13:24:10 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:24:14 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-wcag2ict-irc
13:24:14 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:24:15 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:24:16 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
13:24:16 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:24:22 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
13:24:32 <maryjom> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:24:32 <Zakim> ok, maryjom
13:26:06 <maryjom> regrets: Fernanda Bonnin
13:26:14 <maryjom> Agenda+ Announcements
13:26:20 <maryjom> Agenda+ Mobile TF discussion on interpretation of success criteria applicable to "sets of software"
13:26:25 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results: (Group 1) Review changes due to comments on second public draft
13:45:28 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
13:45:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html maryjom
13:59:06 <PhilDay> PhilDay has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:10 <PhilDay> present+
13:59:31 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
13:59:33 <ChrisLoiselle> present+
14:00:10 <Mike_Pluke> present+
14:00:27 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:43 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
14:00:45 <olivia> olivia has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:47 <PhilDay> agenda?
14:00:52 <olivia> present+
14:00:59 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:06 <shadi> present+
14:02:05 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:02:05 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:02:31 <maryjom> present+
14:02:41 <PhilDay> We were going to discuss some input from the mobile task force, but may need to reschedule
14:02:45 <bruce_bailey> present+
14:02:54 <PhilDay> Comment period for our latest draft on Tuesday. We have received a few more comments
14:03:14 <Devanshu> Devanshu has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:26 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit?usp=sharing
14:03:28 <PhilDay> ... They don't seem very involved, but we will still need people on the TF to work on each issue. Please work in the Google doc with draft responses and text
14:04:05 <bruce_bailey> q+ for awe
14:04:20 <maryjom> ack bruce_bailey
14:04:20 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to discuss awe
14:04:33 <PhilDay> bruce_bailey: Kudos to Mary Jo for managing to run the meeting, and keeping things organised
14:04:43 <Devanshu> present+
14:04:49 <Bryan_Trogdon> Bryan_Trogdon has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:04:49 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:04:49 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Mobile TF discussion on interpretation of success criteria applicable to "sets of software" -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:04:57 <Bryan_Trogdon> present+
14:06:09 <PhilDay> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/
14:06:49 <PhilDay> bruce_bailey: Believe we only had 1 item that was ready for survey - issues were updated.
14:06:56 <PhilDay> In the GitHub issue
14:07:33 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 3
14:07:33 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Survey results: (Group 1) Review changes due to comments on second public draft -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:07:43 <PhilDay> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/
14:07:46 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/results
14:07:52 <mitch11> mitch11 has joined #wcag2ict
14:08:41 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 3, Issue 414 – Issues with the ‘platform software’ notes for 2.5.1, 2.5.2, and 2.5.7
14:08:50 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/results#xq3
14:08:51 <PhilDay> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/results#xq3
14:09:03 <maryjom> Issue 431 link: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/414
14:09:21 <maryjom> Google doc link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.mxhxpsox3ppu
14:09:26 <PhilDay> 5 said option 2 is ready to merge as is.
14:09:56 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
14:10:07 <PhilDay> Apologies from Mary Jo for any confusion over location in the Google Doc - sometimes the direct links don't seem to take you to the correct location
14:10:24 <PhilDay> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.mxhxpsox3ppu
14:10:25 <PhilDay> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/414
14:10:31 <PhilDay> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/results#xq3
14:10:36 <GreggVan> present+
14:10:46 <bruce_bailey> +1 that links to right heading in Google Doc was flaky
14:12:13 <PhilDay> GreggVan: If everyone else is happy with option 2, happy to go with it - I just couldn't untangle it. No big issue with it
14:13:20 <PhilDay> Option 2 (Note 5): Use Note 5 only for applications that are not platform software
14:13:20 <PhilDay> Note 5: This requirement applies to [software applications that interpret] pointer actions (i.e. this does not apply to actions that are required to operate the [underlying platform software] or assistive technology).
