See also: IRC log
group reviews how we communicate and how we will document publicly the activities of the group.
scribe: brainstorming and
creative work will be done in google docs
... agenda and minutes will be published to the WCAG WG
... this is the last call in Skype. Next week we will be
meeting on WebEx.
Jeanne: I haven't spoken with
Andrew yet
... what I expect is that we should send the proposals to the
WCAG WG before TPAC to allow discussion on the mailing
list
... Joshue previously said that Silver would be on the agenda
at TPAC, so we should plan on presenting and discussing
there.
[prior discussion above]
Shawn: Reviews email from AWK
Silver sub group should consider possible update models for sIlver (3.0, 3.1, etc)
Silver sub group should collect and consider possible models for combining WCAG/UAAG/ATAG under one banner
Silver sub group should develop plan to gather feedback on needs for Silver from users/authors/user agent vendors/industry
Shawn: Goal: Feedback channels
should be timely, continuous, checked afterwards, and be
diverse
... the content of Silver itself should include feedback from
the feedback channels
... Silver should look at the structure and process of other
applicable standards
... in my experience, the W3C process may be public, but it is
such a wall of information, it is prohibitively expensive to
learn what is really going on.
... for example, app creaters need to know the information, but
they typically have no idea what is going on.
... we need a predictable and sensible update model
... which is why I want to include standards that have been
around for a while and have predictable models. This is where I
want to include input from legal and policy
professionals.
... but has to be understandable by the people who use it.
Jeanne: This is an important point for me -- I realize that we have to serve the legal and policy audience, but they should not be primary audience that we serve.
Sarah: We should consult with
experts who have experience with developing other accessibility
standards, especially people with UX experience designing
standards.
... thinking about the nature of standards and what makes them
useful.
Shawn: We should make a list of
people that we want to interview and include
... include standards that do not necessarily include digital
or electronic media
... for example, the NYC standard for retrofitting older
buildings to meet accessibility standards
... look at standards that are easily communicatable across all
our audiences.
... We could have a continuous feedback group, and reach out to
people who could be in the group.
<scribe> ACTION: Sarah will ask another person to join the group [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action01]
<scribe> ACTION: Sarah will ask a UK UX person to be interviewed. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action02]
Shawn: I want to see us developing a pool of people that we want to get feedback and comments from.
Goal: Informed decision-making
drives the Silver process and content
... include feedback from other channgels
... look at other standards - comparative analysis technique
and do an analysis and use them for moving forward.
... we want to talk to people: focus groups, 1-1 interviews,
surveys to collect insights, observe people using the tools
(because there is a gap between what people say they want and
how they actually do it).
... Perspectives of people who use WCAG are considered
... user centered design, participatory design, design
thinking. We want to include all of them, but want to focus on
design thinking.
... Think about WCAG over the long term
... establishing a viable update channel is part of that
.
... User community and stakeholders are committed to
success
... keeping the community informed as to the process
Sarah: I thinking we should do a project charter -- not a WCAG charter, we may need to call it something else. It includes goals, stakeholders, audience, and measurements of success.
<scribe> ACTION: Sarah to draft a Project Charter [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action03]
<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne, with Shawn and Sarah to create a questions list and each add questions to the list. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action04]
Jeanne will draft some charter language to talk about next week.
<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne will draft some charter language to talk about next week. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html#action05]
review of some of the questions on a brainstorming list.
regrets for next week from Sarah for Tuesday.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144 of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Shawn: Feedback channels should be timely, continuous, checked afterwards, and be diverse/Shawn: Goal: Feedback channels should be timely, continuous, checked afterwards, and be diverse/ Succeeded: s/chair: working_meeting_no_chair// No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: jeanne Inferring Scribes: jeanne Present: Jeanne Sarah Shawn Got date from IRC log name: 21 Jul 2016 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-silver-minutes.html People with action items: another ask charter draft jeanne language person sarah shawn some will with[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]