- From: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:16:54 -0400
- To: "wai-xtech@w3.org" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Link: http://www.w3.org/2013/08/20-aapi-minutes.html
Plain text version follows:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
20 Aug 2013
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2013Aug/0008.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2013/08/20-aapi-irc
Attendees
Present
Joseph_Scheuhammer, David_Bolter, Michael_Cooper
Regrets
Cynthia_Shelley
Chair
Joseph_Scheuhammer
Scribe
clown
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]ISSUE-595
2. [6]ISSUE-596
3. [7]ISSUE-607
4. [8]ISSUE-604
* [9]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 20 August 2013
<scribe> scribenick: clown
zakim GVoice is Joseph_Scheuhammer
ISSUE-595
ISSUE-595?
<trackbot> ISSUE-595 -- treegrid for UIA has outline roles vs.
gridcell roles. IE implemented gridcell - Change it? -- open
<trackbot> [10]https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/595
[10] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/595
JS: Based on 30 Jul telecon, Cynthia said switch to
ROLE_SYSTEM_CELL for treegrid under UIA express
... and DataItem under UIA.
<davidb> DB: for the key press issue… mozilla fix was
[11]https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=501496
[11] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=501496
JS: mentioned this change at the weekly call, and wondered if
it's really correct.
... then I discovered ISSUE-598 has been raised.
ISSUE-598?
<trackbot> ISSUE-598 -- Mapping for treegrid role is incorrect
for IE -- open
<trackbot> [12]https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/598
[12] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/598
JS: opened this releated issue on the 30th of July.
... it says to map treegrid to control type "tree grid" (not
cell).
DB: this needs cynthia.
JS: at the meeting yesterday, Rich suggested things have
changed with IE11, and maybe this mapping of treegrid to
ROLE_SYSTEM_CELL is no longer applicable.
... just wanted you and mozilla to be aware of this.
... does FF do a UIA implementation?
DB: we are dabbling, but not full bore yet.
ISSUE-596
ISSUE-596?
<trackbot> ISSUE-596 -- Failure of aria-invalid mappings for
AT-SPI in test cases: mapping is via text attributes, not
object attributes but is not exposed. -- open
<trackbot> [13]https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/596
[13] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/596
JS: there is a test case with <img role="presentation"
aria-invalid="true">
... the aria-invalid is there to check that it counteract the
presentation role.
... FF does expose a graphic accessilble in the a11y tree.
... But, because the invalid is given in text attributes (not
object attributes), there is nothing exposed because this is a
graphic (not text).
... If you look at IA2, it says to expose in text attributes
AND to set IA2_STATE_INVALID_ENTRY
... in the above test case, FF does expose
IA2_STATE_INVALID_ENTRY for the graphic, but no text
attributes.
... there is a STATE_INVALID in AT-SPI.
... My question is: should it be set in this test case?
... here is the test case:
[14]https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pfwg/raw-file/default/ARIA/1.0/tests
/test-files/presentation-role/504.html
[14] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pfwg/raw-file/default/ARIA/1.0/tests/test-files/presentation-role/504.html
DB: I could look at the code...
... we purposely bypass the object attribute for aria-invalid.
But you are curious about state invalid?
JS: yes.
<davidb>
[15]http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/accessible/te
sts/mochitest/test_aria_token_attrs.html?force=1#72
[15] http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/accessible/tests/mochitest/test_aria_token_attrs.html?force=1#72
DB: we do test for ^
... something that is invalid maps to STATE_INVALID.
... you were wondering if the state mapping was accidental. The
test I cite shows that it is done on purpose.
... I would expect this to happen for any role we checked.
JS: that means I can change the aria-invalid mappings for
AT-SPI to include STATE_INVALID for aria-invalid='true'.
... it comes down to "copying" what is given for IA2.
DB: yes, exactly.
... let me check one more thing.
... there is an ATK_STATE_INVALID_ENTRY.
JS: There is an ATSPI_STATE_INVALID_ENTRY
[16]https://developer.gnome.org/libatspi/unstable/libatspi-atsp
i-constants.html
[16] https://developer.gnome.org/libatspi/unstable/libatspi-atspi-constants.html
<davidb> we want to check that
DB: we want to check that too.
JS: let me run the test case.
... my mistake. accerciser reports "invalid entry"
<davidb> yeah looks like we map invalid to invalid entry for
atk "{ ATK_STATE_INVALID_ENTRY, kMapDirectly }, //
states::INVALID = 1 << 28"
JS: It's almost identical to IA2.
