W3C

Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference

08 Mar 2017

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
MaryJo, Moe, Wilco, Charu, Wilco, Shadi
Regrets

Chair
Wilco, MaryJo
Scribe
Charu

Contents


Review prior 2 meetings' minutes https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/conformance-testing/wiki/Meeting_Minutes

Wilco: no comments on previous meeting, can close

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/60/files?diff=split

Review pull request 60 - group edits from CSUN meeting https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/60/files?diff=split

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/61

Wilco: no comments on 60
... SHadi you want to speak to it?

<shadi> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/

Shadi: That is the first working public draft, we want ours to look like it
... Ideally change the paragraph to talk to the audience
... Encourage feedback through Github, we have a more technical audience

Moe: How in detail should be the introduction

Shadi: We don't need much details, WCAG is high level and has more details, we can have the inline comments

Moe: to summarize we need to talk about the status of the document

Shadi: yes about the status, and editor notes

Wilco: What does the document provide and what kind of feedback we want

Shadi: This documents provide first full draft of framework with links to some examples and rules in the auto-wcag
... what are the particular highlights of this draft

Wilco: Cover all the sections

<Wilco> ACT Framework 1.0 is a complete draft, addressing all of the topics the ACT Taskforce believes is important to cover when writing rules.

Shadi: ask if there are any aspect that are left out, you are describing the status and not the content

<MoeKraft> Should we say is the first complete draft?

<Wilco> https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/

Wilco: you suggesting a link to the auto-wcag

Shadi: this framework is based on the rules developed by auto-wcag community group, which can be a link

<Wilco> ACT Framework 1.0 is a complete draft, addressing all of the topics the ACT Taskforce believes are important to cover when writing rules. The ACT Framework is based on rules developed by the [Auto-WCAG Community Group](https://auto-wcag.github.io/auto-wcag/).

<shadi> +1

+1

<MoeKraft> +1

<maryjom> +1

<MoeKraft> And then we need: For this publication, the Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force particularly seeks feedback on the following questions:

<Wilco> https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-fr-reqs.html

Wilco: Moe can add the requirements document back in?

Moe: yes i can

Wilco: on the Questions

<Wilco> - Does the ACT Framework address all the topics reviewers feel are critical to rule design?

<Wilco> - The ACT Framework is proposing dealing with accessibility support as an optional component, using metadata. Do reviewers feel this approach is sufficient or overcomplicated in addressing their accessibility support needs?

Wilco: what do folks feel about the questions?

<shadi> suggestion: Does the ACT Framework address all the topics that are critical to rule design?

<maryjom> +1 to Shadi's suggestion

+1 to Shadi's suggestion

<shadi> suggestion: Does the _section on accessibility support_ adequately address the topic?

<MoeKraft> https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-framework.html#structure-acc-supp

Shadi: my suggestion is to be more specific in the topic and link to it

<Wilco> - Does the ACT Framework address all the topics that are critical to rule design? - Does the [section on accessibility support](#structure-acc-supp) adequately address the topic?

Wilco: thats fine

Charu: mention benchmarking, is it sufficient

Shadi: yes that is important

Wilco: yes lets add that

Shadi: ask it differently,

<shadi> suggestion: Are there improvements to better support developers of test rules to adopt this framework?

<shadi> suggestion: Are there improvements to better support developers of test rules to transpose their rules and adopt this framework?

Wilco: anything else? do we want to ask a general question if this would benefit their approach to testing?

Shadi: what if someone says no

Wilco: we will not make it yes or no

Shadi: i think we have enough questions

Wilco: yes lets go with this 4

Moe: how are we asking for feedback, email or comments on Github
... There was a discussion on using Github and challenges in using the tools

Shadi: we will go with WCAG, encourage to use Github and if someone wants in email then we will provide that

Wilco: We have lot to do, can folks stick around for another 30 minutes?

Moe, Charu and Shadi cannot

Shadi: here is a suggestion, are you able to generate an editor's draft with the edits you have, forget my pull request, and send out the survey

Mary Jo: do we have the questions for the Ag Wag survey?

Wilco: no, let you and me stick around

Shadi: my concern we do not have enough people on the call and not everyone has responded to the survey

<MoeKraft> got to drop. I'm fine with call for consensus

Mary Jo: Do we need the call for consensus through email

Wilco: yes lets do that

<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/93339/ACTTF6March2017/results

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/63/files

<Wilco> Determining if a web page is accessible depends partly on the assistive technologies and user agents that are used by the visitors to access it.

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/blob/fpwd-update/act-framework.bs

<Wilco> https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/63/files

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.147 (CVS log)
$Date: 2017/03/15 19:33:57 $