IRC log of coga on 2014-02-10

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:46:32 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #coga
16:46:32 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:47:40 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, what is this
16:47:40 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'what is this', Lisa_Seeman
16:47:51 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, what meeting is this?
16:47:51 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, Lisa_Seeman.
16:48:57 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, list conferences
16:48:57 [Zakim]
I see SW_HCLS(BioRDF)11:00AM, DPUB_DPUBIG()11:00AM, AB_ABW3()10:00AM active
16:48:59 [Zakim]
also scheduled at this time are T&S_Team()12:00PM, WAI_CogTF()12:00PM, Team_JEFF()11:00AM, WAI_PFWG(ARIA)10:00AM
16:49:17 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, this is WAI_CogTF
16:49:17 [Zakim]
Lisa_Seeman, I see WAI_CogTF()12:00PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be WAI_CogTF".
16:49:34 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, this will be WAI_CogTF
16:49:34 [Zakim]
ok, Lisa_Seeman; I see WAI_CogTF()12:00PM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
16:50:58 [Lisa_Seeman]
16:52:06 [Liddy]
Liddy has joined #coga
16:52:12 [Lisa_Seeman]
16:53:05 [Zakim]
WAI_CogTF()12:00PM has now started
16:53:10 [Barry_Johnson]
Barry_Johnson has joined #coga
16:53:12 [Zakim]
16:54:29 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, P1++ is me
16:54:29 [Zakim]
sorry, Lisa_Seeman, I do not recognize a party named 'P1++'
16:54:54 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, ??P1 is me
16:54:54 [Zakim]
+Lisa_Seeman; got it
16:55:31 [JohnRochford]
JohnRochford has joined #coga
16:55:48 [Lisa_Seeman]
agenda+ Any new introductions or issues
16:56:05 [Lisa_Seeman]
agenda+ thanks from UAAG 2.0
16:56:20 [Zakim]
16:56:54 [Lisa_Seeman]
agenda+ When to build in user group research
16:57:21 [Lisa_Seeman]
agenda+ Review of user goals
16:57:31 [Lisa_Seeman]
agenda+ Table of content for gap analysis
16:57:41 [Lisa_Seeman]
agenda+ Table of content for roadmap
16:58:05 [Lisa_Seeman]
agenda+ Actions
16:59:21 [Zakim]
16:59:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.502.802.aaaa
17:00:18 [richardschwerdtfeger]
richardschwerdtfeger has joined #coga
17:00:38 [Zakim]
17:01:35 [Zakim]
17:01:38 [ddahl_]
ddahl_ has joined #coga
17:02:15 [Zakim]
17:02:27 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, +[IPcaller] is Liddy
17:02:27 [Zakim]
sorry, Lisa_Seeman, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller]'
17:02:38 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, [IPcaller] is Liddy
17:02:38 [Zakim]
+Liddy; got it
17:02:51 [Zakim]
17:02:53 [Kinshuk]
Kinshuk has joined #coga
17:03:17 [Zakim]
17:03:22 [Michel]
Michel has joined #coga
17:03:28 [Zakim]
17:03:31 [Zakim]
17:04:37 [Zakim]
17:04:48 [ddahl_]
17:05:34 [richardschwerdtfeger]
RRSAgent, make log public
17:06:16 [ddahl_]
lisa: is there anyone who hasn't been on the call before?
17:06:33 [ddahl_]
barry: I've been on the call
17:06:58 [ddahl_]
lisa: do you want to introduce yourself
17:07:04 [Zakim]
17:07:24 [Lisa_Seeman]
scribe: ddahl_
17:07:27 [ddahl_]
barry: work for deque system, responsible for ?? at the US Department of Education
17:07:30 [MaryJo]
MaryJo has joined #coga
17:07:38 [ddahl_]
lisa: anyone else new?
17:07:42 [Zakim]
17:08:18 [ddahl_]
topic: agenda
17:08:42 [ddahl_]
lisa: any new agenda topics?
