[aapi] Minutes: UAI TF Meeting Tue, 1 March, 2016

Link: https://www.w3.org/2016/03/01-aapi-minutes.html

Plain text follows:


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

   Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference

01 Mar 2016

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/03/01-aapi-irc


          Joanmarie_Diggs, Cynthia_Shelly, Joseph_Scheuhammer

          Rich_Schwerdtfeger, Bryan_Garaventa




     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]ACTION-1569/1585/ISSUE-540 (All) Section on AAPI
            differences - Jason's latest.
         2. [5]ACTION-2012/ACTION-2013/Action-1667 (Cynthia) UIA
            mappings for landmark roles, pull request:
         3. [6]ACTION-1593 (Cynthia) Compare implementations of
            AAPI managed states and look for gaps.
         4. [7]Test file creation
         5. [8]ACTION-1541 (Joanie/Joseph) AXAPI mapping for
            aria-modal property.
         6. [9]ACTION-1668 (Rich/Alex) Add IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK for
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     * [11]Summary of Resolutions

   <clown> agenda: this

   <clown> - Also bugzillas:





   <clown> [14]https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/products/26

     [14] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/products/26

   <scribe> scribe: Joanmarie_Diggs

   <cyns> thank you!

ACTION-1569/1585/ISSUE-540 (All) Section on AAPI differences -
Jason's latest.

   <clown> ACTION-1569?

   <trackbot> ACTION-1569 -- Joseph Scheuhammer to Create a
   section that describes AAPI differences -- due 2016-02-23 --

   <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1569

     [15] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1569

   JS: I incorporated all of Jason's and Cynthia's changes.
   ... I pushed them and asked for feedback.

   CS: I did my action item about changing the example.


     [16] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2016Feb/0050.html

   JS: Jason replied (see above).
   ... He wants to change the end of the second paragraph.
   ... He wants us to not use "accessible" as a noun.

   CS: I tend to agree with him.

   JS: I pointed out that it's used this way throughout the

   CS: You can give him an action item if he wants to change it.

   JS: Is it especially egregious?

   CS: Up to you if you want to make the change or ask him to do

   JS: It might be referencing the glossary, which would make it
   more challenging.

   CS: You could also make a glossary entry with accessible used
   as a noun, which might be less work.

   JS: The next issue Jason mentioned: (Joseph reads text of 1.1)
   ... Jason wants to drop the word "static"
   ... I thought about it a bit.
   ... And I thought it's correct because you need ARIA to get
   across the correct semantics.
   ... So the DOM does not represent the correct semantics.

   CS: But it says "structure and state".
   ... That could mean accessibility structure and state, or DOM
   structure and state, or....
   ... And it's introductory material.

   JS: Jason raised a similar issue (Joseph reads from email)
   ... Jason suggested that the text suggests ATs only use
   accessibility APIs for interactive content.
   ... Which of course is not correct (any longer).
   ... I responded to him that I agree and that this text should
   be updated.
   ... He has a recommended rewrite for the UIA section.
   ... Cynthia responded.


     [17] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2016Feb/0051.html


     [18] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2016Feb/0053.html

   JS: (Reads from Cynthia's reply at above URL)

   CS: The last thing that was written there is fine.

   JS: Where's "there"?

   CS: In his email.
   ... The way that he phrased it is better.

   <clown> action-1585

   <trackbot> action-1585 -- Joseph Scheuhammer to Add to the
   section on differences among aapis highlighting the features of
   uia. -- due 2016-01-15 -- PENDINGREVIEW

   <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1585

     [19] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1585

   CS: But with the example I redid, that may not work.
   ... The button example he uses in his rewrite is incorrect.

   JS: So I should use your (Cynthia's) text in the rewrite?

   <clown> action-2032

   <trackbot> action-2032 -- Joseph Scheuhammer to Provide a new
   example for the accessibility api explanatory text. -- due
   2016-03-01 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2032

     [20] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2032

   JS: That replaces the example. What else should we change?

   CS: Can you munge them together and we can look at them next

   JS: Yes.

   CS: I will be reviewing the complete UIA column next week.
   ... I may just do a pull request as I don't think we need to
   have a discussion about each cell in that table.

   JS: Since we didn't test UIA last time, we need to test
   everything this time.

   (Some discussion about restoring the UIA Express column)

   JS: We need to talk to Alex Surkov about this.

   CS: I think it was about the HTML-AAM.

   JS: We removed it from Core. Jason asked if we should remove it
   from HTML-AAM?

   CS: Alex pointed out that some implementations (i.e. Firefox)
   may still use it.

   JS: Does this imply anything about testing?

   CS: It might.
   ... And we don't know if we have a testable implementation of
   UIA Express.
   ... Unless Alex wants us to use Firefox to test for UIA

   JS: We have plan for differences amongst Accessibility APIs:
   ... I'll tell Jason to go ahead with the accessible objects.
   ... I'll munge the changes.

