Skip to content

2025–12–19

Bruce Bailey edited this page Dec 19, 2025 · 2 revisions

DRAFT Minutes from meeting on December 19th, 2025

Attendance (13): Bruce Bailey, Dan Bjorge, Alastair Campbell, Ken Franqueiro, Mike Gower, Baldino Morelli, Patrick Lauke, Scott O'Hara, Lori Oakley, Adam Page, Giacomo Petri, Francis Storr, Filippo Zorzi

Regrets: Gundula Niemann

Agenda and Announcements

  • From AGWG listserv:
  • Per agenda email:
    • We will start by poll those present if we need to reserve time on call for items not in ‘For Discussion‘ or at top of ‘Drafted’;
    • First discussion item is about Ruby (4746);
    • Then our standing agenda.
  • Our next meeting call is 9 January 2026. We are looking for new TF facilitators in the new year.

Did anyone look at the WCAG-EM pre-CFC? https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2025OctDec/0075.html

For Discussion

[This will provide a summary of issues/PRs updated today, which should be close to generating that for you, as long as you are disciplined in putting in a comment on every issue touched upon.]

Drafted

  • [list issues discussed; add updates in the issue comment] Just listing Issue/PR number is fine.

4112 Bruce to talk to Gregg , alastair will b 4118 https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-user-inactivity is currently NOT a note in the live version ditto https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#dfn-user-inactivity

Ken Franqueiro (Dec 19, 2025, 11:18 AM) https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/4122#issuecomment-2830706554

https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-user-inactivity is currently NOT a note in the live version ditto https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#dfn-user-inactivity

Ken Franqueiro (Dec 19, 2025, 11:18 AM) https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/4122#issuecomment-2830706554

Dan Bjorge (he/him) (Dec 19, 2025, 11:20 AM) https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/4117 was the original issue

Ready for approval

Progress bar 4686 rather long discussion

Drafted

4674 sticky/persistent header can actually be an interesting example because of so many sites that insist on bringing one down whenever you scroll up, what if you shift-tab to something that's at the top of the viewport right under it

that couldn't be failed under totally obscured, but behavior is bad for accessibility. Because “totally obscure” is hard to fail. On call, more people would fail it under another SC, probably be 1.3.1 or 4.1.2. Mike would like to include more information on Understanding for 1.4.11. Last paragraph of Intent section for Understanding 1.4.11. Mike will also follow up with OP.

only fails IF there's an overlay/lightbox/whatever, but it's intended that the underlying content/link/etc is still meant to be readable/operable, might related to 14.3.4

4423 briefly discussed moved to ready for Approval

4626 discuss other weeks, Giacomo has finessed concerns. Moved to ready for aproval

4631 discussed previous and not slightly revised. Moved to ready for Approval.

4758 corrects some minor grammar with F33. Moved to Ready for Approval. yeah just "screen readers will announce this as" it's a statement of fact

4651 requested a changed, but it goes beyond SC. Doesn't warrant WG review as a non-substantive response-only item. Can be int

4762 straight forward response-only

2025

To Do

  • Often we run out of time to cover, so we skip this item.

Open Discussion

  • Anything discussed that is not an issue. Any actions the TF or facilitators intend to take.
  • Not only just conversation at the end of the call. Interesting sidebars, tangents, and things from Zoom chat can go here.

Clone this wiki locally