Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

17 Nov 2015

See also: IRC log


AWK, Laura, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Joshue108, David, Mike, EricE, Jan, marcjohlic
Moe_Kraft, Kathy, Kenny


<trackbot> Date: 17 November 2015

<AWK> Scribe: Mike_Elledge

<Ryladog> trying to get my audio to work in Webex

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: new password for conf call password change

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: This will help prevent hackers from piggy-backing on our calls.

<Ryladog> Right now we are not using a password right?

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: They got it out of agenda emails. Public archive googling.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: If you have problem with WebEx, log into to IRC which will have the info for signing on.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to mention conf call password change

Update on Quickref CfC

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Thanks to everyone who didn't object. Zero responses equals consent. WCAG group supports new quick ref being sent out.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Eric anything else to add?

<Mike_Elledge_> EE: Thanks for "nothing"? lol

<Mike_Elledge_> EE: QuickRef should go out tomorrow. Public review until 12/2. Everything out in mail.

<Mike_Elledge_> DM: When can we communicate this exteranally?

<Mike_Elledge_> EE: Announcment to WCAG tomorrow, then to outside world. Will email out to WCAG mailing list as well.

<Mike_Elledge_> L: Thanks for all the hard work.

Schedule for Techniques and Understanding documents

<Mike_Elledge_> ME: Tehre is an outside world. Josh don't despair.

<AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Timelines

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Timeline on the wiki. Time for an update on last publication date. Vortex of charter work and light update of changes of techniques and understandings, group decided we should publish. But charter interfered and no update was made.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Feb update coming up. We will do it for that. A few additional edits, not too many. Have a short time to get in new techniques, next week really, comments close the end of January, approve Feb 9, request comments, then released.

<Mike_Elledge_> Will be nice to have it done, but it's tight.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: May 17 is more realistic deadline for techniques and updates. Can aggregate new techniques for September.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Have to revise timelines wiki so date is on top.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Concensus on letting last update slide?

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Unanimous consent.

<Mike_Elledge_> DM: PDF footnote changes will get in next update if get in next couple of days?

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Yes, so long as group agrees.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Sometimes debate precludes timely approval.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Any techniques being considered?

Face To Face meeting and survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/WCAGF2F/)

<Mike_Elledge_> ME: Crickets.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Lots of feedback in survey sent to task forces. 32 people. Fair amt of interest in TPAK and CSUN for f:f. Ppl don't really care if we co-locate with another event.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: With the work to be done it might be worth having a f:f that is a one day at CSUN and another day at TPAK. When we get together we get things done.

<Ryladog> I like Sat after CSUN

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Lots of specifics to work out. Saturday after CSUN? Before CSUN? No proposal at htis point, but want to have f:f. Some interest in both events.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to ask about travel and mention virtual FtF

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Talking to Judy. We should try to get f:f sooner than later, lots of new work to do. If hard to sched before plenary, do an extended conf call. Still great to have f:F at CSUN.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Also wanted it to ask if harder to travel given recnet events.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: DK. Close enough that encouraged not to go to France. No suggestion will be continuing issue.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: We should keep that in mind in our planning.

<Mike_Elledge_> K: What does the company look at if hosting a two-day.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Should talk off-line. Cost of room unless one already in facility. Coffee, snacks, etc. Can talk offline.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: My costs for hosting were $4-500, all food.

<Mike_Elledge_> MD: Not thinking about TPAC?

<Wayne> wayne+

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Yes, thinkning about more than one.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: TPAK yes, but befoer then will be nice as well.

<Mike_Elledge_> DM: Whole gang will come with me. Everyone can change diapers. :^)

Extension Requirements – review and timeline

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Extension requirements.

<AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_Extensions_Framework

<Mike_Elledge_> ME: Not sure everyone will be able to go to both events. I hope to go to CSUN.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Send out request for ppl to look at Extension Framework. No recent comments. It is more difficult to comment.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Abstracts, introduction, some changes. Compatibility with WCAG 2.0. Changes in fifth section, changes in level should be made with awareness of impact on existing criteria.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Big change: extensions should not conflict with each otehr, instead of Must not. Our intent is to minimize conflicts. Groups think carefully about it. working group supports non-conflicting extensions.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: David has talked about a single extension at end of day, this allows for it, but also givesmore flexibility.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Conformance was clarified, second paragraph added. Also added an example. Wanted to send around for comments. Should we have a call for consensus?

<Joshue108> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/index.php?title=WCAG_Extensions_Framework&diff=prev&oldid=5886

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Example was one new item since last call.

<Mike_Elledge_> DM: Suggest you 1.4.3 be given short name.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Color contrast minimum.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Case study example?

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: Interesting info about what ppl think about color contrast, especially dyslexia. Had aperson with autism needing something else.

