14:26:11 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:26:11 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-irc
14:26:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:26:15 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
14:26:15 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
14:26:16 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
14:26:16 <trackbot> Date: 05 July 2016
14:26:25 <Joshue108> zakim, agenda?
14:26:25 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
14:26:26 <Zakim> 5. WCAG codename Survey (from last week : [from Joshue108]
14:26:33 <Joshue108> zakim, clear agenda
14:26:33 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:26:39 <Joshue108> Chair: Joshue
14:27:21 <Joshue108> Scribe List: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
14:28:35 <Joshue108> agenda+   New Task Force Exchange
14:28:49 <Joshue108> agenda+  SC Numbering proposals team/work.
14:28:56 <Joshue108> agenda+ Success Criteria acceptance criteria.
14:29:06 <Joshue108> agenda+ Submitting new SCs (non-group)
14:52:05 <allanj> allanj has joined #wai-wcag
14:53:47 <laura> laura has joined #wai-wcag
14:55:15 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #wai-wcag
14:59:00 <Greg> Greg has joined #wai-wcag
14:59:22 <Makoto> Makoto has joined #wai-wcag
15:03:01 <laura> present+ Laura
15:03:16 <laura> Scribe: Laura
15:03:23 <Makoto> present+ Makoto
15:03:53 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:14 <Sarah_Swierenga_> Sarah_Swierenga_ has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:34 <JF> JF has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:48 <laura> Zakim, next item
15:05:48 <Zakim> agendum 1. "New Task Force Exchange" taken up [from Joshue108]
15:06:20 <JF> Present+ JF
15:06:31 <Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Task_Force_Exchange
15:06:35 <laura> JOC: New hub for TF work
15:06:41 <Joshue108> present+ Joshue108
15:06:48 <Rachael> Present+ Rachael
15:06:53 <alastairc> present+ alastairc
15:06:57 <Greg> Present+ Greg_Lowney
15:07:10 <davidmacdonald> davidmacdonald has joined #wai-wcag
15:07:10 <Sarah_Swierenga_> present+ Sarah_Swierenga
15:07:22 <davidmacdonald> present+ Davidmacdonald
15:08:06 <laura> AC: Where is the SC map?
15:08:12 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #wai-wcag
15:08:41 <jeanne> present+ jeanne
15:08:45 <laura> JOC: we don’t have a map. They are scattered now. They will end up on this page.
15:08:54 <kirkwood> + kirkwood
15:09:00 <JF> LV: http://w3c.github.io/low-vision-a11y-tf/requirements.html
15:09:31 <JF> Mobile: https://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-Extension/
15:10:07 <laura> LVTF: Gap
15:10:11 <JF> COGA: https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/
15:10:14 <laura> https://w3c.github.io/low-vision-a11y-tf/WC-UA-alignment.html
15:10:16 <Joshue108> q?
15:10:54 <laura> JF: listed 3 URLS
15:11:24 <laura> Faciliators will update that page
15:11:28 <Joshue108> q?
15:12:06 <laura> AC: Should we be reviewing them?
15:12:13 <laura> JOC: Yes.
15:12:47 <laura> JOC: SC don’t need Techniques.
15:13:02 <Joshue108> q?
15:13:19 <laura> Zakim, next item
15:13:19 <Zakim> agendum 2. "SC Numbering proposals team/work." taken up [from Joshue108]
15:13:47 <Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_SC_Numbering
15:14:11 <laura> JOC: Suggestion to have a team look at this.
15:14:25 <laura> JF: Go to that URL.
15:14:34 <Joshue108> q
15:14:37 <Joshue108> q?
15:14:40 <allanj-lurking> LVTF: SC in development, changes weekly. https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-SC/issues
15:16:37 <laura> JF: Concern regarding Policy numbering.
15:16:55 <Joshue108> q?
15:16:57 <laura> …Kim has provided guidiance.
15:17:22 <MichaelC> present+ MichaelC
15:17:27 <laura> Legislative approach: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_SC_Numbering#Legislative_approach_.28or_.E2.80.9Cwhen_to_try_and_assign_numbers.E2.80.9D.29
15:17:48 <laura> JF: Should read Legislative approach.