17:09:10 [neilmilliken]
neilmilliken has joined #coga
17:09:12 [Liddy]
thank you - ok
17:09:34 [ddahl_]
topic: thanks for UAAG 2.0 review
17:09:36 [Barry_Johnson]
Sorry - Senior Accessibility COnsultant at Deque assigned as Lead 508 Tester at US Dept of Education
17:10:12 [ddahl_]
lisa: if anyone wants to join UAAG call they're welcom, let me know and I'll introduce you
17:10:25 [ddahl_]
topic: when to build in user group research?
17:11:09 [ddahl_]
john: we should be involving our target populations and set up criteria for who we could be recruiting to help us
17:11:34 [ddahl_]
...should we include sensory or physical disabilities as well, do they need to have web experience?
17:12:11 [ddahl_]
...Neil and I have access to people, what do people think the criteria are that we should be recruiting.
17:12:25 [ddahl_]
lisa: a difficult question
17:12:45 [ddahl_]
??: i was going to ask about new research vs. literature review
17:13:02 [ddahl_]
...there's probably a lot of earlier research
17:13:25 [ddahl_] do we approach the body of existing research
17:14:02 [ddahl_]
lisa: the gap analysis so far is mostly literature research, so when do we want to augment that with new user group research
17:14:26 [ddahl_]
...obviously we want to use as much earlier research as possible and not reinvent the wheel.
17:14:37 [ddahl_]
...but we can't only rely on that
17:14:41 [neilmilliken]
Given the relative lack of literature on my topic (Dyscalculia) relating to the web contact with real live people is key
17:15:33 [ddahl_]
lisa: we might be coming up with new techniques that need to be backed by research
17:16:18 [ddahl_]
...we're definitely going to need user group research, but do we also want redundancy, to retest important things that are already out three.
17:16:27 [ddahl_]
17:16:41 [neilmilliken]
I have contacts with UK and Denmark support groups
17:16:47 [JohnRochford]
17:16:57 [ddahl_]
john: has been collecting a lot of resources, would be happy to share
17:17:08 [ddahl_]
lisa: please put it on the wiki
17:17:23 [ddahl_]
??: can you tell us more about this research?
17:17:48 [ddahl_]
john: dates include about 1999-2010
17:18:00 [ddahl_]
...have published a lot of this
17:18:20 [ddahl_]
lisa: there's going to be a lot of related research that isn't about web accessibility.
17:18:56 [ddahl_]
??: a lot of information I have is about seniors and their use of the web, that would be a good place to start
17:19:11 [ddahl_]
john: also included research that involves seniors as well
17:20:04 [Zakim]
17:20:08 [ddahl_]
john: also did some research trying to find a common definition of cognitive accessibility, will share that shortly
17:20:15 [JohnRochford]
17:20:16 [Lisa_Seeman]
17:21:04 [Ryladog]
Ryladog has joined #coga
17:21:08 [ddahl_]
lisa: to summarize -- we want to back up what we're doing, we want to include relevant literature but that's not extensive enough, so we'll be doing user group research
17:21:36 [ddahl_]
....we don't have to worry about excluding techniques because they're few and far between
17:21:39 [neilmilliken]
17:21:50 [ddahl_]
...let's go back to criteria for building user groups
17:21:50 [Barry_Johnson]
17:21:55 [richardschwerdtfeger]
17:22:26 [ddahl_]
lisa: we want to make things achievable, and we want to add people who haven't been online yet
17:22:48 [ddahl_] criterion should be some level of exposure to the internet, say for a year or so.
17:23:17 [ddahl_]
john: that's what I was thinking as well, we should have a criterion for experience on the internet for a defined period
17:23:29 [ddahl_]
(no disagreement)
17:24:28 [ddahl_]
katie: basically, by default, as we move along the web is going to be everywhere, we don't want to go back in the past, but cover the present and the future
17:24:40 [neilmilliken]
17:25:06 [ddahl_]
lisa: we should also say what kind of interaction -- looking at news, interacting with an application
17:25:47 [ddahl_]
...we may need to consider what kind of exposure they have -- tablets, news feed, going to website
17:26:33 [ddahl_]
...we're more interested in accessing a site than generally accessing the web
17:27:02 [ddahl_]
john: do we want to exclude people who also have sensory or physical disabiliites?
