14:51:22 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 14:51:22 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-irc 14:51:24 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:51:26 Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG 14:51:26 ok, trackbot 14:51:26 zakim, agenda? 14:51:27 Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 14:51:27 I see 1 item remaining on the agenda: 14:51:27 4. Submitting new SCs (non-group) [from Joshue108] 14:51:27 Date: 12 July 2016 14:51:39 zakim, clear agenda 14:51:39 agenda cleared 14:51:58 agenda + Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria. 14:51:58 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/July_2016_SC/ 14:51:58 14:52:07 agenda+ Silver sub group 14:52:19 agenda+ TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work. 14:53:53 laura has joined #wai-wcag 14:54:48 laura has left #wai-wcag 14:55:08 laura has joined #wai-wcag 14:55:26 laura has left #wai-wcag 14:56:48 Chair: Joshue 14:56:56 Scribelist: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List 14:57:27 laura has joined #wai-wcag 14:57:34 AWK has joined #wai-wcag 14:57:43 ZAkim, agenda? 14:57:43 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda: 14:57:44 1. Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria. [from Joshue108] 14:57:44 2. Silver sub group [from Joshue108] 14:57:44 3. TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work. [from Joshue108] 14:58:12 +AWK 14:58:18 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:58:18 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html AWK 14:58:54 RRSAgent, set logs public 14:59:04 LisaSeeman has joined #wai-wcag 14:59:33 can somone ping me the meeting password again 14:59:36 sorry 15:00:03 Zakim, who is on the phone? 15:00:03 Present: JF, steverep, alastairc, kirkwood, Laura, marcjohlic, Kathy, Joshue108, MichaelC, KimD, jeanne, Katie_Haritos-Shea, jon_avila, Makoto, Rachael, Greg_Lowney, 15:00:07 ... Sarah_Swierenga, Davidmacdonald, adam_solomon, AWK 15:00:51 present- JF, steverep, alastairc, kirkwood, Laura, marcjohlic, Kathy, Joshue108, MichaelC, KimD, jeanne, Katie_Haritos-Shea, jon_avila, Makoto, Rachael, Greg_Lowney 15:01:04 present- Sarah_Swierenga, Davidmacdonald, adam_solomon 15:01:06 present+ Josh 15:01:14 Present+ Joshue108 15:01:32 Zakim, who is on the phone? 15:01:32 Present: AWK, Josh, Joshue108 15:01:52 KimD has joined #wai-wcag 15:01:59 alastairc has joined #wai-wcag 15:02:41 present- Joshue108 15:03:05 +KimD 15:04:02 present+ alastairc 15:04:50 Makoto has joined #wai-wcag 15:05:02 present+ Makoto 15:05:07 present lisa 15:05:08 Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag 15:05:08 Lauriat has joined #wai-wcag 15:05:19 present + lisa 15:05:22 Present+ Lauriat 15:05:22 Zakim, who is on the phone? 15:05:22 Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat 15:05:26 Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea 15:05:34 Present+ Lisa Seeman 15:05:40 Zakim, who is on the phone? 15:05:40 Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa, Seeman 15:05:55 present- Lisa Seeman 15:06:01 present+ Lisa_Seeman 15:06:04 Zakim, who is on the phone? 15:06:04 Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman 15:06:33 Scribe: Katie 15:06:46 kirkwood has joined #wai-wcag 15:06:48 Scribe: Ryladog 15:06:56 +kirkwood 15:07:00 Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea 15:07:10 zakim, next item 15:07:10 agendum 1. "Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria." taken up [from Joshue108] 15:07:17 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/July_2016_SC/results 15:07:58 present+ MichaelC 15:08:01 JO: An exersize on the acceptance requirements for Success Criteria 15:08:13 Kathy has joined #wai-wcag 15:08:32 SarahHorton has joined #wai-wcag 15:08:44 JO: I asked the group to look at the acceptance requirements, not many have answered 15:08:55 MC; There are 5 15:09:42 Q+ 15:10:06 ack lisa 15:10:30 present+ Kathy 15:11:03 LS: I think when you look at this bare in mind that it may not be possible to put it in a simple statement. When they fill out this questionnaire not wordy. 