15:17:51 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag
15:18:01 <Joshue108> q?
15:18:15 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
15:18:23 <MichaelC> -1 to making a binding discussion yet, before we´ve even seen the set of SC we´re likely to need to incorporate
15:18:27 <alastairc> q+
15:18:59 <laura> JOC: good feedback.
15:19:26 <laura> AC: We were leaning toward #2
15:19:46 <davidmacdonald> +1 to Alastair
15:20:31 <Joshue108> q?
15:20:38 <alastairc> q-
15:20:38 <laura> JOC: Model 2 less likely to break stuff.
15:21:32 <Ryladog> I am also leaning towards model 2
15:21:41 <laura> JF: May want to rework some of the exixting SC. Kim’s would accommodate that.
15:22:47 <laura> …minimise impact to legislation.
15:22:53 <Ryladog> q+
15:23:07 <adam_solomon> adam_solomon has joined #wai-wcag
15:23:11 <laura> JOC: seems to be most robust.
15:23:38 <laura> …would like to walk though models.
15:23:39 <Joshue108> q?
15:24:18 <laura> MC: may be premature for formal decisions.
15:24:40 <Joshue108> ack ryla
15:24:48 <laura> JOC: no decisions now. We are just discussing.
15:25:14 <Joshue108> q?
15:25:18 <Joshue108> q+
15:25:40 <Joshue108> ack me
15:26:08 <adam_solomon> present+ adam_solomon
15:26:37 <laura> JOC: Let’s look at model.
15:26:59 <laura> …(Model 1) 4 tier numbering
15:27:55 <laura> …Pros: Can keep and view the basic structure of the numbering in WCAG.
15:28:16 <laura> …Cons: Four layers seems a bit inelegant, and may confuse newcomers
15:28:31 <laura> …There may be a feeling that the forth level is kind of a second class citizen
15:28:45 <laura> …In statutes and regulations, adding another level of numbers generally indicates that the new section
15:28:51 <Joshue108> q?
15:28:51 <Greg> q+
15:29:04 <laura> JF: Seems like a partial solution.
15:29:18 <Joshue108> ack greg
15:29:23 <laura> …maybe a subsection.
15:29:48 <laura> Greg: May have impact on tools.
15:30:55 <Joshue108> q?
15:31:29 <laura> JF: not a major show stopper.
15:32:07 <laura> JOC: (Model 2) Add a new section to the end of each existing Guideline that will have new SCs
15:32:24 <laura> …Put all the new SCs at the end of their respective Guidelines
15:32:29 <Greg> Tools that track, reference, or mirror the standards may have the assumption that each level has a consistent meaning, and that all items of the same meaning will have the same syntactic level. That is, all GL would have two fields, while all SC have three. Adding a fourth level would require changes to those tools.
15:32:58 <laura> …Wonder about mapping.
15:33:16 <laura> MC: There is an implicit mapping
15:33:19 <JF> Q+
15:33:55 <Joshue108> ack JF
15:34:29 <Joshue108> q+
15:34:46 <laura> JF: Filtering could address levels.
15:35:08 <jeanne> q+ to say that anecdotally people outside the WG do not realize that they are organized by level.
15:35:14 <Joshue108> ack me
15:35:18 <laura> MC: No expicit mapping.
15:35:59 <laura> JOC: nubering seems arbitrary.
15:36:19 <laura> JF: that’s the point.
15:36:43 <laura> …filtering will solve the issue.
15:37:17 <Ryladog> q+
15:37:44 <Rachael> q+
15:38:03 <laura> …like’s that everything new is added to the bottom
15:38:41 <laura> JOC: Pros There are advantages to sticking with 3 levels of numbers.
15:38:53 <laura> new Success Criteria numerically as part of an expanding list allows for easier identification of new SC
15:39:14 <laura> …Cons - have some new AA SCs which come AFTER the AAA SCs from 2.0
15:39:23 <laura> … may be a tendency to disregard the new SCs that appear AFTER the AAA's
15:39:38 <laura> …We do not want that.
15:40:09 <laura> … new SCs should not be  disregarded
15:40:18 <Ryladog> q?
