15:05:44 <API> #startmeeting
15:05:44 <Services> Meeting started Thu Dec  4 15:05:44 2014 UTC.  The chair is API. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:05:44 <Services> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
15:05:49 <API> hmm
15:05:51 <AndroUser> Android badly support IRC clients, it's patryk here:)
15:05:53 <API> and today is not thanksgiving
15:06:04 <AndroUser> and I cannot change nickname here:)
15:06:16 <API> #topic Progress towards 3.16
15:06:17 <joanie> aha
15:06:40 <clown> AndroUser:  === patryk ?
15:07:10 <API> #info During this cycle, Allan day has mentioned the idea of creating a set of bugs for 3.16
15:07:22 <API> #info "3.16 Target Bugs"
15:07:33 <API> #info in spite to what I said to the email to gnome-accessibility-devel
15:07:49 <API> #info this is not a replacement of the feature proposal, but something to complement it
15:08:39 <API> #info as far as I understood, it is used to manage those improvements that using "wiki page to track" it would be too much
15:09:15 <API> #info in that sense, in my opinion, some features that we announced and proposed during the feature process, like the revamp of the magnifier UI settings
15:09:22 <API> #info would fit here
15:09:28 <API> so after this introduction
15:09:43 <API> #info this is the annoucement of the first list created:
15:09:48 <API> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2014-November/msg00043.html
15:09:55 <API> #info quoting from that email:
15:10:09 <API> #info "making sure that we have a good out of
15:10:10 <API> the box experience"
15:10:35 <API> #info in short, this is not a list for the usual "bugfixing", like crashes, leaks, etc
15:10:55 <API> so, now the discussion moment
15:11:00 <API> the current list is about 20 bugs
15:11:07 <API> so the idea is not start to add bugs and bugs
15:11:17 <API> and as I said, is not for bugfixing sake
15:11:28 <API> but for stuff that blocks the "experience"
15:11:51 <API> in my opinion, I was thinking to something like keyboard navigation
15:12:07 <API> using as base jjmarin's email (that I still didn't fully read, sorry)
15:12:10 <API> opinions?
15:12:16 <joanie> +1 to keyboard navigation
15:12:34 <clown> at a glance, it doesn't look like any of the bugs in Allan's email are a11y related.  Am I reading that right?
15:12:42 <jjmarin> I think we'd should agree about how keyboard navigation should work and contact designers and report bugs accordingly afterwards
15:13:00 <API> clown, well, that is the reason we are discusing that here ;)
15:13:06 <API> I mean, he created a initial list
15:13:15 <API> but the idea is the community helping with that
15:13:16 <clown> right, got it, API.  Thanks.
15:13:30 <API> so that is the reason I mentioned that we can't just add any bug
15:13:53 <API> jjmarin, ok
15:14:05 <clown> well, one could argue that a bug that causes a crash in some low level library does not help the experience.  ;-)
15:14:05 <API> so I guess that the conclusion would be something like
15:14:27 <API> experience is about features, crashes doesn't break them
15:14:33 <API> experience is more strong that just that
15:14:36 <API> ejem
15:14:40 <clown> but, okay.  focus is on the user experience.
15:14:41 <API> so jokes apart
15:14:44 <joanie> heh
15:14:54 <API> the conclusion would be something like
15:15:42 <API> "the identified user experience field we want to add on the target list is related to keyboard navigation, but we still need some discussion on the ml, and create the bugs based on that"
15:15:49 <API> before infoing it,
15:15:51 <API> is that corrrect?
15:16:33 <joanie> I think it is
15:16:35 <jjmarin> yes, and I think we should contact the design team
15:16:47 <jjmarin> to add keyboard navigation in the design process
15:16:58 <joanie> +1
15:17:23 <clown> +1
15:17:30 <API> ok, so infoing:
15:17:48 <API> #info the identified user experience field we want to add on the target list is related to keyboard navigation, but we still need some discussion on the ml, contact the designers, and create the bugs based on that work
15:18:05 <API> ok, so that was what I had in mind for this topic
15:18:06 <API> so
15:18:10 <API> anyone else ?
15:18:22 <API> topic==Progress towards 3.16
15:20:16 <API> no one talking
15:20:18 <API> so next topoic
15:20:20 <API> topic
15:20:23 <API> #topic w3c updates
15:20:25 <API> clown, ?
15:20:45 * clown collects his thoughts.
15:21:30 <clown> #info Three ARIA documents were set up for a working draft release, namely the specificition, the core mappings, and the alternative text computation documents.
15:21:58 <clown> #info  A request for publication of these three went out to solicit any formal objections to publication.
15:22:20 <clown> #info The beginning of that thread is here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2014Dec/0016.html
15:22:57 <clown> #info Some have raised objections to publishing.  I'm not sure where we will land on this.
15:23:30 <clown> #info Also, there was more work done in terms of trying to define the meaning of @aria-current.
15:23:57 <clown> #info I put in some thoughts about how it is different from @aria-activedescendant.
15:24:34 <clown> #info People appear to agree with that difference, but others are suggesting that @aria-current is not different from @aria-selected.
15:24:46 <clown> #info Others have raised objects to equating those two.
15:25:27 <clown> #info Discussions are ongoing here.  The url to that (long) email thread begins here:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2014Nov/0039.html
15:25:41 <clown> done, questions?  if not, over to you joanie.
