W3C

– DRAFT –
WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference

27 October 2022

Attendees

Present
AnastasiaLanz, bruce_bailey, BryanTrogdon, ChrisLoiselle, Daniel, Devanshu, FernandaBonnin, LauraBMiller, maryjom, Mike_Pluke, olivia-hogan-stark, pday, Sam, ShawnT, ThorstenKatzmann
Regrets
Chris Loiselle, Chuck Adams, Gregg Vanderheiden
Chair
Mary Jo Mueller
Scribe
bruce_bailey, pday

Meeting minutes

hakim, take up next

Announcements

maryjom: announcements. CfC (call for consensus) went out, got unanimous approval

maryjom: Questions on whether to make it a W3C statement instead of a note - consensus was to leave it as a statement. Guidance from Michael was that WCAG2ICT is a good candidate to become a statement - but has to become a note first then voted on to be a statement

maryjom: would we add a statement clarifying conformance - suggested this should be raised as an issue if it is a strongly held belief

bruce_bailey: Questions on if there is anything different needed for note vs statement?

Michael Cooper: write as a note now, then can become a statement later if needed - no need to do anything differently when writing

maryjom: There was discussion of using markdown, and splitting document into smaller chunks. Keen to explore - but there may be some time needed to resolve technical details

MichaelC: Daniel & I will do some quick exploration on what is possible on this. Hope to have a prototype by next week

maryjom: if there is a glitch - we can work with other tools for a few weeks if needed

Mike_Pluke: Is it possible to have markdown in issues? Then you can propose new wordings in the issues to help with legibility

bruce_bailey: markdown is supported in issues, in wiki, in discussions - all use GitHub markdown

<MichaelC> Basic writing and formatting syntax

maryjom: We are going to learn more about discussions in GitHub today. I have posted videos. If you do not have access contact Daniel.

maryjom: If you prefer to review rather than creating content, then speak up - that is OK

Discussion board walkthrough

<bruce_bailey> Issues: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues

maryjom: Discussions. In main WCAG2ICT repository - there is a discussions tab. Example discussion thread created by MichaelC. We need to create separate discussion threads to help to find them

<bruce_bailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/discussions

maryjom: Select a category, then enter title, then write the content in markdown, then preview to check formatting

bruce_bailey: issues vs discussions. Issues - changes in WCAG2ICT, discussions are broader

maryjom: Agree. But if you are not sure - put it in the discussion. You can then create an issue from a discussion - so can easily do this later

maryjom: Then the discussion & issue are linked

<maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues

<dmontalvo> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/

Mike_Pluke: when looking at issues - saw all W3C issues as well.

maryjom: we haven't got labels right now - this is a specific WCAG2ICT repository so they are separate from general W3C issues

maryjom: Added tags for each of the FCs so you can tag easily by these, or WCAG2.2 related issues

maryjom: If you think we need other tags - let maryjom know and she can make changes

<bruce_bailey> WCAG 2.0 / 2.1 / 2.2 issues are here: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues

Questions about using GitHub to propose changes

WCAG2ICT project walkthrough

maryjom: project walkthrough. If in the main repository - you can see projects at the top. Then WCAG2ICT note update - this is the only project.

maryjom: There are different views: board view, table view etc. Board view sorted by columns - so jobs move along the columns as progress updates

maryjom: table view. Lists by priority - maryjom has tried to order them. So global changes are up top.

maryjom: All issues have been added and ordered and linked to FCs where appropriate

maryjom: Everything is in todo

maryjom: Also have views for WCAG 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 items

maryjom: Table view towards the end - have some admin prep included

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask if these are ways to sort issues ?

bruce_bailey - clarifying that these are all ways to sort the issues.

maryjom: Correct

maryjom: you can add columns, and filter by values - then create new tab for that filter if required

bruce_bailey: if you do this, can we all see them?

<maryjom> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/13/views/7

maryjom: unsure.