15:40:19 <Joshue108> q?
15:40:37 <laura> DM: This is my preferred one.
15:40:52 <Joshue108> ack jeanne
15:40:52 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say that anecdotally people outside the WG do not realize that they are organized by level.
15:41:44 <JF> +1 to Jeanne
15:41:50 <laura> JS: Asked around about this. No one new  about levels.
15:42:08 <davidmacdonald> +1 to Jeanne
15:42:22 <laura> …Changing numbering would be a problem.
15:42:59 <Greg> q+
15:43:36 <JF> Q+
15:43:51 <laura> …thought that they were in the order developed. Did not want renumbering.
15:43:56 <Ryladog> lost connectivity, comming back
15:43:56 <Ryladog> back
15:43:57 <Joshue108> ack rayla
15:44:00 <Joshue108> ack ry
15:44:11 <laura> Katie: Think we should document.
15:44:50 <Joshue108> ack greg
15:44:59 <Greg> If items are not in numeric order, readers would have to use a software Search function to find a specific SC, and those who are reading on paper could have great difficulty. It may also trick readers into thinking an SC doesn’t exist, when they can’t find it where they expect it to be.
15:45:09 <laura> Greg: Don’t greatly dislike #3
15:45:29 <alastairc> +1 to Jeanne's comment: people don't tend to remember/recognise multiple layers of categorisation. The principle categorisation is by POUR, secondary categorisation is less (not?) important.
15:45:30 <laura> …may need to use a search function.
15:46:12 <laura> …a lot of people don’t think ordering important.
15:46:29 <Ryladog> Think we should document in model 2 under Cons that "We understand that most accessibility assessment reports today are delivered as a document of some kind - but we feel filtering will be able to address this when moved to automated systems"
15:46:39 <Joshue108> q?
15:46:46 <Joshue108> ack rach
15:47:32 <laura>  Rachael: benefit in knowing what is a new SC
15:47:43 <laura> …advantave to #1
15:47:45 <MichaelC> +1 to identifying new SC as 2.1, regardless of the numbering scheme chosen
15:47:50 <MichaelC> ARIA 1.1 does that
15:48:37 <laura> MC: would be complementary.
15:49:19 <Joshue108> q?
15:49:22 <laura> Katie: add an identifier.
15:49:22 <Joshue108> ack JF
15:49:32 <Joshue108> zakim, queue?
15:49:32 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
15:49:37 <Joshue108> zakim, agenda?
15:49:37 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
15:49:38 <Zakim> 2. SC Numbering proposals team/work. [from Joshue108]
15:49:38 <Zakim> 3. Success Criteria acceptance criteria. [from Joshue108]
15:49:38 <Zakim> 4. Submitting new SCs (non-group) [from Joshue108]
15:50:35 <laura> JF: We look at the levels. Webdevs don’t do the severity levels.
15:51:08 <Makoto> I prefer Model2 as it doesn't change the existing numbering.  In Japan, we will keep using WCAG 2.0 until WCAG 2.1 will be approved as ISO standard. But global companies maybe use both. So I don't want renumbering.
15:51:33 <laura> JOC: Model 4) Introduce a level marker to SC numbers
15:51:54 <laura> …would change things dramatically.
15:52:13 <laura> …Causes a renumbering of all the SC from WCAG 2.0
15:52:27 <laura> JOC: Model 5) Renumber all the SC
15:52:53 <laura> …Not practical.
15:53:41 <Joshue108> q?
15:53:59 <laura> MC: Wouldn’t discard this model.
15:54:17 <laura> …could do a mapping.
15:54:46 <laura> …has a precendent and has value.
15:54:53 <JF> Q+
15:55:29 <laura> …SC have both handles and ID’s
15:55:50 <laura> …numbers don’t mean much.
15:56:26 <Greg> q+
15:56:27 <laura> JOC: Model 6) Remove SC numbers altogether
15:56:44 <jeanne> I could see removing numbers in Silver, but I would be opposed to removing numbers in 2.1
15:56:49 <laura> JF: I don’t like it. Not backwards comatable.
15:57:40 <Joshue108> q?
15:57:45 <JF> ack jf
15:57:57 <laura> MC: numbering is just a label.
