RE: wiki in the ARIA repository

Thanks Peter.

 

https://github.com/w3c/respec/issues/1752

might be a different issue.

It doesn’t say anything specific about the heading level being wrong but rather the markup using ARIA instead of HTML.

 

I suppose it is close enough that we could sort out in that issue if an additional issue is needed or already exists.

 

Matt

 

From: Peter Krautzberger <peter@krautzource.com> 
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 3:15 AM
To: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>
Cc: Valerie Young <spectranaut@igalia.com>; public-aria-editors@w3.org
Subject: Re: wiki in the ARIA repository

 

Hi Matt, We can definitely keep the page on combobox in the wiki -- since, as you point out, it's linked from 1. 2, we definitely should. In general, I feel like the documentation folder in the main repository could be a more suitable place 

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart




This Message Is From an External Sender 

 

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

Hi Matt,

 

We can definitely keep the page on combobox in the wiki -- since, as you point out, it's linked from 1.2, we definitely should.

 

In general, I feel like the documentation folder in the main repository could be a more suitable place for this kind of content, to separate it from the more ephemeral nature of wiki pages.

 

@James can you comment on the first question?

 

For the second, a quick search turned up https://github.com/w3c/respec/issues/1752

 

Best,

Peter.

 

Am So., 23. Apr. 2023 um 18:54 Uhr schrieb Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com <mailto:a11ythinker@gmail.com> >:

Peter,

 

I’d like to keep the page:

“Resolving ARIA 1.1 Combobox Issues”

Someplace accessible. It is an important record of considerations that we still sometimes need to reference. Given the speed at which the web platform moves, I don’t see that need going away in the next 5+ years.

 

I am willing to move the combobox content to a gist in my GitHub account if there are good reasons for removing it from the wiki. However, I feel it is more appropriate to keep it in the wiki. Another option is moving it into a closed issue. That seems a little weird, but again is better than deleting and reasonable if there is a sound rationale. It is weird in that it would have a high issue number and the presentation of content and heading structure doesn’t fit well in an issue -- it is written as a document.

 

I don’t see any harm leaving it where it is in the wiki. Leaving it in place has the advantage that the links in the old working drafts of the specs will not break. The drafts stay in TR, so breaking the links is probably not a good idea.

 

That brings up two related questions:

1. Why are the editor’s notes still in the 1.2 document? Weren’t they supposed to be removed at CR exit?
2. Respec is still giving the Notes the wrong heading level. Can someone remind  me where the issue for that is? I’d like to see if we can get that fixed. Seems like a simple issue that should have been resolved by now.

 

Matt

 

From: Peter Krautzberger <peter@krautzource.com <mailto:peter@krautzource.com> > 
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2023 3:11 AM
To: Valerie Young <spectranaut@igalia.com <mailto:spectranaut@igalia.com> >
Cc: public-aria-editors@w3.org <mailto:public-aria-editors@w3.org> 
Subject: Re: wiki in the ARIA repository

 

Thanks, Valerie!

 

Before yesterday's meeting, James had some interest in keeping archival copies for interested people. 

 

I'm of two minds here; I think archives are important but I also think it can be problematic to have outdated, official looking documents around.

 

But maybe in practice it's not a big deal -- most wiki pages have moved into the spec (e.g., 1.2 and 1.3 planning, annotation draft). 

 

@james can you take a look at what documents you'd find of interest to keep? 

 

The pages that struck me as still interesting: css-aam, non-modal dialogs, attribute parity, test separation.

 

Best,

Peter.

 

Am Do., 20. Apr. 2023 um 22:25 Uhr schrieb Valerie Young <spectranaut@igalia.com <mailto:spectranaut@igalia.com> >:

Hey Peter,

I deleted the pages I moved to the "documentation" folder and update the 
links on the main wiki page to point to the documentation folder instead 
of the (now deleted) wiki pages.

Also I found another documentation like page and deleted it, as 
everything was covered.

Also I noticed there was an IRC cheat cheat being pointed to and move 
that document, see: https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/1920

Every other page (except the ARIA F2F page) I have no opinion on!

Val

On 4/20/23 01:38, Peter Krautzberger wrote:
> Hi editors,
>
> I was looking at https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1882 again today.
>
> I believe we decided that all stale wiki pages can be deleted and all 
> long term documents would move to the folder "documentation" in the 
> main repository.
>
> I checked that the git repository will keep deleted pages safe in its 
> history - but there's no UI for looking up deleted pages.
>
> Could everyone please take a quick look if you have anything you want 
> to move to the documentation folder? In that case, please add a 
> comment to a page that you want to preserve.
>
> If I don't hear anything, I'll start deleting pages.
>
> Best,
> Peter.