14:29:38 RRSAgent has joined #silver 14:29:38 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-irc 14:29:40 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:29:43 Zakim, this will be 14:29:43 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:29:43 Meeting: Silver Task Force Teleconference 14:29:44 Date: 12 December 2016 14:29:45 meeting: Silver FtF Day 1 14:29:53 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Meetings/FtF_Dec_2016 14:30:15 present: Shawn_Lauriat, Sarah_Horton, Jeanne_Spellman, Michael_Cooper 14:30:23 rrsagent, make log world 14:30:29 scribeOptions: -final 14:30:35 chair: Jeanne, Shawn 14:35:42 MichaelC has changed the topic to: Silver FtF https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=m88dbfe2a65ff0a578bf3897661423543 14:45:07 jeanne has joined #silver 14:46:32 Trackbot, start meeting 14:46:35 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:46:38 Zakim, this will be 14:46:38 Meeting: Silver Task Force Teleconference 14:46:38 Date: 12 December 2016 14:46:38 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:46:54 rrsagent, make logs public 14:47:03 meeting: Silver FtF Day 1 14:47:16 topic: agenda discussion 14:47:36 Edits to the agenda are on the wiki <- https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Meetings/FtF_Dec_2016#Agenda 14:48:50 Sarah: I would like to have 2 hours to do a RACI diagram: What Roles, Who is Accountable, Who do we need to Consult, who do we need to keep Informed. 14:51:22 scribe: jeanne 14:51:38 agenda+ Stakeholder Map 14:52:01 Sarah: Overview, identify roles, then map people to roles. 14:52:09 ... start with an Activity 14:52:41 ... make provisional personas for that role. Who the person is, why they need accessibility guidelines 14:52:56 ... later on we will prioritize and group them 14:53:30 ... created a stakeholder results form, with separate columns for the roles. 14:57:35 SL: [reads list of stakeholders from the Design document. ] 14:57:39 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Design_Plan_for_Silver#Stakeholder_Map 14:58:28 Michael: One of the things that the WCAG WG brings is the institutional memory. We need to be aware of the compromises made in the past. 14:59:47 Jeanne: [reads the list of roles from the submission form] 15:02:23 Topic: Roles of stakeholders 15:02:34 Person with Disability 15:06:12 ... Sites are accessible 15:06:26 ... find sites that are accessibile 15:06:31 ... the standard exist 15:06:44 DIsability organization 15:06:53 ... inform the standards 15:07:08 ... provides structure 15:07:25 ... institutionailzed advocacy 15:07:37 Thought leader in accessibility 15:08:37 ... Where is the industry going? 15:08:50 ... overlap with disability organization 15:09:09 ... having the standard allows thought leader to build on the world 15:09:28 s/build on the world/build on the standard 15:11:32 Influencer in disability 15:12:18 ... floor for disabilities to build 15:12:41 ... identify new technology with new disability needs 15:13:02 ... identify new disabilities not covered by standards 15:13:38 Accessibility Professional 15:14:11 ... the standard by which you know you are doing what is needed 15:14:34 ... may also be someone who works with people with disabilities 15:15:42 Accessibility Developer/Designer 15:15:55 ... point of reference for building software 15:16:03 rrsagent, make minutes 15:16:03 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html jeanne 15:16:34 Accessibility specialist 15:16:58 ... someone who works with people with disabilitities - day to day helpers or training helpers 15:17:12 ... point of reference for how things should work 15:17:29 ... report problems to vendors of software and assistive technology 15:17:50 ... guidelines and sjupporting materials help them identify how to help their clients 15:17:55 ... learning materials 15:18:39 Academic Researcher 15:19:35 ... guidelines can be a topic of study 15:19:44 ... use it as a measure in their research 15:20:00 ... gap analysis of the guidelines as a topic of research 15:20:11 ... could help prioritize research 15:21:50 s/Academic Researcher/Researchers 15:22:13 Instructors/Professors 15:22:42 ... teaching coding - same as accessibility professionals 15:22:59 ... working with people with disabilities, working from the other side 15:23:10 ... point of reference 15:23:48 ... curriculum basis 15:26:19 Accessibility Advisor 15:27:20 ... accessibility audit, gaps in process and development, knows accessibility needs and solutions. 