[16:06] <Jey> present+
[16:06] <anne_thyme_> present+
[16:06] <dmontalvo> present+
[16:07] <Wilco_> present+
[16:08] <dmontalvo> Darius: Developer and Accessibility Consultant for Deeck Inclusion
[16:09] <dmontalvo> Wilco: working at Deque, co-chair of this gropu and facilitator of other groups
[16:09] <dmontalvo> Anne: part of the ACT Taskforce and also part of this group
[16:10] <dmontalvo> Dagfinn: Difi: Agency for Public Management. Working on test procedures, interpreting WCAG, part of the WAI-Tools project
[16:12] <Zakim> agendum 1. "REMEMBER: Sign up for face-to-face meeting 24-25 September 2019 #708" taken up [from Wilco_]
[16:13] <Wilco_> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/708
[16:13] <dmontalvo> Details to sign up for the F2F meeting in Copenhagen
[16:13] <dmontalvo> zakim, take up next
[16:13] <Zakim> agendum 2. "Add many missing links to glossary #695" taken up [from Wilco_]
[16:13] <Wilco_> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/695
[16:15] <dmontalvo> J: I wanted to get the opinion of the group, there's been so many changes.
[16:17] <dmontalvo> Anne: Agree with Jean-Yve, it is hard to know when a word has been defined as a term
[16:17] <dmontalvo> ... We don't know if people is reading the rule in order
[16:18] <dmontalvo> j: I am concerned because of future maintenance. There are rules now in final call that doesn't have this implemented.
[16:19] <dmontalvo> Wilco: Last time we talked about putting some automatic checks to track this, that is my prefference
[16:20] <dmontalvo> Anne: I think we could catch the maojrity of the things automatically
[16:21] <Zakim> agendum 3. "Changing file name will dismiss all reviews #681" taken up [from Wilco_]
[16:22] <dmontalvo> Anne: When we have a pull request and it is aproved, and after that we make changes, all the reviews disappear.
[16:23] <dmontalvo> Wilco: I have the impression that it's always been this way
[16:23] <dmontalvo> Anne: I'm pretty sure it is a new thing
[16:24] <dmontalvo> J: There is a checkbox that might be toggle to fix this. It might come after setting up this new branch.
[16:25] <dmontalvo> Wilco: Reviewers should look at the CFC even after they have aproved changes.
[16:26] <dmontalvo> Emma: Are reviewers aware of changes for reviewers when there is new content to review?
[16:26] <dmontalvo> Wilco: No, it depends on GitHub notifications, and it depends on the user.
[16:28] <Zakim> agendum 4. "Validity of HTML Lang attribute (bf051a) - incorrect info about xml:lang #668" taken up [from Wilco_]
[16:29] <Wilco_> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/693
[16:29] <dmontalvo> Anne: I would like people to have a look at it and decide if this is going to be an ACT rule.
[16:30] <dmontalvo> Anne: we need to add the definition and some text cases.
[16:31] <dmontalvo> Anne: Most accessibility tester would broaden the actual WCAG definition when testing, they would consider headings to be part of the context, for instance
[16:32] <dmontalvo> Anne: We need to change the "programmatically determined" definition.
[16:32] <dmontalvo> Darius: I could take a look
[16:34] <Zakim> agendum 5. "New rule: Explicit SVG image has accessible name (7d6734) #419" taken up [from Wilco_]
[16:34] <Wilco_> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/419
[16:35] <dmontalvo> Brent: Some discrepancies between different spec, but have reached an agreement on where this rule should go. We are really looking for people to review the rule
[16:37] <dmontalvo> Emma: I will try my best
[16:37] <dmontalvo> Brent: There are different opinions among experts as well
[16:38] <dmontalvo> zakim, take up item 12
[16:38] <Zakim> agendum 12. "Naming conventions for rules #250" taken up [from Wilco_]
[16:38] <Wilco_> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/250
[16:39] <Wilco_> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/250#issuecomment-453097578
[16:39] <dmontalvo> Wilco: Suggested changes are in the link above
[16:40] <dmontalvo> Anne: Yes, I am more in favor of singular rather than plural
[16:40] <anne_thyme_> https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/250#issuecomment-514932008
[16:41] <dmontalvo> ... We might have a confusion between rules addressing one single item and rules addressing several
[16:42] <dmontalvo> Emma: I don't mind helping with this
[16:43] <dmontalvo> Brent: what is the format for the capitalization thing? It is weird for me to read titles where all words are capitalized
[16:45] <dmontalvo> Emma: We could go for sentence capitalization. That could be done with CSS later on
[16:45] <Wilco_> https://act-rules.github.io/rules/
[16:45] <dmontalvo> Wilco: These titles are in the rules list
[16:47] <Wilco_> TOPIC: Show implementation data on the website
[16:47] <dmontalvo> Wilco: We submitted 4 out of 5 rules that we have from the CFC.
[16:48] <EmmaJ_PR> cool
[16:48] <dmontalvo> ... The ACT taskforce has put surveys to see if these rules were going to be published in the W3C website
[16:48] <dmontalvo> ... One of the issues stated that it was not clear what an implementation was
[16:49] <dmontalvo> ... They asks us to put on our website not only implementations but partial implementations
[16:49] <dmontalvo> ... Does that make sense?
[16:50] <Wilco_> https://act-rules.github.io/rules/b5c3f8
[16:50] <Wilco_> https://act-rules.github.io/rules/b5c3f8#implementation-metrics
[16:51] <Wilco_> https://act-rules.github.io/implementation/rgaa-3.0#2779a5
[16:53] <dmontalvo> Emma: There might be cases where the implementation does not much the rule
[16:53] <dmontalvo> Wilco: Should we put this information in the website? This might not be a desirable thing
[16:55] <dmontalvo> Emma: The W3C needs to view this information. We might have issues if there is a particular tool showing up that it differs from the rule
[16:56] <dmontalvo> Wilco: I would provide an option for people who want to show their inconsistent results
[16:57] <dmontalvo> ... Also for implementers it would be good to have a link to see their inconsistencies, even if it is private