Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Administrative Items
Developing use cases for our principles -- How best to capture?
<sarahhorton> Janina: Shawn had suggested use cases to go with principles, what user needs do they serve
<sarahhorton> ... could do these in email, develop one per principle, even more
<PeterKorn> +
<sarahhorton> ... how best to capture them
<sarahhorton> Peter: Email is fine to get started, then review in meetings and agree on them
<sarahhorton> ... happy to move away from Google docs
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Add them to wiki once agreed
<sarahhorton> Janina: Develop in email, discuss when we have them to talk about, and then decide how to add to wiki
<sarahhorton> Peter: Can happen in any order
<sarahhorton> Janina: Will write up one and share with group to prototype
<sarahhorton> ... include relevant principle in email Subject
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Use [conformance]
Scoping & Timeline Discussion
<sarahhorton> Janina: Elaborate statement, ideas of bulleted items in scope, out of scope, timeline to get work done
<sarahhorton> ... not doing deep dive on scoring and those details
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Scoring is among solutions
<sarahhorton> Peter: Scope/timeline by end of week, added to top of Google doc
<PeterKorn> https://
<sarahhorton> Peter reviews addtions to document
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Would like to go beyond challenges, another document with same name, other conformance issues that need to be explored
<sarahhorton> Janina: Might be level above testing, assessing, rating versus making conformance claim
<sarahhorton> ... details of testing, assessing, scoring may not be part of conformance claim definition
<sarahhorton> ... if those issues are not about conformance assessment
<sarahhorton> ... describing multiple situations that are met through different protocols
<sarahhorton> ... have worked most of testing ands scoring, some situations doesn't meet what's needed
<sarahhorton> ... need ability to describe how you met it that isn't ephemeral
<sarahhorton> Peter: Seems like a direction for proposed solution, not sure how it influences scope
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Some principles are addressed in details of scoring rather than conformance section
<sarahhorton> ... don't want to rule out details of scoring when a lot of solution is there
<sarahhorton> ... writing new guidelines out of scope
<sarahhorton> ... look at how scoring flows from method to outcome
<sarahhorton> ... multipage website, leaves room for a lot of bugs
<sarahhorton> ... keeping flexibility at guideline level, work with dynamic sites
<sarahhorton> ... look at how solution works with dynamic sites
<sarahhorton> Peter: Added new guidelines, methods, outcomes to out of scope
<sarahhorton> ... and user needs
<sarahhorton> ... and functional need
<sarahhorton> ... put testing and scoring into in scope
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Add revising WCAG-EM to out of scope
<sarahhorton> Sarah: Large digital products and 3rd party content?
<sarahhorton> Peter: No necessary to restrict scope
<sarahhorton> ... revise purpose and principles after scope discussion
<sarahhorton> Peter: Reviews timeline
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: How to get from principles to recommendations?
<sarahhorton> ... how about report on status of use cases? Need time to test use cases
<sarahhorton> ... plan for changes to Silver, depending on what needs to be fixed, some big problems, some well addressed, may have minor changes
<sarahhorton> Peter: Roll out reports to Silver
<sarahhorton> Janina: manual testing and 3rd party content are big challenges we will work on
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Request for scope came from chairs
<sarahhorton> Peter: Does this need soak time, or deliver as preliminary?
<sarahhorton> Jeanne: Would like groups to send link to chairs, Shawn, and Jeanne for comments and changes
<sarahhorton> ... then review, revise
<sarahhorton> Janina: Will share with chairs, silver list, add to wiki page
Principles Discussion; Item #8
<sarahhorton> Peter: No longer concerned about the last principle, that solution meets Silver requirements