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: Person with autism need concrete descrption of what's going on. Non-conceptual. Then they put together concept in own way.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Don't follow.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: How does this relate to example?

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: These conflicts will occur.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Main WCAG extensions begin compatible with each other.

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: This is an issue of backwards compatibilty of extension with existing WcAG.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Areas of conflict will be itneresting. More series things to be re-arranged in WCAG. But for now just get it out there.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Does teh example help?

<Mike_Elledge_> L: Not color contrast, just contrast.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: What's the distinction?

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Color luminosity in original WCAG. We would just call this contrast.

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: Opposite side of color wheel does not have contrast. So person who can't see color won't notice difference.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Very little difference between headings on wiki, but actually a sub heading.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Put out for public review as Editors Draft. Not yet notes.

<Mike_Elledge_> AK: Have to leave meeting.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Start with editors draft, first public working draft makes it more formal. Want to feel confident that what we publish will not cause misunderstanding. Within that, aim for public working draft as soon as can.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Confusion is the nature of the beast, but feel confident about it.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Publish as Editor's Draft? Or is it unclear.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Not ready as public review.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: How do we put out as Editors Draft?

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Once it's out, it's out. If want wide distribution, then put out as Public Working Draft.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: I think we do. Need input.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Rest of the group? Ask on call, ask on list. Take from there.

<Mike_Elledge_> DM: Did I miss something? WCAG 2 Extensions?

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Requirements should be vetted by public as well.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Are tehre any major areas that would cause confusion. Are there things we could tweak.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Move from wiki to draft. Then look in context with group to see if any gothchas. Then can ask for input. Ppl may see it and comment if they follow us, but shouldn't solicit it yet.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Michael, can you get this going?

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: yes, and we can talk Thursday anyway.

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: Really nicely organized document. Send out as is.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Need to put it into context and review it.

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: I agree. Looking at it and digging into it seems to be clear and nicely done. Just being complimentary.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Kudos to working group. Hopefully all future docs will be as well. New paradigm.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Let us know if any objections.

<Mike_Elledge_> +1

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Do a final call next week. Then get it out there.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Beyond that nothing esle to talk about wrt extensions, or publications. Anyone have anything?

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Example is something we can think about. Try to think a couple others that illustrate power of extensions, different contexts, counter-point, for next week.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Soemthing that illustrates how extensions will work, scope, nuances, etc.

<Mike_Elledge_> Crickets.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Nothing else on agenda.

<Mike_Elledge_> DM: Annoucne officially that we are expecting!

<Mike_Elledge_> All: CHEERS!!!!!!

<jamesn> congratulations

<laura> Congratulations, David!

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: New errata item. Quorum to meet next week?

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Before we get to that, Eric did we get to your item.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: New errata item.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Any objection to editorial change to conformacne criteria?

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: No objections

<Mike_Elledge_> Resolution: Agree with change to conformance criteria.

<Mike_Elledge_> L: Won't be here

<Mike_Elledge_> ME: Won't be here

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Not only Americans, so perhaps we have enough for quorum.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Won't be there.

<Mike_Elledge_> K: Can be there.

<Mike_Elledge_> WD: Can be here.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Will be here Tuesday.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Josh will have to chair.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Can make it a short call. Next week want agreement to post as working draft. Maybe get it there in time for meeting.

<Mike_Elledge_> MC: Don't think had anything else.

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Great stuff! Let's wind up.

<Mike_Elledge_> K: Sent an email about a f:f before TPAC.

<laura> Bye

<Mike_Elledge_> JO: Bye all.

<Mike_Elledge_> Yep

<Mike_Elledge_> <yatil> rrsagent, draft minutes

<Mike_Elledge_> trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/11/17 17:05:42 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/ie H/ie_H/
Succeeded: s/Yep. Will be with you momentarily.//
Succeeded: s/TPAK/TPAC/
Found Scribe: Mike_Elledge

WARNING: 2 scribe lines found (out of 261 total lines.)
Are you sure you specified a correct ScribeNick?

Default Present: AWK, Laura, Katie, Haritos-Shea, Joshue108, David, Mike, EricE, Jan, marcjohlic

WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: EricE, Laura, Kenny, Joshue, marcjohlic, Kathy, David, Joshue108, jon_avila, Sarah_Swierenga, MichaelC, AWK)
Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
such as: <dbooth> Present+ 

WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: (no, one), AWK)
Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
such as: <dbooth> Present+ AWK

Present: AWK Laura Katie_Haritos-Shea Joshue108 David Mike EricE Jan marcjohlic
Regrets: Moe_Kraft Kathy Kenny
Found Date: 17 Nov 2015
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/11/17-wai-wcag-minutes.html
People with action items: 

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]