group reviews how we communicate and how we will document publicly the activities of the group.

scribe: brainstorming and creative work will be done in google docs
... agenda and minutes will be published to the WCAG WG
... this is the last call in Skype. Next week we will be meeting on WebEx.

Jeanne: I haven't spoken with Andrew yet
... what I expect is that we should send the proposals to the WCAG WG before TPAC to allow discussion on the mailing list
... Joshue previously said that Silver would be on the agenda at TPAC, so we should plan on presenting and discussing there.

Timelines

[prior discussion above]

Project goals

Shawn: Reviews email from AWK

Silver sub group should consider possible update models for sIlver (3.0, 3.1, etc)

Silver sub group should collect and consider possible models for combining WCAG/UAAG/ATAG under one banner

Silver sub group should develop plan to gather feedback on needs for Silver from users/authors/user agent vendors/industry

Shawn: Goal: Feedback channels should be timely, continuous, checked afterwards, and be diverse
... the content of Silver itself should include feedback from the feedback channels
... Silver should look at the structure and process of other applicable standards
... in my experience, the W3C process may be public, but it is such a wall of information, it is prohibitively expensive to learn what is really going on.
... for example, app creaters need to know the information, but they typically have no idea what is going on.
... we need a predictable and sensible update model
... which is why I want to include standards that have been around for a while and have predictable models. This is where I want to include input from legal and policy professionals.
... but has to be understandable by the people who use it.

Jeanne: This is an important point for me -- I realize that we have to serve the legal and policy audience, but they should not be primary audience that we serve.

Sarah: We should consult with experts who have experience with developing other accessibility standards, especially people with UX experience designing standards.
... thinking about the nature of standards and what makes them useful.

Shawn: We should make a list of people that we want to interview and include
... include standards that do not necessarily include digital or electronic media
... for example, the NYC standard for retrofitting older buildings to meet accessibility standards
... look at standards that are easily communicatable across all our audiences.
... We could have a continuous feedback group, and reach out to people who could be in the group.

<scribe> ACTION: Sarah will ask another person to join the group [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action01]

<scribe> ACTION: Sarah will ask a UK UX person to be interviewed. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action02]

Shawn: I want to see us developing a pool of people that we want to get feedback and comments from.

Goal: Informed decision-making drives the Silver process and content
... include feedback from other channgels
... look at other standards - comparative analysis technique and do an analysis and use them for moving forward.
... we want to talk to people: focus groups, 1-1 interviews, surveys to collect insights, observe people using the tools (because there is a gap between what people say they want and how they actually do it).
... Perspectives of people who use WCAG are considered
... user centered design, participatory design, design thinking. We want to include all of them, but want to focus on design thinking.
... Think about WCAG over the long term
... establishing a viable update channel is part of that .
... User community and stakeholders are committed to success
... keeping the community informed as to the process

Sarah: I thinking we should do a project charter -- not a WCAG charter, we may need to call it something else. It includes goals, stakeholders, audience, and measurements of success.

<scribe> ACTION: Sarah to draft a Project Charter [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action03]

coordinating communication

Brainstorming review

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne, with Shawn and Sarah to create a questions list and each add questions to the list. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action04]

Jeanne will draft some charter language to talk about next week.

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne will draft some charter language to talk about next week. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action05]

review of some of the questions on a brainstorming list.

regrets for next week from Sarah for Tuesday.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144  of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Shawn: Feedback channels should be timely, continuous, checked afterwards, and be diverse/Shawn: Goal: Feedback channels should be timely, continuous, checked afterwards, and be diverse/
Succeeded: s/chair: working_meeting_no_chair//
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: jeanne
Inferring Scribes: jeanne
Present: Jeanne Sarah Shawn
Got date from IRC log name: 21 Jul 2016
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html
People with action items: another ask charter draft jeanne language person sarah shawn some will with