15:11:11 q+ 15:11:31 LS: Would you still leave it out? Practically that might not work 15:11:50 LS: Current SC are long. 15:11:54 1. Acceptance requirements for Success Criteria - Overview 15:12:00 Mike_Elledge has joined #wai-wcag 15:12:02 davidmacdonald has joined #wai-wcag 15:12:33 ack kathy 15:12:46 marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag 15:12:48 JO: It will need to fit the purpoase. Good point Lisa, please add to the survey your comments 15:12:54 ack mich 15:12:55 ack Michaelc 15:13:33 SC 1.1.1 in WCAG 2 is 241 words 15:13:35 MC: My comments are these are general starucres for the SC. I do not mean them to be rules, but more guidelines 15:13:43 JF has joined #wai-wcag 15:13:45 +1 to what Michael said 15:13:50 present+ JF 15:14:03 MC: I did not say we should forbid bullets 15:14:08 Present +Davidmacdonald 15:14:20 can someone drop in link again 15:14:20 q? 15:14:24 Q+ 15:14:34 JO: This really an information gathering exersize 15:14:40 ack lisa 15:14:44 jon_avila has joined #wai-wcag 15:15:05 q+ 15:15:17 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/July_2016_SC/results 15:15:26 LS: Its meant to be acceptance criteria - if it doesn't fulfill this it will not be accepted. They should be guides 15:15:37 laura_ has joined #wai-wcag 15:15:55 -q 15:16:13 q+ to say these are acceptance requirements, not acceptance criteria. 15:16:37 q+ to say that a binary rule can still be based on subjective measures, e.g. "SC needs to be as simple as possible" 15:16:42 Q+ 15:16:43 q- 15:17:05 Ryladog_ has joined #wai-wcag 15:17:10 present+ marcjohlic 15:17:23 q+ I would say that the ¨requirements¨ are the black and white stuff; the acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG about what it´s looking for 15:17:29 q+ to say I would say that the ¨requirements¨ are the black and white stuff; the acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG about what it´s looking for 15:17:31 LS: We have worked very hard to make them testable - so thay are long 15:17:52 ack me 15:17:52 Joshue, you wanted to say these are acceptance requirements, not acceptance criteria. 15:17:59 ScribeNick: Ryladog 15:18:05 ZAkim, who is on the phone? 15:18:05 Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman, kirkwood, MichaelC, Kathy, JF, marcjohlic 15:18:21 present+ Mike_Elledge 15:18:23 JO: Just be clear these are acceptance requirements for our SC 15:18:24 steverep has joined #wai-wcag 15:18:33 present+steverep 15:18:50 JO: Dont worry too much if something needs to be long 15:19:01 JO: Dont get too caught up in that 15:19:19 JO: we want to help TF to aim for how to write them 15:19:33 ack AWK 15:19:33 AWK, you wanted to say that a binary rule can still be based on subjective measures, e.g. "SC needs to be as simple as possible" 15:19:34 present+ Laura 15:19:35 ack awk 15:20:13 ack JF 15:20:17 AWK: I agree with what Lisa is saying, but, they are at some level subjective. This is providing us some guidance 15:20:30 +1 to AWK 15:20:37 +1 to AWK 15:20:49 AWK: Is it testable? is easier than, is this simple? 15:21:29 I would be more concerned about SC being proven to be testable, rather than concern over how terse or verbose they are. 15:21:36 zakim, queue? 15:21:36 I see MichaelC on the speaker queue 15:21:49 AWK: It has to testable. We also want them wrtten as simply as possible. I would disagree with saying SC can never have bullets 15:22:15 Q+ to express concerns about being too presecriptive (patterns) 15:22:22 ack mich 15:22:22 MichaelC, you wanted to say I would say that the ¨requirements¨ are the black and white stuff; the acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG about what it´s looking for 15:22:23 ack m 15:22:24 AWK: Its not always simple, even if it is written as simply as possible 15:23:39 MC: The block/white is what we are calling Requirements. The acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG. WE should use the word Criteria to differentiate it 15:23:48 MC: Have 15:24:11 ing that bar help to trigger that question. Sometimes yes it needs to be that long... 15:24:21 ack jf 15:24:21 JF, you wanted to express concerns about being too presecriptive (patterns) 15:25:16 JF: Lisa said something about being extremely prescriptive. I am concerned about specific pattern needing to be met. I am all about functional requirments 15:25:22 11 of our current SCs have bullets or numbers 15:25:38 in WCAG 2 15:25:49 Thanks David 15:26:00 JO: Is this useful? 