<davidb> DB: yep
resovled: joseph to update UAIG to state that for
aria-invalid='true', for AT-SPI, include a 'set
STATE_INVALID_ENTRY'.
resolved: joseph to update UAIG to state that for
aria-invalid='true', for AT-SPI, include a 'set
STATE_INVALID_ENTRY'.
[17]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#mapping_state
-property_table
[17] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#mapping_state-property_table
ISSUE-607
ISSUE-607?
<trackbot> ISSUE-607 -- Is there a HasKeyboardFocus state in
AT-SPI? -- open
<trackbot> [18]https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/607
[18] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/607
DB: I think that is an error. That the editor put in a
'HasKeyboardFocus' and meant to replace it with the
STATE_FOCUSED from AT-SPI.
resolved: change "HasKeyboardFocus" in AT-SPI column to
'STATE_FOCUSED'
[19]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#focus_state_e
vent_table
[19] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#focus_state_event_table
ISSUE-604
issue-604?
<trackbot> issue-604 -- Normative requirement on User agent
processing of input keys does not belong in UAIG -- open
<trackbot> [20]https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/604
[20] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/604
<davidb> I think this changed on our source tree late July
([21]https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=501496)
[21] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=501496)
[22]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#keyboard-focu
s_tabindex
[22] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#keyboard-focus_tabindex
JS: there a list of MUST requirements for tab navigation with
tabindex
DB: number 7: When a keydown event is cancelled, also cancel
the keypress event
... I think we do this now on our latest but unreleased version
of FF.
MC: what is the mechanism? when you preventDefault()? or
stopPropagation().
DB: Joseph is doing both.
MC: the cancelbubble — is that necessary?
... preventDefault() for FF and return false for IE.
... but why this requirement?
DB: this doesn't need to be a MUST, but it's nice to have
consistency for developers.
MC: why the user agent and not the script?
DB: I think it's a nicety. It's nice to have the consistency to
cancel the keypress when the keydown is cancelled.
... it relates to dojo menus.
... some actions are done on keydown, others on keyup.
... what if there is no keydown event, but there is a keypress
event.
... there could be a keyup on an element that currently has
focus after a keydown event occurred on another element.
MC: that is a very strange situation.
... two questions: (a) is there a defensible requirement? (b)
can it be implemented?
... there appears to be a tentative yes to the second question.
... but is it implemented in a wide spread manner.
... it is implemented in the latest FF, and possibly in IE?
DB: I haven't tested in IE. Yes to FF and Chrome.
<davidb> FF nightly is here [23]http://nightly.mozilla.org/
[23] http://nightly.mozilla.org/
MC: we do not propose to change the requirement in the UAIG.
DB: I'm trying to google the history of this, but I'm not
seeing anything.
... you might ping Becky, Joseph. It may have come from dojo
land.
[24]http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-wai-aria-implementation-201009
16/
[24] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-wai-aria-implementation-20100916/
Canceling a keydown event must also cancel the keypress event,
for purposes of compatibility with other browsers. This is
necessary because authors supporting Internet Explorer must use
keydown events to process keystrokes, where keydown but not
keypress events are fired for non-alphanumeric keys. As web
page authors implement script control over the keyboard they
need to be able to use keydown but cancel the effect of
consumed keystrokes such as arrow keys.
[25]http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-implementation-200902
24/
[25] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-implementation-20090224/
<davidb> that is the reason! ^
JS: do you fully understand it?
... I sort of get it...
<davidb> if you get it, don't give it to me :)
MC: sort of makes sense, but is it still true?
... I found some test pages that let you press various keys,
and it shows what each of the various events return.
... sometimes keycodes are returned. sometimes keychar.
... but I'm not sure this is still true today.
... there is a new DOM 3 UI events recent working draft.
<MichaelC> [26]UI Events
[26] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-uievents-20130725/
JS: Part of the problem is that key events were not
standardized in DOM2. Stuck at DOM 1
DB: I am away next week, but I'm probably available on email.
MC: I've got your email with your test file, and work with it.
I may send you some questions.
JS: Okay.
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [27]scribe.perl version
1.138 ([28]CVS log)
$Date: 2013-08-20 20:09:18 $
__________________________________________________________
[27] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[28] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
--
;;;;joseph.
'A: After all, it isn't rocket science.'
'K: Right. It's merely computer science.'
- J. D. Klaun -
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2013 20:17:22 UTC