- From: Daniel Montalvo <dmontalvo@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 11:33:41 +0200
- To: "'Wilco Fiers'" <wilco.fiers@deque.com>, "'ACT Rules CG'" <public-act-r@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <006d01d67c55$28737d10$795a7730$@w3.org>
Minutes on-line at:
https://www.w3.org/2020/08/27-act-r-minutes.html
Text version below.
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
ACT Rules Community Group Teleconference
27 Aug 2020
Attendees
Present
adil, Helen, Daniel, Wilco, EmmaJ_PR, Jean-Yves, Anne
Regrets
Chair
Wilco
Scribe
dmontalvo
Contents
* [2]Topics
1. [3]Final call
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issue
s/461 '
2. [4]Rules ready for W3C publication
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issue
s/1120 '
3. [5]Element with role has required states and
properties - Failed example 1
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issue
s/1373 '
4. [6]"Links with identical accessible names rules"
should check link text and not accessible name
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issue
s/1378 '
5. [7]Element with aria-hidden has no focusable content -
Passed Example 3 is a fail
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issue
s/1386 '
* [8]Summary of Action Items
* [9]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<scribe> Scribe: dmontalvo
Final call
[10]https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/461'
[10] https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/461
Wilco: 2 1-week and 2 2-weeks final calls
... Anything else we need to do in the auto-complete rule?
Aron: The type attriute is now covered in the assumption, we
may add something with auto-comoplete="off"
... Will create another pull request
Wilco: Updates to test case design, and new rule to check the
default language's markup in HTML elements
... Any questions?
Helen: It is not clear what the actual purpose is?
Emma: 461 has two links on it.
Rules ready for W3C publication
[11]https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1120'
[11] https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1120
Wilco: Working on the "non-empty title", waiting for TF
JYM: id is unique looks like I have done it
Wilco: Will hand it back to the TF
Daniel: Audio - video should probably be taken by somebody who
has actually written rules
[Updated dates in the different issue sections]
Wilco: I will take "Scrollable elements are keyboard
accessible"
Element with role has required states and properties - Failed example
1 [12]https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1373'
[12] https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1373
Wilco: If you add up all the different specs, comobox doesn't
really have a required role, the only one is aria-expanded
... ARIA 1.2 is getting close to publishing
JYM: Would it make sense to change that example to something
elase as the combobox pattern seems to change a lot?
Wilco: The only role with required attributes is the scrollbar
... Anything else either has default values or is changing
... ARIA 1.2 does not have default value for aria-level
Aron: if aria-level is not going to have value of 2, it may not
be announced by ATs
Wilco: It may happen.
Aron: aria-controls is required in ARIA 1.2, I know the
confusion is around 1.1
Emma: Think should be going with the latest version
Wilco: Latest is 1.1, and is also requiring to support 1.0
... Conformance checkers should continue to support 1.0
... If we are supposed to follow 1.1 and 1.0, we cannot say
aria-controls is required
Adil: Probably the example should be passing, and we can add
anote that the example will be updated once ARIA 1.2 is
published
Wilco: The only thing we could use to replace the example is
scrolbar
... We could start using ARIA 1.2 in this rule
JYM: If there are only two examples we can test in this rule
with ARIA 1.1, this might look like a weak rule, it might be
useful for 1.2
Emma: Implementers may need to take a decission as to whether
to implement it or not
Helen: To future-proof it, you have the rule now so it covers
you for the eventuality that it might change
Wilco: My preference is to wait, if anybody wants to take it to
migrate it to 1.2...
... Anybody disagree with that?
RESOLUTION: Leave this rule as is until ARIA 1.2 comes out.
"Links with identical accessible names rules" should check link text
and not accessible name
[13]https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1378'
[13] https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1378
Wilco: Our link rules use the accessible name. Mark is arguing
that it is not about the accessible name but the visible text.
Emma: Should be about both. Visually you get the visible text,
but screen readers are getting the accessible name.
JYM: Agree with Emma
Adil: This is for the links that contain text, links that do
not contain text, images should be assessed under 1.1.1
Aron: You can have accessible name with some other text and
still pass the criteria, those types of rules still apply to
visual content only. I see WCAG is not requiring that
accessible names, but visual text
<Wilco> [14]https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Techniques/aria/ARIA8
[14] https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Techniques/aria/ARIA8
Anne: I wrote the rule, I remember having this discussion
before. There is a lot of ARIA under techniques for 2.4.9
Emma: Techniques for 2.4.4 talk about alternative texts, so
they are getting into the accessible name
Wilco: Link text mean accessible name. Otherwise linked images
would not apply, which seems odd to me.
... Also this is about the programmatically determined context,
not visible text.
Anne: In the definition of mechanism, it refers to assistive
technologies
Emma: Where is the requirement for visible name and accessible
name to do or be the same?