15:58:23 <laura> MC: Think we should consider it.
15:58:30 <Joshue108> q?
15:58:35 <Joshue108> ack greg
15:59:13 <laura> Greg: Removing numbering potentially difficult for international and non-English communication that use localized handles
15:59:58 <laura> MC: IDs are English centic.
16:01:05 <laura> JF: Would be alot of work to change all support materials that include numbers.
16:01:35 <laura> …we have attached importance to numbers.
16:01:39 <Joshue108> Some take aways are 1* Model 2 is popular 2* If there was an identifier for new SCs this would be helpful 3* There may be value in renumbering all together, this is not off the table.
16:01:57 <Joshue108> q?
16:02:06 <laura> Zakim, next item
16:02:06 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Success Criteria acceptance criteria." taken up [from Joshue108]
16:02:48 <laura> Thanks to all who have contributed.
16:02:56 <Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria
16:03:49 <laura> JOC: Walk though.
16:04:03 <laura> …7 items.
16:04:08 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #wai-wcag
16:04:11 <laura> … Success criteria are testable.
16:04:20 <jamesn> rrsagent, make minutes
16:04:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-minutes.html jamesn
16:04:28 <laura> …Success criteria describe the specific condition required to meet the criteria
16:04:35 <laura> Success criteria must apply across technologies
16:04:42 <laura> …Ensure that the conformance requirements are written as simply as possible.
16:04:50 <laura> … Success criteria will utilize the WCAG 2.0 A/AA/AAA level structure
16:04:54 <MichaelC> q+
16:05:00 <laura> …Success criteria need to be as broad as possible
16:05:11 <laura> …Success criteria must be applicable to all content, unless specific exceptions are included
16:05:20 <JF> Q+
16:05:29 <MichaelC> q+ to say these are overall requirements for SC, but think we need more specific acceptance criteria about how SC should be structured, how wordy, use of bullets, notes and if they´re normative, etc.
16:05:36 <Joshue108> ack mich
16:05:37 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say these are overall requirements for SC, but think we need more specific acceptance criteria about how SC should be structured, how wordy, use of bullets,
16:05:37 <Zakim> ... notes and if they´re normative, etc.
16:05:43 <Ryladog> q+
16:05:58 <laura> …Are these coherent?
16:06:38 <laura> MC:  these are overall requirements for SC, but think we need more specific acceptance criteria about how SC should be structured, how wordy, use of bullets, notes and if they´re normative, etc.
16:06:47 <jeanne> q+ to ask how we want to handle definition changes.
16:08:19 <laura> MC: Not sure if notes are normative.
16:09:03 <laura> JOC: can you flesh these our in the Wiki.
16:09:09 <laura> MC: Yes.
16:09:10 <Joshue108> ack JF
16:09:25 <davidmacdonald> q+
16:10:16 <laura> JF: Maybe some SC may have to be tech dependant.
16:10:33 <Ryladog> Success criteria need to be as broad as possible, but specific enough not to become a 'catch-all' for any given requirement.
16:10:39 <Joshue108> ack rylado
16:10:44 <laura> Katie: suggestion for #6.
16:11:08 <JF> Q+ to say I'd also like to see a definition of what "Content" actually means
16:11:18 <laura> … will update Wiki.
16:11:20 <Joshue108> ack jeanne
16:11:20 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to ask how we want to handle definition changes.
16:12:18 <laura> JS: How to handle defiinition changes? ie points to pixels
16:13:40 <laura> JOC: Good question. We will have to think about it.
16:14:00 <Joshue108> ACTION: On Josh to discussion need for definition changes in WCAG at editors meet.
16:14:00 <trackbot> Error finding 'On'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/users>.
16:14:18 <laura> ACTION: On Josh to discussion need for definition changes in WCAG at editors meet.
16:14:18 <trackbot> Error finding 'On'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/users>.
16:14:18 <Joshue108> ACTION: Joshue to discuss need for definition changes in WCAG at editors meet.
16:14:18 <trackbot> Created ACTION-328 - Discuss need for definition changes in wcag at editors meet. [on Joshue O Connor - due 2016-07-12].
