Accessible name guidance for table contradicts specification

[Liz-Matmos]

The link for <table> in the Accessible Name Guidance points to the 1.3 draft, which specifies that 'Authors SHOULD provide an accessible name for a table...'. Should this be updated to reference the 1.2 spec until 1.3 is finalised?
Also, curious to know the reason behind the update?

Thanks!

[css-meeting-bot]

The ARIA Authoring Practices (APG) Task Force just discussed Issue 3315: Table naming guidance.

The full IRC log of that discussion

<jugglinmike> Topic: Issue 3315: Table naming guidance
<jugglinmike> github: https://github.com//issues/3315
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: ARIA 1.2 had specified that naming a table is required. In ARIA 1.3, the group has wisely removed the requirement to name the table
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: Our table-naming guidance still reflects the ARIA 1.2 requirement
<jongund> I need to go a little early today
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We can change this to match ARIA 1.3
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: The ARIA spec text, currently reads that "authors SHOULD"
<jugglinmike> CurtBellew: I couldn't find this when I went looking
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: If you go to the "table" role in the ARIA 1.3 draft (and there is a link to that in this issue)
<jugglinmike> CurtBellew: This is a huge change for us! I can't believe I missed it
<jugglinmike> Adam_Page: We found instances in the real world where the name wasn't helpful
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: I thought we previously had a pull request that made all the necessary changes in APG. Maybe we should check the others, too
<Adam_Page> https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/2297
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: What this does is, it makes your job a little bit harder. You don't have strict guidance, anymore. The APG will say that something is "recommended"
<Adam_Page> https://github.com//issues/3244
<jugglinmike> Adam_Page: I just shared two URLs. The first is the ARIA spec pull request that made the spec change. And the second is the aria-practices counterpoint. It's just an issue that I created, and it's still open
<Adam_Page> s/counterpoint/counterpart/
<jugglinmike> Hadi: Where is the guidance on aria-label?
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: It's in the table on the editor's draft of the ARIA spec
<jugglinmike> Hadi: I don't see anything about aria-label there
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: The "characteristics" table only includes normative-MUST requirements
<jugglinmike> Hadi: How can we understand this change by looking at the spec itself when it is not written anywhere?
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: I thought that we were supposed to go to "evergreen" at the beginning of the year. Maybe that's not actually happening until after 1.3 is done
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: That may be affecting the AXE core decision
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: Okay, so the question is, I think, what the APG guidance should be
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We have two options
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We can list it as "recommended" or "discretionary"
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think that because there is an "authors SHOULD" in the spec, the most appropriate guidance for APG is "recommended"
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: Since "discretionary" is "optional or in some cases discouraged"
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: If we look at the next row down after table (which has a "recommended" for tab list), the very first bullet of the "recommended" ones for the third column explains why we recommended
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We don't do that for the required ones
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We could almost copy the first bullet of the "tablist" one word-for-word
<jugglinmike> Adam_Page: I think that would work
<jugglinmike> Adam_Page: Do we want to update the others while we're at it?
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: Yeah, I think so
<jugglinmike> Adam_Page: The issue I raised is issue #3244 in aria-practices
<Jem> https://github.com//issues/3244
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: I'm hesitant to put my name on it because I think it will be a long time before I can get to it. Probably that's the same reason everyone else is hesitating
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We're definitely going to change what's in the APG from "required" to "recommended". And we'll make a similar change for the other roles, as well
<jugglinmike> Jem: I can do this. Adam_Page can you review my work?
<jugglinmike> Adam_Page: Sure
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: Awesome, thank you Jem!