike 18:05:46 scribe+ jugglinmike 18:05:50 Topic: Setup and Review Agenda 18:06:13 Jem: Matt_King is out next week, should we cancel the meeting? 18:06:25 Matt_King: the day before is a holiday in the US 18:06:46 Jem: Hearing no objection, we will cancel the meeting for May 28 18:06:58 Jem: Next meeting: June 4 18:07:16 Topic: Publication planning 18:09:43 Matt_King: Shawn has agreed to do a publication on Thursday of this week 18:09:57 Matt_King: Can we have a branch ready on Thursday morning, howard-e? 18:10:02 howard-e: Yup 18:10:21 present+ Daniel_Montalvo 18:10:32 present+ Curt 18:10:43 Matt_King: The relevant milestone is linked in the agenda: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/milestone/31 18:10:44 present+ arielagilmore 18:10:48 present+ siri 18:11:51 howard-e has joined #aria-apg 18:11:54 present+ 18:11:55 s/present+ arielagilmore/ / 18:11:57 Matt_King: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/2775 is ready to merge 18:12:40 Matt_King: tests seem to be taking much longer to run in GitHub Actions 18:12:47 howard-e: I noticed that as well 18:13:07 howard-e: At the time, there was a GitHub Status advisory regarding performance issues; maybe we were experiencing the the same problem 18:13:23 Matt_King: I observed it as recently as this morning, so maybe not. 18:13:34 Matt_King: the regression tests were especially slow 18:14:11 Matt_King: the skipTo changes are waiting on a review from myself and from Jemma https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/2975 18:14:21 Jem: I will get to that today 18:14:58 Matt_King: I think that will be ready for this coming publication. I expect to perform these merges early tomorrow morning 18:15:16 Matt_King: I'm going to push out https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/pull/1611, so we won't worry about that today 18:15:43 present+ 18:16:28 Matt_King: It looks like Jon submitted a duplicative pull request. I'm confused about that, so I posted a question to learn more 18:17:40 Matt_King: it looks like the only thing in this milestone that we won't get in for the next deployment is Jon's work with the coverage and quality report 18:18:32 Topic: Update to AT Support tables 18:18:46 Matt_King: a brand new page: https://deploy-preview-318--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/about/at-support-tables/ 18:18:52 Matt_King: Boaz drafted it 18:18:59 Matt_King: We need reviewers 18:19:15 Matt_King: we have two major sections: what are the meanings of the support levels, and recommendations to readers 18:22:16 siri has joined #aria-apg 18:22:30 [Matt_King reviews the content of the new page with the group] 18:23:52 Jem: Generally, there's a lot of negative phrasings, and that's giving me a little trouble in understanding 18:24:35 present+ Daniel 18:24:56 Jem: for example, "Not negatively affect the experience when the failure being accommodated is resolved." 18:25:20 Matt_King: Maybe it should be phrased in terms of "When the AT vendor fixes the behavior [...]" 18:25:24 Jem: Yes, I like that 18:25:43 Jem: Also, I don't know what "Unless otherwise noted, all testing is done using the default configuration of an assistive technology." means 18:25:52 Jem: Everyone can have a different default, right? 18:26:12 Matt_King: No, because the default is what the AT ships with 18:26:23 Jem: Could you say the "system default", then? 18:26:47 Matt_King: How about "the assistive technology vendor's default"? 18:26:55 Jem: That sounds better to me 18:27:32 q+ 18:27:53 https://deploy-preview-318--aria-practices.netlify.app/aria/apg/about/at-support-tables/ 18:28:18 dmontalvo: We say that we don't advise implementing patterns that don't have 100% "must have" support 18:28:47 dmontalvo: It seems like there are a lot of ATs at the moment which don't have 100%, but I can't recall if that includes "should have" assertions 18:29:04 dmontalvo: I'm not sure if we want to make this recommendation differently 18:29:34 "When possible, test implementations of APG patterns with an assistive technology that provides 100% support for both must-have and should-have behaviors." 18:29:45 Matt_King: The only places where VoiceOver has had a problem with "must have" have been features which are specific nav key features that people can generally work around 18:30:04 Matt_King: e.g. "navigate backwards to a button" might only work under certain circumstances 18:30:28 Matt_King: I don't think that failures there will raise a lot of red flags in terms of keeping someone from using a given pattern 18:30:42 Matt_King: though it might impact how they design their application 18:31:02 Matt_King: In general, though, when it comes to "must have" behaviors, the screen readers are doing quite well 18:31:40 dmontalvo: I defer to your familiarity with the latest results; I'm just concerned that requiring 100% may be too high a standard and may mean we are advising against using many patterns 18:32:44 dmontalvo: How many patterns do we have now which don't reach 100% of "must have" passing? 18:33:08 Matt_King: Maybe I need to change how I worded this 18:33:55 Matt_King: It says, "where *feasible*, avoid implementing *features* of APG patterns [...]" 