15:27:59 ... knows the guidelines, communicating about how the guideline applies to a specific situations 15:28:19 ... gives perceived legitimacy and a framework for the communication 15:29:01 s/Accessibility Advisor/ Accessibility advisor or consultant-type role 15:29:19 QA Professional 15:29:37 ... manual testing, writing test plans 15:29:46 AWK has joined #silver 15:29:56 zakim, agenda? 15:29:56 I see 7 items remaining on the agenda: 15:29:57 ... automation side writes the tooling and validate the tooling 15:29:58 1. Finalize items for F2F [from SarahHorton] 15:29:58 2. CSUN advance preparations - descriptions, ideas for outreach for town hall meeting [from SarahHorton] 15:29:58 3. research projects and faculty outreach [from SarahHorton] 15:29:58 4. Timeline and resources needed for Q1 2017 and longer term [from SarahHorton] 15:29:59 5. holiday schedule [from SarahHorton] 15:29:59 6. review stakeholder submissions [from jeanne] 15:29:59 7. Stakeholder Map [from jeanne] 15:31:04 ... goal is that the product conforms to the guidelines and validating the product conforms 15:31:14 rrsagent, makes minutes 15:31:14 I'm logging. I don't understand 'makes minutes', jeanne. Try /msg RRSAgent help 15:31:26 rrsagent, make minutes 15:31:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html jeanne 15:32:18 Designers 15:32:30 ... to design products that conform to guidelines 15:32:45 ... understand constraints of guidelines 15:32:59 ... must have creativity within the constraints of the guidelines 15:33:26 ... guidelines provide a boundary 15:33:54 ... the boundary cannot be a so small that it becomes a constraints. 15:34:14 ... must have language in the guidelines that they can understand 15:35:00 Developers 15:35:18 ... using the guidelines to know how to write the software 15:35:38 ... a specification book (for Designers, more than developers) 15:36:11 ... must solve the problems even the designers overlooked. 15:36:20 ... developer executes the design 15:36:40 ... validating designs they get 15:36:49 ... validating that what they have made is correct 15:39:12 ... source of solutions of problems -- what is an accessible data picker? 15:39:34 q+ 15:40:12 ack a 15:43:47 AWK: I'm worried about haviing so many different stakeholer groups. I think that we are making it less defined. I worry that we will not be able to map person-to-role mapping. I see 3 different levels: person with disability, content developers, intermediaries 15:44:25 Product Manager - the person who owns the product and has to make it successful 15:44:52 ... more indirect: prioritization of whatever has to be done in their product 15:45:13 ... use the guidelines to understand the issues that their product has to meet 15:45:37 ... and understand the impact of their product lacks 15:46:07 ... helps set and communicate expectations 15:46:15 Product Manager 15:46:30 Project Manager 15:46:43 ... help designers understand scope 15:46:52 ... help developers prioritize 15:47:07 ... scoping, timeframes of what peeople want to do. 15:48:22 Content providers, producers and editors 15:48:27 ... similar to designers 15:48:43 ... need to know boundaries within they can work 15:48:59 ... depends on the type of content creators 15:49:42 ... informs a style guide 15:50:19 ... creative solutions to accessibility needs 15:50:28 ... awareness 15:51:45 Topic: I need guidelines for... 15:52:05 Researcher: For a thesis statement 15:52:28 Influencer: to be creditble 15:52:51 QA: Know what bugs to write 15:52:57 Developer: Avoid creating bugs 15:53:16 Instructor: have topics for my class 15:53:42 Disability organization: sue 15:53:54 Person with a disability: Use technology 15:54:09 Accessibility helper: understand how to do my job 15:54:29 Accessibility/designer developer: tell people what to do 15:55:06 Accessibility advisor consultant: tell people what to do. 15:55:47 Designer: know what to do 15:56:08 s/Disability organization: sue/Disability organization: Advocate