SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 24 Feb 2014

<Lisa_Seeman> regrets debra_dahl,Mary Jo Mueller,Kinshuk

<ElleWaters> Apologies, everyone, but I am in a conference workshop and only able to participate via IRC today.

<karlgroves> zakim [IPcaller] is me

scribeL JF

<scribe> scribe: JF

Set scribe

Any new issues and introductions

<janina> zaim, mute me

LS: some folks reporting having issues with the wiki

any other issues to discuss?

<JohnRochford> I have no issues to bring up.

<NeilMilliken> I'd definitely like an overview of how to use the wiki

LS: is it worth scheduling some time to look at wik?

DR: yes

LS: perhaps look at a skype sesssion or equiv

<NeilMilliken> text is OK but tables and more advanced content is causing me to scratch my head.

<ElleWaters> Yes, please

<JohnRochford> Yes, please.

<JohnRochford> Lisa, I think you missed that Elle is interested as well.

Review of work done so far

<NeilMilliken> Should be good by then

LS: asking Neil to talk-through next week on discalcula
... heads up that I will be asking for other volunteers to do the same in the next weeks

if you are having issues with the wiki, pink Lisa to overcome the "bumps in the road"

LS: need to start looking at technologies next for the background research

what technologies exist, and where the holes are

how things could be used to help us

and when/where things are lacking

Look at WCAG, ARIA, INdieUI

Web Components?

if anyone is not looking at user-scenarios or research that would be helpful

Rich is looking at Fluid (a non W3C spec)

is there something else we need to look at?

Course modelling language, etc.

anyone interested?

LS: there are a number out there, if we don't find volunteers or folks who are familiar with this, we will need to look for recruits

<Liddy> I am interested in doing things on language, yes

LS: seems that there are already folks on this call who could fill thost roles

<Lisa_Seeman> liddy can you also do IMS?

Lisa, we lost your audio feed

<Liddy> do what to them?

<Liddy> sure

KHS: suspect that Lisa wants a review of...

(lisa returns)

LS: need to look at IMS to know.

LN: Do this on the wiki, or vocally, or what

LD: Interested to know why IMS

The work done therer is done by a very few people

<ElleWaters> (I'm not on the call today, just IRC, due to being in a conference)

multiple threads of work/research - I can speak to that at any time

LD: the idea is access for all, and it is being played out using meta-data

used to convince the user what they actually want, not what they think they want

content is then transformed [unintelligable...]

LD: we need to figure out *how* to do the accessiblity, then extedn it out using the metadata

everyone is using the same metadata ideas

LS: so don't look at IMS, but rather access for all

LN: there are two types of metadata - from the user stating what is needed, and the resource: this is what is available

LS: so we need to see what is there, as well as the holes - is there metadat of the cognition issues that are needed?
... this would surface in the gap analysis, so that when we build the road map we can capture it then
... are there any other types of technology that should be in the gap analysis?

RS: believe we need to determine how are persons needs delivered to a web application? we need to convey the user needs

RS; plus the metadata, and then the handshake in the middle

LS: makes sense

:LS really about personalization

LS: Rich, the Fluid project address some of those issues, correct?

RS: yes, how well not sure, but it does
... Fluid has been developed at OCAD, and is now growing

it has always been looking at personalization

LS: it does feel like the work of JIm Allen is useful

he is working on the labels to match them up

we need to look at Fluid to see if they are addressing the needs

LN: all of these projects are focused on how to do the matching

we also need to look at how to deliver that

LS: so one of the pieces that is missing is labels for cognitive function?

LN: yes

LS: so we need to look at those "tags" as well?

KHS: agree that metadata is important

but suggest that human factors stuff is also important

defingint he components in usability could be helpful

<Ryladog> Add HFES usability techniques

KHS: usability techniques
... CAN VOLUNTEER TO REVIEW THOSE

DR: interested in helping Katie with that

<NeilMilliken> Also interested in the Usability Coga crossover

LS: does anyone want to look at Web Components?

RS: the W3C Web Components? I have an awareness but don't think they have done any coga work there

LS: they haven't, but discussions at TPAC suggested it might be an enabling technology

<NeilMilliken> Currently doing quite a lot of work on UX/Usability/Accessibility crossover

RS: two google editors there

<NeilMilliken> My team at work are

(nobody on the call has a high awareness)

LS: they are doing stuff with the shadow DOM, etc.

