IRC log of wai-wcag on 2016-07-12

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:51:22 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:51:22 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-irc
14:51:24 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
14:51:26 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
14:51:26 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
14:51:26 [Joshue108]
zakim, agenda?
14:51:27 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
14:51:27 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
14:51:27 [Zakim]
4. Submitting new SCs (non-group) [from Joshue108]
14:51:27 [trackbot]
Date: 12 July 2016
14:51:39 [Joshue108]
zakim, clear agenda
14:51:39 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
14:51:58 [Joshue108]
agenda + Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria.
14:51:58 [Joshue108]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/July_2016_SC/
14:51:58 [Joshue108]
14:52:07 [Joshue108]
agenda+ Silver sub group
14:52:19 [Joshue108]
agenda+ TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work.
14:53:53 [laura]
laura has joined #wai-wcag
14:54:48 [laura]
laura has left #wai-wcag
14:55:08 [laura]
laura has joined #wai-wcag
14:55:26 [laura]
laura has left #wai-wcag
14:56:48 [Joshue108]
Chair: Joshue
14:56:56 [Joshue108]
Scribelist: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
14:57:27 [laura]
laura has joined #wai-wcag
14:57:34 [AWK]
AWK has joined #wai-wcag
14:57:43 [AWK]
ZAkim, agenda?
14:57:43 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
14:57:44 [Zakim]
1. Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria. [from Joshue108]
14:57:44 [Zakim]
2. Silver sub group [from Joshue108]
14:57:44 [Zakim]
3. TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work. [from Joshue108]
14:58:12 [AWK]
+AWK
14:58:18 [AWK]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:58:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html AWK
14:58:54 [AWK]
RRSAgent, set logs public
14:59:04 [LisaSeeman]
LisaSeeman has joined #wai-wcag
14:59:33 [LisaSeeman]
can somone ping me the meeting password again
14:59:36 [LisaSeeman]
sorry
15:00:03 [AWK]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:00:03 [Zakim]
Present: JF, steverep, alastairc, kirkwood, Laura, marcjohlic, Kathy, Joshue108, MichaelC, KimD, jeanne, Katie_Haritos-Shea, jon_avila, Makoto, Rachael, Greg_Lowney,
15:00:07 [Zakim]
... Sarah_Swierenga, Davidmacdonald, adam_solomon, AWK
15:00:51 [AWK]
present- JF, steverep, alastairc, kirkwood, Laura, marcjohlic, Kathy, Joshue108, MichaelC, KimD, jeanne, Katie_Haritos-Shea, jon_avila, Makoto, Rachael, Greg_Lowney
15:01:04 [AWK]
present- Sarah_Swierenga, Davidmacdonald, adam_solomon
15:01:06 [Joshue108]
present+ Josh
15:01:14 [AWK]
Present+ Joshue108
15:01:32 [AWK]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:01:32 [Zakim]
Present: AWK, Josh, Joshue108
15:01:52 [KimD]
KimD has joined #wai-wcag
15:01:59 [alastairc]
alastairc has joined #wai-wcag
15:02:41 [AWK]
present- Joshue108
15:03:05 [KimD]
+KimD
15:04:02 [alastairc]
present+ alastairc
15:04:50 [Makoto]
Makoto has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:02 [Makoto]
present+ Makoto
15:05:07 [LisaSeeman]
present lisa
15:05:08 [Ryladog]
Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:08 [Lauriat]
Lauriat has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:19 [LisaSeeman]
present + lisa
15:05:22 [Lauriat]
Present+ Lauriat
15:05:22 [AWK]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:05:22 [Zakim]
Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat
15:05:26 [Ryladog]
Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
15:05:34 [LisaSeeman]
Present+ Lisa Seeman
15:05:40 [AWK]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:05:40 [Zakim]
Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa, Seeman
15:05:55 [AWK]
present- Lisa Seeman
15:06:01 [AWK]
present+ Lisa_Seeman
15:06:04 [AWK]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:06:04 [Zakim]
Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman
15:06:33 [AWK]
Scribe: Katie
15:06:46 [kirkwood]
kirkwood has joined #wai-wcag
15:06:48 [AWK]
Scribe: Ryladog
15:06:56 [kirkwood]
+kirkwood
15:07:00 [Ryladog]
Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea
15:07:10 [Ryladog]
zakim, next item
15:07:10 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria." taken up [from Joshue108]
15:07:17 [AWK]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/July_2016_SC/results
15:07:58 [MichaelC]
present+ MichaelC
15:08:01 [Ryladog]
JO: An exersize on the acceptance requirements for Success Criteria
15:08:13 [Kathy]
Kathy has joined #wai-wcag
15:08:32 [SarahHorton]
SarahHorton has joined #wai-wcag
15:08:44 [Ryladog]
JO: I asked the group to look at the acceptance requirements, not many have answered
15:08:55 [Ryladog]
MC; There are 5
15:09:42 [LisaSeeman]
Q+
15:10:06 [Joshue108]
ack lisa
15:10:30 [Kathy]
present+ Kathy
15:11:03 [Ryladog]
LS: I think when you look at this bare in mind that it may not be possible to put it in a simple statement. When they fill out this questionnaire not wordy.
