<Charles> lurking in IRC only. cannot join call.
Welcome
We're talking about the keeping the POUR acronym thing.
Lauriat: We have things like
activity/planning/developing. With other IA prototypes, we're
already kind of incorporating that. I would argue against
including those types of tags for now.
... partially because it would get a bit speculative and up for
interpretation really quickly.
Jeanne: That's one of the things that came out of the needs from the research.
<Charles> I would prefer to keep the principles but not the acronym, so that we can add principles
Lauriat: I'm talking about what
to have in th tagging prototype in two weeks.
... We're already including that information, but I don't think
we need the tags.
Jeanne: We will need them
Lauriat: In time, but I don't think we need them now.
<kirkwood> I’m a little confused now about the stated purpose of the tags?
Lauriat: The tags help for navigating and understanding "Success Criteria" in Silver.
<kirkwood> “Filter by tag” would be a functional way of interacting with Silver?
Lauriat: If you're trying to account for all the things that are "perceivable" and you notice the tag, it gives you a quick way to find all things that would need to be addressed
Jeanne: Which do you think are the most appropriate tags to have in two weeks?
Shawn: POUR principles...because a lot of people find them very helpful. Not necessarily in terms of architecture, but in terms of understanding the success criteria themselves
Lauriat: POUR principles and functional need
Note: Shaun replied to Jeanne...I just misscribed
thanks, Jeanne
Jennison: If there's interest in what people thought of the other tags, you could add that as a question. "We're thinking of these other tags, what do people think?"
Lauriat: One reason for not including disability or functional need in the tags. Charles created a document...and there's a lot. There would be the potential for the list to explode. by listing some, we'd be excluding some
Jeanne: In that case, we're better doing just POUR for now.
Lauriat: Why not include the high-level activities as well?
Jeanne: Yeah, good. Thank you.
Lauriat: So, given that. How do we want to construct the tag prototype?
Jeanne: I think we're going to use the plain language prototype files to mock show how it fits together.
Lauriat: On Friday, Cyborg was going to write an invite for developers to help write the methods for the plain language prototype..I need to look at that
Jeanne: We should look at the EasyChecks. We could pull stuff right out of that.
We've sort of drifted a little to the Plain Language Agenda Item
<jeanne> Jeanne: We needto credit EO for anything we take from EasyChecks.
Lauriat: Looks like we're good on
plain language and tagging. Can we move on to
Conformance.
... we should have something for conformance. We're not going
to have a big solid prototype in time for TPAC. We need to be
prepared.
Jeanne: We need to have some tests.
<jeanne> Jeanne: My priority will be working on tests - I will write up the "does the alt text make sense" example and at least one COGA example
Lauriat: So for those tests, would it make sense to tackle the same success criteria as we have for the plain language prototype?
Jeanne: Yes, then we could show how it all goes together.
Lauriat: Not necessarily all one big thing, but just reference the others.
Jeanne: We're deep diving a
little into tests
... In the Plain Language, we have headings...
Lauriat: Name, Role, Value
... I have the document
... Sensory Characteristics, and Pause, Stop, Hide
Jeanne: If you look at the
document, in each section there's an original and the
proposed.
... I think Name, Role, Value will all be pass/fail stuff, so
we don't need to do a lot with that one
Lauriat: There are times when you
have a toggle button, checkbox, and switch...and they're not
necessarily wrong, but some are better than others.
... In Google Docs, we have a "Star" icon. What role should
that have?
... it's to mark the document as important.
... it could be toggle button, but we went with checkbox;
because toggle buttons don't work with VoiceOver
... it could also be a switch. I'd argue that checkbox is the
worst option because typically it's associated with a form and
checking a checkbox doesn't have an immediate interaction
Jennison: I think that role is going to be important the more widgets we have
Lauriat: Yeah, like it may be
better to use table instead of grid...so I think there's a lot
of room for interpretation when it comes to these
... and for Heading, it can be complicated. Like on a news
site, there may be subsections within another section.
... do you add another heading, or would that just add more
noise to the page?
... if you're getting to heading level 6, you've probably gone
too far
... We need to balance between meeting the letter of the law,
but failing the user; not meeting the letter, but helping the
user; and meeting the letter and making it work for
everyone
Jennison: We need to be forward thinking about new technologies and understanding that they don't support everything in the beginning.
Lauriat: And this raises a question from my perspective. If we tie tests to the technology...and what the technology supports, it very rapidly continues the accessibility-supported aspect of WCAG
Jeanne: Keep in mind, we have
three structural things that intersect. The guidelines, the
methods, and the points system in conformance which allows us
to associate methods with technology.
... We have the ability with this system to continue the
methods into new technologies without having to do an update of
Silver in theory
... the principles and guidelines will go into guidelines. The
techniques and some success criteria will go into
methods.
... and the methods can be "assigned" or something by the
points system.
... we could have methods that are more appropriate to certain
technologies. Or certain types of web technologies. Like more
appropriate for static or eCommerce sites.
... so we have a lot of flexibility on how to make them work
together
Lauriat: I think that's more than a solid enough start for what we can do for TPAC
Jeanne: Is anyone good at drawing
diagrams? We're going to need some for TPAC
... that's a good start for now.
Lauriat: Anything else we need to
discuss related to conformance?
... If not, we get 10 minutes back
Jeanne: well how about we think about Sensory characteristics?
<Lauriat> 1.3.3 Sensory Characteristics: Instructions provided for understanding and operating content do not rely solely on sensory characteristics of components such as shape, size, visual location, orientation, or sound.
Jeanne: And what about pause, stop, hide?
<Lauriat> Auto-updating: For any auto-updating information that (1) starts automatically and (2) is presented in parallel with other content, there is a mechanism for the user to pause, stop, or hide it or to control the frequency of the update unless the auto-updating is part of an activity where it is essential.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154 of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Jeanne: POUR principles/Shawn: POUR principles/ Succeeded: s/We just need /We need/ Present: Lauriat Jennison LuisG_ kirkwood Charles jeanne Shawn Angela Regrets: Jan Mike Shari Charles No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: LuisG_ Inferring Scribes: LuisG_ WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. Found Date: 02 Oct 2018 People with action items: WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]