<ChrisLoiselle> yes

<ChrisLoiselle> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/13/views

maryjom: so it looks like once these views are setup, everyone in the project can see them - so give feedback if you want other views setup

maryjom: In any view, you can click on any issue, then add assignees and you can add yourself

maryjom: then in status you can change it (e.g. to In Progress when you start working on something) or you can drag between columns

<FernandaBonnin> *zoom issues please go on

maryjom: created different views to support kbd only user

FernandaBonnin: is there another alternative to dragging/dropping between columns? What happens when we have more items on the board view?

maryjom: alternative is to click on issue to open, then click on status field to change to next state as needed - via the dropdown

FernandaBonnin: is there any priority within each status? to order tasks in each column

maryjom: don't know if there is any finer sorting. If you want to focus on your issues - you don't have to use project view - go to repository, then search by issue number, or filter by assignee to find your issues

maryjom: you can do the same thing from the issue - under projects you have the status field for the project view - so there are multiple ways to do the same thing

Mike_Pluke: finding it difficult to find the project view

<FernandaBonnin> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/13

maryjom: from main repository, click on projects tab - then click on WCAG2ICT Note Updates- that takes you to the project view

maryjom: if you don't like project view - you can use issues view as needed

bruce_bailey: if in the project view, how can you go back to issues?

maryjom: seems to require back navigation in browser, or browse directly to the repository. Direct links are in the wiki

maryjom: GitHub.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki has the direct links

maryjom: Pointed out the wiki tab at top of repository

All links you need should be available from the main repository page

maryjom: Wiki has lots of relevant info.

maryjom: Wiki also has "Drafts for updated content" which may be helpful as a starting place. Mary Jo has done an update to David MacDonald's original word doc

maryjom: Work for this week - take a look a the aforementioned MJM update to David's work - and see where you want to get started - and assign yourself to an issue (or issues)

maryjom: your own ID will usually be at the top of the assignees list. From issues, board, or table view - do it from any of these

FernandaBonnin: Asked for more info on how we are going to work - expectation after we assign ourselves. Conversation for each success criteria (SC)?

maryjom: Initially start with the document - it has an idea of a possible process - you can read it and see if you agree

maryjom: next week we'll pick an issue and discuss as a group. There will be some that require discussion - may not agree with an issue, or not understand, or think there should be more.

maryjom: Either send email to maryjom or add a comment to the issue - saying you want a discussion about this issue

Naming / referencing conventions

<ChrisLoiselle> +1 to Bruce's comment!

maryjom: Naming/referencing conventions. Lots of repeated use of terms like WCAG2.0 - easy to miss when going through a document. maryjom suggests she makes these global changes before next week

<ChrisLoiselle> s

maryjom: WCAG2.0. What should we change it to? WCAG? WCAG2? WCAG2.x? WCAG2.2?

LauraBMiller: If you use 2.x it's unknown - may have to add a statement - with the latest release

maryjom: danger now is future changes.

LauraBMiller: Could use 2.0 or 2.1 - give indication of the latest release that we know

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to suggest keep name, but make specific to 2.2 in intro

<LauraBMiller> +1 to bruce with the name

bruce_bailey: Keep WCAG2ICT name, but be specific on version that we are referring to - WCAG 2.2 or whatever

<LauraBMiller> +1 all of what Bruce said.

<Mike_Pluke> +1

<Sam> +1

+1

<ThorstenKatzmann> +1

<FernandaBonnin> +1

<AnastasiaLanz_> +1

<olivia-hogan-stark> +1

<Devanshu> +1

<ShawnT> +1

<bruce_bailey> +1 to change 2.0 to 2.2 throughout

<BryanTrogdon> +1

maryjom: RESOLUTION: Change to WCAG 2.0 to WCAG 2.2 throughout

RESOLUTION: Change to WCAG 2.0 to WCAG 2.2 throughout

maryjom: If you have ideas of other global ideas - let Mary Jo know and add to the global changes issue #18

<maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/18

maryjom: Any comments/suggestions - send Mary Jo an email and will add to agenda or address.

reagent, make minutes

Summary of resolutions

  1. Change to WCAG 2.0 to WCAG 2.2 throughout
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 192 (Tue Jun 28 16:55:30 2022 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/You are here/s

Maybe present: MichaelC