Draft Minutes: June 2, 2014 WAI-PF ARIA Caucus

http://www.w3.org/2014/06/02-aria-minutes.html

[W3C]<http://www.w3.org/>
- DRAFT -
Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
02 Jun 2014
See also: IRC log<http://www.w3.org/2014/06/02-aria-irc>
Attendees
Present
Stefan_Schnabel, susannK, rich, Jon_Gunderson, Joanmarie_Diggs, Michael_Cooper, Joseph_Scheuhammer, LJWatson, Matt_King
Regrets
Chair
Rich
Scribe
jongund
Contents

  *   Topics<http://www.w3.org/2014/06/02-aria-minutes.html#agenda>
  *   Summary of Action Items<http://www.w3.org/2014/06/02-aria-minutes.html#ActionSummary>

________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 02 June 2014
<richardschwerdtfeger> meeting: W3C WAI-PF ARIA Caucus
<richardschwerdtfeger> meeting: make log public
<richardschwerdtfeger> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2014Jun/0001.html
zakiim scribe, jongund
RS: Do we need more test cases for HTML5
... More for ARIA 1.1
... We have native host language semantics in ARIA 1.1
... TR has the same as role=row
MC: We were talking about this earlier
... the strong native sematics needs testing, if not implemented it would need to be removed
RS: Fundamental difference
MC: Does the HTML working group need to testing
RS: If they say will not be able to over right ....
... I think we need additional test cases or take it out
MC: We did accommodate, as they progress they will need to test
RS: As the host language has the native semantics we may need to test
MC: We will need to test
RS: They don't have such a document, do they need to test
JS: They seem have a permissive approach to testing, they test some things and not others
... they need to chow implementatino
RS: We are in better shape for 5.1
JS: they will say it is an edge case
... they are trying to get to last call, met with TBL last week
... TBL may be asking about accessibility
... We are OK with most stuff in 5.0
RS: RS: The need an API, almost like it is not testable since no mapping guide
MC: I think it is possible to test, without guide it is more difficult
... It will be better with the mapping guide
RS: You could a validator for testing that stuff?
... What will HTML validator do for conflicting information
MC: You can test it
JS: What will happen in the accessibility API
<Zakim> Joseph_Scheuhammer, you wanted to ask: what is this, if not a mapping guide:
RS: Better question, but they don't have a mapping guide
MC: If it is a user agent requirement, using the validator helps identify that is a condition, validator probably cannot be used for CR requirements
RS: I beleive thats the best they can do
JS: Do we prefer the section be removed?
RS: I care about ARIA 1.1
MC: I don't have a preference
... they made a big deal to add it
JS: Here is the problem, then we need to renegociate, if its there it will be there in 5.1
... If we like it we develop the mapping guide and file bugs
RS: they could make the session non-normative
... They could say "This could be normative in a future spec"
MC: YI think that is viable
RS: We could have them test it
... aria-checked would trump checked in FF
Clown: I agree that it is a possibility, not consistent
RS: make it non-normative
MC: We say that the section needs testing, it is expected to have problems
... Do we say up front that it should be non-nromative or wait until they have problems
RS: We should probalbt say it up front it is not testable
<clown> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/dom.html#wai-aria
MC: We are talking about strong native semantics
RS: I don't know how they test without an API
Clown: they need to create test files and test them on 4 platforms
MC: This was tested in our ARIA testing
... Give them a couple of tick marks
JS: i want to keep our working relationships, and so be straight forward with them
MC: Say some sections are not normative
JS: That will change as we develop the mapping guide
MC: We have consensus for HTML
JS: Joseph can you take this up on the tuesday call
Clown: That is not in code?
JS: You should start calling it core
... You can decide how often to talk about the HTML mapping
... On the HTML side we need to editors which tree it should be in
... need to ask the editors
... I have what we need
... We are basically happy with 5.0, we do have a few problems, we just talked abotu some of them
RS: I want to keep the relationship good, like with the canvas work
JS: We will not have everything in the 5.0 time frame
RS: OK
... What does that do for the rest?
MC: I don't think it does
RS: Do they define role computation?
MC: no
RS: we are good
... Is chris G on today?
MC: I would liek to talk about publishing, before other topics
RS: Righ the heart beat draft
MC: I have been working on publication, I am not sure it is ready to go and we need a resolution to publish
RS: I had some problem with the status section
MC: That's because it is old content, i will be updating it
... I updatied with editors draft
RS: I think they need to fix 5.5.3
Clown: I see it in the list
RS: OK, good
... Abstract stuff, I think you saw that, RDF stuff is still there
