See also: IRC log
<Lisa_Seeman> agenda: this
<Lisa_Seeman> scribe: NeilMilliken
zakim +44 203 618 is neilmilliken
LS first item is which user groups go into chunk 1
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Gap_Analysis/ADHD
Mary Jo - Susanne & I have been concentrating on Aging & dementia
LS suggest we leave for chunk 2?
NM - Put in chunk 2
Kate Deibel asking for timelines on chunk 2?
LS or could we leave it out altogether?
KD - Keeping on task is important
TD agrees it needs to remain in
Consensus that it should stay
LS thanks Susanne & Mary Jo for the work done
Susann we still have a "to do" to list articles if they are relevant over the next week. Goal is to be ready for next Monday
SK kate sent articles we just need to do the review and pull in data
LS the stuff I found most useful from the recent conference was the stuff on people using tablets an I have been trough the journals and added stuff into the guidelines and characteristics section
LS I know that Steve also added a section
<Lisa_Seeman> my section https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Gap_Analysis/Aging_and_Dementia#Characteristics_of_Content_Optimized_for_Aging_and_Dementia
SL I contacted a number of people working in the area one of them came back with info
SL I put the abstracts from the Peter Cudd work into the wiki but we need to look at all of the literature listed in the academic reviews
KD I work at an academic library so I can probably get access for you
SL I kept in the stuff that specifically referenced technology
<slee> http://www.aaate.net/
KD most of these Journals I should have access to I will take a look at lunch time
LS this is very useful - because so much information is stuck behind paywalls
LS lets see how far we get over the next week with this - but even with how it is now I think that it is ready to include in chunk 1
SK give us one more week before we freeze it and we should then send it.
LS agree to freeze at the end of next week
SL when you say frozen do you mean a snapshot
LS yes
LS what is going to happen is the content will be ported into an editors draft on GiThub
The aim is to edit slightly for consistency - does any one object?
LS feel free to tell us if there are things we change that you are not happy with
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Non_W3C#IMS
LS Next up Technology Reviews
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Non_W3C
LS I am happy we have a review of APIP GPII and Flow
LS can we approve putting that into chunk one?
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Non_W3C
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Adaptive_technologies_for_learning
LS trying to find the adaptive technologies page
KD the idea of the independent learner is pretty much discounted in current education theory
NM I think it is too generic, needs more detail and some discussion
LS consensus not to include in chunk one
<Lisa_Seeman> http://accessibility.athena-ict.com/cognitive/VisionCoga1.html
LS Kate can you start a discussion on the list
LS the more abstract you make the suggestions the better
LS when you are writing up a technique
LS this means it stays relevant as technologoes change over time
LS so it should be techniques and abstractions
LS perhaps it should be placed in the topic "potential for Inclusion"
Does anyone object?
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Section_3
NM I think thatthis should be in the suggestions section
LS this now poses the question do we want to include in suggestio the content that is now in "a vision for the roadmap"
LS that area is currently nice and empty....are we comfortable with that?
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Gap_Analysis#Section_5:_Suggestions
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Gap_Analysis#Section_5:_Suggestions
<KateDeibel> Minor system crisis. Have to run.
<Lisa_Seeman> http://accessibility.athena-ict.com/cognitive/VisionCoga1.html
Are people comfortable with putting the vision document into the Suggestions Section 5 of the gap analysis?
<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Section_3
LS plus a short introduction into the ideas for inclusion
NM I would support putting it in
<richardschwerdtfeger> +1
<MaryJo> +1
<Tim> +1
<Tony_Doran> Not sure if I have a vote yet as not a proper member yet but +1!
LS that motion is Passed --- this brings us to the next item timelines and agenda?
LS Janina and Michael would like us to submit the work so far as an editors draft
LS we can then do some more tweaks and put out the next iteration as a working draft which is more likely to attract feedback
LS idea is to get a working draft ready for October in time for TPAC for the face to face sessions
Tim Bolland What does the W3C processes say about this approach>
<Lisa_Seeman> make snapshot - auges t 6th
<Lisa_Seeman> when are people ok, Resolution: next week
<Lisa_Seeman> chairs to review aim for augest 18
<Lisa_Seeman> next editors draft: 24 September 2nd editors draft.
<Lisa_Seeman> when are people ok with it pass Resolution: next week
<Lisa_Seeman> send to parent groups
<Lisa_Seeman> get approval a week later end of 6th oct
<Lisa_Seeman> transition request
LS because we are not a working group we are a taskforce we need both WCAG and PF to be happy
EA worried that we have divergent templates - if TPAC has input from security can we reference other WG's that we should perhaps address as part of the process of cross referenceing and discussion
Janina creating that kind of analysis is the Ultimate goal
LS we are nearly at the hour so does anyone have any objections to the time line
LS I will post to the list to make sure people are comfortable
NM the enemy of good is great
NM we need the feedback
LS we can state that this is an EARLY draft
LS AOB??
NM Elle and I met last week to discuss the Usability / Cog accessibility crossover
<Lisa_Seeman> ACTION: lisa post schedules to the list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/07/28-coga-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-30 - Post schedules to the list [on Lisa Seeman - due 2014-08-04].
<Lisa_Seeman> ACTION: Susann Keohane and aging subgroup to add content about rearch before snapshot [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/07/28-coga-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-31 - Keohane and aging subgroup to add content about rearch before snapshot [on Susann Keohane - due 2014-08-04].
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: NeilMilliken Inferring ScribeNick: neilmilliken WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: EA IPcaller KateDeibel Lisa_Seeman MaryJo Mary_Jo_Mueller MichaelC NeilMilliken P0 P1 P2 P7 Rich_Schwerdtfeger Susann_Keohane Tim Tim_Boland Tony_Doran https inserted janina richardschwerdtfeger slee trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Regrets: Katie_Haritos_Shea Debra_Ruh Deborah_Dahl John_Rochford WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting Got date from IRC log name: 28 Jul 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/07/28-coga-minutes.html People with action items: aging keohane lisa post schedules subgroup susann WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]