17:27:09 [Ryladog]
17:27:19 [ddahl_]
17:27:42 [ddahl_]
rich: is there something that's not covered in current WCAG guidelines for those users
17:27:52 [ddahl_]
17:28:37 [ddahl_]
john: It seems that it would be simpler to exclude people with sensory or physical disabilities
17:28:48 [neilmilliken]
they should not be excluded
17:29:01 [neilmilliken]
we need to address the totality of the spectrum
17:29:23 [ddahl_]
some people with cognitive disabilities often have related physical disabilities, for example people with aphasia often have hemiplegia
17:29:25 [neilmilliken]
and we need to understand the effects of comorbidity
17:30:26 [Zakim]
17:30:28 [ddahl_]
katie: what we want to talk about cognitive issues, we shouldn't talk about excluding people with other issues
17:30:45 [ddahl_]
john: I think we're saying the same thing
17:31:04 [Barry_Johnson]
Yes Neil, comorbidity can be important
17:31:05 [Zakim]
17:32:18 [ddahl_]
lisa: the argument against comorbidity is the complexity that's being added by a screen reader, where the assistive technology plus the cognitive disability is compounding the issue
17:33:12 [ddahl_]
...if our user groups have a combination of disabilities it might be hard to decide what techniques are working
17:33:14 [neilmilliken]
I understand the argument that Lisa is making - and agree that the primary focus should not necessarily be on this subset of users
17:33:31 [ddahl_]
...we could treat pople with compound disabilities as separate user groups
17:34:07 [Lisa_Seeman]
17:34:40 [ddahl_]
??: what about an autistic user that uses a screen reader?
17:35:26 [ddahl_]
lisa: my proposal was that we could have one group with autism, and another group that has autism along with someone else. that will be a smaller group
17:36:31 [ddahl_]
neil: let's achieve the achievable first. let's look at the distinct ones and get the material collected. comorbidity is important
17:36:58 [ddahl_]
...some of our techniques may actually run counter to some of the stuff that we've done before.
17:37:31 [ddahl_]
...we're working in a world where there are lots of different needs, but we need to concentrate on the distinct areas of cognitive disabilities first
17:37:38 [ddahl_]
lisa: is that part of phase 2?
17:37:45 [Ryladog]
17:37:58 [ddahl_]
neil: yes
17:38:08 [Lisa_Seeman]
ack neilmilliken
17:38:26 [ddahl_]
katie: that's what I was going to say
17:38:46 [ddahl_]
...we don't want that in a 1.0 WD but we could say that's something we'll do late
17:38:51 [ddahl_]
17:39:57 [ddahl_]
lisa: with aging, people will have low vision or minor motor problems, but we're interested in people who need additional assistance
17:40:27 [ddahl_]
john: should not exclude people who are using assistive technology because of their cognitive disability
17:40:55 [neilmilliken]
i am dyslexic and use AT and use text to speech feedback but it's not a screenreader like JAWS
17:41:13 [ddahl_]
...we might exclude them because they're blind, but not because of a cognitive disability
17:41:24 [neilmilliken]
AT is definitely part of the equation
17:41:42 [Ryladog]
My suggestion is to identify in the beginning drafts that we will address comorbidity in a later phase but recommend in the meantime that people use current COGNITIVE techniques with the relevant WCAG 2 techniques
17:42:00 [Ryladog]
to achieve a solution
17:42:07 [ddahl_]
lisa: are we confortable that addressing people with a severe physical disability at a later phase
17:42:10 [Ryladog]
17:42:20 [ddahl_]
(no disagreement)
17:42:24 [richardschwerdtfeger]
17:42:25 [neilmilliken]
no disagreement
17:43:15 [ddahl_]
john: in order to recruit people we should have an idea about what we want them to do, so that we can recruit people well.