toward a stable standard reference 15:56:26 Product manager: Priorize adding new features 15:56:46 Content: make accessible content 15:57:23 Accessibility Influencers: be credible 15:57:48 Disability Influencers: identify gaps 15:58:21 Project manager: allocate time /wrangling 15:59:04 rrsagent, make minutes 15:59:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html jeanne 16:15:02 Topic: Roles for Stakeholder Map, Part 2 16:15:13 Policymaker 16:15:53 ... define the policies that others need to work against 16:16:18 s/Policymaker/Policymaker (govt) 16:16:48 ... they need guidelines to set policy 16:17:08 ... they need international guidelines for harmonization with other countries 16:17:34 Policymaker (organization and corporations) 16:18:09 ... internal policies match exteral (when applicable) or to meet customer needs and goals 16:18:21 ... sometimes to demonstrate compliance 16:19:01 ... risk limiting factor -- meeting the guidelines mitigate risk, even if all customer needs aren't met. 16:23:46 Web browser and platform developer (extensions, ECHO platform, hardware input output, native apps) 16:24:35 ... need standards to insure their platforms enable software to meet the standards 16:25:35 ... platform itself needs to meet guidelines 16:25:59 Assistive Technology developer 16:26:28 ... follow their side of the guidelines so the AT works with conforming platforms and software 16:27:00 ... capitalize on the guidelines -- build increased functionality that is based on the guidelines 16:27:35 ... meet the needs of the audience with the specific disability they are addressing 16:27:43 Authoring Tool Developers 16:28:12 ... software needs to meet the guidelines so people with disabilities can use it 16:29:09 ... create application, content and interactivity that is accessible 16:29:43 ... the border between content creation and programming is blurring. It will be a challenge to Silver 16:30:18 ... help you author accessible content and reduce the way to make inaccessible content 16:32:14 Evaluation Tool Developers 16:32:32 ... something to evaluate, test cases 16:32:55 ... automatic and semi automatic tests, they need guidelines that are implementable to them. 16:33:44 Lawyers 16:34:03 ... communicate definitively 16:34:15 ... define the terms of case settlements 16:34:23 ... demonstrate non-compliance 16:34:55 Accessibility Advocates 16:35:19 ... educating people on need for accessibility 16:35:30 ... persuading and validating a position 16:37:05 Innovators (not necessarily accessibility related) 16:37:28 ... when innovations are deployed, the guidelines address the requirements of those technologies 16:38:07 Industry Association 16:38:42 ... and Professional Associations 16:38:54 ... cerrification for memebers - training and testing 16:39:34 s/cerrification /certification 16:40:23 Creating Training Materials 16:41:08 ... topics and explanation of concepts 16:42:31 CTO - IT Managers 16:42:41 ... prioritization 16:42:55 ... compliance with standards 16:43:23 ... establish accountability for compliance 16:44:23 Call Center 16:45:09 ... indirect. Need to know how it is implemented on the products they are responsible for. 16:45:30 ... similar to the accessibility specialist 16:45:43 rrsagent, make minutes 16:45:43 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html jeanne 16:47:05 Standards Organizations 16:48:06 ... coordination with guidelines 16:48:11 WCAG WG 16:48:21 ... so the web will be more accessible 16:49:15 ... to address all the needs of everyone else. The guidelines are the way the working uses to meet all those needs. 16:49:45 s/coordination with guidelines/coordination with their own standards 16:50:06 ... standards that are reasonable with their jurisdictions 16:50:18 ... harmonized with other juristictions 16:50:36 ... useful and up to date (despite unpredictable timelines) 16:50:45 rrsagent, make minutes 16:50:45 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html jeanne 17:52:56 MichaelC has joined #silver 17:53:41 jeanne has joined #silver 17:54:36 Lauriat has joined #silver 17:59:28 scribe: MichaelC 18:00:05 topic: Follow-up from morning exercise 18:00:16 sh: let's make sense of the roles 18:00:48 what do they need 18:00:53 what are