16:47:41 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria
16:47:45 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-aria-irc
16:47:46 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:47:47 <Zakim> Meeting: ARIA WG
16:47:52 <jamesn> agendabot, find agenda
16:47:52 <agendabot> jamesn, OK. This may take a minute...
16:47:53 <agendabot> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/2b57854a-65cb-421e-b9e0-f9a8da31f160/20240808T130000/
16:47:53 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:47:53 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/3WBocej
16:47:53 <agendabot> agenda+ -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3YDvlO8
16:47:55 <agendabot> agenda+ -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y
16:47:58 <agendabot> agenda+ -> TPAC planning https://github.com/w3c/aria/discussions/2283
16:48:00 <agendabot> agenda+ -> 9.3 Presentational Roles Conflict Resolution does not consider custom element use cases https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2303
16:48:04 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Spec for menu/menuitem does not provide enough author guidance for structure https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2300
16:48:13 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Accessibilty review of CSS proposal: reading-flow interacts with focusable display: contents elements https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2241
16:48:13 <agendabot> agenda+ -> Clarify "undefined" assignment for a state/property as the value (not the string) https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2177
16:56:38 <melsumner> melsumner has joined #aria
16:58:07 <Adam_Page> Adam_Page has joined #aria
17:01:47 <spectranaut_> spectranaut_ has joined #aria
17:01:49 <katez> katez has joined #aria
17:02:12 <katez> present+
17:02:13 <aardrian> aardrian has joined #aria
17:02:33 <aardrian> present+
17:02:33 <scotto> scotto has joined #aria
17:02:34 <pkra9> pkra9 has joined #aria
17:02:42 <pkra9> pkra9 has left #aria
17:02:45 <aardrian> scribenick aardrian
17:02:45 <Adam_Page> present+
17:03:00 <smockle> present+
17:03:00 <pkra> pkra has joined #aria
17:03:04 <pkra> present+
17:03:31 <spectranaut_> present+
17:04:07 <sarah> sarah has joined #aria
17:04:15 <sarah> present+
17:04:20 <jcraig> present+
17:05:01 <aardrian> scribe+
17:05:36 <Rahim> present+
17:06:14 <jcraig> agenda?
17:08:17 <aardrian> Provided introductions all around.
17:08:27 <aardrian> zakim next item
17:08:33 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:08:33 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- -> New Issue Triage https://bit.ly/3WBocej -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:08:45 <scotto> present+
17:09:19 <OliverH> OliverH has joined #aria
17:09:32 <dmontalvo> present+ Daniel
17:09:37 <aardrian> jamesn: 2306 May be a duplicate. I propose closing it as there is considerable discussion in previous issue.
17:09:58 <aardrian> jamesn: Anyone disagree?
17:10:15 <aardrian> scotto: I can respond to direct OP to participate in original issue.
17:10:28 <aardrian> jamesn: 2304 is a request from Mario.
17:11:05 <jamesn> q+
17:11:10 <aardrian> mario: this is implemented in different ways across applications.
17:11:12 <jcraig> There's a similar issue for "token" or "token list" the more general term IMO
17:11:19 <jcraig> q+
17:11:28 <aardrian> mario: There was a similar issue 6 years ago.
17:11:56 <aardrian> mario: The APG has an example but it may not make sense for screen reader users.
17:11:58 <sarah> q+
17:11:58 <jamesn> ack me
17:11:59 <aardrian> Q?
17:12:26 <aardrian> jamesn: My opinion is we should take this to OpenUI for a potential component.
17:12:38 <aardrian> jamesn: Then the ARIAWG can help that implementation along.
17:13:04 <jamesn> ack jcraig
17:13:08 <aardrian> jamesn: The various implementations cited have enough nuance that they cannot be addressed here in a satisfactory way.
17:13:29 <jamesn> ack sarah
17:13:31 <aardrian> jcraig: There was a similar list for token lists (689) closed for a similar reason.
17:13:44 <scotto> q+
17:13:51 <jcraig> https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/689
17:13:52 <jamesn> ack scotto
17:13:59 <aardrian> sarah: I agree with the prior comments, but am curious if the interactive list role might get us closer.
17:14:11 <aardrian> scotto: This would need to be done in more than just ARIA.
17:14:12 <jcraig> Closed for same reason... OpenUI would be a better landing spot.
17:14:13 <aardrian> Q+
17:14:48 <aardrian> scotto: I agree it should be on OpenUI. Please go there and bring the discussions from here to that group. There aren't enough people in that group focused on accessibility. I can't be the only one over there.
17:14:58 <aardrian> scotto: Come join the club.
17:15:06 <aardrian> jamesn: Talk to Scott if you want to get involved.
