Meeting minutes
<janina> /join #apa-plan
yakim, take up next item
Agenda Review & Announcements
janina: TFs moved up right behind TPAC.
<Dr_Keith> Question: If there is availability, can you Janina talk abit more about the AI and Accessibility group and the work being done there?
janina: The rest may get juggled too.
janina: No announcements.
<matatk> New WCAG3 draft ready for review: https://
TPAC 2024 Planning
janina: We have been talking to W3C management whowants to start arranging more specific things.
janina: We need all foru days and some breakouts.
janinaManagement wants to help us arrange meetings, so we'll do some traditional June/August work in May/June.
janina: We still don't have a wiki for TPAC up, and that is starting to become a prpoblem.
janina: Maybe just clone our 2023 wiki to 2024?
janina: It is really happening. It's not just about meetings we want to have. EO has requested meetings with us. ARIA-TF has requested a meeting with us.
janina: The wek is shaping up, and it's still only May!
Fazio: Love our popularity!
Fredrik: Humblebragging in minutes should be a thing.
Task Force & Deliverables Updates
<janina> subtopic RQTF Wide Review Request
janina: RQTF has gbeen working on the CTAUR. The FPWD was published in Oct 2022. WE had a lot of comments from COGA.
janina: The document is far better for the comments from CO@GA and the back-and-forth.
janina: The document has been strenghtened because of COGA issues and because everyone has a COGA issue in a collab environment.
janina: We haven't had enough review form the wider a11y community.
janina: We really want to ask again for a WR from the community before we lock this in as a WG note.
<janina> https://
<JenStrickland> Certainly do recommend pushing it out a week due to the holidays.
janina: We're talking about complexity management and the a11y aspects of that. We're very comfortable with the scope. It doesn't include text editing, any kind of software code editing; it's just the collaborative aspects of a collaborative environment, wether a or synchronous.
janina: This is a new kind of document, a new kind of addressing.
janinaWe've done the research but haven't got the bibliography in place. We have the questions, we have the new questions. There's been enough ddevelopment in this document and we didn't get enough screen reader, enough D/deaf, enough community comments.
New Charters Review https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22
SVG Maintenance Working Group
<Roy_> - charter: https://
<Roy_> - issue: w3c/
Roy_: The re are some followups for a11y.
Roy_: We reviewed this charter ca 3 months ago, but now we got a message from Kevin who mentioned that htere is a desire from some of the members to see SVG a11y mapping things from this WG, too, so he wants to know if there is any possibility to move this work to an a11y workijgn group for that.
janina: That's a request you should forward to ARIAWG.
matatk: As Roy mentioned, Kevin is asking that the a11y mappings get done. This is on the charter thread. Isn't Kevin the staff contact for ARIAWG?
Roy_: NO, Daniel is.
matatk: Should we do anything to see that this question goes to the right people?
Roy_: I'll do that.
Roy_: That''s all.
HR A11y Review Comment Tracker https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3c/a11y-review
matatk: This is specifically comment reviews.
Mark features that might expose accessibility tools
<Roy_> - issue: w3c/
janina: I'm going to volunteer Lionel. He's not on the call, but he is interested in action items that are relevant to him and this is very relevant to him.
ACTION: Lionel: Review suggestion on accessibility-specific fingerprinting marking
<Roy_> gb, help
<gb> Roy_, I am a bot to look up and create GitHub issues and
<gb> … action items. I am an instance of GHURLBot 0.5.
<gb> … Try gb, help commands or
<gb> … see https://
matatk: Do I understand that in gneeral, we are concerned about fingerprinting for any reason, and it seems liek there is already some sort of marking proposed for fingerprinting in general, but what we are talking about here is the subset of fingerprinting instances that specifically highlight that the user is using an AT?
janina: That vector has been raised a a concern again and again from the community.
janina: We might want to work on a position paper on this.
janina: Anytime we talk about it: yes, we are qaware that the wider community is concerned about that vector. It alwasy lands here.
matatk: I think this is an important issue, but not necessarily more so than any other fingerprinting issue.
matatk: People in gneral outside a11y seem very well aware of the issue of AT fingerprinting.
janina: We tend to have a reputation for being noisier than most. Since it is a social issue in some respects, we get more attention than many others. That may not always be a good thing.
<Fazio> I do
matatk: I'd like to invite any differing opinions on that. Soemtimes, legally, there are terms like "vulnerable poeople" involved. There may be issues where you make people disporportionately vulnerable if you fingerprint in this way. If anyone feels that we should take a more risk-aeverse stance on this, please speak up.
janina: I want to poropose that we don't dispose of this today. If someone wants to take a formal action to be responsive on this, but let's not take the whole meeting wringing our hands abou thtis.
Fazio: I agree with everything said. Vulnerable populatiosn can be a lot more than PWDs or AT users. It may howerver apply in authoritarian regimes where it may be extremely bad. It will take a while.
janina: Do we still need to talk about this today?
Roy_: That's all for this block.
Explicit Review Requests https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues
janina: Let's get ethical!
Ethical Web Principles
<matatk> w3c/
matatk: See previous discussions last week. DR. Keith offered to have a look at it, which he had.
Dr_Keith: I think it could benefit from some stronger language if they wanted to say some things more strongly. But it goes through as is. The y mention a11y in two sections staying at high levels. It's all kind of wrapped together in teh Ethical Document. Those two statements are fine enough. I provided some recommendations in terms of making the
language stronger. I also believe that we can consider it editorial and that they can move on down the line.
matatk: Next steps: We've set the tone for those suggestions you've made to come in.
matatk: You could post them as an issue with two suggestions yourself.
matatk: One point is that we don't want to slow this down with a CFC on something that is basically editorial.
<Dr_Keith> how do I post to the list?
Dr_KeithThanks for all the comments.
new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
Roy_: Nothing new!
CSS Update (Paul) https://github.com/w3c/css-a11y/issues
janina: Discussions of APIs are ongoing.
zakim , next item
Actions Checkin (Specs) issues/assigned
<Dr_Keith> just added the document to public-apa@w3.org
<matatk> https://
janina: Thanks Dr. Keith for an excellent review!
janina: We assume W3C documents are published and live in the context of other W3C publications. For isntance, there was some suggestion about refereincing MM. Perfectly good point, but we can't do it, because it is not a thing yet.
Other Business
matatk: We do need to sign off on the Ethical Web Principles from an APA perspective on account of it being nice and propoer.
matatk: This odesn't mean we can't comment on it and say what needs to be improvede.
matatk: TAG doesn't need HR to motivate them to improve documents. They are very keen for feedback.
janina: +1 on that.
matatk: We got some feedback on something that Adapt is working on on the APA list. It was very cool.
matatk: The person who provided the feedback has been referred to the Adapt-TF.
be done
janina: Honoring red zone.
janina: Thanks for everything. A wonderful call, wonderful people. More and less wonderful jokes.
janina: See you next wweek!
matatk: See you all!