MC: I don't think it needs to be in the spec, some people might be using it
RS: We need to link to HTML5, not HTML 4
JS: I agree
... Doesn't sound like publication this week
MC: Need to sort out who will make the edits
... The user agent implementation guide needs some more work
Clown: Not called that anymore
MC: thats one of the issues
RS: Mark as a defect and fix in next release
MC: I think it can wait, but we hope to get public feedback
JS: I think we should drop the RDF
Clown: What does that mean?
MC: Dropping the appendix
<MichaelC> https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/spec/aria.html
RS: not quite
... Let me find you an example
... We have related concepts ...., a whole section on RDF in here
... We have RDF properties, in section 5.1
MC: That section might not be ...
RS: You might want to save taking RDF out for next release
... Don't we have an issue on this
... Have we moved to bugzilla?
MC: We are in transition
JS: We are going to get some bugzilla to IRC support
RS: We talked about it at FTF meeting
MC: Creating an action item
... Section 5 needs major edits
RS: Also appednix
MC: Plan was to use the side by side until tracker issues are closed
... Other groups need to look at both
... We won't worry about RDF for publication, just your comments
... Current editors will be credited as a former editor
JS: Editor emartitus
RS: There are other people who should be included
... need to be pointing to SVG 2, where aria-describedat will be
MC: I am going to redo status
... will add a new status and check with at least RS and JC
<clown> http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/implementation/aria-implementation.html
Clown: This is what I am looking at it
... How user agents should support keyboard...
RS: I am finding stuff we need to delete
MC: Mapping guide does need an edit
RS: There is a lot of stuff that is not interesting anymore
... The whole introductions need to be synchornoized
... I should put the SVG thing in github, but it is ugly
Clown: Send me an e-mail with what you want changed
RS: What time is your meeting tomorrow?
Clown: 3:00pm eastern
RS: Michael do have enough to get this published?
MC: I have to go over some things in the mapping guide, will not get done this week
... The title "Core accessibility API mapping"?
... That is not in the document yet
Clown: i will change it
... Change to "Core....
"
MC: Do we want the 1.1? Started drafting ....
... I think we still want to have 1.1
Clown: Fine with me
JS: Correct
MC: I have a whole para in the status....
... I will need a summary of what is new
... If you have the changes that will be helpful
... What do we want to ask the public about?
... I always what to help people focus their reviews
<clown> MichaelC: https://github.com/w3c/aria/commits/master/implementation ?
RS: There is not a huge about a stuff we want comments on
... What about role=none?
... Alot of role=presentation out there
... TABINDEX on tabs
... ANy other thoughts?
<richardschwerdtfeger> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2014Jun/0000.html
Clown: the GNOME a11y team want updated API mappings, we can ask if I got it right
RS: Editorial, number 4, why gird shows up as "red", some other elements are red
Clown: If you mark them as code they come out red
... it might be the code tag or class name
RS: Section 5.4
MC: Code element
... We can over write the style...
more styling discussion....
MC: Might take a careful code review
... The short name shows up in the URL
RS: Is it all caps
MC: I forgot what we decided
RS: What is that section called...
MC: Reference within the document and short name for the W3C, not rules, my pref is lowercase, but we can do upper case
RS: You mean in the short name
<clown> +1 for lower case in W3C url.
RS: I am with Joseph
<richardschwerdtfeger> +1 for URL's as lower case
MC: I will make a note, to use upper case for biblo..
... For the mapping specification, we need to send a transition request, we need to get it on record, it might be hard to do this week, next thursday is more likely
RS: its fine with me for next thursday
MC: I am wokring in a branch right now
RS: Any objections for publishing next thursday?
... Do we need to discuss next week?
MC: I will be at the advisory meeting next week, so I don't have anything specific
RS: What changes will be done by wednesday
MC: title, status section, short name....
... I am working on a branch, you can also work on it
... Thats it for the spec
... Ratify on wednesday
JS: Confirm on wednesday for pub on 12th
MC: Can we get the confirmation now?
... Want to to confirm by 5th
<richardschwerdtfeger> +1
RESOLUTION: Request to transition Core Accessibility API Mappings 1.1 to FPWD and WAI-ARIA 1.1 for updated Working Draft
<bgaraventa1979> yes!
+1
<richardschwerdtfeger> +1
RS: Next
<clown> +1
Issue 587
<clown> issue-587?
<trackbot> issue-587 -- Consider allowing the aria-selected state on any focusable element, or add a new attr like aria-active or aria-current -- open
<trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/587
RS: We are looking at aria-current and not use aria-select
... ATs don't want to hunt for these
