Minutes Auto-WCAG December Meeting

Present: Wilco, Charu, Birkir, Frank, Rob, Alistair, Emma, Moe, Shadi, Jose
Scribe: Charu

[16:08] <Wilco> topic: Updated website
[16:09] <Wilco> https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/
[16:10] <Wilco> https://github.com/auto-wcag/auto-wcag
[16:11] wilco: mostly updating are repository
[16:13] wilco: website looking very static, thoughts on how we can build
this out
[16:13] <Birkir> HOw do we get from static to ecstatic
[16:13] <Wilco> https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/
[16:14] Wilco: pass the question to Frank
[16:15] Frank: we can add links to the source
[16:15] <Wilco>
https://github.com/auto-wcag/auto-wcag/blob/master/_rules/SC1-1-1-aria-describedby.md
[16:17] wilco: are there any editing options for files
[16:17] <Rob_F>
https://github.com/auto-wcag/auto-wcag/edit/master/_rules/SC1-1-1-aria-describedby.md
[16:18] wilco: not a bad turnout for Dec
[16:19] Rob: some inconsistancies in the template and the files
[16:20] Wilco: yes, hope to finish the template discussion today
[16:22] Rob: one thing i was curious about is there ever a case where you
will not want the web driver, the page loaded due to changes that occur due
to JavaScript
[16:23] Wilco: yes and no, when you building test sites and when using
component libraries
[16:24] Rob: that leads to another question, what exactly is being tested
say for color contrast, and taking into account the background that depends
on the viewport
[16:24] Wilco: yes testing the page in the current test
[16:25] Wilco: is color contrast on the agenda?
[16:25] Rob: not prepared
[16:25] Rob: i have question that i raise
[16:25] Wilco: good reason to put that on the agenda
[16:26] Alistair: when you have dark background, does it not fail color
contrast
[16:26] Wilco: i will make a note, it does not seem like
[16:26] <Wilco> topic: Template redesign
[16:27] <Wilco> https://github.com/auto-wcag/auto-wcag/pull/15
[16:27] AListair: under the rule design, the dom tree we need to be more
generic
[16:28] Rob: so it is like we are testing a State
[16:28] Rob: it will be helpful to include examples of test enviroments
[16:29] Wilco: yes
[16:29] Rob: i am unclear
[16:29] Alistair: it is rare u use source
[16:29] <MoeKraft>
https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/pages/design/rule-design.html
[16:29] <emma_jpr> The grey text in the Nav has a 5.74 contrast ... it
passes, but not by much. Partly because the dark background is not fully
black. Wouldn't hurt to darken the background a little or lighten the grey
a little.
[16:29] Alistair: how do test responsive site
[16:30] Rob: you use the source without the styles to build a foundation to
test
[16:30] Wilco: yes the only one is parsing error
[16:31] Mark: parsing you need to do before u get to the dom
[16:31] Bikir; catch mismatch of divs
[16:31] <Wilco>
https://github.com/auto-wcag/auto-wcag/pull/15/files?diff=split
[16:32] Wilco: i have been working on updating the template, please take a
look
[16:33] Wilco: i found we can do split diff, really nice for reviewing
documents
[16:33] Alistair: just curious is GITHUB ACCESSIBLE?
[16:34] Bikir: it is reading across the page
[16:34] Wilco: that make sense for comparision
[16:34] Bilkir; little confusing but works
[16:35] <jose> ok
[16:35] Wilco: i have made updates to the last comment, any other comments?
[16:36] Charu: apologize i have not looked at thsi
[16:37] <jose> Maybe add pointer property in outcomes
[16:37] Bikir: looks good, except for prefeble should be prefebely
[16:38] <Birkir> Speak now, or forever hold your peas.
[16:38] Wilco: unless any objection i will merge this pull request
[16:39] Emma: move the background up
[16:39] Wilco: glad you noticed, i will make the change
[16:39] <Wilco> Topic: Review older releases
[16:39] Wilco: lets move to the next item
[16:39] <Wilco> https://github.com/auto-wcag/auto-wcag/issues/26
[16:39] Wilco: look at some previous release, have bunch of feedback
[16:40] Jose: you can see my comments from my review
[16:41] Jose: have some suggestions, it only some easy corrections
[16:42] Jose: now we have a new template
[16:42] <Birkir> Good set of comments Jose. I agree with them.