15:11:11 [MichaelC]
q+
15:11:31 [Ryladog]
LS: Would you still leave it out? Practically that might not work
15:11:50 [Ryladog]
LS: Current SC are long.
15:11:54 [Ryladog]
1. Acceptance requirements for Success Criteria - Overview
15:12:00 [Mike_Elledge]
Mike_Elledge has joined #wai-wcag
15:12:02 [davidmacdonald]
davidmacdonald has joined #wai-wcag
15:12:33 [AWK]
ack kathy
15:12:46 [marcjohlic]
marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag
15:12:48 [Ryladog]
JO: It will need to fit the purpoase. Good point Lisa, please add to the survey your comments
15:12:54 [Joshue108]
ack mich
15:12:55 [AWK]
ack Michaelc
15:13:33 [davidmacdonald]
SC 1.1.1 in WCAG 2 is 241 words
15:13:35 [Ryladog]
MC: My comments are these are general starucres for the SC. I do not mean them to be rules, but more guidelines
15:13:43 [JF]
JF has joined #wai-wcag
15:13:45 [AWK]
+1 to what Michael said
15:13:50 [JF]
present+ JF
15:14:03 [Ryladog]
MC: I did not say we should forbid bullets
15:14:08 [davidmacdonald]
Present +Davidmacdonald
15:14:20 [davidmacdonald]
can someone drop in link again
15:14:20 [Joshue108]
q?
15:14:24 [LisaSeeman]
Q+
15:14:34 [Ryladog]
JO: This really an information gathering exersize
15:14:40 [Joshue108]
ack lisa
15:14:44 [jon_avila]
jon_avila has joined #wai-wcag
15:15:05 [Joshue108]
q+
15:15:17 [AWK]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/July_2016_SC/results
15:15:26 [Ryladog]
LS: Its meant to be acceptance criteria - if it doesn't fulfill this it will not be accepted. They should be guides
15:15:37 [laura_]
laura_ has joined #wai-wcag
15:15:55 [Joshue108]
-q
15:16:13 [Joshue108]
q+ to say these are acceptance requirements, not acceptance criteria.
15:16:37 [AWK]
q+ to say that a binary rule can still be based on subjective measures, e.g. "SC needs to be as simple as possible"
15:16:42 [JF]
Q+
15:16:43 [LisaSeeman]
q-
15:17:05 [Ryladog_]
Ryladog_ has joined #wai-wcag
15:17:10 [marcjohlic]
present+ marcjohlic
15:17:23 [MichaelC]
q+ I would say that the ¨requirements¨ are the black and white stuff; the acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG about what it´s looking for
15:17:29 [MichaelC]
q+ to say I would say that the ¨requirements¨ are the black and white stuff; the acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG about what it´s looking for
15:17:31 [Ryladog_]
LS: We have worked very hard to make them testable - so thay are long
15:17:52 [Joshue108]
ack me
15:17:52 [Zakim]
Joshue, you wanted to say these are acceptance requirements, not acceptance criteria.
15:17:59 [Ryladog_]
ScribeNick: Ryladog
15:18:05 [AWK]
ZAkim, who is on the phone?