14:13:44 <bruce_bailey> minutes from last week:  https://www.w3.org/2024/08/01-wcag2ict-minutes.html
14:13:55 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate the changes to ‘platform software’ notes in 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7 using option 2, as-is.
14:14:04 <PhilDay> Option 2 (Note 6): Use Note 6 for all platform software
14:14:04 <PhilDay> This would be an additional Note (and would no longer be mentioned in the word substitutions). The verbiage for the word substitutions would be:
14:14:04 <PhilDay> This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.5.2, making changes to the notes for non-web documents by replacing “web content” with "content", for non-web software applications by replacing "web content that interprets" with "user agents and other software applications that interpret" and
14:14:04 <PhilDay> "user agent" with "underlying platform software".
14:14:06 <PhilDay> And verbiage for Note 6 would be:
14:14:06 <PhilDay> Note 6: This requirement also applies to [platform software], such as user agents, assistive technology software, and operating systems. Each layer is responsible for its own pointer actions only, not for those in an underlying layer.
14:14:07 <PhilDay> +1
14:14:12 <mitch11> +1
14:14:14 <mitch11> present+
14:14:41 <PhilDay> Similar changes will be made to all the relevant SCs (2.5.1, 2.5.2, and 2.5.7)
14:14:49 <GreggVan> +1
14:14:49 <olivia> +1
14:14:49 <shadi> +1
14:14:52 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
14:14:54 <Devanshu> +1
14:14:58 <Bryan_Trogdon> +1
14:14:58 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:14:59 <ChrisLoiselle> +1
14:14:59 <Chuck> present+
14:15:01 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:15:44 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate the changes to ‘platform software’ notes in 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7 using option 2, as-is.
14:15:57 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 5, Issue 428 – SC Problematic for Closed Functionality – add 3.2.6 Consistent Help
14:16:30 <PhilDay> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/results#xq5
14:16:42 <PhilDay> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.30h4ihscud8j
14:16:42 <maryjom> q5 survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-july/results#xq5
14:17:04 <maryjom> Issue 428 link: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/428
14:17:38 <PhilDay> 6 said option 1 is ready to merge as is
14:18:36 <JJ> JJ has joined #wcag2ict
14:18:39 <PhilDay> Option 1: Add in 2.5.2 using text similar to 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks
14:18:39 <PhilDay> 3.2.6 Consistent Help — The WCAG2ICT interpretation of this success criterion replaces "sets of Web pages" with "sets of software programs" which are extremely rare - especially for closed functionality software. However, providing consistent access to help is generally considered best practice.
14:18:44 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate the bullet for 3.2.6 Consistent Help into the SC problematic for closed functionality, as proposed.
14:18:48 <PhilDay> +1
14:18:49 <GreggVan> +1
14:18:51 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:18:52 <mitch11> +1
14:18:52 <olivia> +1
14:18:53 <Mike_Pluke> +1
14:18:53 <Bryan_Trogdon> +1
14:18:54 <ChrisLoiselle> +1
14:18:56 <shadi> +1
14:18:58 <JJ> present+
14:19:08 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate the bullet for 3.2.6 Consistent Help into the SC problematic for closed functionality, as proposed.
14:19:24 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 2
14:19:24 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Mobile TF discussion on interpretation of success criteria applicable to "sets of software" -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:19:47 <PhilDay> Welcome to Jan, who is going to give an overview of input from the Mobile task force
14:20:34 <PhilDay> Jan Jaap de Groot - usually goes by JJ. Facilitator of Mobile Task Force, with special focus on mobile apps (including embedded in)
14:21:27 <PhilDay> Looking at WCAG2ICT to see if it can be directly applied to apps for each SC
14:21:58 <PhilDay> Particular issues is with the sets of software criteria - which do apply in a mobile app context
14:22:06 <PhilDay> s/is/are
14:22:08 <bruce_bailey> MATF https://www.w3.org/WAI/about/groups/task-forces/matf/
14:22:26 <JJ> MATF issues: https://github.com/w3c/matf/issues
14:22:50 <PhilDay> maryjom: Think the other topic was page titled
14:22:54 <PhilDay> TOPIC: Page Titled
14:23:10 <PhilDay> WCAG: All web pages should have a title.