17:15:13 <scotto> https://open-ui.org/
17:15:20 <scotto> https://github.com/openui/open-ui
17:15:31 <jamesn> ack aardrian
17:15:57 <aardrian> matt: At one point there were quarterly conversations.
17:16:28 <Matt_King> Matt_King has joined #aria
17:16:31 <aardrian> aardrian: Agree with Scott. OpenUI has a shortage of accessibility pros and the impact can be larger than just ARIA's remit.
17:16:43 <aardrian> mario: I thought the best place to start would be with ARIA roles.
17:17:19 <Matt_King> q+
17:17:19 <aardrian> jamesn: From past history, starting something here without more buy-in has proven to be challenging. We can specify, but then we need to get implementors on board and authors as well.
17:17:39 <aardrian> jamesn: The experience hasn't been successful.
17:17:39 <jamesn> ack Matt_King
17:18:07 <aardrian> Matt_King: I understand Mario's point.
17:18:27 <aardrian> s/matt:/Matt_King:/
17:18:52 <aardrian> Matt_King: I think Sarah's idea with interactive list role can be an example of that discussion.
17:19:09 <aardrian> jamesn: Keep in mind if there are things from that discussion that can be folded into it.
17:19:22 <aardrian> Matt_King: ARIA actions is a related example.
17:19:44 <aardrian> jamesn: Let me think about this and comment.
17:19:59 <aardrian> jamesn: 558, tabindex=0 on UA scrollable containers.
17:20:41 <aardrian> scotto: Follow-on to minimum role proposal. A tabindex would cause something to have a minimum role of `group`, but we left it out due to uncertainty. Aaron is running into issues so wanted to bring it up again.
17:20:53 <aardrian> scotto: I know what needs to be done and who to talk to, so assign it to me.
17:21:11 <aardrian> jamesn: 557, shadow DOM sub-issue from a closed issue.
17:21:44 <aardrian> Rahim: This and the next issue is the work Scott and I are doing to triage open AAM issues. DOn't need to discuss. Just needs grunt work.
17:21:56 <aardrian> scotto: If anyone is interested (also 556), comment.
17:22:03 <aardrian> jamesn: Last item is already on the agenda.
17:22:09 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:22:09 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- -> New PR Triage https://bit.ly/3YDvlO8 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:22:48 <aardrian> jamesn: 5 new PRs. ATK URL (2309) looks editorial. If an HTML-AAM editor can weigh in, that would be great.
17:23:04 <aardrian> jamesn: Labeling "editorial", assigning Scott.
17:23:35 <aardrian> jamesn: Add `class` and `id` mappings to HTML-AAM (2308). Can I have reviewers from each of the platforms?
17:23:46 <aardrian> valerie: I'll review.
17:23:52 <aardrian> Rahim: I'll review.
17:23:59 <aardrian> scotto: Add me for general arguing.
17:24:26 <aardrian> jamesn: The next is editorial, no need to look. Same with the next.
17:24:40 <aardrian> jamesn: Fix broken links in AAPI mappings (447).
17:24:46 <aardrian> scotto: On my backlog.
17:25:05 <aardrian> Pkra: There is a new one as well.
17:25:12 <aardrian> Rahim: Is there an updated PR?
17:25:16 <aardrian> scotto: Not done yet.
17:25:25 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:25:25 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- -> WPT Open PRs https://bit.ly/wpt_a11y -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:25:41 <aardrian> jamesn: Anything to talk about here? These seem old.
17:25:50 <aardrian> jcraig: I've updated a few.
17:26:04 <aardrian> valerie: I can respond to 45916.
17:26:15 <aardrian> jcraig: Can I just go ahead an auto-merge?
17:26:19 <aardrian> valerie: Yes.
17:26:28 <aardrian> jcraig: Not this one yet, but commit and I can merge.
17:26:36 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:26:36 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- -> TPAC planning https://github.com/w3c/aria/discussions/2283 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:27:03 <aardrian> jamesn: We have some comments from Aaron. Please everyone add something.
17:27:04 <aardrian> Q+
17:27:12 <jamesn> ack aardrian
17:27:19 <aardrian> jamesn: The event is coming soon.
17:27:58 <aardrian> aardrian: Is my comment Aaron's enough to +1 one of those items.
17:28:30 <aardrian> jamesn: Aaron doesn't think we need a bunch of time on this, so if it's important to you then comment.
17:28:42 <aardrian> aardrian: I don't know the process nor the other WGs.
17:29:03 <aardrian> jamesn: Make sure you have a goal.
17:29:14 <aardrian> aardrian: So an output objective with supporting material.
17:29:44 <aardrian> jamesn: Time-boxed as well. There may be 50-60 people in a room with maybe 15 minutes for a discussion.
17:30:04 <aardrian> Matt_King: Make sure we have the appropriate level of discussion in this group so we are speaking with one voice.