17:43:34 [neilmilliken]
got to run
17:43:44 [ddahl_]
...both in terms of the effort involved and what we're trying to achieve
17:43:47 [Zakim]
17:44:16 [ddahl_]
lisa: what kinds of usability tests will we do?
17:45:42 [ddahl_]
debbie: what kind of testing would we want to do? would it be a formal experiment or more like a focus group?
17:46:18 [ddahl_]
john: could we even recruit developers and ask them to build things that people could try?
17:46:46 [ddahl_]
lisa: I think that's essential
17:46:51 [ddahl_]
topic: goals
17:47:25 [ddahl_]
lisa: setting goals will help with the answer to what we're doing
17:47:40 [Lisa_Seeman]
17:48:39 [ddahl_]
katie: later on some improved version of WCAG will be available
17:48:41 [Lisa_Seeman]
ack k
17:48:47 [Lisa_Seeman]
ack ry
17:49:17 [ddahl_]
lisa: looking at goals will feed into defining what we'll be testing in user groups
17:49:47 [ddahl_]
john: it's reasonable to wait until goals are defined until we start recruiting people
17:50:09 [ddahl_]
topic: user goals
17:50:14 [Lisa_Seeman]
17:51:48 [ddahl_]
lisa: what are the specific activities that people will be doing?
17:52:30 [ddahl_]
...for example, with educational software, you want to make sure that person has learned something. I thought that was overreach for what we're doing.
17:54:03 [ddahl_]
l: i wanted to make sure that we had a final defined end
17:54:51 [ddahl_]
lisa: can someone summarize what Suzanne's saying?
17:55:57 [ddahl_]
l: I would like to understand our goals, want to distinguish what the task is vs. how the user is accomplishing their task.
17:56:21 [ddahl_]
...for example, "fill out a web form" vs. "open a bank account"
17:56:55 [ddahl_]
...not sure that we con distinguish between communication and social media
17:57:00 [Lisa_Seeman]
17:58:01 [ddahl_]
lisa: communication might be a task, but social media might be a context
17:58:20 [ddahl_]
...being in a specific context might add something that we need to think about
17:59:26 [ddahl_]
l: we should not limit context, for example, to something that implies a desktop context
18:00:20 [Zakim]
18:01:25 [ddahl_]
l: user goals should be higher level, for example play a game. should start at the highest level, in case the context doesn't apply in five years
18:02:03 [ddahl_]
...for example, what if the way that opening a bank account switches to all voice in five years
18:02:15 [Barry_Johnson]
The higher goal is filling out a form.
18:02:45 [Barry_Johnson]
the detail is opening a bank account.
18:03:02 [ddahl_]
lisa: we can revisit this next week
18:03:15 [Zakim]
18:03:28 [ddahl_]
...techniques and recommendations will be abstract.
18:03:45 [ddahl_]
...are we talking about user goals or testing goals?
18:03:51 [ddahl_]
john: agrees
18:04:22 [ddahl_]
rrsagent, format minutes
18:04:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ddahl_
18:04:37 [Zakim]
18:04:42 [Zakim]
18:04:56 [Zakim]
18:04:58 [Lisa_Seeman]
zakim, bye
18:04:58 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were Lisa_Seeman, John_Rochford, Kinshuk, +1.502.802.aaaa, Barry_Johnson, Debbie_Dahl, Liddy, Michel_Fitos, Rich_Schwerdtfeger,
18:04:58 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #coga
18:05:01 [Zakim]
... Neil_Milliken, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Katie_Haritos-Shea
18:05:11 [Lisa_Seeman]
rssagent, bye
18:06:00 [Lisa_Seeman]
18:06:04 [Lisa_Seeman]
18:59:43 [ddahl_]
ddahl_ has left #coga