- 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