<LisaSeemanKest> i set it up for you :)

<LisaSeemanKest> :)

<LisaSeemanKest> regrets" EA, Abi and Kriss

<Rain> Lisa: I did add a draft icon for "help users understand with clear images and text"

<Jennie> * Is there a scribe for today?

<JustineP_> scribe: Steve

<LisaSeemanKest> scribe:stevelee

updates and scedule

JustineP_, schedule - working to wards publication on Thurs?

<Rachael> That sounds right

Lisa - quite bit of tidying up to do, then we send to the Coga list for a CFC - say Weds next week

scribe: then we pass on to our working groups time to review
... once they sign off we can publish

Roy - also we need to give time for announcements review

Actions <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage#Timelines_and_actions>

Rachael, that has been started - will add roy to CC list

Rachael: a long history here. EO suggested we remove a section that we wanted to keep so we worked through with them to find a solution.
... they produced a long list. This email is the suggested outcome covering their key points
... further review raised some more issues and so at this late stage we need to hold some of the changes, though have done others.

Lisa: we could have a editors call to reach consensus in the TF
... there's been a lot of content churn since the report which makes it harder to see what the references are
... esp the "building in the user" section
... point 2, for section 5.2 on testing we wanted to help small site developers. Another section was moved as well.

<kirkwood> +1 to Lisa’s Aging point, there are lots of users. (btw I am against the word “struggling” in our materials)

<kirkwood> +1 to testing with aging

Lisa: plus section on usability testing was removed leaving somehting small for beginners

so are currently 2 issues: 1) "finding people to include" do we remove it as cannot provide complete info or do we include some basic advice

<kirkwood> +1 to lisa on finding people

Jennie: including people in our testing in a more casual way could not be done by the people I think will be using. They may objetc to 'easy'

<LisaSeemanKest> note that it never said it was easy

john: agree with points on gov. perspective. But agree it is relatively easy to find people to test. so do not want to make it seem difficult

<Rachael> The sentence that raised the objections was "Finding people to include in usability testing who have different learning and cognitive disabilities can be relatively easy. "

rain: lisa's points are good - we want to encourage user testing. But also concerned some people will find there are hurdles to finding poeple.
... just tasking people to give feedback seems to indicate people should not be payed for their testing effort.
... worried about the term "struggle"
... just aging does not imply age == cognitive difficulties

lisa: lets frame this and move on. 1st draft did not say it was easy but started off with context setting. hope it doesn;t make other implications raised here.
... suggest we compare old and new and see which direction is preferred and then make edits.
... this requires serious editorial work.

johnR: to include someone means they are part of the process - not the same as find - which is it

lisa: find

<JohnRochford> no prob

<Rachael> The sentence that raised the objections was "Finding people to include in usability testing who have different learning and cognitive disabilities can be relatively easy. "

rachael: could just tweak the original sentence to remove 'easy' for now

<LisaSeemanKest> +1 to rachaels scedule

<LisaSeemanKest> do we prefer the direction of the new text (+1 new 0 old and please add can you live iether way)

<Rachael> I can live either way as long as we address the easy sentence

<Jennie> +1 to Rachael's comment

<LisaSeemanKest> 0 for old

<kirkwood> +1

<Rain> +1 new, but can live with either way knowing that this is something that can be evaluated and edited over time

+1 to removing 'easy'

<JustineP_> 0 can live with either

<LisaSeemanKest> (can live with new content with a round of edits)

<JohnRochford> No opinion / neutral.

<Albert> +1 to Rachael (but can live with either way)

<Rain> +1 to "achievable"

<kirkwood> can we put the 2 full sentences in irc to vote?

<Rachael> New straw poll: Option 1 Overall Edit Option 2 small changes including fixing easy

<LisaSeemanKest> `2

<JohnRochford> 2

2

<JustineP_> 2

<Rain> 2

<kirkwood> 2

<Jennie> 2

<Albert> 2

<LisaSeemanKest> It is beyond the scope of this document to provide a guide to usability testing and user-research. However, there are useful resources available on our developer resource page. As a short overview, usability can be measured based on efficacy, efficiency and satisfaction. This can be done by measuring or tracking:

<LisaSeemanKest> • successes in completing tasks while noting any errors to measure efficacy,

<LisaSeemanKest> • time taken per task to measure efficiency. Note that the relative time between tasks is often more useful than absolute numbers and

<LisaSeemanKest> • user’s mood and comments to measure satisfaction.