they looking for 18:00:56 what do we want from them 18:01:02 what are their commonalities 18:01:07 we want to prioritize the 18:01:13 s/the/them/ 18:01:16 sl: group 18:02:08 sh: I did abstractions for us to work with 18:02:17 sl: group first 18:02:26 will help with the following conceptualization 18:02:37 based on the needs for the staeholders 18:10:28 sh: so we have all the buckets 18:11:08 for group 18:11:17 e.g. if we´re interested in design decision types 18:11:39 we might look at AT devs, PMs, designers 18:13:03 18:13:33 sl: some groups might be technical, others not 18:13:39 allows us to tailor surveys 18:14:38 sh: I use accessibility guidelines to make policy 18:14:49 * gov 18:14:52 * org policy 18:14:55 * disability orgs 18:15:29 sh: I use accessibility guidelines to use policy 18:16:03 * lawyers 18:16:11 * disability orgs 18:16:25 * a11y consultant 18:16:39 sh: is there difference between make and use policy? 18:16:47 sl: yes, though interactions similar 18:16:59 sh: make design decisions 18:17:25 js: (for content) 18:17:31 * eval tool 18:17:34 * authoring tool 18:17:59 js: make content 18:18:05 * project manager 18:18:09 * product manager 18:18:15 * developers 18:18:18 * designers 18:18:20 * QA 18:18:26 * content producers 18:18:33 * accessibility development / design 18:18:36 * IT managers 18:18:53 js: Standards orgs 18:18:59 * standards developers 18:19:02 * WCAG WG 18:19:54 18:21:25 sl: policy sometimes grouped into sub-categories sometimes not 18:21:26 sh: is grouping not helpful? 18:21:32 sl: it is but not 1:1 18:21:59 sh: does it help us? 18:22:10 e.g., researchers might go in multiple buckets 18:22:32 sl: goal to come up with stakeholder gap with gaps identified and plan to fill the gaps 18:23:31 sh: @@ 18:23:35 sl: @@ 18:23:54 sh: this grouping helps understand the roles 18:24:17 mc: grouping make fewer types of roles we need to treat separately 18:24:33 sh: I want the provisional personas 18:24:56 put attributes on the roles so we can see the overlaps better 18:25:16 sl: what do we accomplish by grouping? 18:25:27 surveys and stakeholder interviews we´ll handle later 18:28:02 sh: what roles critical to meet the goal of supporting PWD? 18:28:15 sl: depends on which specific exercise we´re doing 18:28:43 right now priority to identify gaps 18:29:07 js: let´s look at how many people we have in the categories 18:29:45 sl: easier for the ones we had in the survey 18:29:53 note accessibility professionals is a big bucket 18:31:16 greater flexibility is a big priority 18:32:03 let´s look at roles that seem sparsely populated 18:32:50 WGAG WG participants, standards orgs 18:32:59 though WG easier to reach out to 18:33:07 we have lots of people from a11y orgs 18:33:18 though there may gaps in types we´ll want to fill in 18:33:24 24 marked as policy makers 18:34:26 sh: ask people to self-categorize? 18:34:39 mc: we don´t want to make too much noise with these people 18:34:46 sl: we probably need more in the lawyers category 18:34:57 12 web browser developer 18:36:07 73 web content developers 18:36:20 9 AT developers 18:36:34 think we need emphasis on diversity within this category as well 18:37:04 e.g., no screen reader developer 18:37:35 mc: that´s been a difficult group for us to reach 18:37:56 action: jeanne to cast about for screen reader developer names 18:37:56 Created ACTION-9 - Cast about for screen reader developer names [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2016-12-19]. 18:38:27 sl: from some of the sparse categories, we could ask the people already in them for recommendations of others 18:38:37 action: jeanne to ask Lainey for other lawyer names 18:38:37 Created ACTION-10 - Ask lainey for other lawyer names [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2016-12-19]. 18:39:07 sl: many of these are ¨know accessbility¨ types 18:39:27 need to also explicitly try to reach ¨don´t know accessibility¨ types 18:39:42 js: AWK suggested alistapart outreach 18:40:13 action: andrew to do outreach to alistapart for non-a11y people 18:40:13 Created ACTION-11 - Do outreach to alistapart for non-a11y people [on Andrew Kirkpatrick - due 2016-12-19]. 