[16:42] Wilco: i think we need to devide the work in the group for
published changes
[16:43] <Wilco> https://github.com/auto-wcag/auto-wcag/issues/25
[16:43] Wilco: will get to that at the end of the meeting, thank you very
much for comments
[16:44] Wilco: have not made the updates, fortunately Mark jumped in
[16:44] Mark: had comments on the general structure of 1.1.1
[16:45] Mark: button element needs more defined and needs aria label
[16:45] Mark: adjacent text next to image to consider
[16:46] Mark: the same applys to heading and some opportunity for automation
[16:46] <Birkir> aria-describedby is very poorly supported by screen
readers unless the refering element is focusable. I am not saying that
necessarily changes anything (it is on the a.t. to ensure accessible
description gets communicated), but it is something to keep in mind.
[16:47] Mark: 1.1.1 is most complicated, if better to split it
[16:47] Mark: images , links etc
[16:47] <Birkir> I think at minimum we should split images into active
(part of an active element) or non-active .. there are differences in the
requirements for active and non active images as well as differences in how
their accessible name (alt text) can be provided.
[16:47] == MoeKraft [~MoeKraft@public.cloak] has quit ["Page closed"]
[16:47] Wilco: that has been Alistairs feedback as well
[16:48] Wilco: i have  suggestion, i can work with you on that
[16:48] Mark: happy to do that
[16:49] Mark: try few thinks and see it works
[16:50] Mark: last is rule naming convention, what happens as WCAG evolves
[16:50] <emma_jpr> Noticing that Mark considered splitting a complex rule
via different selectors. This has been suggested a few times now.
[16:50] Mark: suggest having some scheme that works, type and context of
the problem
[16:50] Wilco: the reason we have done this cuz we are focused on WCA 2.0
[16:51] WCA/ WCAG
[16:51] <emma_jpr> There are 4 rules already for SC1.1.1
[16:51] <Birkir> We can always remap our rule structure to a new standard
once we have one.
[16:51] Rob, question, which rule are we dealing with in the issue?
[16:52] Rod: CSS image?
[16:52] Wilco: text Alternative
[16:52] Wilco: i like the idea on working with you to split this
[16:53] Frank: too much information
[16:53] Frank: in WCAG i have not seen any text alternative for buttons
[16:54] <Birkir> The thing with the button image combo is taht the image
itself does not need alt text, but the button needs accessible name (so
decorative image button could sort of pass 1.1.1 but definitely fails
4.1.2). The trick is to catch this issue once in testing rather than create
2 sometimes 3 (if we look at images in links) issues that
testers/deverlopers have to chase down.
[16:54] Frank: i can find an example and put it in th feed
[16:54] <Rob_F> I'd like to know what folks think about this:
https://github.com/squizlabs/HTML_CodeSniffer/issues/156
[16:55] Wilco: we want to avaoid duplication so tied it togather, but
looking at the complexicity not a good idea
[16:55] <Frank>
https://www.w3.org/community/auto-wcag/wiki/SC1-1-1-text-alternative
[16:55] Frank: there are diagrams at the bottom
[16:55] <Rob_F> Basically, I reported as a bug html_codesniffer's flagging
as an error providing alternative text using aria-labelledby, but was told
this was correct behavior
[16:55] Wilco: it will be up to us to untangle the mess
[16:56] Wilco: done with this issue
[16:56] Rob: html code sniffer to see if it flags
[16:56] Rob: used aria-labelledby was reported
[16:57] Rob: they did not think it was an issue
[16:57] Rob: label is not the same as the description
[16:57] Wilco: that is starnge
[16:58] Rob: it works with Screen reader
[16:59] Emma: accessibility is for screen reader, if the image wont load
there will be no alternative
[16:59] Alistair: the name computation in ARIA says that
[17:00] Alistair: the screen reader does not do the name computation
[17:01] <emma_jpr> Accessibility is about more than just what is available
for a screen reader. Does aria-labelled by show on screen if an image fails
to load?
[17:01] Alistair: browser does the computation and puts it in the MSAA
[17:01] <Wilco>
https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/pages/structure/accessibility-support.html
[17:01] Wilco: let me bring the discussion back
[17:02] Wilco: W will not consider that is not covered by ARIA
[17:02] Wilco: in ACT task force we are working on how to deal with
accessibility, don't want to take that here
[17:03] <Birkir> There have been discussions in the ARIA group about
requiring at least one assistive technology suports the ARIA standard (in
addition to 2 user agents) before release. I am hoping that, with ARIA,
that idea can move forward.
