Judy spoke with Elizabeth Lyle of FCC to talk about launch issues, also a brief discussion with @@ of the White House about "priming the pump"

<Judy> jamal mazrui

<Judy> john croston

<Judy> deborah kaplan

<Judy> jan richards

Agenda overview

Brief recap of Challenge.gov host and next steps

JB: @@ from challenge.gov joined the call last week to answer questions.
... there were questions about the back end
... we received an email with details of back end including how the menus work.
... the official agency host needs to be confirmed. There may be an option for a non-federal agency to be a co-sponsor. One possibility is for the W3C to be a co-sponsor with the primary host.
... we weren't thinking of US-only, but there may be cons to that. I still have not confirmed internally in W3C whether there are any issues. I am not anticipating that there are.

JM: How does the W3C co-sponsor?

JB: It must be accessible. There are other requirements, but I don't want to go into detail.

JM: Can you give a link to something W3C co-sponsored?

JB: nothing relevant & parallel.

JC: We need something to bring the international influence.

DK: We want to think about first impressions. W3Cwould add a lot to credibility and international interest if W3C were involved.

JB: I will send menu options for the back office of Challenge.gov. The 3 of us will stay together to stay in touch with challenge.gov.

Questions & approaches for vetting submissions

JB: We may be getting a lot of submissions in the beginning. We may get submissions from people who are not knowledgable in accessibility. Challenge.gov does not put up any information without vetting.
... how complicated would it be to have some volunteer help to review the submissions and pass on how accessible they are.
... it can be very complicated to evaluate a web site, but this would be different to test the template or a small component of the site.

Jan, Jeanne and Jutta are going to have testing issues coming up for ATAG 2.0 and Gregg and Cynthia have experience with WCAG 2.0 evaluation testing

<Judy> [judy flagging issues with ##]

<Judy> ## test environment needs to be set up in advance

<Judy> ## need to customize different versions of the set-ups

CS: Templates and widgets can be a challenge to set up, as they can't be tested without data or the environment where they will run

<Judy> ## need to account for the code environment that is overlaid

<Judy> [judy flagging potential solutions with &&]

<Judy> && pre-set a testing environment if possible

JR: I would also mention the different code environments involved. Another possible solution would be to allow URIs out to the person's site doing the submission, so we wouldn't have to set everything up. Get the developer to do some of the initial testing.

<Judy> && require the submitter to pre-test

<Judy> ## non-persistence of malicious submitter materials

<Judy> && p'rhaps build in a checksum test

<Judy> && or embed widget in a page so can demo & understand functionality

<Judy> ## understandability of the code snippet

GV: This is vulnerable to malicious code, using the W3C or FCC as a way to give verity to the malicious page. If there was a application that you can submit or link off to it. Embed the widget in a page because code snippets are difficult to understand

JB: If we did end up with a good vetting or evaluation function, it could also be abused as a service for people wanting a free evaluation of their work.

<Judy> ## PR issue -- how do we be broadly welcoming when we also have to be careful about what gets posted?

<Judy> && could have some educational focus on the site

<Judy> && or could have different categories of participation

DK: I want it also to be a welcoming place for the people who are creating something to support accessibility, even if it is something to learn about accessibility and showcase something they have done. I think levels of categories of submissions, so Microsoft and a 13-yr old aren't competing against each other.
... a crowd sourcing invitation should also be included.

<Judy> http://scratch.mit.edu/

<Judy> && could use the popular commentary feature on the site, and manage expectations wrt expert review

CS: When we are evaluating these templates and components. Do want to evaluate them on the accessibility of the final product, or also how the process supports authors to create accessible.

JB: I would like to see our reviews be as simple as possible to do the job and I propose only to verify WCAG AA, and some ATAG 2 - jeanne, there are only 2 SC for templates?

JS: Roughly two, there may be others that indirectly apply.

CS: I think of this more as a search engine than a contest. Microsoft sees it more as a way to draw attention to a lot of material.

JB: the challenge.gov site is optimized for contests, but my sense of this group is that we do not want to go that way. My sense of the group is that we want to do the minimal vetting.
... there is a piece of wanting to be able to search submissions, that has been lost, so I am grateful for the reminder. The tech challende for submissions, and a long term repository. There is a possibility of splitting stuff of.

DK: I have concerns of people getting to challenge.gov or being put off from challenge.gov because it is different from what we are trying to do. I want to have a separate gallery.
... @@ want s there to be a separate accessibility gallery that he wants to be associated with.

JB: I'm hearing that people may also want a separate gallery from challenge.gov, and others that have a concern with challenge.gov at all

DK: if the goal is to have a gallery that is user friendly to those who wannt to find gallery. As a stand-alone, I have reservations.

<Judy> ## an intake spot but not the gallery itself

JR: I can see people using the challenge.gov to submit things, but not to have that be the only way to search or find things in the gallery.

GV: This could be useful for many years.

CS: we would want to link to the source so that it can get updated easily and stay relevant.

<Judy> ## repository of code

DK: since intake is a precursor to people using it, it gives us some staging time, but we can get started.

JB: It might solve some of the problme of the prize or psuedo-prize. any submission that meets the needs 'graduates" and goes into the gallery.

JC: I agree to use it as a place to grab code, then it goes onto a repository.

JM: It's not the ideal place for people finding and using it on challenge.gov. I don't think we need to have everything worked out in advance. I think we can work it out as we go along.

JB: My concern is having to build two things at once at the same time we are taking in and vettting material.

CS: Has the HTML5 bug submission deadline.

JC: Has the accessibility barcamp

JB: Who would be available next week.
... Are there anything here that could apply to the ATAG testing process

JR: I don't think it is that big a problem - running it through a basic checker.

The challenge.gov site can acknowlege the people who are helping to volunteer to review and vet the submissions

Update on potential wrap-up and launch scenarios

"Priming the pump" with high-confidence submissions

does anyone know of samples that we could submit on challenge.gov? Do we have some resources for that? Could some be vendor submissions or CIO submissions.

CS: Microsoft, Adobe and possibly Hi-Software has some.

JR: AEGIS and ITRC have some.

CS: IBM and Fluid.

DK: SS, IRS, and other agencies will have some.

JC: I will check with IRS, I have contacts over there.

JB: What kind of volume are we talking about?

CS: I will have to look around, but we are talking a lot of stuff.

JC: We have a number of widgets. But we have to see if they can give them up "for the collective good"

JB: We may be flooded and have to be selective. Maybe we should be more selective.
... then maybe we could ask them to file a conformance claim.
... Could it happen at the barcamp, where people may be willing to be hand-held through it.

JC: We want to have contributions from individual submitters.

JB: Looking for 12 things that cover a range of things. A "dirty dozen of diverse demos"

Update on related challenges (cloud, other)

GV: Jamal is also involved in it. This is about visions of accessibility, the context to allow students and others to create multi-media of what accessibility may look like in the future.
... web sites and simulations of what the web sites could look like in the future. We are also looking to use challenge.gov

JM: Larry Goldberg also mentioned a challenge on accessible education
... I have an additional comment on GV's earlier worry about malicious code, we can get help from GSA about it. That malicious code is a federal offense and will be referred to the FBI.

Schedule

We have settled on the Friday time. If we moved it one hour earlier would it work for others?

Please keep the current time as the default time and I will check with others and see if moving it one-half hour earlierwould make it better for more to attend.

JC: Can we put out a blog post announcing it?

JB: I've been setting up a wiki with all the information, but I'll have that ready for next week. I'll see what pieces are best to put together more of a public announcement you can use for the barcamp.