Wilco: 2.5.3
Aron: There are some caviots to it, it does not need to be the
same, if it is preceeded by some words
JYM: We had a lot of discussion, we decided to add an
assumption not to use homonyms. There are a few border-line
cases
... WCAG doesn't say this, but it is a reasonable assumption
that needs to be made
Helen: Some of this is down to the application of it when using
assistive technology. Maybe you go to the first one and you
wanted to go to the second one
Aron: Some highlight the two links and ask for numbers
Wilco: Proposal -- leave the rule as is and provide Mark the
feedback from this meeting.
Adil: This rule is better related to the programmatical
context. The other aspect of the sc to check the link text, we
may want to have another rule for that.
Emma: The visible link text will always be used in context, you
would only need one extra rule.
Element with aria-hidden has no focusable content - Passed Example 3
is a fail
[15]https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1386'
[15] https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1386
<Wilco>
[16]https://act-rules.github.io/rules/6cfa84#passed-example-3
[16] https://act-rules.github.io/rules/6cfa84#passed-example-3
Wilco: -1 makes it not part of the sequence of focus, but you
can tap on it using screen
... I was looking at fixing it, but if you have an overlay on
top of it, there is no way for you to tap on it
... It checks avoiding AT to get to something that does not
need to be announced
Aron: What is the purpose of this example?
Emma: Modals, to make sure AT do not get to things behind it as
it is open
Wilco: You need to apply -1 to everything, there was a proposal
for an attribute that could be added to the background content
but did not make it through
... setting aria-hidden and role="none" is something people
use, but creates problems
Emma: I see valid cases for aria-hidden to be used even in
visible content
Wilco: Should we change the passed example?
Adil: No, but maybe have an assumption that it may be possible
to get to this element using touch screens
<Wilco>
[17]https://act-rules.github.io/rules/6cfa84#passed-example-3
[17] https://act-rules.github.io/rules/6cfa84#passed-example-3
<Wilco> [18]https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#dfn-hidden
[18] https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#dfn-hidden
Wilco: There is an issue opened about the definition of hidden
JYM: We are using sequential focus navigationbut we are
checking just a subset. We are passing this because we don't
have a good enough definition of focusable. I am in favor of
removing it, because it is failing what the rule was supposed
to test
Aron: In favor of removing the example
Emma: Also reconsider passed examples 5 and 6
Wilco: I am personally inclined to fix this. Maybe adding a
requirement for it not to be clickable or tappable
Adil: Is aria-hidden related to interactive or non-interactive
content?
Wilco: Both.
<adil> [19]https://www.w3.org/TR/using-aria/#fourth
[19] https://www.w3.org/TR/using-aria/#fourth
Wilco: Any objections?
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
1. [20]Leave this rule as is until ARIA 1.2 comes out.
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
--
Daniel Montalvo
Accessibility Education and Training Specialist
W3C/WAI
From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 6:13 PM
To: ACT Rules CG <public-act-r@w3.org>
Subject: ACT-R Meeting, Thursday (Aug 27)
Hey everyone,
Thursday (August 27th) we are going to have another one of our twice-monthly ACT-R Community telcos. I hope you will all be able to attend again. Please review the GitHub issues on the agenda before the meeting.
The meeting will be from 10:00 CEST to 11:00 CEST. See https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ACT-R+call <https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ACT-R+call&iso=20200827T10&p1=16&ah=1&am=00> &iso=20200827T10&p1=16&ah=1&am=00 for your local time.
To join the meeting online, go to: https://mit.zoom.us/j/573349897
Password: Ask in IRC
Join us on IRC at irc.w3.org/?channels=#act-r <http://irc.w3.org/?channels=#act-r>
Agenda
------
https://github.com/search?q=user%3Aact-rules+repo%3Aact-rules.github.io+label%3A%22Agenda+item%22+state%3Aopen <https://github.com/search?q=user%3Aact-rules+repo%3Aact-rules.github.io+label%3A%22Agenda+item%22+state%3Aopen&type=Issues> &type=Issues
- AGENDA ITEM: Final call
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/461
- AGENDA ITEM: Rules ready for W3C publication
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1120
- Element with role has required states and properties - Failed example 1
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1373
- "Links with identical accessible names rules" should check link text and not accessible name
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1378
- Element with aria-hidden has no focusable content - Passed Example 3 is a fail
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1386
- Scrollable element is keyboard accessible: test cases break if user changes browser default font
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1389
- Should rules check for the duration of effects that can come into play for passing the rule?
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1394
- Link to related rules in the background
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1402
Upcoming meetings:
- September 10th (16:00 CEST)
- September 24th (10:00 CEST)
- October 8th (16:00 CEST)
- October 22nd (10:00 CEST)
Kind regards,
--
Wilco Fiers
Axe for Web product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2020 09:33:48 UTC