18:34:37 Matt_King: Maybe it should be something like "Avoid designing experiences that rely upon features which have not reached 100% of 'must have' assertions" 18:35:05 Jem: I think the first list item is very clear. Are the others really necessary? 18:35:33 Matt_King: The second item is really saying what less-than-100% doesn't mean 18:35:53 Matt_King: Maybe saying "every way of implementing" instead of "every variant" 18:36:04 Jem: That would be better 18:36:34 Jem: ...but it makes me wonder about the title of this section. "Design Around Critical Support Failures". What do you mean by "design around"? 18:38:34 Matt_King: I think I have a wording here 18:38:42 Matt_King: I'll paste it in the chat 18:38:53 present+ Matt_King 18:39:27 Matt_King has joined #aria-apg 18:40:08 suggestion: 18:40:10 Where feasible, avoid designing experiences that rely on features of APG patterns that have less than 100% support for must-have behaviors. 18:40:11 If the must-have support level is less than 100% for the example implementation of a pattern, that does not mean all ways of implementing that pattern will present assistive technology users with critical problems. 18:43:34 Jem: I'm still wondering about "Design Around" 18:43:50 Matt_King: How about "Design to mitigate critical support failures" ? 18:43:55 Jem: That's much better to me 18:43:59 dmontalvo: Me too 18:44:50 CurtBellew: I hadn't thought about this. I usually say things like "work around" 18:45:15 Matt_King: Great! I've just now implemented all the suggestions from this call so far 18:45:48 Matt_King: I also wanted to discuss the links *to* these pages 18:46:18 Matt_King: Just under the heading "Assistive Technology Support", there is a new link labeled, "Learn how to interpret and use assistive technology support data" 18:46:40 Matt_King: I just put it in a paragraph under the heading. Is that positioning/styling okay? And is the wording of the link clear? 18:46:45 Jem: The wording is clear to me 18:46:58 Jem: Do we want to use a sub-heading for the link? 18:47:03 Matt_King: I don't think so, no 18:47:09 Jem: It looks good to me 18:47:17 Jem: Anyone else? 18:47:56 Matt_King: If it's fine the way it is, then lets not complicate things 18:48:01 howard-e: seems fine to me, too 18:48:26 Matt_King: I would like at least one (ideally two) people on this pull request to serve as reviewers 18:48:47 Matt_King: We'd like a review before I would merge, and I want to merge in the middle of the day tomorrow 18:48:55 Siri: I can take a look this evening 18:49:04 Matt_King: That would be awesome! Thank you, Siri 18:49:10 Jem: I can look, also 18:49:49 Matt_King: I'm super-excited to get this out 18:50:17 Matt_King: We can merge the support tables in ARIA-AT App, howard-e 18:50:35 Matt_King: I think it's fine to merge it as-is even right now. Then these previews will show the real support tables 18:50:42 Matt_King: This is so great; we're gonna get this launched 18:50:51 Topic: Quality report tracking of force-colors 18:51:04 Matt_King: We don't have Jon right now, so we can't really do this 18:51:22 Topic: Select-only combobox enter key behavior 18:51:32 Matt_King: We'll come back to this when we have more time 18:51:39 Topic: Mouse behavior differences between Select-only and editable combobox 18:51:46 github: https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues/2966 18:52:47 Matt_King: My intuition was the opposite of the intuition of the reporter 18:52:58 Matt_King: I assumed that it WOULD select it because it was selected by the keyboard 18:53:25 Matt_King: The last person I remember talking a lot about using both mouse and keyboard was our friend at Norton--his name escapes me, now 18:53:39 Matt_King: It was about how many people would arrow down with the combobox but then blur with the mouse 18:53:52 Matt_King: Personally, though, I don't know what's reasonable here 18:54:41 CurtBellew: Honestly, I would expect it to work the same way as if I was using the keyboard, arrowing down, and then tabbing out 18:54:55 CurtBellew: Why would clicking out be different from tabbing out? 18:55:31 Matt_King: Would you be willing to check how Chrome, Firefox, and Safari behave with a native HTML select? 18:55:39 CurtBellew: Sure! I'd like to know, anyway 18:56:35 Matt_King: Great. We can put this back on the agenda in a couple weeks (since we're not meeting next week). We can follow the browsers' lead if they're consistent. If they're NOT consistent, then we'll have to have more of a discussion 18:58:13 Zakim, end the meeting 18:58:13 As of this point the attendees have been arigilmore, jugglinmike, Daniel_Montalvo, Curt, arielagilmore, siri, howard-e, CurtBellew, Matt_King 18:58:16 RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2 18:58:17 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/05/21-aria-apg-minutes.html Zakim 18:58:24 I am happy to have been of service, jugglinmike; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 18:58:24 Zakim has left #aria-apg 18:58:33 RRSAgent, leave 18:58:33 I see no action items