Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

<Detlev> I hope it's alright that my colleague Sonja will be lurking once more - asked AWK but got no reply yet...

<Detlev> can do

<scribe> scribe: Chuck

Michael: May be short meeting.

JF: Introductions of new member, Jennifer Dailey with Deque
... Intention is to join mobile accessibility task force.

Jennifer: Hello. Mostly iOS development at Deque, since 2015.

Michael: Thanks for joining.
... Introductions all around.

Brooks: introduction

Bruce: Introduction

Chuck: Introductions.

Detlev: Introductions.

John Kirkwood: silence.

Laura: Introductions.

Marc: Introductions.

Mike: Introductions.

Rafal: silence.
... Introductions.
... You can call me Raf.

Sonja: Introductions.

<Jennifer> sorry, yes my name is spelled Jennifer Dailey :)

Steve: Introductions.

John: still silent.

Michael: That's everyone present. Welcome. Lot's of work coming up.

<kirkwood> osrry about audio issue

WCAG 2.2 SC Interest Survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-signups/)

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-signups/results

Michael: only 6 people have responded. Will walk through quickly. If you haven't, speak up. Get a grid of who is volunteering to work on which sc.
... Accessible authentication. Rachel, Alastair and Andrew as maybe's. Anybody else for this one?

<Detlev> yes I am

Michael: No response, moving on. Touch target spacing. Jake wants to work on it, Alastair, Mark & Andrew as maybes. Anybody else?

Detlev: Yes.

Michael: Anybody else?
... Moving on. Orientation Content Change. Jake and Andrew want to work on it. Marc is maybe. Anybody else interested?
... No response, moving on. Gesture indication. Jake (again), Andrew is maybe.

Detlev: I am yes, but limited capacity.
... As well as the one before.

Michael: Anybody else? Next. Proximity of related information. Jake and Andrew.

Detlev: Add me.

Michael: Great. Page refresh. Andrew and maybe Jake. Any other interest in page refresh? No response.
... Focus more visible. Alastair and JoAnn. Jake & Andrew are maybe.
... Meaningful set. Andrew is maybe. Anybody else?
... Make it easy to find most important thing. Andrew and Rachel. Anybody else?
... Do not rely on users memorizing information. Jake and Rachel. Andrew and JoAnn are maybes. Anybody else?
... Make it easy to undo errors. Jake and Rachel. Andrew is maybe. Anybody else?
... Icons for inactive UI components. JoAnn is yes, Andrew is maybe. Anybody else?

Laura: Put me down as maybe.

Michael: SRGB Value Update. Alastair, Andrew and Bruce. Anybody else interested?
... Location of labels.

Detlev: Likely to be the same as proximity of information. I tried to narrow it down. It will need to be discussed. I think it's the same task.
... I put myself down, but I think it will be merged.

Michael: So this won't need working on if people are working on #5?

Detlev: Yes.

Michael: I'm updating grid and putting asterisk on it.
... Deprecate 4.4.1. Andrew & Bruce want to work on it. Anybody else?

Bruce: Who suggested this?

Michael: Andrew? That's what I recall.
... Filed as a public comment. Discussion for quite a while. I don't remember how it hit triage. Lots of discussion.

Bruce: I thought there were volunteers for a filter tool.

Michael: Not ringing a bell.
... Going to share screen.
... Talking to grid.
... audio description of table.
... Some people have volunteered too much. Jake and Andrew. Unlikely they can work on every SC. There are some SC that don't have attention. If we don't get volunteers sc will go away.
... We have 100+ people in wg, but only 10 people volunteered.

<bruce_bailey> i do not feel like survey has been up long

Mike Gower: My name is not on there. I sent email to chairs, did gap analysis. We don't have any success techniques for 2.1 and only 3 failure techniques. That's where my effort will be.

<bruce_bailey> +1 to mg comment about 2.1 needing work

Michael: Got email, think that's useful analysis. Rest of wg hasn't seen it yet. You raise some good points. Chairs and I will discuss on Thursday. Getting 2.1 up to snuff makes sense.
... I still want some volunteers for these new sc.

MG: We'll need volunteers for 2.1 as well.

Michael: Not looking to assign to everyone, but want as many participants as possible.
... We want 2-5 people on each SC, including sme's and non sme's. Each person should only be yes on one SC and maybe on a couple of others.
... So people can focus and not spread their time out. Accessible Authentication has Rachael... I'm worried Andrew may be over-comitted.
... Anybody else on for this?

JF: Add me.

<bruce_bailey> MC just answered the questions I had!

Michael: Great! Anybody else?
... Moving on. Touch Target Space. Jake and Detlev. But Jake you are on a lot. Can I put you on as secondary?
... No Jake on the call. I'll change him to maybe.
... Detlev you are marked yes on 2, that's probably ok.

Detlev: I've sme on these. I'm happy to be there for now.

Michael: Adding Kathy as maybe for now.
... We'll need to circle back. Orientation content change. Jake's primary.
... Reluctant to accept Jake and Andrew on this, I want them on one or two at most. Anybody else interested?