15:18:05 [Zakim]
Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman, kirkwood, MichaelC, Kathy, JF, marcjohlic
15:18:21 [Mike_Elledge]
present+ Mike_Elledge
15:18:23 [Ryladog_]
JO: Just be clear these are acceptance requirements for our SC
15:18:24 [steverep]
steverep has joined #wai-wcag
15:18:33 [steverep]
present+steverep
15:18:50 [Ryladog_]
JO: Dont worry too much if something needs to be long
15:19:01 [Ryladog_]
JO: Dont get too caught up in that
15:19:19 [Ryladog_]
JO: we want to help TF to aim for how to write them
15:19:33 [AWK]
ack AWK
15:19:33 [Zakim]
AWK, you wanted to say that a binary rule can still be based on subjective measures, e.g. "SC needs to be as simple as possible"
15:19:34 [laura_]
present+ Laura
15:19:35 [Joshue108]
ack awk
15:20:13 [JF]
ack JF
15:20:17 [Ryladog_]
AWK: I agree with what Lisa is saying, but, they are at some level subjective. This is providing us some guidance
15:20:30 [Joshue108]
+1 to AWK
15:20:37 [JF]
+1 to AWK
15:20:49 [Ryladog_]
AWK: Is it testable? is easier than, is this simple?
15:21:29 [Joshue108]
I would be more concerned about SC being proven to be testable, rather than concern over how terse or verbose they are.
15:21:36 [Joshue108]
zakim, queue?
15:21:36 [Zakim]
I see MichaelC on the speaker queue
15:21:49 [Ryladog_]
AWK: It has to testable. We also want them wrtten as simply as possible. I would disagree with saying SC can never have bullets
15:22:15 [JF]
Q+ to express concerns about being too presecriptive (patterns)
15:22:22 [Joshue108]
ack mich
15:22:22 [Zakim]
MichaelC, you wanted to say I would say that the ¨requirements¨ are the black and white stuff; the acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG about what it´s looking for
15:22:23 [AWK]
ack m
15:22:24 [Ryladog_]
AWK: Its not always simple, even if it is written as simply as possible
15:23:39 [Ryladog_]
MC: The block/white is what we are calling Requirements. The acceptance criteria are guidance from the WG. WE should use the word Criteria to differentiate it
15:23:48 [Ryladog_]
MC: Have
15:24:11 [Ryladog_]
ing that bar help to trigger that question. Sometimes yes it needs to be that long...
15:24:21 [Joshue108]
ack jf
15:24:21 [Zakim]
JF, you wanted to express concerns about being too presecriptive (patterns)
15:25:16 [Ryladog_]
JF: Lisa said something about being extremely prescriptive. I am concerned about specific pattern needing to be met. I am all about functional requirments
15:25:22 [davidmacdonald]
11 of our current SCs have bullets or numbers
15:25:38 [davidmacdonald]
in WCAG 2
15:25:49 [Ryladog_]
Thanks David
15:26:00 [Ryladog_]
JO: Is this useful?
15:26:44 [davidmacdonald]
13 of our current SCs have notes in WCAG 2
15:26:49 [MoeKraft]
MoeKraft has joined #wai-wcag
15:27:16 [Ryladog_]
LS: Yes I like the idea it being clear that testable is must. Something we had originally - we had a summary of each one. It had themes. Have a simple language sentence in brackets with each one.
15:27:25 [Ryladog_]
LS: So that would be one way
15:27:39 [Joshue108]
q?
15:27:42 [Ryladog_]
JO: I like that, it is a good idea. A factoid
15:28:17 [Ryladog_]
4. How much should SCs be 'self contained' and verbose or can we move concepts to 'definitions' page for full context?
15:28:50 [Ryladog_]
JO: I want to talk about this....MC said he prefers self contained SC
15:29:09 [lisaSeeman]
lisaSeeman has joined #wai-wcag
15:29:14 [lisaSeeman]
q+
15:29:30 [Ryladog_]
JO: Principle for 2.0. Kim said it is a balancing act.
15:29:42 [AWK]
YEs, definitions must be normative
15:29:44 [JF]
+1 to mcooper
15:29:45 [Ryladog_]
MC: Yes they should be yes
15:30:22 [Ryladog_]
JO: It is a balancing act. We would like to keep the overall structure of 2.0
15:30:25 [davidmacdonald]
There are 81 definitions of terms in WCAG 2
15:30:35 [Ryladog_]
5. Should an SC use bullets? If so, how many?
15:30:48 [Joshue108]
q?
15:30:51 [Ryladog_]
AWK: There should be no more than 6 bullets
15:31:10 [Ryladog_]
AWK: If a SC can be short, great. But no ban on bullets
15:31:52 [Joshue108]
KHS: David said there are 11 with bullets.
15:32:15 [Ryladog_]
JF: When we are prescriptive we get in troible
15:32:23 [Ryladog_]
MC: Guodance is useful though
15:32:51 [Joshue108]
ack lisa
15:32:56 [Ryladog_]
JO: Wahtever is required is what we need to do
15:33:02 [AWK]
s/Guod/Guid
15:33:36 [Ryladog_]
LS: Use of definitions help you use SC
15:34:00 [Ryladog_]
LS: Dont add mechanism that could confuse, it is simple
15:34:11 [Joshue108]
q?