14:23:39 <GreggVan> q+
14:23:41 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT: is it the name of the application, or the window of the application? In apps it is helpful to have titles for each screen (in navigation bar or top of content)
14:23:54 <PhilDay> (Above comments were from JJ)
14:24:20 <PhilDay> If we were to make a change to this it would have an impact to other "sets of..." SCs
14:24:32 <GreggVan> q-
14:24:45 <PhilDay> JJ: It is difficult to define what is a screen vs what is a view
14:24:57 <GreggVan> q+
14:25:16 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:25:19 <PhilDay> JJ: Do we want to try and define it again for WCAG2ICT, or just do it in the Mobile Task force and not try and consider the wider ICT like kiosks
14:26:04 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Started this discussion with the 2013 WCAG2ICT - very difficult to work out what a view is - content changes on screen, but the whole screen may not change. There is no single, stable "view'.
14:26:28 <bruce_bailey> Page Title is one of our open issues:  https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/437
14:26:37 <PhilDay> GreggVan: One app may be very page like, but another app may not have a page-by-page navigation style
14:26:53 <shadi> q+
14:26:59 <PhilDay> ... In a web page it was easy - but in an application it is more difficult
14:27:42 <shadi> q-
14:27:43 <PhilDay> GreggVan: That's where the "sets of" came from - sets gathered under different URLs.
14:27:46 <PhilDay> q?
14:28:03 <PhilDay> JJ: Even if you limit the scope just to mobile apps it is still difficult
14:28:30 <Mike_Pluke> q+
14:28:52 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
14:29:09 <bruce_bailey> s/Page Title/SC 2.4.2 Page Titled
14:29:27 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: I would also like to find a suitable equivalent to view, but we also struggled
14:29:32 <ChrisLoiselle> https://www.w3.org/2003/glossary/keyword/All/view.html?keywords=view may be dated, but for what I have understanding of, this may be helpful or not
14:29:36 <PhilDay> ... and haven't found it yet
14:30:11 <PhilDay> maryjom: Difficulty is applying to all types of software (including closed systems)
14:30:15 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
14:30:45 <PhilDay> ... You have applications which may manage a process -single purpose apps - it is self evident what the application does, so each view does not need to be titled.
14:30:54 <PhilDay> q?
14:31:00 <maryjom> ack ChrisLoiselle
14:31:20 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle: There was a glossary link - added above. This is what W3C has currently on view, viewport etc.
14:31:32 <GreggVan> q+
14:31:40 <Chuck> ack Gregg
14:32:01 <PhilDay> GreggVan: View could be thought of as a mode. Different to the W3C definition of view.
14:32:11 <PhilDay> ... Page view rather than Print view...
14:34:06 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
14:34:12 <GreggVan> q+
14:34:19 <PhilDay> Current draft content on this is at https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#applying-sc-2-4-2-page-titled-to-non-web-documents-and-software
14:34:20 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:34:24 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:34:29 <JJ> q+
14:34:48 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Closest parallel is a change of context - so if you change a context, you should notify the user
14:35:06 <PhilDay> Content copied from the latest WCAG2ICT editor's draft
14:35:07 <PhilDay> Applying SC 2.4.2 Page Titled to Non-Web Documents and Software
14:35:09 <PhilDay> This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 replacing “Web pages” with “non-web documents or software”.
14:35:09 <PhilDay> With this substitution, it would read:
14:35:09 <PhilDay> 2.4.2 Page Titled: [Non-web documents or software] have titles that describe topic or purpose.