17:30:24 <aardrian> jamesn: Yes. With a WAI group maybe less formal, but definitely be on point with CSSWG.
17:30:26 <jcraig> q+
17:30:54 <jamesn> ack jcraig
17:31:16 <aardrian> jcraig: On the topic of good will and speaking with one voice, Daniel if you or other W3C contacts are working with that or other WG, then please coordinate in advance.
17:31:38 <aardrian> dmontalvo: Yes.
17:32:10 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:32:10 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- -> 9.3 Presentational Roles Conflict Resolution does not consider custom element use cases https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2303 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:32:39 <scott> scott has joined #aria
17:32:43 <scott> q+
17:33:11 <jamesn> q+
17:33:55 <aardrian> scott: Some context here is that Aaron has noticed a lot of custom elements are created by putting ARIA elements on the container and then propagating down to the shadow DOM.
17:34:22 <aardrian> scott: So it's being reflected down. The authors' intent or assumption is that other elements work this way so ARIA attributes should work this way.
17:34:44 <aardrian> scott: They are following prior art and doing the right thing, so validation errors are surprising.
17:34:50 <melsumner> q+ to ask if we can see some sample code? This sounds like author error as described.
17:35:12 <aardrian> scott: I see this all the time, so I see where he's coming from.
17:35:35 <jamesn> ack scott
17:35:57 <aardrian> scott: So undoing this role specific to valid custom elements, or a new rule, to reflect actual use by authors for custom elements. The alternative is to tell all authors they are wrong and have to refactor.
17:36:05 <jamesn> ack me
17:36:11 <aardrian> scott: This seems like a use case to make the rule more nuanced.
17:36:57 <Brett-Lewis> Brett-Lewis has joined #aria
17:37:07 <aardrian> jamesn: I see this all the time, that authors then have to rename the `aria-label` that gets mapped down to the element, camel case it or whatever. It seems like something it would be nice to support but how can we know if the custom element is doing anything useful with that `aria-label`?
17:37:33 <aardrian> jamesn: I don't know how we would implement this? How would we prevent the custom element naming the element and its child?
17:37:46 <aardrian> scott: Good question. Aaron said he has done some test implementations for cases he has seen.
17:38:04 <aardrian> scott: I am being Aaron's mouthpiece here, not expressing my opinions, so I have no response.
17:38:17 <pkra> q+
17:38:23 <aardrian> scott: But if someone did that, then it's hard to know what authors were expecting.
17:38:35 <aardrian> jamesn: We should talk to the web components folks before progressing any further.
17:38:35 <jamesn> ack melsumner
17:38:35 <Zakim> melsumner, you wanted to ask if we can see some sample code? This sounds like author error as described.
17:38:39 <aardrian> scott: Makes sense.
17:38:59 <aardrian> melsumner: I spend a lot of time writing and correcting, so I'd like to see some code and use cases.
17:39:21 <aardrian> melsumner: I'd like to advocate for adding a custom component role rather than changing how the current approach works.
17:39:23 <jamesn> ack pkra
17:39:27 <aardrian> jamesn: Please add that to the issue.
17:39:45 <aardrian> pkra: Do people remove the wrong ARIA attribute or just leave it?
17:39:55 <aardrian> scott: They leave it.
17:40:12 <aardrian> "paving the cowpath"
17:40:34 <aardrian> jamesn: If we can find enough web components folks at TPAC, it sounds like a good potential discussion.
17:40:42 <jamesn> q?
17:40:50 <aardrian> jcraig: Verbal +1 for TPAC.
17:41:29 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:41:29 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- -> Spec for menu/menuitem does not provide enough author guidance for structure https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2300 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:42:26 <jamesn> UAs/ATs need a way to determine the parent menuitem that caused a menu to be opened. This is important for Talback on Android, which provides the name of the menu along with the choices.
17:42:27 <jcraig> scribe: jcraig
17:43:17 <aardrian> aardrian has joined #ARIA
17:43:25 <aardrian> present+
17:43:29 <aardrian> scribe+
17:43:50 <jcraig> jamesn: notes `scribe+` works for multiple scribes
17:44:06 <aardrian> jamesn: Are you prepared to discuss this Scott? I don't know what to do with this one.
17:44:08 <jcraig> scott: are you prepared to discuss this one at TPAC?
17:44:21 <aardrian> scott: Haven't read it yet.
17:44:22 <jcraig> scribe-
17:44:39 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:44:39 <Zakim> agendum 7 -- -> Accessibilty review of CSS proposal: reading-flow interacts with focusable display: contents elements https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2241 -- taken up [from
17:44:42 <Zakim> ... agendabot]
17:45:27 <aardrian> jamesn: Could use an accessibility review.
17:45:40 <jcraig> q+
17:45:44 <aardrian> valerie: We discussed at a previous meeting. I feel like Aaron was on it.
