15:53:17 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 15:53:17 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-wai-wcag-irc 15:53:19 RRSAgent, make logs public 15:53:21 Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG 15:53:21 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 15:53:22 Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 15:53:22 Date: 15 December 2015 15:53:26 zakim, agenda? 15:53:26 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda: 15:53:27 1. Discussion on 'Checkbox and Radio button labels and 1.3.1' https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/122 [from Kenny] 15:53:27 2. Walkthru and status update of current issues [from Kenny] 15:53:27 3. AOB from last week [from Kenny] 15:54:18 agenda+ 15:54:18 1. The COGA TF would appreciate the working groups feedback on two proposals for pulling together all the information from the COGA into a readable/digestible summary for the purposes of gap analysis. [1] 15:54:18 15:54:18 [1] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/COGA_Proposal_review/ 15:54:51 agenda+ The COGA TF would appreciate the working groups feedback on two proposals for pulling together all the information from the COGA into a readable/digestible summary for the purposes of gap analysis 15:54:56 zakim, agenda? 15:54:56 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda: 15:54:57 1. Discussion on 'Checkbox and Radio button labels and 1.3.1' https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/122 [from Kenny] 15:54:57 2. Walkthru and status update of current issues [from Kenny] 15:54:57 3. AOB from last week [from Kenny] 15:54:58 5. The COGA TF would appreciate the working groups feedback on two proposals for pulling together all the information from the COGA into a readable/digestible summary for the 15:54:58 ... purposes of gap analysis [from Joshue108] 15:55:50 david has joined #wai-wcag 15:58:23 AWK has joined #wai-wcag 15:58:42 ZAkim, agenda? 15:58:42 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda: 15:58:43 1. Discussion on 'Checkbox and Radio button labels and 1.3.1' https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/122 [from Kenny] 15:58:43 2. Walkthru and status update of current issues [from Kenny] 15:58:43 3. AOB from last week [from Kenny] 15:58:44 5. The COGA TF would appreciate the working groups feedback on two proposals for pulling together all the information from the COGA into a readable/digestible summary for the 15:58:44 ... purposes of gap analysis [from Joshue108] 15:59:20 zakim, drop item 1 15:59:20 agendum 1, Discussion on 'Checkbox and Radio button labels and 1.3.1' https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/122, dropped 16:00:25 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:00:25 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html AWK 16:00:55 RRSAgent, set logs public 16:01:01 Jan has joined #wai-wcag 16:01:10 Chair: Joshue 16:01:12 +AWK 16:01:15 +Joshue 16:01:21 +Wayne 16:02:09 Agenda+ meetings and timelines 16:02:23 Mike_Elledge has joined #wai-wcag 16:02:38 Wayne has joined #wai-wcag 16:02:49 present+ Laura 16:04:56 Why is it that WebEx is extra unresponsive just when you´re running late? 16:05:09 wayne+ 16:06:28 Kurt has joined #wai-wcag 16:06:31 scribenick: wayne 16:06:33 present+ MichaelC 16:06:47 Scribenick: wayne 16:06:47 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:06:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html AWK 16:07:37 zakim, next item 16:07:37 agendum 3. "AOB from last week" taken up [from Kenny] 16:08:21 just got connected... 16:08:21 zakim, item 6 16:08:21 I don't understand 'item 6', Wayne 16:08:32 zakim, take up item 6 16:08:32 agendum 6. "meetings and timelines" taken up [from AWK] 16:09:47 Josh: No Meeting for the next 3 week, Next meeting Jan 5 16:10:54 AWK: To follow w3c publications schedule: First we publish erata then Techniques with final changes. 16:11:50 AWK: Our plan is so we can have a survey out in three weeks. This is so all is back from CSUN. 16:12:08 adam_solomon has joined #wai-wcag 16:12:20 zakim, take up item 5 16:12:20 agendum 5. "The COGA TF would appreciate the working groups feedback on two proposals for pulling together all the information from the COGA into a readable/digestible summary for 16:12:24 ... the purposes of gap analysis" taken up [from Joshue108] 16:12:36 the password wcag for webex doesnt work for me - is it correct? 16:12:43 s/First we publish erata then Techniques with final changes/First we publish extension requirements document draft then Techniques and understanding docs with final changes 16:12:53 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/COGA_Proposal_review/ 16:13:34 JF has joined #wai-wcag 16:13:56 marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag 16:14:07 present+ marcjohlic 16:14:19 present+ JF 16:14:59 me 16:15:10 Josh: The COGA group asked for review of documents. The summary format is most popular. 16:15:19 budgies! 16:16:41 Rakesh has joined #wai-wcag 16:17:00 rakesh 16:17:06 JR: BUT I wonder if the table headings could be improved. I suggest: 16:17:08 - split up "HTML" and "Content". HTML should cover programmatic practices (e.g. use of