15:26:44 13 of our current SCs have notes in WCAG 2 15:26:49 MoeKraft has joined #wai-wcag 15:27:16 LS: Yes I like the idea it being clear that testable is must. Something we had originally - we had a summary of each one. It had themes. Have a simple language sentence in brackets with each one. 15:27:25 LS: So that would be one way 15:27:39 q? 15:27:42 JO: I like that, it is a good idea. A factoid 15:28:17 4. How much should SCs be 'self contained' and verbose or can we move concepts to 'definitions' page for full context? 15:28:50 JO: I want to talk about this....MC said he prefers self contained SC 15:29:09 lisaSeeman has joined #wai-wcag 15:29:14 q+ 15:29:30 JO: Principle for 2.0. Kim said it is a balancing act. 15:29:42 YEs, definitions must be normative 15:29:44 +1 to mcooper 15:29:45 MC: Yes they should be yes 15:30:22 JO: It is a balancing act. We would like to keep the overall structure of 2.0 15:30:25 There are 81 definitions of terms in WCAG 2 15:30:35 5. Should an SC use bullets? If so, how many? 15:30:48 q? 15:30:51 AWK: There should be no more than 6 bullets 15:31:10 AWK: If a SC can be short, great. But no ban on bullets 15:31:52 KHS: David said there are 11 with bullets. 15:32:15 JF: When we are prescriptive we get in troible 15:32:23 MC: Guodance is useful though 15:32:51 ack lisa 15:32:56 JO: Wahtever is required is what we need to do 15:33:02 s/Guod/Guid 15:33:36 LS: Use of definitions help you use SC 15:34:00 LS: Dont add mechanism that could confuse, it is simple 15:34:11 q? 15:34:28 LS: Defined term enable you to use a simpler language 15:34:36 KHS: Good point 15:35:04 present+ jeanne 15:35:11 JO: AWK Notes are Normative - so should 2.1 but have as few notes as possible 15:35:20 AWK: A note is like a bullet 15:35:42 AWK: In the spirit of keeping in simple and short 15:35:56 Q+ 15:36:23 q+ 15:36:37 rrsagent, make minutes 15:36:37 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html jeanne 15:37:23 JO: I think we are not going to get away from Notes 15:37:31 zakim, queue? 15:37:31 I see lisaSeeman, Ryladog_ on the speaker queue 15:37:48 MC: If there is a temptation - look at, is this note really needed 15:38:04 q+ 15:38:08 ack lisa 15:38:34 LS: It is similar comment to last time. They add a clarity for a special case 15:39:08 ack ryla 15:40:03 ack awk 15:40:44 AWK: I agree with Lisa and others. If we had a definition we could get ride of some of the notes 15:41:06 AWK: Definitions will help us reduce notes 15:41:17 zakim, queue? 15:41:17 I see no one on the speaker queue 15:41:21 s/get ride/get rid 15:41:21 JO: a certain amount of brevity 15:41:22 I have Greggs comments on simplicity vs complextiy in a table here https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/What_are_Success_Criteria,_and_how_to_write_them 15:41:38 7. What guidance can we provide about constructing a single SC, or dividing the content up into multiple SC? 15:42:25 q? 15:42:36 q+ 15:42:42 ack m 15:43:09 7. What guidance can we provide about constructing a single SC, or dividing the content up into multiple SC? 15:43:14 zakim, agenda? 15:43:14 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda: 15:43:15 1. Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria. [from Joshue108] 15:43:15 2. Silver sub group [from Joshue108] 15:43:15 3. TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work. [from Joshue108] 15:43:17 I think we skipped a question 15:43:24 #7 about splitting SC 15:46:06 zakim, queue? 15:46:06 I see no one on the speaker queue 15:46:06 what do you meen by a topic? 