17:45:56 <aardrian> jamesn: We didn't take agenda off it. Oops. Removing that.
17:45:59 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:45:59 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, aardrian
17:46:35 <aardrian> jcraig: It's great they are reaching out. It's the purview of APA, so did they ask and not get a response or asked to move it along.
17:46:56 <aardrian> valerie: Not really sure. I'll follow up to make sure CSSWG knows they should go through APA.
17:47:08 <aardrian> jcraig: Was this is a side request to you personally or the ARIAWG.
17:47:24 <aardrian> valerie: He asked the ARIAWG to review.
17:47:43 <aardrian> valeria: The problem is APA reviews occur late in the game, so an early review would be nice.
17:48:01 <aardrian> s/valeria/valerie/
17:48:54 <aardrian> jamesn: APA provides the reviews and feedback and files issue, which must be resolved before going to CR. If it's a feature they want to ensure meets that requirement, they are being proactive.
17:48:59 <jcraig> should this be cross referenced https://github.com/w3c/aria/discussions/2283
17:49:33 <aardrian> jcraig: Should this be cross-referenced to the TPAC discussion.
17:49:45 <aardrian> aardrian: Yes, it's the same or related issue.
17:50:00 <aardrian> jamesn: Maybe we can arrange a topic for TPAC.
17:50:35 <aardrian> jcraig: If we schedule at the time the CSSWG meeting is not happening, we might get participants from CSSWG. Then they can join if they want.
17:51:00 <aardrian> jamesn: We can have a less-targeted discussion if we host and they attend as interested members.
17:51:08 <aardrian> +1
17:51:32 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:51:32 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, aardrian
17:51:38 <aardrian> ack q
17:51:40 <jamesn> ack jcraig
17:51:47 <aardrian> zakim, next item
17:51:47 <Zakim> agendum 8 -- -> Clarify "undefined" assignment for a state/property as the value (not the string) https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2177 -- taken up [from agendabot]
17:52:11 <aardrian> jamesn: Still around but new comments from James Craig. Do you want to talk through these?
17:52:18 <aardrian> jcraig: Rahim and I can summarize.
17:52:51 <aardrian> jcraig: DOM string ?s are unlikely to change; it's a nullable string.
17:53:22 <aardrian> jcraig: If we want to update some to operate like enumerated attribute, we can do it in a reasonably backward-compat manner.
17:53:30 <jcraig> flase
17:54:08 <aardrian> jcraig: There are some concerns from an author perspective since "true", "false", "undefined" aren't really boolean.
17:55:30 <aardrian> jcraig: If we wanted a new validation type, we could equate to true or false or undefined [aardrian: line noise garbled my understanding while scribing]
17:56:03 <aardrian> jcraig: Similar to CSS added the class list to avoid name trampling.
17:57:02 <aardrian> jcraig: One complication was all number types having a default value, and an undefined versus missing type (zero) created challenges. There were some decisions done in the past as a result, but could not find documentation.
17:57:21 <aardrian> jcraig: Perhaps we could put notes about those in the spec, or a wiki (which tends to get forgotten).
17:57:43 <aardrian> jcraig: Should we write new WPT tests? Should the spec include additional notes?
17:58:17 <aardrian> jcraig: A suggestion to not add any new DOMstring accessors, but that seems confusing to authors as well for a different reason. Would need to discuss in detail.
17:58:54 <aardrian> jamesn: It seems there's not as much to do as we feared. Good summary?
17:59:15 <aardrian> jcraig: Sure? If we had a time machine, there was more to do before we shipped these things 6 years ago.
17:59:33 <aardrian> jamesn: Documenting why these decisions were made would be valuable.
17:59:55 <aardrian> jcraig: Mark that as "File as new issue".
18:00:37 <aardrian> Rahim: I have an open issue on proposed IDL updates. This could maybe go in that issue.
18:00:43 <aardrian> jamesn: I'm fine with the new issue.
18:01:21 <aardrian> zakim, end meeting
18:01:21 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been katez, aardrian, Adam_Page, smockle, pkra, spectranaut_, sarah, jcraig, Rahim, scotto, Daniel
18:01:23 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
18:01:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-aria-minutes.html Zakim
18:01:32 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, aardrian; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
18:01:32 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria
18:20:44 <jcraig> s/DOM string ?s are unlikely to change; it's a nullable string./reflected nullable `DOMString?` is unlikely to change for webcompat reasons, as it's aligned and has shipped in all engines./
18:20:45 <jcraig> s/author perspective since /author confusion since /
18:22:35 <jcraig> More of that IDL meeting summary listed here. https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/2177#issuecomment-2259171763
18:22:43 <jcraig> rrsagent, make minutes
18:22:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-aria-minutes.html jcraig