15:25:51 <joanie> i've nothing to add
15:25:59 <API> ok, thanks for the summary
15:26:06 <API> I have not questions
15:26:15 <API> as it iseems that basically, everything is just in discussion
15:26:47 <clown> Did joanie add a +1 for the publication issue?
15:27:01 <clown> Or, does Igalia agree with the working draft publication?
15:27:10 <joanie> yes, with an acknowledgement that we still have crap to fix
15:27:17 <joanie> like Jason White stated
15:27:28 <clown> understood.  That's the nature of a *working* draft.
15:27:32 <joanie> exactly
15:27:42 <API> the official message will be "there are still crap to fix"?
15:27:46 <joanie> i.e. I'm not loving role="text"; just not blocking on it
15:28:16 <clown> yes, there seems to be a relatively strong misgivings about role="text".
15:28:24 <joanie> read example 15
15:28:37 <joanie> I'm going to start a new thread I think
15:28:40 <joanie> but that's a deep dive
15:28:42 <clown> which doc?  the spec?
15:28:45 <joanie> yup
15:29:40 <joanie> anyhoo I think we can move on
15:29:49 <clown> yeesh. I just read that example.
15:29:58 <joanie> full of win, ain't it?
15:30:14 <clown> Why would one want to do that — flatten a bunch of paragraphs?
15:30:14 <API> #topic marketing
15:30:20 <API> ups sorry
15:30:24 <API> as joanie said move on
15:30:25 <clown> no problem, API.
15:30:28 <API> you want to keep discussing?
15:30:31 <joanie> API: do move on
15:30:36 <API> ok, so then
15:30:37 <API> jjmarin,
15:30:45 <API> the floor is yours
15:30:53 <jjmarin> no activity in this area this week,sorry :-)
15:31:09 <joanie> jjmarin: but lots of good work on the keyboard nav investigation
15:31:13 <joanie> and thanks again!!
15:31:17 <API> ok then
15:31:20 <API> #topic Misc time
15:31:22 <jjmarin> :-)
15:31:24 <API> jjmarin, your turn again
15:31:34 <API> not sure if you wnat to mention something about that email
15:31:45 <API> sorry, is long, and I didn't have time to read/answer it carefully
15:31:59 <jjmarin> no really, I think it is better to comment in the ml
15:32:21 <jjmarin> then, as a summary
15:32:47 <jjmarin> group of control is a nice concept to have
15:32:52 <jjmarin> controls
15:33:07 <jjmarin> if possible, we should encourage
15:33:36 <jjmarin> and clarify when it is possible to use tab and/or arrows
15:34:05 <jjmarin> and if we support accelerators in the menus
15:34:50 <jjmarin> user acceletators configuration has been removed from gtk
15:35:08 <jjmarin> I think these are the basic ideas
15:35:10 <API> ok
15:35:19 <API> we'll try to discuss that on the mailing list
15:35:22 <API> so just to info this
15:35:43 <API> #info jjmarin started a thread about keyboard navigation, everybody is encouraged to follow up the thread
15:35:45 <clown> jjmarin, it matches the keyboard model for tool bar in the aria practices guide:  http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/Overview.html#toolbar.  See the section "Keyboard interaction", the first bulleted list.
15:36:20 <jjmarin> clown: that could be a nice reference to follow
15:36:37 <clown> cool.
15:37:24 <API> and just to finish the meeting
15:37:43 <API> patryk, AndroUser I think that you missed the last question mgorse added on the atspi-tests bug
15:38:01 <API> mgorse asked you if you have commit rights
15:38:17 <API> if not, we don't have any problem to push the commit in your behalf, as soon as mgorse do the final review
15:41:24 <API> well, it seems that he got disconnected
15:41:48 <API> so anyone wants to say something before ending the meeting?
15:41:52 <clown> API,  earlier for 3.16 issues you mentioned something about changing the magnifier UI.
15:42:00 <API> hmm
15:42:01 <API> no
15:42:03 <API> or at least
15:42:06 <API> I didn't want to say that
15:42:10 <API> what I tried to say
15:42:13 * clown scrolls up.
15:42:20 <API> is that some cycles ago
15:42:26 <API> the revamp of the magnifier UI
15:42:30 <clown> "the revamp of the magnifier UI settings"
15:42:32 <clown> right.
15:42:40 <API> well, true bad wording
15:42:44 <API> at that moment was not revamp
15:43:02 <API> but adding the UI to configure the already available settings
15:43:07 <API> what I tried to say
15:43:24 <API> is that that task "add color preferences on the UI"
15:43:36 <API> and that we used the feature proposal process to
15:43:41 <API> coordinate it with the release team
15:43:48 <API> now it would be done using the target list
15:43:57 <API> instead of creating that wiki page etc
15:44:11 <clown> oh, right — the "tint" effect needs a UI.
15:44:12 <API> we would have just added that (already reported) bug to the target list of 3.12
15:44:16 <clown> for example.
15:44:21 <API> well, yes,
15:44:29 <API> but right now we are not going to add it to the target list
15:44:35 <API> because afaik
15:44:42 <API> there isn't anyone available to do that
15:44:56 <clown> right.
15:45:09 <API> sorry for the bad wording before
15:45:18 <clown> no problem.  that's why I asked.
15:46:11 <clown> thanks for the clarification.
15:46:24 <API> so, if nobody wants to add anything else
15:46:28 <API> closing meeting?
15:46:42 <jjmarin> ok for me
15:47:20 <API> #endmeeting