<JohnRochford> Web Components Current Status = https://www.w3.org/standards/techs/components#w3c_all

JF asks Janina if there was anyone in WAI looking at WEb Components?

JS: nothing in a systematic way
... on the roadmap for a better response

JF asks if anyone is interested in that?

JS: the other one is CSS modules

LS: there was simeone at TPAC interested in what we were doing - that there was a connedtion

the person had ADHD, and could see the link between the two

LS: if there are any other of these technologies we should be looking at, bring them forward now

ST: yes, the IMS would be usrful there

(JF notes that metadata keeps coming up)

<richardschwerdtfeger> APIP

ST: there is APIP as well

happy to look at that as well

RS: looking to merge the metadata from schema dot org and APIP and the access for all team

LS: we've heard that no-one has all of the pieces of what we want to do, so we continue to identify the gaps

RS: sure that we don't do cognative justice to coga (access for all)

<Lisa_Seeman> jf: look at biometrics

<NeilMilliken> I'm not cringing - I think biometrics would be a great help

<Lisa_Seeman> me to

<NeilMilliken> University of Southampton have done a lot around biometrics

<NeilMilliken> including stuff around gait recognition

<Lisa_Seeman> useful for CAPTCHA

<Ryladog> or Voiceprint recognition

<NeilMilliken> Also look at stuff like Jock McClear and his NFC ring

LS: so the sum is that we need to identify that you are a human, and "who I am"
... this applies to secure emails as well - whenever there are new codes to copy over or etc. - sees that as a possible security benefit

KHS: yes, using biometrics would be a huge thing - calling up metadata for cognitive issues is not broad enough. biometricds could bring up fuirther needs as well

LS: don't want to lose this - can we capture it on the wiki?
... there is a section on the wiki that collects "how could inclusion be improved

ACTIO: john foliot to add to the wiki

<scribe> ACTION: john foliot to add to the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/02/24-coga-minutes.html#action01]

LN: metadata can be very robust

can specify exactly what the person needs

we don't have metadata that describes people, but rather their functional requirements - what the person wants

KHS: yes, that is the end. just thinking that one-way or other we need to get specific to user needs

relative to a specific individual, we could go very tightly focused - very specfic

LD: the way of delivering the requirments using biometrics, perhaps. the metadata itself is focused on functional requirements of the usre

LS: we need to identify who I am, then the metadata of who i am

LD: the way the metadata is built... if we can identify the functional requirement of what they need it can be added to the list

LS: which brings us back to where we are - identify the gaps
... we are going to have this dicussion a few times - we will need to continue to brainstorm further

Technologies overview

<NeilMilliken> have to drop off the call but wilk stay on irc

CSUN

<Ryladog> +1

<allanj> i'll be there

so far looks like Lisa, Rich, Katie, JF, mary-JO

<karlgroves> I'll be there

looks like at least 7 people, perhaps more will be at CSUN

LS; as far as an official meeting, we can't do it at this time

MC: there is time on the agenda on Tuesday for Task Force checkins

WCAG group will be meeting then

MC: can also organize something in advance, formally or otherwise

LS: would like to attend the WCAG meeting
... think it would be helpful if we all sat in one place for a dinner or...

KHS: there is the WCAG EM on Monday, then WCAG on Tuesday

Will folks be there on Monday?

<NeilMilliken> it would be but i willstruggle to attend

JF suggests a working breakfast?

(looking at Thursday - 7:30 - 9:00 AM?)

<NeilMilliken> any video conferencing opportunities

<karlgroves> +1 to mornings

<allanj> +1 to mornings

Lyles restaurant?

KHS: will look into that for next week

LS: on the hour, will leave it at that

<Liddy> quit

<NeilMilliken> ok until next week

<Lisa_Seeman> Thanks!

<Lisa_Seeman> trying to figuer it out....

<allanj> title: Cognitive TaskForce

- DRAFT -

SV_MEETING_TITLE

24 Feb 2014

Attendees

Contents

Set scribe

Any new issues and introductions

Review of work done so far

Technologies overview

CSUN

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output