15:47:00 Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag 15:47:04 rakesh has joined #wai-wcag 15:47:08 back 15:47:15 q+ 15:47:25 ack me 15:47:32 ack awk 15:48:00 AWK: I find this a vey difficlt balance 15:48:19 I.3.1 would be doing the opposite of what MC just said 15:48:39 AWK: 1.3.1 is just overlaoded to bits 15:48:51 Agree re: 1.1.1 being overloaded also 15:49:45 our wiki :https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Main_Page 15:49:59 issue papers: https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/issue-papers/index.html 15:50:06 e.g. cntl-cmd-r on Mac 15:50:11 https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/ 15:50:20 https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/index.html 15:51:03 Zakim, take up item 3 15:51:03 agendum 3. "TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work." taken up [from Joshue108] 15:52:08 Scribe: Alastair 15:52:56 Lisa: Posted links to various COGA resources. E.g. issue papers includes a lot of the important things, e.g. voice systems, security etc. 15:53:55 Lisa: There is the 1st draft of the roadmap. The gap analysis is good for overview of what we've found so far. The roadmap (2.4) is a table of user-needs, and how they are addressed. Good to see how each is addressed. Getting to publication will take a while, so please take a look at the current version. 15:53:59 https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/table.html 15:54:51 Lisa: this area is how things are addressed across the board. Lets you see why each SC is needed. If there is a better way to address it, great, but gives you an insight into the thought process. 15:56:22 Lisa: the guidance column is for techniques. Otherwise people might not understand how it fits together, why things are not addressed currently. 15:56:41 q? 15:56:42 JO: Suggest changing "Guidance for content" to techniques / guidance. 15:57:04 https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/index.html 15:57:44 https://www.w3.org/wiki/WCAG/Coga_SC 15:57:48 Lisa: There is a wiki for comments so that we can look them over and respond. 15:58:29 q? 15:58:31 jamesn has joined #wai-wcag 15:59:00 Lisa: Copied over the SC full text into the wiki, which will age. However, people need to look at the full text before commenting. Unfortunately people comment on the proposal without having read the bullets or the full text. Therefore copied that over. 15:59:35 jnurthen has joined #wai-wcag 15:59:51 q+ 16:00:12 Lisa: Have added to the TF exchange what we've been doing. 16:00:47 JO: Please keep in touch with the other TFs, e.g. looking for links between SCs, avoiding duplication, aligning. 16:01:01 rrsagent, make minutes 16:01:01 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html jnurthen 16:01:42 Lisa: worth knowing I'm on Skype whenever I'm at my desk, if anyone would like to discuss it please ping me, I find that the easiest way. 16:02:16 q? 16:02:20 ack david 16:02:26 scribe:Ryladog_ 16:02:29 rrsagent, make minutes 16:02:29 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html jnurthen 16:02:47 David: For the full text, is it possible to pull in the full text from / to the wiki? 16:03:14 Lisa: Once you change the text the internal links change. Also, if there's only a link, think people won't use it. 16:03:46 David: Might have to copy paste when changes are made? 16:04:00 q? 16:04:06 zakim, take up item 2 16:04:06 agendum 2. "Silver sub group" taken up [from Joshue108] 16:05:32 JO: Having a conversation about Silver, and one of the options is a sub-group to work on the requirements, and take it on. What we need to do with silver. Want to discuss: is it a good idea, are people interested. 16:05:45 q? 16:06:23 +1 to start Silver work 16:06:27 JO: Would like the planning to start firming up. Big, important project. We've been caught up in 2.1 but need to keep eyes on Silver. Any comments now? 16:06:56 +1 to a Silver sub group 16:07:58 q+ to say that we could do advance planning, user interviews, etc. 16:08:16 AWK: Lot of work to do to figure out a (possible) major change to WCAG. Big impacts of combining ATAG/UAAG. Lot of work to do to figure out the options, pitfalls, benefits. That effort needs to keep close to the 2.1 work, as some new SC will get moved to Silver if we can't do them in 2.1. 16:09:39 ack jeanne 16:09:39 jeanne, you wanted to say that we could do advance planning, user interviews, etc. 16:09:43 JO: A co-ordination piece needed between 2.1 & Silver. Need to identify things that can't get done in 2.1. Important that people interested in Silver can tackle those things. 