15:34:28 [Ryladog_]
LS: Defined term enable you to use a simpler language
15:34:36 [Ryladog_]
KHS: Good point
15:35:04 [jeanne]
present+ jeanne
15:35:11 [Ryladog_]
JO: AWK Notes are Normative - so should 2.1 but have as few notes as possible
15:35:20 [Ryladog_]
AWK: A note is like a bullet
15:35:42 [Ryladog_]
AWK: In the spirit of keeping in simple and short
15:35:56 [lisaSeeman]
Q+
15:36:23 [Ryladog_]
q+
15:36:37 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:36:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html jeanne
15:37:23 [Ryladog_]
JO: I think we are not going to get away from Notes
15:37:31 [Joshue108]
zakim, queue?
15:37:31 [Zakim]
I see lisaSeeman, Ryladog_ on the speaker queue
15:37:48 [Ryladog_]
MC: If there is a temptation - look at, is this note really needed
15:38:04 [AWK]
q+
15:38:08 [Joshue108]
ack lisa
15:38:34 [Ryladog_]
LS: It is similar comment to last time. They add a clarity for a special case
15:39:08 [Joshue108]
ack ryla
15:40:03 [Joshue108]
ack awk
15:40:44 [Ryladog_]
AWK: I agree with Lisa and others. If we had a definition we could get ride of some of the notes
15:41:06 [Ryladog_]
AWK: Definitions will help us reduce notes
15:41:17 [Joshue108]
zakim, queue?
15:41:17 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
15:41:21 [AWK]
s/get ride/get rid
15:41:21 [Ryladog_]
JO: a certain amount of brevity
15:41:22 [davidmacdonald]
I have Greggs comments on simplicity vs complextiy in a table here https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/What_are_Success_Criteria,_and_how_to_write_them
15:41:38 [Ryladog_]
7. What guidance can we provide about constructing a single SC, or dividing the content up into multiple SC?
15:42:25 [Joshue108]
q?
15:42:36 [MoeKraft]
q+
15:42:42 [AWK]
ack m
15:43:09 [Ryladog_]
7. What guidance can we provide about constructing a single SC, or dividing the content up into multiple SC?
15:43:14 [Joshue108]
zakim, agenda?
15:43:14 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
15:43:15 [Zakim]
1. Questions on acceptance requirements for Success Criteria. [from Joshue108]
15:43:15 [Zakim]
2. Silver sub group [from Joshue108]
15:43:15 [Zakim]
3. TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work. [from Joshue108]
15:43:17 [MoeKraft]
I think we skipped a question
15:43:24 [MoeKraft]
#7 about splitting SC
15:46:06 [Joshue108]
zakim, queue?
15:46:06 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
15:46:06 [lisaSeeman]
what do you meen by a topic?
15:47:00 [Ryladog]
Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag
15:47:04 [rakesh]
rakesh has joined #wai-wcag
15:47:08 [Ryladog]
back
15:47:15 [AWK]
q+
15:47:25 [Joshue108]
ack me
15:47:32 [Joshue108]
ack awk
15:48:00 [Ryladog]
AWK: I find this a vey difficlt balance
15:48:19 [Ryladog]
I.3.1 would be doing the opposite of what MC just said
15:48:39 [Ryladog]
AWK: 1.3.1 is just overlaoded to bits
15:48:51 [AWK]
Agree re: 1.1.1 being overloaded also
15:49:45 [lisaSeeman]
our wiki :https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Main_Page
15:49:59 [lisaSeeman]
issue papers: https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/issue-papers/index.html
15:50:06 [alastairc]
e.g. cntl-cmd-r on Mac
15:50:11 [lisaSeeman]
https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/
15:50:20 [lisaSeeman]
https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/index.html
15:51:03 [Ryladog]
Zakim, take up item 3
15:51:03 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "TF presentations 'show and tell' - COGA to walk the group through current work." taken up [from Joshue108]
15:52:08 [Ryladog]
Scribe: Alastair
15:52:56 [alastairc]
Lisa: Posted links to various COGA resources. E.g. issue papers includes a lot of the important things, e.g. voice systems, security etc.
15:53:55 [alastairc]
Lisa: There is the 1st draft of the roadmap. The gap analysis is good for overview of what we've found so far. The roadmap (2.4) is a table of user-needs, and how they are addressed. Good to see how each is addressed. Getting to publication will take a while, so please take a look at the current version.