18:42:33 mc: let´s be very deliberate on that type of public outreach 18:42:58 sl: content orgs, want to get lots of very different types of content 18:43:09 js: @@ 18:43:19 sl: games, lots of authoring tool overlap 18:43:25 google docs 18:43:34 audio interfaces 18:43:48 action: jeanne to contact ian hamilton for game developer frameworks 18:43:48 Created ACTION-12 - Contact ian hamilton for game developer frameworks [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2016-12-19]. 18:44:07 sl: need to brainstorm a list of content types we want to capture 18:44:27 likewise on platforms, want diverse set of platforms 18:44:45 don´t think we have mobile, VR right now 18:45:20 mc: want to get vehicles, web of things 18:45:53 js: Mike Elledge for former, Dave Raggett for latter 18:46:10 Alan Bird may have connections as well 18:46:36 mc: +1 to broad brainstorm here 18:47:17 sl: also diversity in general within the groups 18:47:24 international, types of org, etc. 18:47:54 sh: what is platform? 18:48:14 better word 18:48:28 js: hardware, os, extension 18:48:39 sl: everything between content and person except AT 18:48:46 js: and maybe even that 18:49:03 sl: sometimes 18:50:12 mc: is this a sufficient grouping axis? 18:50:16 sl: good for now 18:50:26 just want to make sure we haven´t missed a group 18:50:51 e.g., content creators we didn´t reach out for 18:50:57 js: at least outside a11y community 18:51:06 sl: which filtered our resuts 18:52:16 sh: 18:52:27 sl: we need to expand people with disabilities 18:53:19 SarahHorton has joined #silver 18:53:29 zakim, make minutes 18:53:29 I don't understand 'make minutes', SarahHorton 18:53:39 rrsagent, make minutes 18:53:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html MichaelC 18:53:47 Thank you :) 18:55:23 mc: for disability categorization 18:55:30 Here's a start on the roles and activites inventory: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XK_evYulIaLsYOlMjuDOC763xWL2TOM9SvPjRX_d9ag/edit?usp=sharing 18:55:35 blind and visually impaired 18:55:41 deaf and hearing impaired 18:55:47 mobility impaired 18:56:07 cognitive impaired 18:56:08 learning disabilities 18:56:27 and multiple disabilities which is often overlooked 18:56:31 sl: deaf-blind 18:57:56 JS: disabled veterans organizations 18:58:43 sh: let´s fill in roles and activities 19:00:02 19:00:21 19:31:25 19:31:39 sl: some roles we won´t need to go into as much depth as others 19:31:42 sh: today 19:32:34 sl: forseeable future 19:33:34 sh: what will future look like if future succeeds? 19:33:44 js: significant step towards unicorns and rainbows 19:34:03 easier for people to get information on making their products and services accessible 19:34:47 sl: everybody can do what they´re trying to do more easily 19:35:13 mc: people can get the info they need sooner to address a11y 19:35:25 js: broaden what standards apply to 19:36:38 mc: we´d all love a11y to come automatically without thought 19:36:48 but Silver won´t make that happen 19:37:26 we hope it takes us a step closer 19:37:41 but don´t bite off an over-large scope 19:38:03 sl: we want to make it easier for people to adapt to technology change 19:38:05 and keep a11y 19:38:47 right now we´re being aspirational 19:38:52 but later we will need to narrow things down 19:41:09 mc: WCAG 2 tried to be be-all and end-all 19:41:14 for stability of policy 19:41:29 led to heistance to change, even create supplementary guidance 19:41:43 for silver we want to be able to react to technology change more quickly 19:42:10 while remaining viewed as a useful and solid base for policy harmonization 19:42:14 sl: @@ 19:42:39 sl: think for stakeholder map we´ve gotten what we need out of today´s discussion 19:42:44 have a starting point for goals, discussions 19:43:25 for recruiting do we want to prioritize some of these roles for TF participation? 19:43:27 mc: yes 19:43:41 sh: how about that stack ranking thing? 19:44:26 sl: not out of context of specific activities 19:44:39 in specific tasks it will make sense to focus more on different groups 19:44:51 we might do prioritization and group of surveys 19:45:42 sh: are there roles that our work would fail if we don´t have people from that role? 19:46:08 sl: some roles as needing to be involved in the full process rather than as needed? 