... The discussion is how to move forward
... This will take an ID, and ..... shadow DOM
... aria-current is on a container...
CS: question
RS: you could have an aria-owns and it could be outisde the container
CS: Something other than explicit relationship
RS: It would be on a container and then there would need to be a reverse
... this seems like a new relationship
<joanie> jongund: aha. That's Cynthia talking; not me
<cyns> <div role=progress>
Cynthia: I want something other that an ID ref, like ...
<cyns> <div role=step>
<cyns> <div role=step aria-currant>
CS: If you have a progress diagram, the container is a progress, ...
RS: That was a step within a progress, the role=step is a descendant of role=progress, it is in a progress container
Joanie: I am not sure I understand it, it is preferable than hunting
RS: Given this type of role there can only be one type of container
... A good example is listbox, it can only have options
... Option can only be inside of a listbox, so the container is known
... Is that enough
Joanie: I am not trying to be difficult, ...., steps along a process, it may be hard to find where it says
RS: We don't have one of those left, like "breadcrumb"
<bgaraventa1979> +q
RS: navigation region is a good example, in that case you would need a relationship
... Is there anywhere we can just use aria-current?
... I have seen navigation with tree widgets....
CS: What is more common, a column with 12 links....
RS: In that case you can go back to the container, is that OK Joanie?
Joanie: What I need to know what is the current for?
... Can we provide an ROLE, go from the current object ....
CS: There can be several roles that can have a current
Joanie: I go up until I find the role
<clown> <div role="step" aria-current="true" aria-context="navigation">?
<clown> where aria-navigation takes a role value.
RS: The definition of aria-current, would it be better to say it only applies to specific roles
Jaonie: as long as it is not on too many roles
BG: There is also pagination......
... Have essentially images are being used as part of authentication
... There are many scenarios that current could help, outside of navigation
RS: The current should look for container elements, do we need currentfor?
CS: I think they are different use cases
RS: I think we will need to expand on the use cases, it will require some API changes in the platforms
... 1. we have an aria-current which applies to an element in a navigation container
... 2. aria-currentfor that would apply to any container, takes a single idref
CS: Makes sense to me
<clown> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1442
Clown: Look at Issue-1442
... Look at action-1442
<Zakim> Joseph_Scheuhammer, you wanted to note that Bryan G. wrote spec text for aria-current in ACTION-1442.
RS: should it be called called aria-currentfor?
... What about context....
BG: What if there is nesting
We need to have similar names
Clown: owns is for parent child relationships
BG: If you are referencing a parent element from ...
RS: that is a different use case, new action item?
... mixing two different things in the same action
... Can we change this one to currentfor and then create a new action
... I think we have enough for JC to write spec text,
CS: As long as the action item....
RS: Can I edit the cation BG
BG: yes
... I think JC was on the callw e assigned the action item
RS: I think we changed it to currentfor...
... Let me put this text in heere
... We are at the end of time
... Assign to LW?
LW: I would be happy to give it a shot
RS: I could do it, but I am swamped, I know everyone else is too
... I will see if you are in the list, I will assign to LW
zakim scribe
<scribe> scribe: jongund
<joanie> +1 to having the text first before trying to map it
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> version 1.138 (CVS log<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
$Date: 2014-06-02 18:36:23 $
________________________________
Scribe.perl diagnostic output
[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/>

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/they need to test on 4 plateforms/they need to create test files and test them on 4 platforms/
Succeeded: s/the ORCA people/the GNOME a11y team/
Succeeded: s/Joanie: question/CS: question/
Succeeded: s/Joanie: Something other than explicit relationship/CS: Something other than explicit relationship/
Found Scribe: jongund
Inferring ScribeNick: jongund

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Default Present: Stefan_Schnabel, susannK, rich, Jon_Gunderson, Joanmarie_Diggs, Michael_Cooper, Joseph_Scheuhammer, LJWatson, Matt_King
Present: Stefan_Schnabel susannK rich Jon_Gunderson Joanmarie_Diggs Michael_Cooper Joseph_Scheuhammer LJWatson Matt_King
Found Date: 02 Jun 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/06/02-aria-minutes.html
People with action items:

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


WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


[End of scribe.perl<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm> diagnostic output]