WCAG2ICT Task Force

18 May 2012

See also: IRC log


Judy_Brewer, Michael_Cooper, Bruce_Bailey, Loic_Martinez, Al_Hoffman, Jane_Vincent, Mike_Pluke, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Janina_Sajka, John_Lee, Alex_Li, Peter_Korn, Andrew_Kirkpatrick, Kiran_Karja, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Duff_Johnson, Peter_Korn, Shadi_Abou-Zahra



Welcome to this Information Session for the WCAG2ICT Task Force.

We will be going around to introduce who is here shortly.

We are opening up and linking to an additional room on the phone bridge as there are some people who weren't expected;

we'll sort this out before the next call.

In this call we will discuss people and participation; process and collaboration tools; and introduce the starter documents.

For now let's go around introducing who is here.

Judy Brewer, Director of WAI, Boston

Bruce Bailey, US Access Board, Washington DC

Loic Martinez, Technical University of Madrid, Spain

Jane Vincent, AT lead, U Michigan Ann Arbor

Mike Pluke, Vice-Chair HF Committee for ETSI, leading M-376

Gregg Vanderheiden, Co-Chair WCAG WG, TEITAC, Trace, Madison

John Lee, RIM, M-376, Toronto

Mary Jo Mueller, IBM, Austin

Duff Johnson, NetCentric

Janina Sajka, Chair Linux Open Accessibility; Chair WAI-PFWG, Washington DC

Andrew Kirkpatrick, Adobe, WCAG, TEITAC

Alex Li, Microsoft, WCAG WG, TEITAC

Peter Korn, Oracle, WCAG WG, TEITAC

Al Hoffman, Homeland Security

Shadi Abou-Zahra, WAI, M-376, Europe

Kiran_Karja, Adobe Accessibility, London

Michael Cooper, WAI, WCAG WG

Description of the group

jb:The charge to the Task Force is to perform a technical review of how WCAG 2 maps to non-Web ICT

and produce an informative (non-normative) document

it is not in our scope to make statements about whether WCAG 2 *should* apply to those technologies

that is prerogative of other organizations, including regulatory bodies

also not going to change WCAG 2.0 itself

the goal is to have a circulatable draft in the next few months

want a lot of continuity from one discussion to the next

impacts participation, and is a reason for high time commitment

time commitment applies to individuals, not organizations shared among multiple individuals

we would prefer a single person from an organization be the direct participant, and any others serve just as offline backup, commenters, etc.

We've been looking for people who have extensive knowledge of the development of WCAG 2

or who have participated in US and European discussions of takeup of WCAG 2

people with both those sets of experience particularly helpful

W3C participation structures

jb: Many here have worked with W3C, but some haven't, so want to describe as applied to task force

W3C areas of work happen under Activities

in a specific Working Group that is defined by a charter

the charter is carefully prepared and reviewed by the hundreds of W3C Member organizations

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (WCAG WG) is one of these

(WCAG WG charter is linked from TF Work Statement)

W3C WGs have ability to create Task Forces (TF) under it to work on items specifically relevant to its charter

W3C/WAI was specifically asked for help on the question of applicability of WCAG to non-Web ICT

this task force was formed to respond to that, with a carefully defined work statement

any outputs of the group must be approved by the sponsoring WG

i.e., WCAG has to approve and publish documents, those are not published by the TF directly

so the work we do is governed by W3C process, as enabled by the WCAG WG

one aspect of W3C process is the Patent Policy that enables royalty-free information sharing

to join the TF, you join the WCAG WG

which requires acceptance of the patent policy requirement

after you join the WG, you flag your interest in the TF

There are two ways to join a WG

1) Via Membership; 2) as Invited Expert

majority of people in this call are from W3C Member organizations

your Advisory Committee representative can nominate you

we can tell you if you don't know who that is

Invited Expert process is for people from organizations that do not have resources to be W3C Member

but have perspective that is particularly relevant to the work

we may have to have a discussion with you about your knowledge and affiliations

Your participation in this TF is for the expected limited lifetime of the TF

but welcome this being an entry to participation in other areas

some may find early on that other areas of work are more relevant

Keep in mind that you are a participant in the TF, not someone who speaks on behalf of it

Also be clear that the TF is not involved in regulatory work

please defer to facilitators and staff with respect to representations of the work

Andi Snow-Weaver, Mike Pluke, Judy Brewer, Michael Cooper

Thanks to people who helped get this going

Peter Korn, Gregg Vanderheiden, Andi Snow-Weaver

al: Are there people invited who are not in this call?

jb: Yes, some who couldn't attend at this time

think I've heard from everyone one way or the other, who was invited

but don't have a collated list yet

some people are here via forwards

expect a few people in next week or two besides those on this call

but expect to begin working together early next week

there will be a bit of flux initially but want a stable group to form, moving ahead

pk: In addition to expertise in WCAG and familiarity with regulatory aspects

familiarity in applying accessibility frameworks, making applications and documents accessible would be very welcome

jb: Note we haven't sent a general call for participation

TFs normally draw their membership from the WG directly

potential interest might be higher than for a typical TF, but we need to stay focused

please don't send invites around generally; instead, bring suggested members to our attention

mp: the above requirements are met by many of the people already here

Process and collaboration tools

jb: Task Force Work Statement

is now a stable document

will update the liaison and leadership sections.