19:46:10 sh: yes 19:47:43 mc: pwd critical 19:47:50 policy people important for our history 19:47:56 js: tool developers 19:50:26 sl: can sort by responsibility, accountability, consult, inform 20:03:10 MichaelC has joined #silver 20:05:56 AWK has joined #silver 20:12:49 Lauriat has joined #silver 20:12:52 Scribe: Lauriat 20:13:08 Topic: Recruiting: how many people, what outreach 20:13:14 SarahHorton has joined #silver 20:13:20 jeanne has joined #silver 20:13:32 Jeanne: Particularly looking at how many people, what specialties, that sort of thing. 20:13:44 Michael: We should talk about the size of the TF. 20:14:28 …a lot of people feel the time expectation is high, which it is, so I want to reconfirm with you the size of the TF and other ways people can participate. 20:15:04 …How restrictive to want to be? 20:15:31 …Then talk about how do we want to go about with active recruiting. 20:15:57 Jeanne: We want a larger circle. Research partners, people who contribute heavily, but aren't necessarily part of the TF. 20:16:26 Sarah: Does it make sense to talk about the structure of the activity? It seems a bit up in the air. 20:17:09 Michael: Part of why I wanted to talk about that after tomorrow's WG Call, as the charter will influence things. 20:19:02 Michael: Maybe talk about how the group would account for things if the decision goes in either direction? 20:20:30 Jeanne: I prefer to stay with WCAG, but the advantage of the CG is other people (researchers, etc.) would have different rules around IP, but we could also have a TF and a CG for researchers. 20:21:13 …We have a plan for how to move forward and get started, but the danger is CGs tend to have a high rate of failure without support TF have. 20:22:26 Sarah: I don't really know a lot about the internal workings of the W3C. To pick up another point we had started before the break, I think we have some goals in the guidelines being more effective in producing accessible outcomes. 20:23:53 …We do have goals that mean that we will do this effectively. It helps a lot to have an autonomous group that's working on the project, because you're less likely to get sidetracked or bogged down by legacy stuff, and can focus on the attributes of the project you need to. 20:24:46 Michael: I agree with that, but I'll argue for having a degree of contact with the WG helps, with validity of the work itself. 20:26:33 … A strong ongoing connection. We need a group that can move fast and do the work, but also have the WG bringing that memory and experience to inform the work. 20:27:33 Sarah: Not advocating for one thing or another, since I don't know how these things work. 20:28:04 Jeanne: For the next nine months, we won't have a lot of standards work going on, and we'll really need people who know research. 20:28:28 … While we do the research, it'll attract more interest from people who know the standards work. 20:31:28 Michael: To a certain extent, we can't control who joins the TF, but we can set expectations and manage things in a way that accounts for that. I want someone in the core group who can provide a bit of a slowdown in terms of perspective and catching things early so that we don't end up with something unusable for one case for whatever reason. 20:32:14 Sarah: Someone has said he'd help with research, and managing it. 20:34:02 Michael: We probably would want to work with the Research TF in order to form requests correctly to the outside world for research, and then they could do that on their own. They'd have their own timelines and quality requirements that may not match our own, though. 20:34:23 … That can be coordinated by the Research TF or by the CG. 20:35:37 Sarah: If someone volunteered to help us with the diary studies, the self-reporting projects. Helping design the studies and evaluate the findings from it. That might end up being a document articulating the things we need to know. 20:36:30 Michael: W3C probably couldn't publish the document, for reasons of copyright, but they could publish it and then we could reference, but CG could publish it and then it'd have W3C copyright. 20:37:20 Sarah: To review, we sent out a request for research partners. 