ACTION-2012/ACTION-2013/Action-1667 (Cynthia) UIA mappings for
landmark roles, pull request:

     [21] https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/272

   <clown> [22]https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/272

     [22] https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/272

   JS: Your (Cynthia's) github pull request for landmarks: I'm
   fine with that, but if we make your change here, we need to do
   it everywhere.

   CS: I don't think that's the only change I made.

   JS: No, the rest I'm fine with.



   <clown> ACTION: cynthia to change the phrase "Control
   type/role" to "Control Type" throughout the Core-AAM [recorded
   in [24]http://www.w3.org/2016/03/01-aapi-irc]

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2016/03/01-aapi-irc]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-2037 - Change the phrase "control
   type/role" to "control type" throughout the core-aam [on
   Cynthia Shelly - due 2016-03-08].

   <clown> action-2037

   <trackbot> action-2037 -- Cynthia Shelly to Change the phrase
   "control type/role" to "control type" throughout the core-aam
   -- due 2016-03-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2037

     [25] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/2037

   CS: Go ahead and merge the current pull request.
   ... And give me an action to do the other changes to "control

ACTION-1593 (Cynthia) Compare implementations of AAPI managed states
and look for gaps.

   <clown> action-1593

   <trackbot> action-1593 -- Cynthia Shelly to Compare
   implementations of AAPI managed states and look for gaps. --
   due 2016-03-04 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1593

     [26] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1593

   JS: We talked about this briefly last week.

   CS: I didn't get to this one yet.
   ... Let's move it to the 29th.
   ... And when are we doing test file creation?

Test file creation

   CS: I had an action due today to create a test case.


   <trackbot> action-1373 -- Cynthia Shelly to Create a test case
   for when aria-posinset and aria-setsize are provided explicitly
   on some but not all elements. -- due 2016-03-01 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1373

     [27] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1373

   CS: I'd like to align this with when the other test case
   writing takes place.
   ... Testing starts after last call?

   JD: When is last call?

   JS: I think the plan is, because we've been doing heartbeats
   regularly now, we choose the last heartbeat for last call.

   CS: There's no way all the test cases will be written by March

   JS: I'll add a note that the due date for this action should
   coincide with test case creation.

ACTION-1541 (Joanie/Joseph) AXAPI mapping for aria-modal property.

   <clown> action-1541

   <trackbot> action-1541 -- Joseph Scheuhammer to Investigate and
   propose mappings for aria-modal property for axapi. -- due
   2016-02-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1541

     [28] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1541



   JS: I did a little research. And found the above in the Apple
   ... There is a accessibility-modal property of a window.

   <clown> [30]https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138566#c23

     [30] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138566#c23

   <clown> @property(getter=isAccessibilityModal) BOOL

   JS: The method is isAccessibilityModal()

   <clown> A Boolean value that determines whether the window is

   JS: The documentation states the above.
   ... That tells the AT programmer what to look for, but not what
   to look for in the accessibility inspector.

   <clown> [31]https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138566#c23

     [31] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138566#c23

   JS: So I commented on the bug associated with the
   ... I asked them what to put in the accessibility mappings.
   ... I haven't gotten a reply.

   JD: If memory serves me, they don't expose the property; the
   act upon it being present.
   ... For instance, if an aria-modal dialog became active, the
   page content underneath would be treated as if aria-hidden were
   ... I think. I am not Apple.

   JS: So how do we test it?

   JD: Hypothetically, if you had a page with text and an OK
   button that triggered the appearance of an aria-modal dialog,
   then you would activate the button and then look in the
   accessibility tree to verify that text and that button were not
   in the accessibility tree.
   ... And you would probably also want to verify that upon
   dismissing the aria-modal dialog, the original content was
   re-added back to the accessibility tree.

ACTION-1668 (Rich/Alex) Add IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK for IA2.

   JS: Rich and Alex are not here.
   ... There is an email thread.
   ... We'll put it off to next week since Rich is not here.

   <clown> object:state-changed:invalid_entry


   Indicates that the object has encountered an error condition
   due to failure of input validation. For instance, a form
   control may acquire this state in response to invalid or
   malformed user input.




   Indicates an invalid state - probably an error condition.

   <clown> issue-1013

   <trackbot> issue-1013 -- Is there a need for an aapi event for
   aria-errormessage -- open

   <trackbot> [33]http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/issues/1013

     [33] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/issues/1013

   JS: I raised the above issue.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: cynthia to change the phrase "Control type/role"
   to "Control Type" throughout the Core-AAM [recorded in

     [34] http://www.w3.org/2016/03/01-aapi-irc

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2016 21:18:24 UTC