<Lisa_Seeman> agenda: this

<Lisa_Seeman> agenda: Lang (issue 30), personalization and help

<Lisa_Seeman> scribe: Jim_S

<Jan> I was not aware that there was a draft for 2.1

Lisa expressed concern about the notification of the requiremnts for reviewing the editor's draft

<Lisa_Seeman> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/FPWD_review/guidelines/index.html#

Lisa commented that there appear to only be 6 COGA SC in the list

<Thaddeus> +Present Thaddeus

Michael Cooper explained that the pull requests were possible in deciding which SC made the list, the using the version at the top of the list. SC that seemd to be editorially robust were included.

Michael Cooper listed the 8 COGA SC added

Lisa asked can we request changes to the selected COGA SC

Lisa feels "Support personalisation" and "accessible authentication" are more important for feedback

Michale Cooper suggested that, if they were flagged as important they may have been excluded as they were not of editorial quality yet.

<Lisa_Seeman> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/status.html

<Lisa_Seeman> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2017Feb/0199.html

Mike Pluke felt that the amount of dispute around accessible authentication and support personalisation may have been the reason for them not being included.

Mike Pluke feels that the Manageable blocks should have been included as the final version was not considered due to it being at the end of the document

Lisa suggets that all feedback should be included in GitHub to keep all information in one place

Discussion on how to improve reviewing issues will be done after CSUN

Michale Cooper suggests that we publish monthly after FPWD

<Lisa_Seeman> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/23

Should https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/23 be added as a proposal with a note that further work on the wording is required?

<Mike_Pluke> -1

<alastairc> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/24#issuecomment-277750603

<Thaddeus> Is it possible for us to review the list during the day so we can be careful with our decisions or is there not enough time

Should Manageable blocks be added as a proposal based on the fact that the final wording wasn't assessed? https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/24

<Mike_Pluke> Statements which instruct a user to make a choice or take an ACTION: have only one instruction per sentence, except when two things have to be done simultaneously; use sentences of no more than 15 words; should have no more than one relative pronoun per sentence. Glossary entry: Relative pronouns are any of the words "who", "whom", "that", "which", "whose", "where", "when" and "why".

https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/FPWD_review/guidelines/index.html#minimize-user-errors

Lisa - we need to ensure that when SC are split up we do not lose important parts of the original SC

<Mike_Pluke> +1

<Lisa_Seeman> +1

<kirkwood> +1

<maryjom> +1

+1

<alastairc> +1 (I can do a pull request if that helps?)

<Jan> +1

Above consensus was for including Manageable blocks

<Lisa_Seeman> Support personalization: Contextual information and author settable properties of regions and elements are programatically determinable so that personalization is available.

<Lisa_Seeman> Where the number of steps in a process can be reduced, the user can control the trade off between function and simplification.

<Lisa_Seeman> Exception: Information does not need to be exposed when there is not a standardized way of exposing it in the technology or the platform.

<Lisa_Seeman> ---------

Support personalization (minimum) : Contextual information and author settable properties of regions and critical features and important information are programatically determinable so that personalization is available.

<Pietro> +1 for Manageable blocks

<Lisa_Seeman> +1 for support personlization

<Pietro> +1 for support personlization

+1 for support personalisation being included

<Mike_Pluke> +1 for support personalisation being included

<Thaddeus> +1

<kirkwood> +1 for support personalization

<Jan> +1 for support personalization

<alastairc> won't object, but will note that personalisation will get a lot of push back from developers, so it needs to be really solid.

<kirkwood> familiar design can live with taking it out

<Lisa_Seeman> subsuitie if needed : Familiar Design (Minimum), extra symbols

CFC: we trade-off familiar design and extra symbols in this order if required

<Lisa_Seeman> +1

+1

<Mike_Pluke> I'm OK to trade familiar design and extra symbols

<Mike_Pluke> +1

<kirkwood> +1

<maryjom> +1

<Pietro> extra symbols is very important for me

<Pietro> extra symbols are for some users unique way to access

Lisa changes vote to support extra symbols rather than manageable blocks

<Jan> +1 to symbols and personalization

<kirkwood> actually think chage managbel bocks to xtra symbols

<Lisa_Seeman> subsuitie if needed : Familiar Design (Minimum), for personlization

<Pietro> thank you

<Jan> I need to drop

<Lisa_Seeman> http://doodle.com/poll/nt2634gek2quykn9

circle back to plain language

<Lisa_Seeman> Simple, clear, and common words: Use the the most common 1500 words or phrases or, provide words, phrases or abbreviations that are the are most-common form to refer to the concept in the current context.

<Lisa_Seeman> Simple, clear, and common words: Use the the most common 1500 words or phrases or, provide words, phrases or abbreviations that are the are most-common form or provide a glosary definition

<Lisa_Seeman> Simple, clear, and common words: Use the the most common 1500 words or phrases or, provide words, phrases or abbreviations that are the are most-common form to refer to the concept or provide a glossary definition

https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/30

<Lisa_Seeman> Simple, clear, and common words: Use the the most common 1500 words or phrases or, provide words, phrases or abbreviations that are the are most-common form to refer to the concept in the identified context.

<Lisa_Seeman> identified context - context and word list for the context that has been idetified in an accessibilty statment or other known techneque

<Lisa_Seeman> identified context - context and word frequency list for the context that has been identified in an accessibility statment or other known technique. A word frquency list has to be generated from at least 1000 sources from the same context

<Lisa_Seeman> identified context - context and a context specific word frequency list (and glossary) has been identified in an accessibility statement or other known technique. A word frequency list has to be generated from at least 1000 sources from the same context or how ever many pages can reasonably be found

<Lisa_Seeman> Simple, clear, and common words: Use the the most common 1500 words or phrases or, provide words, phrases or abbreviations that are the most-common form to refer to the concept in the identified context.

<Lisa_Seeman> +1 for this draft

+1 for this draft

<Mike_Pluke> +1 for this draft

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.148  of Date: 2016/10/11 12:55:14  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: Jim_S
Inferring ScribeNick: Jim_S

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found, but dash separators were found.  
Defaulting to -dashTopics option.

Present: Pietro alastairc kirkwood Lisa MaryJoMueller Jan McSorley Mike Pluke Jim_S MichaelC

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 20 Feb 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/02/20-coga-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.