14:35:09 <PhilDay> NOTE 1
14:35:09 <PhilDay> As described in the WCAG intent, the name of a non-web software application or non-web document (e.g. document, media file, etc.) is a sufficient title if it describes the topic or purpose.
14:35:09 <PhilDay> NOTE 2
14:35:10 <PhilDay> See also the Comments on Closed Functionality.
14:35:31 <bruce_bailey> q+ to note proposal on GitHub
14:35:55 <PhilDay> q?
14:35:57 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
14:36:09 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-change-of-context
14:36:41 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: This is a thorny issue - sometimes you can remove "set of" and just look at within an application. Task force can't do that as it is changing the meaning of the original SC
14:37:09 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: The team have been looking at this within the EN 301 549 committee - but they are able to reinterpret SCs
14:37:27 <PhilDay> q?
14:37:28 <maryjom> ack jj
14:37:35 <GreggVan> q+
14:38:02 <PhilDay> jj: Wonder how you would test this - firstly on a web page, with a multi-step form. Would this mean that the title changes for each step/field?
14:38:18 <PhilDay> ... This is a similar problem for web apps.
14:38:38 <PhilDay> maryjom: If the URL does not change - this requirement does not require each step.
14:39:02 <PhilDay> jj: Would be useful if this was covered for web apps, then we may be able to apply this more broadly
14:39:18 <PhilDay> maryjom: WCAG2ICT are not able to extend what is covered in WCAG.
14:39:24 <PhilDay> ... So changes need to be done in WCAG
14:39:32 <Chuck> +1 this would go outside of our charter
14:39:39 <PhilDay> ... Then we would apply these changed requirements in WCAG more broadly to ICT
14:39:44 <PhilDay> q?
14:39:49 <maryjom> ack bruce_bailey
14:39:49 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to note proposal on GitHub
14:39:50 <bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/437#issuecomment-2250406007
14:39:57 <bruce_bailey> Note: When software content is presented as separate screens that resemble pages, and the technology supports a separate title for each screen, it is a best practice to provide screen titles and ensure that they describe the topic or purpose of each screen. Where screen titles are provided, a title for the overall software program is still
14:39:57 <bruce_bailey> necessary.
14:40:04 <PhilDay> bruce_bailey: Mitch added a note on this issue -link above
14:41:27 <PhilDay> maryjom: Thinks she has also done something related in the Google Doc, which JJ and others in the mobile task force may not have access to
14:41:38 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit#heading=h.4h2q2jf1kbio
14:41:58 <maryjom> q?
14:42:01 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:42:06 <PhilDay> Text from the Google doc:
14:42:07 <PhilDay> Option 1: New note indicating “best practice”
14:42:07 <PhilDay> One possible addition could be a note that is similar to what is added to “sets of” criteria:
14:42:07 <PhilDay> Note: Although not required by this success criterion, ensuring that individual windows or screens have a title that describes the topic or purpose addresses the user needs identified in the Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 Intent section, and is generally considered a best practice.
14:42:07 <PhilDay> Option 2: Mitch’s alternate proposal from his Issue 437 comment
14:42:09 <PhilDay> Note: When software content is presented as separate screens that resemble pages, and the technology supports a separate title for each screen, it is a best practice to provide screen titles and ensure that they describe the topic or purpose of each screen. tWhere screen titles are provided, a title for the overall software program is still
14:42:09 <PhilDay> necessary.
14:42:38 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Change of context is covered in 3 separate SCs.
14:43:26 <PhilDay> ... We can't add something that is not there in WCAG2ICT. But could consider "if there is a change of context, there should be a notification of what has happened"
14:44:29 <PhilDay> SC 2.4.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.5
14:44:35 <JJ> q+
14:44:44 <maryjom> ack jj
14:44:49 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
14:44:58 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:45:24 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
14:45:24 <PhilDay> jj: Change of context - may be a way to cover this problem. When a change of context happens - either by the user or the system - have to check if the page/software has a title that describes the change of context
14:45:34 <GreggVan> q+
14:45:41 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Suspect we will hit a similar problem with change of context as we have with change in views
14:46:01 <PhilDay> ... Obvious question is what constitutes a change of context
14:46:10 <PhilDay> q?