20:38:01 … People from that will expect a response from us after this week for how we can move forward with that. 20:38:54 Michael: The group will need to publish the list of research requests, and the group will need to publish a timeline of these things. 20:39:17 Jeanne: We've published the timeline, which does need refining. 20:40:32 Michael: We have a core set of people, hopefully under W3C process. Talking about needing to interface with certain external groups, including managing the results and these interfaces. 20:41:25 … When things happen outside of W3C process, we'll need to come up with ways to work with them that don't introduce complications, like IP-related publishing issues. 20:41:59 Sarah: If this person joined the TF, we'd need to get Andrew and Josh invite this person to join the WG? 20:42:05 Michael: Yes. 20:42:40 Sarah: If I, as an outside person, want to contribute for two years but not join the WG, how would that work? 20:43:06 Michael: They'd need to communicate things via the public open channels. 20:43:48 Sarah: Back to the question of recruiting, we want to focus on people committed to the WG over time and not someone looking to sign up for this one project. 20:44:43 … In the CG path, it's a more fluid engagement, and can come and go depending on the work at hand. Do we need to figure out recruiting for each scenario (TF vs. CG)? 20:44:56 Michael: Yes. 20:45:30 Jeanne: Once we product a requirements document, we need to figure out what to do with that. If in the WG, it wouldn't be a major battle to get the work chartered to move forward. 20:46:02 … If a CG, we'll need to find a place to put the work. That may mean rechartering the WG, or creating a new one, which would creating conflicts. 20:46:13 s/creating/create/ 20:47:06 Michael: A major risk: Silver is developed to be great by the people working on it, and the WG doesn't take it seriously. 20:47:17 … it could work as a CG, but it's a risk. 20:47:55 … A CG is technically independent. I would technically be prohibited from working with the CG. 20:48:13 Jeanne: Web Platform has a CG, as one exception to that. 20:49:36 Michael: Let's move forward with the assumption that the TF will happen. What do we want for that? 20:50:06 … Issues with the 8-hour per week time commitment, other ways to direct people to other channels? 20:50:47 Sarah: One way to look at this is to look at the work of the TF, talk about the roles needed on the TF to execute it. 20:51:08 … It may be the case that people come and go from the TF, depending on the work. 20:51:40 … Maybe someone just comes in for the duration of the activity and then backs up again once we move to another phase. 20:52:10 Jeanne: I was looking at it from the point of what does it take to work with the W3C. A group less than six isn't really viable. 20:52:34 … I think we should try for eight. Manageable, nimble, and small, but could have the flexibility of something small. 20:53:22 … What kind of persona do we need for the group? We have too many people from TPG on the group, and that will cause problems. We have someone from another place reaching out to join, which is great. 20:54:02 … We have some people (including some research-focused) interested, but very put off by the 8-hour requirement. 20:54:30 Michael: Thinking in terms of diversity of the TF. 20:55:01 … Including having at least two disability groups represented. 20:55:40 … We may want to think in terms of concentric circles, where the core puts in 8 hours, and then the next circle out puts in a bit less. 20:56:09 Sarah: In the past when you've had a successful project, can you describe the personas of the core people involved? 20:56:47 Michael: I think we need people who are organized, keep up on action items, plot their work effort into the future, technically skilled, able to express their opinion and accept other people's opinions. 20:57:32 Sarah: These are attributes of a person, which is good. Any other experience, role-based types, maybe people involved in policy for example? 20:58:08 Michael: Well, people with disabilities are a must. 20:58:51 Sarah: PhD? 20:59:01 Jeanne: Certainly not on the TF. 20:59:47 Sarah: Jeanne, you mentioned where people work. (Oh! International.) How important are you seeing that? 21:00:14 Michael: A little more fluid. If half the TF comes from one company, that'll raise questions. 