-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 292
2025‐04‐18
Attendance (7): Bruce Bailey, Duff Johnson, Filippo Zorzi, Francis Storr, Giacomo Petri, Ken Franqueiro, Mike Gower
Regrets: Alastair, Patrick, Dan, Scott, Gundala, Lori
- It is a holiday in many locals. Attendance expectedly low.
- Sent for AG Approval — Following AG notice REVIEW - WCAG 2 proposed changes (due by April 15), AG WG WCAG 2.2 issues at top of their call. That puts us at the end of the review cycle.
- ACT Material — Email Reminder: ACT TF PR review of ACT request for WCAG 2 Backlog TF review of Label in Name Algorithm #4312.
- Audio Description then our usual standing agenda (i.e., For Discussion, then Drafted).
The following outlines the updates proposed and implemented by the WCAG 2 Task Force. It provides a three-week window for Working Group members to review WCAG 2 updates, and consists of changes in several categories.
In addition to the non-normative changes in the sections below, the Task Force has identified a normative change for the Working Group. This is listed here to initiate a normative review process. It will be added to an upcoming call, and if the attending working group members are in general agreement, it will go through a CFC process.
- Update index.html to correct alphabetical order #4256
-
Update user-inactivity.html #4122 (originally sent Nov 20, 2024)
- One thumbs down, so will hold off and keep in For Discussion
These are changes that meaningfully add or alter existing non-normative guidance.
- 3984 labels descriptions #4212
- Modified examples in Language of parts #4240
-
2.4.6-headings-and-labels-descriptive-icons #4147
- Comment, so moved to For Discussion, and we will make small edit assuming Patrick agrees, else stays in For Discussion.
- Alternatives match language #4262
Small improvements to language intended to clarify existing guidance.
Trivial editorial corrections such as typos and broken links.
- Migrate Reflow videos out of repository #4308
- Add missing headings to 1.4.8 Visual Presentation #4286
- Add missing quotation mark #4277
From 28 March call notes our TF has been asked to review Rule 2ee8b8 ("Visible label is part of accessible name"): introducing a new "label in name algorithm". #2075. Preview link and DIFF are available.
On call, we discussed why copy/paste of algorithm name rather than reference? Is it necessary to pull in so much of the Accessible Name calculation? It is part of calculation for inner text. If we link, to what? This does seem a modification or subset of algorithm.
How to add audio descriptions to videos? #1768 is very long discussion thread at this point. Mike has ambitions to resubmit to make easier for WG AG to follow. Complication raised on call that if AA passes, then a single A SC must be a pass. Mike used his recent comment to lead a conversation on Audio Description and we discussed new PRs to try to better align the guidance across 1.2 Time-base media SCs. The PRs are created in series, building off one another. This makes it easier to consider each proposed change in isolation, as well as relatively easy to incorporate wholly or in part.
Briefly discussed Update audio-description.html #4323 adds the word “important” to Note 3 to match the wording of the definition of audio description (which reads “..to describe important visual details...”). It was noted on call (and in thread) that important is itself subjective, but it‘s part of normative text.
Discussed Audio description Understanding covers "important" visual content #4324 makes two changes to the first note in the informative Understanding document. “Adding important” (to match definition of AD) and swaps out the word “provided” in preference for the “conveyed”. On call, we adjusted prose slightly, but we agreed edit is not controversial. Moved to Ready for Approval.
Discussed Removed 1.2.7 reference from note 1 #4325 removes 1.2.7 mention from Understanding for 1.2.3/1.2.5 Understanding. There was one thumbs down and some discussion on call that note could be helpful for extended audio description. Preamble in Understanding for 1.2.7 is different from 1.2.3 and 1.2.5, and the preamble covers need for cross reference. Mike will revisit. Left in For Discussion.
Discussed Update media-alternative-prerecorded.html #4326 removes possibly irrelevant (but numbered) note, then changes to bullet rather than number (since now there is only one note). 4326 addresses an overlap between media alternative. Has few thumbs up, but seems entirely editorial. Left in Drafted to address concerns raised in conversation thread.
Discussed Meeting audio description through existing narration #4327 revises Understanding Note 1 to confirm that (existing) narrative audio can be used to pass Audio Descriptions and create a new technique for “providing audio descriptions” in the existing soundtrack. Not a full build, but a raw.GitHack preview is available for the new technique. 4327 is trying to clarify about narration to be sufficient for audio description. Keeping in drafting pending at least one more review.
Related to AD updates, we briefly discussed Time based media EO references #4339, a request from EO to link to WAI resource. Mike has addressed but left in Drafted for now, pending review by Shawna.
Discussed Tweak G13, on-input understanding, F37 #4291 which Francis has reviewed. Concern raised that radio buttons may be selected just by navigating to them via keyboard. Concern raised about are some reversions because lower case on success criteria (the preferred style) has not been updated and used old base. Three files, but minor edits but DIFF makes edit look like its more than it is. Mike will move to Ready for Approval after addressing build conflicts.
SC 1.4.3 - Contrast minimum - note on evaluation success criterion using px - misleading px value #4337 currently tagged as Response-Only regarding calculation for contrast. Ken asked if could be resolved by picking other numbers? Mike pointed out that values picked reflect normative mention of 14 point bold. Bruce expressed concerned that 18.7 begs question of 18.6 versus 18.8? Giacomo pointed out that 18.5 pt is not a pass. Could we change note? Edit could be minor, such as changing “therefore” to “for example”. Please add comment if you feel one way or the other.
Update Understanding SC 2.5.6 links #4336 is editorial correction for old links. Moved to Ready for Approval.
Some editorial updates to Understanding SC 2.5.3 #4335 is minor editorial, even bug fix (from deprecated version). From discussion on call, we removed questionable paragraph entirely. Moved to Ready for Approval.
Discussed Remove incorrect "not" from 1.3.4 Orientation note #4348 which does seem like VR example is incorrect. It seems like previous edit, in trying to make example clearer, reversed meaning. Emphasis added:
Examples where a particular display orientation may be essential are a bank check, a piano application, slides for a projector or television, or virtual reality content (where content is not necessarily restricted to landscape or portrait display orientation).
The others (check, piano, slides) are examples of content that are necessarily restricted to landscape or portrait display orientation!