15:53:59 [lisaSeeman]
https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/table.html
15:54:51 [alastairc]
Lisa: this area is how things are addressed across the board. Lets you see why each SC is needed. If there is a better way to address it, great, but gives you an insight into the thought process.
15:56:22 [alastairc]
Lisa: the guidance column is for techniques. Otherwise people might not understand how it fits together, why things are not addressed currently.
15:56:41 [Joshue108]
q?
15:56:42 [alastairc]
JO: Suggest changing "Guidance for content" to techniques / guidance.
15:57:04 [lisaSeeman]
https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/index.html
15:57:44 [lisaSeeman]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/WCAG/Coga_SC
15:57:48 [alastairc]
Lisa: There is a wiki for comments so that we can look them over and respond.
15:58:29 [Joshue108]
q?
15:58:31 [jamesn]
jamesn has joined #wai-wcag
15:59:00 [alastairc]
Lisa: Copied over the SC full text into the wiki, which will age. However, people need to look at the full text before commenting. Unfortunately people comment on the proposal without having read the bullets or the full text. Therefore copied that over.
15:59:35 [jnurthen]
jnurthen has joined #wai-wcag
15:59:51 [davidmacdonald]
q+
16:00:12 [alastairc]
Lisa: Have added to the TF exchange what we've been doing.
16:00:47 [alastairc]
JO: Please keep in touch with the other TFs, e.g. looking for links between SCs, avoiding duplication, aligning.
16:01:01 [jnurthen]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:01:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html jnurthen
16:01:42 [alastairc]
Lisa: worth knowing I'm on Skype whenever I'm at my desk, if anyone would like to discuss it please ping me, I find that the easiest way.
16:02:16 [Joshue108]
q?
16:02:20 [Joshue108]
ack david
16:02:26 [jnurthen]
scribe:Ryladog_
16:02:29 [jnurthen]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:02:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html jnurthen
16:02:47 [alastairc]
David: For the full text, is it possible to pull in the full text from / to the wiki?
16:03:14 [alastairc]
Lisa: Once you change the text the internal links change. Also, if there's only a link, think people won't use it.
16:03:46 [alastairc]
David: Might have to copy paste when changes are made?
16:04:00 [Joshue108]
q?
16:04:06 [alastairc]
zakim, take up item 2
16:04:06 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Silver sub group" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:05:32 [alastairc]
JO: Having a conversation about Silver, and one of the options is a sub-group to work on the requirements, and take it on. What we need to do with silver. Want to discuss: is it a good idea, are people interested.
16:05:45 [Joshue108]
q?
16:06:23 [jeanne]
+1 to start Silver work
16:06:27 [alastairc]
JO: Would like the planning to start firming up. Big, important project. We've been caught up in 2.1 but need to keep eyes on Silver. Any comments now?
16:06:56 [SarahHorton]
+1 to a Silver sub group
16:07:58 [jeanne]
q+ to say that we could do advance planning, user interviews, etc.
16:08:16 [alastairc]
AWK: Lot of work to do to figure out a (possible) major change to WCAG. Big impacts of combining ATAG/UAAG. Lot of work to do to figure out the options, pitfalls, benefits. That effort needs to keep close to the 2.1 work, as some new SC will get moved to Silver if we can't do them in 2.1.
16:09:39 [Joshue108]
ack jeanne
16:09:39 [Zakim]
jeanne, you wanted to say that we could do advance planning, user interviews, etc.
16:09:43 [alastairc]
JO: A co-ordination piece needed between 2.1 & Silver. Need to identify things that can't get done in 2.1. Important that people interested in Silver can tackle those things.
16:10:21 [alastairc]
Jeanne: At this stage we could do things we don't normally get to do, e.g. talk to audiences and work out how to change things from a usability point of view.
16:10:50 [alastairc]
JO: Does that mean gathering user requirements?
16:12:14 [alastairc]
Jeanne: The informal group looking at 2.1 thought about an exercise looking at the wider issues. However, at the time we were focused on what 2.1 became. Now we can do the advanced planning for Silver. Partly user-requirements, but more about the brain-storming before we have a deadline.
16:12:18 [Mike_Elledge]
+1 to talking to WCAG users for input
16:13:24 [alastairc]
JO: Also need to work out what 2.0 & 2.1 haven't been able to address, the broadest user-requirements that are effective for different audiences, but as light as possible (if possible!)
