W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-aria@w3.org > February 2017

Minutes for Thursday, 16 February 2017 WAI-ARIA Working Group

From: Michiel Bijl (list) <michiel.list@moiety.me>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:00:45 +0000
To: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
Message-Id: <77694951-10F5-4352-9E9A-6DAD96B18105@moiety.me>
Minutes for today’s meeting can be found as text in this e-mail or at this URL: https://www.w3.org/2017/02/16-aria-minutes.html

— Michiel


      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

   Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference

16 Feb 2017


      [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Feb/0033.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2017/02/16-aria-irc


          scribe, Stefan, Joanmarie_Diggs, janina, MichaelC,
          Joseph_Scheuhammer, ShaneM, jongund1




     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Testable statements - More tests in need of writing
            than we realized!
         2. [6]ATTA progress updates
         3. [7]Getting started on manual testing
         4. [8]TPAC
         5. [9]CSUN
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     * [11]Summary of Resolutions

   <joanie> agenda: this

   <joanie> agenda: be done

   <scribe> scribe: MichielBijl

   <joanie> Testable statements assessment:

     [12] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Feb/0034.html


     [13] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Feb/0027.html

   JD: that’s a link where he replied to my request

   list of items literally doing a diff from the spec


     [14] https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/wiki/ARIA_1.1_Test_Case_Coverage

   This is the list that Michael Cooper compiled

   JD: Start putting placeholders for all of the items


     [15] https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_1.1_Testable_Statements

   Rather than another wiki page

   I’ve redone the Testable Statements page

   I think we had 5 areas left

   I think Rich asked Stefan to do them

   At no point did Rich say that there would be a ±170


     [16] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Feb/0034.html

   That has some assumptions

   <joanie> 1. For new, *non-global* properties: We need a test
   for each role that

   <joanie> supports that new property.

   <joanie> Rationale: We cannot assume that user agents use our

   <joanie> programmatically in their implementations. Thus for

   <joanie> properties, there's an excellent chance that we won't
   get the

   <joanie> implementation "for free"; instead, user agents will
   likely have

   <joanie> to add new support on a per-role basis.

   <clown> +1

   Joseph: Only see ?? for button

   Do we only test button?

   JD: That’s the next point we’ll get to.

   Have only talked about non-global properties

   I’m beyond curious and hope that people can prove me wrong on
   point one?

   <joanie> 2. For new, *global* properties: We just need to test
   one representative

   <joanie> role, plus any role for which there is special/custom

   <joanie> related to that property.

   <joanie> Rationale: Global properties without role-specific

   <joanie> behavior is something we *can* assume user agents will
   not be

   <joanie> implementing on a per-role basis. Thus because the

   <joanie> itself is likely to be global, exhaustive testing is
   not needed.

   <joanie> Hurray!

   JD: Example - on my platform, GTK, is like a widget toolkit, we
   have placeholders, we have a mapping for it

   Gecko never implemented that

   It exposes an object attribute


     [17] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#ariaPlaceholder

   In role description what the spec says it’s supported on

   It can’t be whitespace only, can’t be an empty string, and can
   only be applied to an explicit or implicit role

   Joseph: Shouldn’t we have examples where this is not as clear

   Like role=application

   JD: As long as it’s a role and the role description is valid

   We could test like very last role

   But I think that wouldn’t be worth all the trouble

   Joseph: Is there a number of things that we’re missing?

   <joanie> 3. For new roles: We just need to test non-global
   properties supported

   <joanie> on those roles:

   <joanie> Rationale: See rationales 1 and 2 above.

   JD: We just need to test non-global properties supported on
   those roles

   If it’s a global property on a role we get it for free

   If it’s a non-global property we need to test it


     [18] https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_1.1_Testable_Statements

   Link to testable statements ⤴

   JD: Priority number 1 is we need volunteers

   Please, please, volunteer for as many test as you can

   And fill in your name at the test

   So we don’t get duplications

   Some tests have “has questions”

   Sometimes it boils down to “do we need to test this”

   <joanie> In ARIA 1.1, aria-controls went from a supported to a
   required attribute for combobox.

   <joanie> QUESTION: Is this really testable? There is no
   implicit value. The property was supported on combobox in 1.0,
   so we do not need to test that. There is nothing in the ARIA
   spec regarding what user agents need to do if the author fails
   to provide a value.

   JD: Joseph, can I ask you to go through the has questions?

   And delete if it cannot be test?