14:46:28 <PhilDay> ... So not sure if it solves the problem
14:46:36 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:46:41 <PhilDay> maryjom: May be better to phrase it as best practice where feasible
14:47:13 <mitch11> q+
14:47:41 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Agree with Mike. It's the only thing that I could think of, but it does get messy. What is the threshold for change of context? Also in apps, you don't have a new page ever - so there is nothing to give a title to. So it doesn't work for me.
14:48:00 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:48:26 <PhilDay> mitch11: Agree - change of context requires human judgement more than a definition of a page (resource at a URI)
14:49:48 <bruce_bailey> I think threshold for change of context may be a good item for wcag2-Issues tf.  (not that it would be solved faster there than here)
14:49:50 <PhilDay> mitch11: If we were willing to do a substitution for page that makes it more objective - but we would still have to take the definition and use in other places. May be well suited to consistent identification. It would still have problems with Page Titled.
14:49:55 <JJ> change of context includes "4. content that changes the meaning of the Web page" - you likely need a new title. The other three listed are user agent, viewport, focus - the title is usually still descriptive enough
14:50:10 <ChrisLoiselle> reference on discussion https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/on-input.html#dfn-changes-of-context
14:50:18 <PhilDay> maryjom: Think we have discussed Page Titled enough.
14:50:27 <PhilDay> TOPIC: "Sets of" criteria
14:50:35 <mitch11> s/for page that makes it more objective/for page that makes it more subjective/
14:51:51 <PhilDay> jj: Bypass blocks, multiple ways doesn't make much sense. So pick consistent navigation, identification, or help.
14:52:03 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
14:52:05 <PhilDay> maryjom: Start with Consistent Identification
14:52:16 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#consistent-identification
14:52:46 <PhilDay> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#applying-sc-3-2-4-consistent-identification-to-non-web-documents-and-software
14:52:55 <maryjom> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#consistent-identification
14:52:56 <bruce_bailey> q+ for time check
14:53:21 <PhilDay> Applying SC 3.2.4 Consistent Identification to Non-Web Documents and Software
14:53:21 <PhilDay> This applies directly as written and described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 3.2.4, replacing “set of web pages” with “set of non-web documents” and “set of software programs”.
14:53:21 <PhilDay> With these substitutions, it would read:
14:53:21 <PhilDay> (for non-web documents)
14:53:23 <PhilDay> 3.2.4 Consistent Identification: Components that have the same functionality within a [set of non-web documents] are identified consistently.
14:53:23 <PhilDay> (for software programs)
14:53:23 <PhilDay> 3.2.4 Consistent Identification: Components that have the same functionality within a [set of software programs] are identified consistently.
14:53:24 <PhilDay> NOTE 1
14:53:24 <PhilDay> See set of documents and set of software programs in the Key Terms section to determine when a group of documents or software programs is considered a set for this success criterion. (Sets of software that meet this definition appear to be extremely rare.) Those implementing this document (WCAG2ICT) will need to consider if this success criterion
14:53:24 <PhilDay> is appropriate to apply to non-web documents and software. See the Interpretation of Web Terminology in a Non-web Context.
14:53:25 <PhilDay> NOTE 2
14:53:25 <PhilDay> Although not required by this success criterion, ensuring that component identification be consistent when they occur more than once within non-web documents or software programs directly addresses user needs identified in the Intent section for this success criterion, and is generally considered best practice.
14:53:25 <PhilDay> NOTE 3
14:53:26 <PhilDay> See also the Comments on Closed Functionality.