16:39:54 jamesn has joined #wai-wcag 16:40:11
16:40:13 both are ok 16:40:25 yes 16:40:27 MC: So user need is as a navigation landmark? 16:40:33 it shows up in the landmarks 16:40:35 rrsagent, make minutes 16:40:35 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-wai-wcag-minutes.html jamesn 16:40:39 that's right 16:40:51 that works 16:41:01 s/MC/JO 16:41:03 present+ JamesNurthen 16:41:11 got it 16:41:14 MC: AT user can bring up a list of landmarks, etc 16:41:19 JO: James? 16:41:41 AWK: Is it ok to use role=search on form 16:41:59 James: Yes it should be ok, but our spec should clarify that 16:42:44 MC: Yes, ARIA spec should clarify. 16:43:03 James: Right, you're overriding something that doesn't really have any semantics 16:43:30 MC: OK, then its an ARIA issue. WCAG has to wait for them 16:43:57 q? 16:44:12 jamesn has joined #wai-wcag 16:44:47 q+ 16:44:58 AWK: Maybe we should propose a response...this is allowed by the spec...unless we feel strongly that it overrides native semantics, then we let this one be...we should flag this for validator people to no longer flag this as warning 16:45:09 http://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/ 16:45:20 MC: So leaving this agrees with ARIA, but disagrees with HTML 16:46:51 James: In ARIA in HTML, it says only allows global aria attributes on form elements...so roles not allowed. 16:47:33 AWK: We could also say that Leonie provides a valid way of doing this... 16:47:44 q? 16:47:54 James: Anyone have a link to the ARIA thread 16:47:55 q+ 16:48:03 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/113 16:48:07 AWK: Discussion in 113 thread 16:48:34 MC: I should point out that ARIA in HTML is not a spec-track doc 16:48:44 MC: And doesn't seem to rule it out 16:49:10 DM: It's not that you can't override...but use native semantics when possible 16:49:37 MC: For element doesn't have a native semantic...invisible to accessibility API 16:49:50 FORM element 16:50:03 MC: So not overriding, it's just extending 16:50:06 q+ 16:50:19 MC: Of course we wouldn't want to block it working as a form 16:50:35 This is from the ARIA in HTML document 16:50:59 "Documents must not use any role values with elements in the Document conformance requirements for use of ARIA attributes in HTML table, other than the corresponding role value (if any) as listed for that element in the third column, other than those indicated in the second column, which should not be used." 16:51:12 AWK: I think the intermediate position until we have clear advice...is to use Leonie's xample instead of current example 16:51:45 MC: From what I've now seen, our example seems ok 16:51:58 MC: ARIA needs a note on this 16:52:17 James: Steve's document has this.... 16:52:18 http://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/ 16:52:54 MC: OK this is different....it's normative rec track 16:53:33 James: In a table in chapter 3... 16:53:41 q? 16:53:49 contact Steve F.. 16:53:51 James: Does not seem to allow this role 16:53:55 q- 16:53:57 ack me 16:54:08 MC: OK so, this does need to be taking up with them as the ARIA group 16:54:42 MC: I would recommend WCAG take the path of least resistance and leave example alone 16:54:53 ack james 16:54:56 ack me 16:55:18 WD: This is what drives developers crazy 16:55:37 WD: If they use our code and get a warning 16:56:12 MC: Validator is at fault, because it follows a spec that's at fault, but WCAG advice appears to be correct 16:56:13 Logged https://github.com/w3c/html-aria/issues/18 16:56:32 DM: Maybe tweet Steve on this 16:57:04 James: Better to log bug and then tweet that 16:57:27 MC: Best not to try to use twitter to track bugs 16:57:58 JO: OK, should we have Leonie's advice added 16:58:08 proposed response: The best judgement of the Working Group is that the validator is at fault in this situation. Currently, the WG does not believe that this example is overriding native semantics and provides useful functionality at present, but if normative information demonstrates that this is incorrect we will modify the example. 17:00:39 Scribe: Laura 17:01:38 AWK: Think it is technologies. Don’t think we need role on it. 17:02:21 AWK: We don’t really know. So we should leave it alone. 17:02:51 q? 17:02:51 JOC: Okay 17:02:53 +1 17:02:54 +1 to AWK 17:02:57 +1 17:03:01 +1 17:04:11 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/106 17:04:32 AWK: Not sure what 106 is asking. 17:05:38 Wayne: Is this related to CMS’s? 17:05:49 JOC: not sure 17:06:29 AWK: need to follow up with requestor. 17:06:52 david has joined #wai-wcag 17:07:21 #99 I still need to add an example... 17:07:46 q? 17:08:17 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/95 17:08:58 Wayne: Will put in low vision use cases. 17:09:12 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/92 17:09:25 David: Is working on it. 17:09:44 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/91 17:10:45