Meeting minutes
Ongoing projects: https://github.com/orgs/act-rules/projects/2
chair correction: Helen
Helen share ACT projects in GitHub to be closed, or stored. #2424 was closed as Wilco made changes. Helen updated #2447.
Helen: Any updates on #2390. grifare is working on responding to Wilco's details. Bring the idea that failures should be acceptable. Headings are not as impactful as labels -when they are incorrect, Headings, when describing the section but is imperfect should not be failures. JennC would like to meet with grifare to confirm joint
understanding of failure. Rune has looked into it and agrees that a heading may not be a complete failure - it's hard to determine whether content is "wrong" in order to fail.
grifare and Rune and JennC - recommend meet that content can be a failure. Consider a description of what is a failure for content. Helen is saying the content could fail if it does not describe a page section accurately for screen readers. It is both a technical issue (using H tags) and content quality. Helen uses example of decorative with
infographics is also dubious. Similar discussion about hues and colour.
Editorial judgement.
grifare JennC will meet before the next meeting to discuss and Rune is invited. Kathy questioned the issue. grifare -the first perceivable content - a made-up term, makes it an AI-generated article, contact us on this address. These are all examples, but to fail with a heading is where the "Passport application page" has a heading of "hello".
grifare is in agreement with the relevant criterion. The pass criterion needs to be agreed upon and aligned so testers don't fail the headings, several failures from editorial judgement - in practice.
Kathy agrees that first perceivable content like an H1 that must be descriptive, how much should be evaluated by testers. grifare for this one, it should be about the purpose of the page. Contact us may be perceivable on the page after a poor heading, but the scientific article may be more difficult. Obvious, relative, relevant are all terms to
discuss.
Rune is asking if the issue is focused on making something understandable. grifare asking how practically the rule will be used by testers. Being too prescriptive could be a risk. Daniel says headings can be less impactful on a poor label, but still an impact to users, which cannot be underestimated. Content headings before the cost on a
website, and it caused confusion on the page.
grifare and Daniel both agree there needs to be subjective tag. Looking at #2390 the "Chapter 1" heading was a strong, pass example.
<Helen> act-rules/
Daniel asking grifare to provide more examples. I want to rename this rule as relevant.
Helen stated that Trevor, a previous member, explored this definitions. Consider creating a new PR for the change to rename the rule.
<Helen> act-rules/
Kathy recommend separating the success critierion questions and subjective editorial content questions. Where it is actually about first perceivable content, this can stay at the ACT level. However if there is a query about the success criterion itself it could be raised with the AG. grifare confirms he is not proposing to change the SC, but to
question the editorial judgement.
Therefore, #2390 still in progress and members will meet to discuss.
Helen confirming that there is a column called Stalled in ACT Projects.
Items have been moved into there. There are no open tickets.
#2393 - Add Standalone ACT Rules glossary on WAI. Godwin may not be as available to proceed on this. He completed the work related to the issue, but W3C recommended separating content to several pages but instead, a long list of accordions. He would like to revisit it later when he can. Helen will move to Backlog until Godwin is able to work
on it again.
<Helen> act-rules/
#2400 Migrate ACT Rules. Shunguo is working on it and has reviewed the comments. He has updated the Issues page in GitHub. #2432 Migrate ACT rules to use ARIA 1.3. He is working on the first one and asked Dan_Tripp Daniel to assist and he will work on this shortly.
Helen confirmed there is work ongoing, but nothing new.
#2424 Reflow rules to be rewritten needs to be reviewed by members not attending this meeting today.
Other topics
Rune asked is there an official target for ARIA 1.3 becoming an official recommendation. Karen thinks end of the year.
Helen Giacomo may know as one of the owners.
Karen would like to see how she can contribute and Helen suggested reviewing the open issues.
Helen Reflow 1.4.10 - any questions from grifare can be answered by the AG group in GitHub and raise a ticket there to have it reviewed.
<Helen> https://