Detlev: Jake is one of the people to push this. He'd be a good person to own it.

Michael: If he's willing to give up some of the other ones.
... Gesture Indication. Jake's on it. Anybody else?

Detlev: This came from Jake. he sent out first version of SC with explanations and draft of test procedures. He's already involved.

Michael: Will leave this one alone. Moving on. Proximity of related information. Again Jake, Andrew and Detlev. Detlev, we could move Jake and Andrew down and keep you as owner.

Detlev: John Avila may be interested.

Michael: Will make him maybe.

Detlev: We had discussion if it was ok for me to put something forward. He's been active.

Michael: Page refresh. Andrew and Jake. Anybody else want leadership? From low vision apparently.

Laura: We voted to not formally be proposing any SC's.

Michael: Low vision doesn't want to push these forward?

Laura: Did you talk to Jim? He's going to talk to you about it.

Michael: You expect proximity, page refresh (and one more) may not have protagonists?

Laura: Not from low vision task force.

Michael: I'll move Andrew to maybe. Detlev still wants to work on proximity.

Detlev: Yes.

<laura> LVTF Survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/81151/wcag22orSupp/results

Michael: Nobody wants to support page refresh.
... <making comments on page>
... Focus visible in same boat. 2 people wanted to work on it. JoAnn, you still interested?

JF: You can put me down for that one as well. I had some concerns about color contrast from before.

Michael: There are people allocated to this. Alastair markes this as one of his 2, so he's interested. I think he wants to take lead on this for now.
... Meaningful set. Only one person expressed maybe. Any volunteers?
... From epub, don't remember history. May be removed.
... Make it easy to find the most important thing. Andrew and Rachael... this was one of your priority 1s.

<kirkwood> I will help on this one

Michael: Does anybody else want this one?
... I'm worried about this one, there's not really enough support.

<kirkwood> I have interest

Michael: Do not rely on users remembering information. I'm moving Andrew to maybe.
... Anybody else for this?

<kirkwood> i have interest

Michael: Make it easy to undo errors. John Kirkwood... it would be great for John to take the lead.
... Icons for inactive UI components. JoAnn wants this one. Andrew and Laura have interest.

Laura: DM wrote up the original issue.

Michael: I'll add DM as maybe.
... SRGB update. Various people really want to see this done. Anybody else?
... Bruce, I'll mark you as lead. Alastair and Andrew will work with you on it.

Bruce: Who's the academic person?

Michael: We got feedback from Chris Lilly. We can put you in touch with him.
... Location of labels. Detlev says this one will merge anyways.
... Deprecate 4.1.1 Andrew & Bruce want to do this one. Anybody else want to see it go away?

Wilco: yes me.

Michael: Adding Wilco. I want to add you as lead.
... This table doesn't look really good right now, but we have good groups. We will need to chase a couple of people for some of these. Some of these may be removed.
... I'll post table in more readable form as soon as call is over. Any other comments for this agenda?

Detlev: What happened to States Discernable? to detect functional state changes.
... Lot's of discussion around it. What happened to it?

Michael: I don't know complete answer. It's chairs that made decision. My guess is that this list came from triaging from a couple of months ago to determine if 2.2 made sense.
... this one was filed AFTER the triage.
... Not sure for priotizing plans, just want to prioritize these. We will circle back at some point.
... Anything else?

Bruce: Leave the survey open for a little bit more. This is important and should be called out.

<Detlev> Just for reference: States discernable https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/686

Michael: Survey is open for one more week. I'd like to see more participation in survey. Chairs have gotten into some habbits. Should send survey's with separate subject lines from meeting agendas.

Bruce: Just needs a distinct email.

Michael: Anything else on this?
... <stops sharing>. Moving on.

<bruce_bailey> good use of call time

Silver Requirements (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Silver_Requirements/)

Michael: In the meantime did we have silver people join?
... Chuck's here but not leadership. I want some silver people here. Nobody's saying "can't live with this". We should take a brief abount of time and review comments.
... I don't feel we can make decisions besides take note of thoughts. Silver wants formal conensus. We've got some comments.
... Walk through comments.
... If we can't make decision with the absentees we may have to put off the discussion.

Bruce: Might be premature to walk through survey. This survey JUST got discussed today.
... It wasn't visible to someone who isn't member of org.

<KimD> Also, it's open until May 1, so still time

Michael: Let me aks... Anybody have burning desire to ask or raise specific points? Or are you comfortable waiting for more input and Silver can look at it longer?

DM: I would appreciate more time.

Marc: I can live with it, but not understanding why... on design principal #2.

Michael: My take is that these are groups that didn't get addressed as well as wanted in 2.1, so called out here.

Marc: We can have broader discussion later.

Detlev: Closed?

Michael: Open until May 1. Still open.
... If you haven't filled out, please look at it. My expectations is that this will circle back next week.

dm: Is there anybody who felt we didn't address low vision well enough? I understand coga, but low vision?
... Is that an artifact?