16:10:21 Jeanne: At this stage we could do things we don't normally get to do, e.g. talk to audiences and work out how to change things from a usability point of view. 16:10:50 JO: Does that mean gathering user requirements? 16:12:14 Jeanne: The informal group looking at 2.1 thought about an exercise looking at the wider issues. However, at the time we were focused on what 2.1 became. Now we can do the advanced planning for Silver. Partly user-requirements, but more about the brain-storming before we have a deadline. 16:12:18 +1 to talking to WCAG users for input 16:13:24 JO: Also need to work out what 2.0 & 2.1 haven't been able to address, the broadest user-requirements that are effective for different audiences, but as light as possible (if possible!) 16:13:46 JO: don't want a huge thing based on combined WCAG/UAAG/ATAG. 16:13:47 q? 16:13:58 Jeanne: Want to talk to people who have ideas about this. 16:14:01 q+ to ask steps 16:14:08 ack michae 16:14:08 MichaelC, you wanted to ask steps 16:14:23 MichaelC: Are we agreeing to a sub-group? What's the structure. 16:14:51 We need to define the goals of the sub-group 16:15:00 JO: Have a couple of people interested, so in principle we should go for it. Anyone else interested on the call? 16:15:20 People interested: MichaelC, Sean. 16:15:35 s/Sean/Shawn/ 16:16:11 q? 16:16:12 JO: Chairs would also be involved. Want there to be practical outcomes, e.g. what form the spec would take. There's the list as well, anyone on the list can volunteer. 16:16:13 q+ 16:16:31 laura_ has joined #wai-wcag 16:16:39 ack sarah 16:16:44 MichaelC: If Jeanne could write down some initial thoughts/ideas (e.g. on the wiki) then people can contribute from there. 16:16:53 +1 for recording and starting to write up thoughts. 16:17:54 Sarah: There are a few ways to move forward, but what we talked about before was a lean & mean sub-group that brings forward proposals for the larger group to respond to. initially, that would be how we go about conceptualising what silver might be. (proposals for proposals) 16:17:57 My #1 questions for Silver are: 1) What problems/opportunities are created by the possibility of combining user agent and content guidelines and 2) How can we re-think conformance (especially accessibility support)? 16:18:38 MichaelC: Proposals for proposals sounds like a good start. 16:19:27 AWK: Several issues in WCAG to deal with, e.g. conformance, combining UA & content guidelines. 16:19:58 JO: Have a sense it's a good idea to continue with this. Several people can put some ideas down soon. Lets do it. 16:20:31 JO: Any objections? None heard. 16:20:52 I am interested in helping but have limited time right now 16:21:04 And Shawn 16:22:38 RESOLUTION: silver sub group is initiated 16:22:44 Woohoo! 16:23:05 Excellent! 16:23:19 q? 16:23:20 JO: Please start, let us know if there's anything we can help with. 16:23:58 zakim, who is on the phone? 16:23:58 Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman, kirkwood, MichaelC, Kathy, JF, marcjohlic, Mike_Elledge, steverep, Laura, jeanne 16:25:17 present+ MoeKraft 16:25:25 present+ 16:25:37 P.S. I view "\o/" as applause in ASL. 16:25:40 present+ SarahHorton 16:25:40 present+ JamesNurthen 16:25:57 I have joined on phone : Rakesh 16:26:10 bye 16:26:12 bye 16:26:14 Bye! 16:26:18 bye all! 16:26:21 zakim, who is on the phone? 16:26:21 Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman, kirkwood, MichaelC, Kathy, JF, marcjohlic, Mike_Elledge, steverep, Laura, jeanne, MoeKraft, 16:26:25 ... SarahHorton, JamesNurthen 16:26:25 laura has left #wai-wcag 16:26:30 trackbot, end meeting 16:26:30 Zakim, list attendees 16:26:30 As of this point the attendees have been JF, steverep, alastairc, kirkwood, Laura, marcjohlic, Kathy, Joshue108, MichaelC, KimD, jeanne, Katie_Haritos-Shea, jon_avila, Makoto, 16:26:31 present+ Rakesh 16:26:33 ... Rachael, Greg_Lowney, Sarah_Swierenga, Davidmacdonald, adam_solomon, AWK, Lauriat, Lisa, Seeman, Lisa_Seeman, Mike_Elledge, MoeKraft, SarahHorton, JamesNurthen 16:26:38 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 16:26:38 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html trackbot 16:26:39 RRSAgent, bye 16:26:39 I see no action items