In Approach section

looking at applicability of WCAG SC to non-Web ICT

will produce a W3C Working Group Note

which is an informative document, is *not* a formal standard

may do some work in sub-teams of the Task Force

which report to the TF (which in turn reports to WCAG WG)

all drafts will be publicly visible

with multiple mechanisms for comments

responses to comments prepared by the TF

use TF as a dialog opportunity, then WG approves work

in as quick as possible of a timeline

Timeline section is known to be aggressive

expect the short- and medium-term milestones to be defined in early work of the TF

work in Europe and US means we need a draft asap

and a reasonably complete outline by July

Communication has multiple means

expect twice-weekly meetings at first

mailing list publicly archived and available for discussion

TF has a sub-page http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/

that will be the home base for finding things out about Task Force news

will set up an action tracker and opinion survey tool

before meetings there will often be surveys to collect input before the meeting

you may be in the position of preparing things for comment

we find it good for people to put proposals out for discussion and collect feedback on the list and in Web-Based Survey (WBS)

so there will be homework...

On the TF home page

announcements at the top

meeting information

teleconferences have a US number or use SIP, a form of Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP)

we use Internet Relay Chat (IRC) for chat and minute-taking

links to help on SIP and IRC available

will need help scribing (taking minutes)

don't expect face-to-face meetings, though possible that could change

may have people join calls using interpreters / captions / relay services

which means we need to be careful of communication, not talking over each other, etc.

will add a references section

will have links to drafts

initial drafts in a Google site

jb: Status of drafts?

gv: there is one document, have incorporated input from others received so far

bb: why using Google sites instead of wiki?

jb: let's come back in a minute, when GV introduces

MC, please inform about tools

<overview of mailing lists and infractructure available from the TF home page>

jb: We are going to start with some default meeting times

and then check how it's working

we are bridging continents

and have an editorial team with constraints

so our starter times are:

Tuesdays and Fridays at 10:00 am U.S. Eastern (14:00 UTC while North America in Daylight Savings Time)

Starter draft documents

jb: Gregg Vanderheiden is one of the co-chairs of the WCAG WG

Loretta Guarino Reid is the other

gv: the survey (WBS) tool is used as a natural part of our meetings

think of it as a pre-staging of our weekly meeting

bring up items for discussion

and queue comments and feedback in advance

so meeting goes more quickly

ensures people have reviewed materials in advance

and gives chance to review each others' comments and prepare response

al: duration of calls?

jb: 90 minutes each

gv: we looked at a number of tools for document drafting

W3C wiki is not WYSIWYG

requires learning a text format

Google docs is easier to work with

there have been a lot of accessibility improvements

there are a bunch of pages available

each has ability to attach comments

it's publicly viewable, but not publicly editable

each item we cover is a separate page

so can attach documents and comments on just that topic

important to separate opinions of individuals from task force statements

so each page has a clear division

there is a section that has the consensus-based content

and a following section that has anything else

right now not much in the consensus area because we haven't started the process yet

we are copying in the Intent section from Understanding WCAG20

there is a section for contributions

jb: we'll work out practices for ensuring content appears in the right places

and will migrate content to W3C reasonably soon

gv: note the tool does track who makes what edit

jb: summary of content so far?

gv: right now we have an outline of what the document might look like

some proposed frontmatter and introductory text

each Principle, Guidelines, and Success Criterion from WCAG has a reflection in this document

with the consensus content, proposals, and issues / comments / questions / answers / discussion etc.

There are links in glossary to some items, may need expansion

Wrap-up, continuation

jb: note this was an extremely introductory session

al: Will meetings have agenda?

jb: yes, though first meeting agenda will be shortly before

bb: I have a document that compares WCAG language, TEITAC, and ANPRM language

want to upload, don't want to email

jb: send to Gregg, Judy, MichaelC, we'll sort out where it seems best

mp: we have a draft document as well, that explores some of the issues

it could serve as input to the work of this TF

jb: the early input is extremely valuable

means there's a lot everyone will need to review

al: is the M376 content in the Google site?

gv: no, we can link to it but didn't want to copy over

jb: ok, we're about done

will follow up on various things

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/05/21 05:01:45 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/05/18-wcag2ict-minutes.html