Michael: Won't put anybody on the spot. I do recall that some of low vision ones seemed hard to get in. Before you joined the call, low vision task force decided to not push sc into 2.2.
... May be context that I'm not aware of behind that.
... Back to Marc's question. Most people felt that coga was not addressed as well as hoped for 2.1. Some low vision in the mix as well. That's why those two are called out in the requirements.
... I've some issues with naming individual groups, let's wait to see responses.

Anything else?

Issues

<MichaelC> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/

Michael: Chair's did not indicate what they wanted to do on issues. I'll walk through and see if anybody wants to assign themselves.

<bruce_bailey> Circling back to volunteer recruitement for 2.1 -- The introduction from survey is dropped

Michael: 696. Overlap between 3.3.1 and 4.4.2.

DM: Github issues?

<bruce_bailey> I added it to wiki page: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Talk:WCAG_2.2_Success_criterion_acceptance_requirements

Michael: Yes. Patrick wants some level of clarification. An understanding issue?
... Does anybody want to take this issue on?

DM: I can take a look.

Michael: Checking on # of issues you have assigned.
... 695.

Detlev: That's very interesting discussion. The person knows a lot about measuring contrast. He posts some examples where 4.5:1 is not enough. He questions validity of current algorithm.
... This should be taken up by a sme. That's not me. but point is valid.

Michael: This would relate to the srgb criteria. We arm-twisted Bruce.
... Can I assign this issue to you along with that?

Bruce: Yes. I was already out of my comfort zone. this looks bigger than the current sc. This is saying we need to do something completely different. Current problem is that we got bad digit at 3rd digit kind of thing.

JF: Is this worth bring over to Silver? Doing it differently?

Michael: Let's look at it. We already had requests to clean up algorithm. If we decide that we don't want to address what this issue proposes then we bump over to silver. For now look at it in 2.2.

<jon_avila> This contrast issue is definitely a silver issue -- IMO can't be addressed in 2.2

Michael: I understand Bruce where you are coming from. You don't have to be expert, just shephard.
... 689. Demonstration videos need captions and descriptions. Sounds editorial.
... Did Alastiar do those docs?

MG: Kathy or Kim.

Marc: I can take this one and get with Kathy or Kim and sort it out.
... Just have to skip source videos, they aren't long.

Michael: I'll assign Marc.
... 687 SC language... could be misinterpreted. Filed by Mike. Did you expect to deal with this in understanding?

Detlev: Basically around q if there's any other way than escape to get rid of. there's text in understanding about selecting close button, but would have to shift focus...
... Alastair had some ideas about this. I can pick up the issue and formulate a response.

Michael: Will assign to Detlev.

MG: Steve authored this, it's important to note that his interpretation may differ from wg. Understanding doc is interpreting the language.

Michael: 686. Detlev mentioned earlier. Somebody marked it 2.2. Need to assign to somebody.
... We can leave it alone for now.

Detlev: Alastair was interested in a way, but don't know if that shifted to focus visible.

Michael: Scribing note.
... 3 more issues then we'll have issues through last few weeks.
... 683. <reads title>.
... Mike you are asking....

MG: What I flagged was when I reviewed docs and techniques, there's text in that we could create a failure technique. Looks like a group is picking it up. Wayne made comment.
... He doesn't think it's a failure.
... Looks like it has been picked up for auto WCAG.
... I'll review one last time and close.

Michael: 682. Missing content. Mark it as editorial.
... Assigning to Alastair.
... 680.

Detlev: Q around it, maybe we need ... contrast requirement applies to only ... may be merged with states discernable.
... That's current position. Don't know where it's going.

Michael: Should we assign to you?

Detlev: Yes.

Michael: This is the issues raised in last 2 weeks. We've looked at issues prior to that. I'll talk with Chairs about addressing the rest of these issues (190 open issues).
... They may think I did great with use of time :-)
... Anything else?
... We can wrap up meeting. When the chairs are away...
... Thanks for attending. Andrew will be back next week.

trackbot, end meeting

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/Jennifer Dailey (??)/Jennifer Dailey with Deque/
Succeeded: s/good use of time i say//
Succeeded: s/Michael/Bruce/
Succeeded: s/ackd//
Found embedded ScribeOptions:  -final

*** RESTARTING DUE TO EMBEDDED OPTIONS ***

Default Present: MichaelC, Chuck, kirkwood, stevelee, JF, Jennifer, Brooks, Detlev, MarcJohlic, Sonja, bruce_bailey, Laura, Katie_Haritos-Shea, mbgower, Raf, KimD, JakeAbma, jon_avila
Present: MichaelC Chuck kirkwood stevelee JF Jennifer Brooks Detlev MarcJohlic Sonja bruce_bailey Laura Katie_Haritos-Shea mbgower Raf KimD JakeAbma jon_avila
Regrets: Andrew_Kirkpatrick Alastair_Campbell Kathy_Wahlbin Rachael_Montgomery
Found Scribe: Chuck
Inferring ScribeNick: Chuck
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2019AprJun/0010.html

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

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


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.)