21:00:47 Sarah: I like the idea of concentric circles, bringing certain people into the core for periods of time. 21:01:20 … Should we reach out to specific individuals? 21:02:25 Michael: Thinking of specifically two levels of collaboration, the core group and an outer group. 21:26:21 jeanne has joined #silver 21:27:43 Michael: We'll update the work statement to say that the core group will put in an expected 8 hours per week and then have other contributors, but we don't need to explicitly say that they aren't in a core circle. 21:28:14 Sarah: We got a lot of people in the stakeholder responses who want to take part in Silver. 21:28:41 Michael: Do we want to just set up a CG now in order to get more participation and interest? 21:29:39 Sarah: I like that idea, because we really need to get people involved and bring them along. It allows us to do some of these activities that seem confining within the context of the WG (like the research) that we could do in the CG. 21:30:15 … Having a group around that activity gives it a bit more formality and credibility. 21:30:32 Michael: We can set up a mailing list, a wiki, things like that. 21:32:42 Andrew: Thinking about the community group aspect, I feel like it's going to be hard to characterize our current state without people pointing out that that's what incubation is. 21:33:23 … We know that there's tight connection that we'll need to have between Silver and the WG. 21:34:04 Michael: Maybe plan A will be that we don't talk about the supplementary CG idea yet, and just go ahead with the proposal for the TF. 21:34:24 Jeanne: We won't be successful unless we continue with the WG. 21:34:30 Sarah: Yeah. 21:34:58 Michael: We can be thinking it might happen, but don't have to propose it just yet. 21:35:43 Action: Michael Update work statement to reflect updated work expectations. 21:35:43 Created ACTION-13 - Update work statement to reflect updated work expectations. [on Michael Cooper - due 2016-12-19]. 21:37:19 Sarah: If you want names of people, let me know. Not-your-usual suspects kind of people. 21:37:35 Michael: With this, knowledge of W3C is kind of important. 21:39:51 Topic: Liaisons to other organizations 21:40:37 Michael: I want to cover strategy for liaising with these organizations, and what organizations we want to liaise with. 21:41:24 Michael: We want to avoid misunderstandings about expectations and such. 21:49:20 Sarah: Liaising with other standards organizations to let them know about what we're doing? 21:49:27 Michael: At least that. 21:50:49 … We want to really not be prohibited from doing this work, but still remain sensitive to their needs. 21:51:36 rrsagent, make minutes 21:51:36 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html MichaelC 21:51:40 RRSAgent, make minutes 21:51:40 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html Lauriat 21:53:09 trackbot, make meeting 21:53:09 Sorry, Lauriat, I don't understand 'trackbot, make meeting'. Please refer to for help. 21:53:12 trackbot, end meeting 21:53:12 Zakim, list attendees 21:53:12 As of this point the attendees have been Shawn_Lauriat, Sarah_Horton, Jeanne_Spellman, Michael_Cooper 21:53:20 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 21:53:20 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-minutes.html trackbot 21:53:21 RRSAgent, bye 21:53:21 I see 5 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-actions.rdf : 21:53:21 ACTION: jeanne to cast about for screen reader developer names [1] 21:53:21 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-irc#T18-37-56 21:53:21 ACTION: jeanne to ask Lainey for other lawyer names [2] 21:53:21 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-irc#T18-38-37 21:53:21 ACTION: andrew to do outreach to alistapart for non-a11y people [3] 21:53:21 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-irc#T18-40-13 21:53:21 ACTION: jeanne to contact ian hamilton for game developer frameworks [4] 21:53:21 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-irc#T18-43-48 21:53:21 ACTION: Michael Update work statement to reflect updated work expectations. [5] 21:53:21 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/12/12-silver-irc#T21-35-43