[17:03] Rob: W3C recommendation is accessibility supported
[17:03] Wilco: yes our responsibility stops there
[17:03] Wilco: does that answer your question
[17:04] Rob: anything out of the name computation counts as accessible name
[17:04] Wilco: next topic, questions on color contrast rules
[17:04] <emma_jpr>
https://github.com/robfentress/auto-wcag/blob/sc1-4-3/_drafts/SC1-4-3-text-bg-contrast.md
[17:04] Emma: you have anything to add?
[17:05] Emma: Rob and i had a discussion, this is in his fork
[17:05] Emma: we can show you in the fork
[17:05] Emma: comments basically are not visible
[17:07] Emma: We have not dealt with any complicated stuff like background
image, gradiant, so should we split this up?
[17:07] +1 on slitting
[17:08] Alistair: color attributes on something, if we drop the css we
still have color
[17:08] Rob: great you mention, almost getting at failure to support css
[17:09] Rob: i don't understand the issue of user agent, how do u
understand f24
[17:10] Wilco: if you apply either the foreground or back ground and leave
the other to thw browser, when the browser reverses then it becomes a
problem
[17:11] Charu: we have split the rule into 2
[17:12] Alistair: text with background is not F24
[17:12] Rob: so F24 is we cannot calculate the ratio
[17:12] Alistair: It is to do with css
[17:13] Rob: folks can apply their own CSS and change it
[17:14] Alistair: have to make sure you do not have dropped in the
background
[17:14] Alistair: mixture of old html attributes of color and css
[17:14] Rob: if that is not used then it is not a issue?
[17:15] Emma: it would?
[17:15] Rob: was that what you are saying?
[17:16] Wilco: if you have black text and the user uses css that is black
then there is no text
[17:17] Mark: You might say white text on black
[17:17] Emma: user has text that raps beyond the image, it becomes a problem
[17:18] Rob: can you clear what you mean by user css
[17:19] Alistair: the oder is the browser css as default, after that comes
user css, then app css
[17:19] Alistair: that is specified in CSS but one can override the priority
[17:20] Wilco: that is not how it is happening in FF
[17:20] Rob: still having hard time accepting if the user agent is
overiding the css , so wheter you have set the color is set or not then
they can change it
[17:21] Wilco: Windows HC can change that
[17:22] Rob: Seems little fussy to me when the failure occurs
[17:22] Alistair: the failure seems bizzare
[17:22] <MarkR> Here's the CSS spec on the order the user style sheets get
applied
https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-CSS2-20110607/cascade.html#cascading-order
[17:23] Emma: The reason to declare both foreground and background
[17:23] Emma: we do that at the body level
[17:24] Mark: if you leave the body then it fall backs
[17:24] Wilco: we sort havr this figured out, this has to be it own rule,
case is pretty clear
[17:24] Emma: yes noted that
[17:25] Wilco: color contrat can be improved
[17:26] Rob: the ositioning of the text ans size and what appears behind
matters
[17:27] Wilco: yes, but beyond our scope
[17:28] Wilco: alright, 2 more success criteria that i want to get it done,
please put your comments this week, then i will email the request to merge
[17:28] Wilco: pull request 21 and 22
[17:29] Wilco: put out a request, we have whole bunch of rules that we need
to address in the new template
[17:30] Alistair: first 2 example use html color test not css
[17:30] Alistair: that where my comments were comimng from
[17:31] Emma: i have a question, in our last meeting we agree to review,
and also update?
[17:31] Wilco: lets update them
[17:31] Wilco: final thoughts
[17:32] Jose: i can review the rules into the new templates
[17:32] Alistair: no final thoughts, looking forward to xmas
[17:32] Rob: this is much more complicated then i though
[17:33] Mark: good meeting
[17:33] <emma_jpr> Happy Christmas / holiday ... everyone :o)
[17:34] Wilco: thank you very much
[17:34] Birkir: to all goodnight
[17:34] Shadi: good see the work happening and getting more visibility
[17:35] Wilco: thank you for joining, have a good one

-- 
*Wilco Fiers*
Senior Accessibility Engineer - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair Auto-WCAG