   Or update it if it can be tested

   It’s really only 24

   (if you don’t count the duplications)

   MC: If “non-testable” is related to something in the spec
   wouldn’t that be a spec issue

   JD: *points to question earlier*

   The difference is between “this is supported” and “author must”

   You can’t test that

   <joanie> figure (HAS QUESTION)

   <joanie> The figure role was added in ARIA 1.1

   <joanie> QUESTION: The figure role has no non-global ARIA
   attributes. It is Joanie's assumption that global attributes do
   NOT also need to be tested for figure because presumably the
   user agent implementation of global attributes is not done on a
   per-role basis. If this is correct, only the role-mapping test
   below is needed.

   JD: We have a 170 tests, but that is based of the three
   assumptions that we’re going through in this call

   <ShaneM> we definitely do not need to test every last global
   attribute on every element...

   JD: Are you suggesting that we leave the questions?

   Can you do one so I know what you mean?

   Are you saying we need to test all global attr?

   Stefan: no

   JD: Are you suggesting we document it elsewhere

   Stefan: yes, that would be better

   JD: Do you agree that given the consensus that it’s okay for
   Joseph to remove the question

   Stefan: he can do what he want

   JD: if the group consensus is that we need to test all the

   We should

   JS: If it had global attributes we just tested the role mapping

   JD: Are you willing to eliminate the has questions?

   JS: Yes

   MC: I do not believe we ever wrote ?? down

   If we did it’s buried in a wiki somewhere

   JS: We can put it at the top of this new page


     [19] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Feb/0034.html

   Reminder: volunteers to please sign-up at the wiki

   <Stefan> :)

   <jongund1> can you hear me?

   JD: Stefan can I ask you to edit the wiki, and add your name to
   everything that you’re going to test for

   Stefan: yeah, but not today, will do later

   JD: A lot of my writing had you in mind
   ... Anyone else who can volunteer

   JG: I don’t have anymore bandwidth

   Working on ATTA for MSAA and IA2

   If we do start manual testing

   I do have two additional people that can help with that

   One is a mac user

   JD: Any given testable statement singular has multiple

Testable statements - More tests in need of writing than we realized!

ATTA progress updates

   JD: Microsoft had indicated that they could provided manual

   But won’t be doing an ATTA

   But the test cases were hardcoded in

   It does not in any way reflect the shared API

   MS had indicated that they could convert their new testing to

   They kept not doing it

   And a couple weeks ago they said they wouldn’t do it

   What I wound up doing is I replied to ?? and ??

   Boiled down to “thank you, we’ll take you up on your generous
   offer of the manual testers”

   But would be awesome if you could provide an ATTA for your

   I’m starting to figure out how to drill down into the a11y tree
   on mac

   JG: One of my students has ?? working

   We can now respond to PRs and get PRs

   JD: Appreciated!

Getting started on manual testing

   JD: Started writing documentation for manual testing, not done

   Might also need a version for people supporting volunteers

   If you have people that can test, manually, whose attention to
   detail is high, we want them!

   JD: Any questions




   It’s not next week but the week after right?

   <jongund1> I will be at CSUN

   JS: Right

   <jongund1> I will probably not be available while I am at CSUN

   JD: We’re meeting next week, and plan to have a meeting on
   March 2nd

   If we don’t have enough people on the call we’ll cancel

   Please please please please please please please start writing
   testable statements

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [20]scribe.perl version
    1.148 ([21]CVS log)
    $Date: 2017/02/16 18:59:41 $

     [20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.148  of Date: 2016/10/11 12:55:14
Check for newer version at [22]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/

     [22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/joanie/JD/
Succeeded: s/he/Michael Cooper/
Succeeded: s/iterally doing a ?? from the spec/iterally doing a diff fro
m the spec/
Succeeded: s/??/can only be applied to an explicit role/
Succeeded: s/explicit/explicit or implicit/
Succeeded: s/roledescription/role description/
Succeeded: s/SZ/Joseph/g
Succeeded: s/the ?? for ??/ATTA for MSAA and IA2/
Succeeded: s/??/assertions/
Found Scribe: MichielBijl
Inferring ScribeNick: MichielBijl
Present: scribe Stefan Joanmarie_Diggs janina MichaelC Joseph_Scheuhamme
r ShaneM jongund1
Agenda: [23]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Feb/003
Found Date: 16 Feb 2017
Guessing minutes URL: [24]http://www.w3.org/2017/02/16-aria-minutes.html
People with action items:

     [23] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Feb/0033.html
     [24] http://www.w3.org/2017/02/16-aria-minutes.html

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

   [End of [25]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2017 19:01:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 16 February 2017 19:01:17 UTC