16:14:40 <Joshue108> q?
16:14:42 <davidmacdonald> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#guidelines
16:14:42 <Joshue108> ack dav
16:15:00 <Joshue108> ACTION: Josh and AWK to work out a way to deal with definition changes.
16:15:01 <trackbot> Created ACTION-329 - And awk to work out a way to deal with definition changes. [on Joshue O Connor - due 2016-07-12].
16:15:10 <laura> DM: Notes are normative.
16:15:56 <laura> JOC: Maybe they shouldn’t be.
16:16:03 <Joshue108> JOC: Should these notes be normative at all?
16:16:38 <laura> MC:  Notes are normative. But some confusion.
16:16:57 <laura> …need to look at it.
16:17:21 <davidmacdonald> q+
16:17:33 <Joshue108> ack jf
16:17:33 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to say I'd also like to see a definition of what "Content" actually means
16:17:35 <laura> MC: Would like to propose no notes.
16:17:35 <JF> ack jf
16:18:16 <laura> JF: What does “content” actually mean?
16:19:04 <davidmacdonald> content (Web content)
16:19:06 <davidmacdonald>     information and sensory experience to be communicated to the user by means of a user agent, including code or markup that defines the content's structure, presentation, and interactions
16:19:32 <laura> MC: we need to disscuss it.
16:19:51 <laura> JOC: Silver discussion.
16:20:26 <Joshue108> ack david
16:20:40 <laura> DM: we have a definition of content.
16:21:16 <Joshue108> q+
16:21:44 <laura> MC: SC’s may change.
16:22:06 <laura> JF: Will need to call it out.
16:22:23 <Joshue108> ack me
16:22:37 <laura> JOC: They could well change.
16:22:58 <laura> …as long as we don’t reduce requirements.
16:23:21 <laura> MC: many won’t change.
16:23:38 <laura> JOC: We should address needs.
16:23:55 <laura> …numbering is secondary.
16:23:58 <Joshue108> q?
16:24:06 <laura> Zakim, next item
16:24:06 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Submitting new SCs (non-group)" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:25:14 <laura> JOC: How do we make it easier for people?
16:25:27 <davidmacdonald> q+
16:25:32 <laura> JF: Suggest a form.
16:25:50 <laura> JOC: Let’s think about it.
16:26:03 <Joshue108> ack dav
16:28:16 <MichaelC> q+
16:28:34 <laura> DM: doesn’t seem to be a huge interest in using previous forms form outside folks.
16:28:37 <MichaelC> ack me
16:29:20 <Joshue108> zakim, close queue
16:29:20 <Zakim> ok, Joshue108, the speaker queue is closed
16:29:33 <laura> MC: process may be difficult. We should be open to SC from outside WCAG.
16:29:56 <laura> JOC: maybe Github.
16:31:06 <laura> rrsagent, make minutes
16:31:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-minutes.html laura
16:31:12 <Joshue108> thanks Laura for scribing!
16:31:25 <laura> Youre welcome, Josh
16:31:32 <laura> trackbot, end meeting
16:31:32 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:31:32 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been JF, steverep, alastairc, kirkwood, Laura, marcjohlic, Kathy, Joshue108, MichaelC, KimD, jeanne, Katie_Haritos-Shea, jon_avila, Makoto,
16:31:35 <Zakim> ... Rachael, Greg_Lowney, Sarah_Swierenga, Davidmacdonald, adam_solomon
16:31:40 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:31:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-minutes.html trackbot
16:31:41 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:31:41 <RRSAgent> I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-actions.rdf :
16:31:41 <RRSAgent> ACTION: On Josh to discussion need for definition changes in WCAG at editors meet. [1]
16:31:41 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-irc#T16-14-00
16:31:41 <RRSAgent> ACTION: On Josh to discussion need for definition changes in WCAG at editors meet. [2]
16:31:41 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-irc#T16-14-18
16:31:41 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Joshue to discuss need for definition changes in WCAG at editors meet. [3]
16:31:41 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-irc#T16-14-18-2
16:31:41 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Josh and AWK to work out a way to deal with definition changes. [4]
16:31:41 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-wai-wcag-irc#T16-15-00