Silver Task Force Teleconference -- 07 Mar 2017

Shawn: Things went well, the presentation on Thursday. Good attendence, close to packed.
... good questions. No one was asking why we were doing it.
... Most of the questions were about: What about this aspect? This seems like a lot of work.
... the followup Q&A and also well attended.
... people who wanted to help. Some who wanted to join the task force.
... we announced the Community Group there.
... I need to go through my contacts, because I made a lot of contacts, especially international.

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Interesting question at presentation from IBM, looking at plan

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Wanting more detail about process and expressing doubt about how well we have process planned out

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Followed up with person, asked for help from IBM with process

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Looking for more perspectives on project management

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Have had several people reach out with interest in getting involved

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Also spoke at role=drinks event

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Did presentation about Silver work, had 100–120 people

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Also someone from BBC who looked at process, thought there were ways to do detailed work of research phase

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Lots of feedback on process

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: People looking to provide input on functional approach to accessibility guidelines

Sarah: I had a conversation with Larry Goldberg about the CVAA choice to use functional criteria, so that instead of saying (for example) it needs to be this high off the floor, it says that they user must be able to do X.

Jeanne: A woman who suggested using Functional Success Criteria, said she thought it was the best approach to handling multiple platforms.

Jan: I had a good meeting with EOWG on MOnday and Tuesday. I had lunch with them on Tuesday and talked about Silver.
... What they said was going well with AGWG was that they had clear schedules in place. The homepage has the schedules and timelines
... clear requirements what is expected in a success criteria
... Things that needed improvement:
... harder to tell what is being updated
... some resources were not being updated regulated and didn't know who was responsible. No control to make sure the quality is good.

<SarahHorton> Resource that includes discussion of functional requirements in CVAA: http://rosenfeldmedia.com/a-web-for-everyone/cvaa-with-larry-goldberg/

Jan: developers aren't a primary audience of 2.0. It was focused on policy makers. The Techniques were the key to making sure that people could use the SC effectively.
... they are concerned that 2.1 is separate from 2.0
... want to meet quarterly with Silver Task Force to look at outreach and training.
... references and tutorials are ways that EO can help with Silver
... disenfranchised people in 2.1 are: cognitive, developers, @@@
... we need to pay more attention to needs that conflict with the needs of others.
... Good Best Practices would help. Others said that if it isn't in the standard, it won't be done.
... someone from Nissan spoke that they make their own success criteria.
... someone from Visa spoke about using a functional approach. They have the code samples.
... the Visa person is speaking at AccessU in May. They would like more streamlined Techniques so that the benefits and explanation is somewhere else, so developers don't have so much to wade through.
... work with Silver to determine how to better serve needs of developers.
... there are concerns that Silver is trying to do the work of EO. I suggested that he get involved in Silver, so he could understand more about the work.
... I met with Klaus, one of the researchers. I'll talk about that more later in the meeting.
... once the conference started, I spent a lot of time focusing on Pearson presentations.
... I also heard that the research timelines were too aggressive for academics

Jemma: I heard the same things.

Jan: It takes a long time to get permission to get certain types of research. That was mentioned to me more than once.

CSUN check-in

Above discussion is the first topic.

Silver Community Group

Jeanne: https://www.w3.org/community/silver/

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Purpose is to have place and tools for people who want to help but cannot make commitment to taskforce

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Open to anyone, do not need to be W3C member, do not have to pay fees, do not have to be associated with a company

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Handles IP part of activity

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: All W3C work must be royalty free

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Also gives us wiki and working space

<SarahHorton> Jeanne: Blog space, tools that come with community group

Benefits of W3C Community Group: https://www.w3.org/community/about/

Tools: https://www.w3.org/community/about/tool/

Sarah: I think we need to communicate with stakeholders who want to be involved. Can we direct people from the Stakeholder group there as a place to communicate and engage.
... in addition to a place for Researchers, that it is also a place for Stakeholders.
... if we feel we need a division is needed, then we can have it be a place that Stakeholders can observe the research.
... Michael suggested that Shawn and Jeanne do a communication to the Stakeholders to say "thanks, we are working hard. Here is a place to join. And here is a public wiki page where we will be providing updates."
... there is a communcation that needs to happen with the Stakeholders.

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne with shawn and sarah draft a communication with the Stakeholders. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/07-silver-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-68 - With shawn and sarah draft a communication with the stakeholders. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2017-03-14].

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: it should include a link to the community group.

Jeanne: We could send the monthly update.

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to add to the Friday agenda ways that we can use the Community Group more effectively. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/07-silver-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-69 - Add to the friday agenda ways that we can use the community group more effectively. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2017-03-14].

Research Partner check-in

Sarah: Quick update: I had many conversations last week with research partners.
... I created a Communications area in Google drive, and put the text I was using with the researchers
... I assigned homework to review the research questions and come up with proposed activities.
... based on that we will start making plans.

Jemma: Where is the document?

Sarah: In Google Drive, it's a folder named Communications.
... Researcher Next Steps Emails

<SarahHorton> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZeVz5Uzhy67du47JBqrHD53pmhq0GWMMVNOJolXJkFQ/edit

Jemma: I have one conversation that went very well. She titled it with her name in the folder. She is going to have the project pamphlet at the end of March

Shawn: I reached out to researchers last week. None of them were at CSUN.

Jan: I met one of my researchers for dinner. WE talked about the process that we were following. I was asking them to break down the document. I will also ask them to do more.
... I met with Bob McMillen. He said the timeline was too aggressive, but he will have time available after April 1.
... he wants us to break it down into small chunks so that he can address it more quickly.

Jeanne: I met with one of my researchers at CSUN, but other than that, I have not communicated with my researchers.
... that's a problem. I want to ask one of the new people to work with my researchers.

Jan: And that is a problem for the timeline. How was the research timeline set?

Shawn: It was balance that we struck between an estimate between what we needed and not taking too long. We expected that the timeline would need to be adjusted.
... I think we can adjust the timeline, but we can't go as far as two years.

Jan: Prof MacMillen wants the summer to make his preparations.

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to add to the agenda: Researcher Check-in, 2) Timeline adjustments 3) Onboarding new members. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/07-silver-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-70 - Add to the agenda: researcher check-in, 2) timeline adjustments 3) onboarding new members. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2017-03-14].

Jan: I can help with Jeanne and Shawn's researchers.

- DRAFT -

Silver Task Force Teleconference

07 Mar 2017

Attendees

Contents

CSUN check-in

Silver Community Group

Research Partner check-in

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output