16:13:46 [alastairc]
JO: don't want a huge thing based on combined WCAG/UAAG/ATAG.
16:13:47 [Joshue108]
q?
16:13:58 [alastairc]
Jeanne: Want to talk to people who have ideas about this.
16:14:01 [MichaelC]
q+ to ask steps
16:14:08 [Joshue108]
ack michae
16:14:08 [Zakim]
MichaelC, you wanted to ask steps
16:14:23 [alastairc]
MichaelC: Are we agreeing to a sub-group? What's the structure.
16:14:51 [AWK]
We need to define the goals of the sub-group
16:15:00 [alastairc]
JO: Have a couple of people interested, so in principle we should go for it. Anyone else interested on the call?
16:15:20 [alastairc]
People interested: MichaelC, Sean.
16:15:35 [MichaelC]
s/Sean/Shawn/
16:16:11 [Joshue108]
q?
16:16:12 [alastairc]
JO: Chairs would also be involved. Want there to be practical outcomes, e.g. what form the spec would take. There's the list as well, anyone on the list can volunteer.
16:16:13 [SarahHorton]
q+
16:16:31 [laura_]
laura_ has joined #wai-wcag
16:16:39 [Joshue108]
ack sarah
16:16:44 [alastairc]
MichaelC: If Jeanne could write down some initial thoughts/ideas (e.g. on the wiki) then people can contribute from there.
16:16:53 [jeanne]
+1 for recording and starting to write up thoughts.
16:17:54 [alastairc]
Sarah: There are a few ways to move forward, but what we talked about before was a lean & mean sub-group that brings forward proposals for the larger group to respond to. initially, that would be how we go about conceptualising what silver might be. (proposals for proposals)
16:17:57 [AWK]
My #1 questions for Silver are: 1) What problems/opportunities are created by the possibility of combining user agent and content guidelines and 2) How can we re-think conformance (especially accessibility support)?
16:18:38 [alastairc]
MichaelC: Proposals for proposals sounds like a good start.
16:19:27 [alastairc]
AWK: Several issues in WCAG to deal with, e.g. conformance, combining UA & content guidelines.
16:19:58 [alastairc]
JO: Have a sense it's a good idea to continue with this. Several people can put some ideas down soon. Lets do it.
16:20:31 [alastairc]
JO: Any objections? None heard.
16:20:52 [Kathy]
I am interested in helping but have limited time right now
16:21:04 [SarahHorton]
And Shawn
16:22:38 [alastairc]
RESOLUTION: silver sub group is initiated
16:22:44 [SarahHorton]
Woohoo!
16:23:05 [KimD]
Excellent!
16:23:19 [Joshue108]
q?
16:23:20 [alastairc]
JO: Please start, let us know if there's anything we can help with.
16:23:58 [AWK]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:23:58 [Zakim]
Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman, kirkwood, MichaelC, Kathy, JF, marcjohlic, Mike_Elledge, steverep, Laura, jeanne
16:25:17 [MoeKraft]
present+ MoeKraft
16:25:25 [SarahHorton]
present+
16:25:37 [Lauriat]
P.S. I view "\o/" as applause in ASL.
16:25:40 [AWK]
present+ SarahHorton
16:25:40 [jnurthen]
present+ JamesNurthen
16:25:57 [rakesh]
I have joined on phone : Rakesh
16:26:10 [MoeKraft]
bye
16:26:12 [laura]
bye
16:26:14 [SarahHorton]
Bye!
16:26:18 [Mike_Elledge]
bye all!
16:26:21 [AWK]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:26:21 [Zakim]
Present: AWK, Josh, KimD, alastairc, Makoto, Lauriat, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Lisa_Seeman, kirkwood, MichaelC, Kathy, JF, marcjohlic, Mike_Elledge, steverep, Laura, jeanne, MoeKraft,
16:26:25 [Zakim]
... SarahHorton, JamesNurthen
16:26:25 [laura]
laura has left #wai-wcag
16:26:30 [alastairc]
trackbot, end meeting
16:26:30 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:26:30 [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,
16:26:31 [AWK]
present+ Rakesh
16:26:33 [Zakim]
... Rachael, Greg_Lowney, Sarah_Swierenga, Davidmacdonald, adam_solomon, AWK, Lauriat, Lisa, Seeman, Lisa_Seeman, Mike_Elledge, MoeKraft, SarahHorton, JamesNurthen
16:26:38 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:26:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-wai-wcag-minutes.html trackbot
16:26:39 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:26:39 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items