<LisaSeemanKest> At the end of the evaluation you should be able to answer:

<LisaSeemanKest> • What prevents the user from completing a task?

<LisaSeemanKest> • What creates confusion? When and why do they misinterpret the interface?

<LisaSeemanKest> • What produces an error and an incorrect action?

<LisaSeemanKest> • When does the user get frustrated or upset

<LisaSeemanKest> • When does the user misunderstand navigation, menus and controls?

<LisaSeemanKest> • How can these problems be avoided?

<Rachael> You can see it in context https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#usability-testing

lisa point 2) is do we want to focus on cognitive use testing in 5.4 and so delete the above.

<LisaSeemanKest> +1 to jennie

jennie - lest be clear on want to cover. If we can say there is a gap in including people with cognitive needs we can point to more general tsources to

<Rachael> staw poll: Option 1) Remove section 5.4 Option 2) Add framing language to it as to why including

<LisaSeemanKest> 2

<JustineP_> 2

<Rachael> 0

2

<Albert> 0

<Rain> 2

<Jennie> 2

<kirkwood> 0

<kirkwood> interested in participating in it, can do

<LisaSeemanKest> +1 to rachaels comment

rachael: i think we have covered the issue - thank you

<kirkwood> I would

<Rain> if it is at a time I can attend, I would love to

<Jennie> depends on the time

RESOLUTION: Make small changes including fixing easy and leave section 5.4 in but add framing language

lisa: who will be involved in a focus meeting on monday

RESOLUTION: Make small changes including fixing easy and leave section 5.4 in but add framing language

<Jennie> I am available 8-10 am central time

CFC for icons as in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2021Feb/0121.html

<LisaSeemanKest> i need to jump off. thanks everyone

justine: can we go forward wih the new icon, perhaps with later iterations?

Rain: I'm comfortable with the idea of iterating, but need to consider quality of early versions. Perhaps we could try easy mashup from noun project.

<JustineP_> straw poll: option 1: select from noun project option 2: move forward with current concept and adjust

0

<JustineP_> 0

<kirkwood> 0

<Albert> 0

<Jennie> 0

<Rain> 1

<Jennie> +1 to screen share!

to clarify - have a couple of new iterations we have looked up have are different

<Rachael> Straw poll: option 1) stickies in thought bubble 2) sticky notes with brain

<kirkwood> proposed

<kirkwood> 1

<Rachael> 1

<JustineP_> 1

rain: could replace wit h2 stickies in thought bubble with new one

1

<Albert> 1

<Rain> 1

<Jennie> 1

<Jennie> Rain - can you make it smaller on the screen so it is more similar in size?

RESOLUTION: Use new icon of stickies in thought bubble

<kirkwood> +1 to the new one

<Rachael> straw poll: 1) document with square and text block 2) document with two blocks of text with images

rain: next an alternative to clear text

+1

<JustineP_> +1

<Jennie> +1 and more to new one!

<Albert> +1

<Rachael> +1 to option 2, new one

<Jennie> *with thanks to the designer of the previous one

Persona and gender (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2021Feb/0124.html)

<kirkwood> avoid gender specific prononouns.

<Jennie> Have to drop - have a good week!

<Jennie> Nice job Justine!

<JustineP_> rrs agend, make logs world

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: Albert, Rachael, Jennie, Rain, Roy, JohnRochford, JustineP_, stevelee, LisaSeemanKest, kirkwood
Present: Albert, Rachael, Jennie, Rain, Roy, JohnRochford, JustineP_, stevelee, LisaSeemanKest, kirkwood

WARNING: Replacing previous Regrets list. (Old list: EA, Abi and Kriss)
Use 'Regrets+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
such as: <dbooth> Regrets+ EA, Abi and Kriss. Lisa for the last bit

Regrets: EA, Abi and Kriss. Lisa for the last bit
Found Scribe: Steve
Found Scribe: stevelee
Inferring ScribeNick: stevelee
Scribes: Steve, stevelee
Found Date: 25 Feb 2021
People with action items: 

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.)