14:53:30 <PhilDay> Content above is from WCAG2ICT
14:53:30 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
14:53:56 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: EN 301 549 team were discussing these ones yesterday. Mike wanted to revisit our exclusion of these in WCAG2ICT
14:54:05 <bruce_bailey> +1 to mike pluke
14:54:16 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Consistent identification - just needs to refer to "within the software"
14:54:31 <PhilDay> ... So EN may create a new requirement (not mapped directly onto WCAG2ICT
14:54:49 <PhilDay> ... Consistent navigation seems very important, but what constitutes navigation
14:54:54 <PhilDay> ... is an unresolved question
14:54:57 <bruce_bailey> RRSagent, draft minutes
14:54:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html bruce_bailey
14:55:05 <GreggVan> +1 to what Mike just said
14:55:10 <maryjom> ack bruce_bailey
14:55:10 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to discuss time check
14:55:41 <PhilDay> seems like we are in agreement that bypass blocks and multiple ways don't make sense for non-web software
14:55:44 <GreggVan> q+
14:55:47 <mitch11> q+
14:56:09 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:56:40 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Soften from "don't make sense" to "not defined clearly enough". They make sense as general principles, but they are not objectively defined
14:56:46 <JJ> +1
14:57:17 <PhilDay> maryjom: Sometimes "doesn't always exist" rather than "doesn't make sense". Concept makes sense
14:57:18 <bruce_bailey> fantastic conversation
14:57:54 <maryjom> ack mitch11
14:57:59 <maryjom> ack mitch
14:58:42 <PhilDay> mitch11: Similar point to Greg - softening. These are less often present in software. Larger screen software (e.g. some tablet and some smart TV apps) may sometimes have these.
14:59:20 <PhilDay> ... Not suggesting a change to WCAG2ICT. Our response should not be that we are skipping these SCs because they don't matter, just they are not often present.
14:59:25 <PhilDay> jj: Consistent help.
14:59:36 <PhilDay> ... Imagine sets of screens in an app.
15:00:01 <PhilDay> In an app you may go 1 level deeper - then help may not be on the same level as the content
15:00:23 <PhilDay> jj: So wondering if this would apply - could be problematic
15:01:28 <PhilDay> maryjom: If there is built-in help, it needs to be presented consistently
15:01:59 <PhilDay> ... Not sure that we will be changing anything from this discussion. We could consider adding something about best practice for some of these SCs.
15:02:21 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:02:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
15:02:32 <mitch11> q+
15:02:38 <maryjom> ack mitch11
15:02:41 <maryjom> ack mitch
15:03:49 <PhilDay> mitch11: Wondering about best practice - could look at these SCs - do we convey the best practice encouragement like we have on the call. If it is there - pull it out in the responses. If it is not - may be useful in EN
15:04:18 <PhilDay> Mike_Pluke: Focus of EN is requirements, but are starting to add a little more on guidance / best practice
15:04:22 <bruce_bailey> +1 for just about anything which might be of utility for EN 301 549 drafting !!
15:04:25 <PhilDay> mitch11: May be an action for the TF
15:04:32 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:04:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
15:04:47 <JJ> Clarification on "the same order relative to other [content]" in Consistent Help would be useful
15:04:59 <JJ> (in context of software, or sets of software)
15:05:12 <PhilDay> We will continue to work on the survey, along with working on the open issues. If you have time to take up any open issues and draft content or responses that would be very much appreciated.
15:05:42 <PhilDay> We will keep JJ in the loop if we add any notes on these SCs
15:06:07 <PhilDay> JJ: Thanks for including me - I will link to this from Mobile TF.
15:06:07 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:06:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
15:06:18 <maryjom> zakim, end meeting
15:06:18 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been PhilDay, ChrisLoiselle, Mike_Pluke, olivia, shadi, maryjom, bruce_bailey, Devanshu, Bryan_Trogdon, GreggVan, mitch, Chuck, JJ
15:06:23 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
15:06:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/08-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
15:06:30 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, maryjom; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:06:30 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
15:06:32 <maryjom> rrsagent, bye
15:06:32 <RRSAgent> I see no action items