09 May 2017


Mike_Pluke, JohnRochford, kirkwood, Lisa, Pietro, janina


review SC, and timelines show status table.sc status: https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/status.html

<Lisa> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/status.html

<kirkwood> the links would be helpful

<Lisa> FC. 5) [COGA] Plain Language https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/30 6) [COGA] Timeouts SCs https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Timeouts_Issue14/

The links Lisa is adding are for members to vote on

<kirkwood> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/30

Mike: I'm going to look a the programmatic controls being worked on by the Mobile TF.

Lisa: We also have Support APIs, any follow up with that?

Lisa is asking that question of kirkwood.

Lisa: We need an extra call for specific success criteria.
... Time after WCAG call has not been successful.
... How about a call on Monday, 2 hours before the regular COGA call?

Mike: Works for me.

kirkwood: Works for me.

Works for JohnR too.

voting on wcag, and review of last week

Jan: Works for me too.

<EA> Sorry I am having problems with Webex will keep trying

Lisa: On WCAG call tomorrow, we will be discussing plain language.

accessible authentification

<Lisa> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/23

<Lisa> For user authentication one of the following is true: A user authentication method is offered where the user is not required to memorize or copy information or character strings; perform calculations, such as including correctly identifying and entering numbers and letters from a character string A mechanism is available to reset authentication that does not require the user's ability to memorize or copy information or character strings; perform calculation

<Lisa> https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/accessible-authentication_ISSUE-23/guidelines/sc/21/accessible-authentication.html

<Lisa> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/issue-papers/privacy-security.html

I'm here

JohnR: A significant problem with the SC, based upon our discussions, is testability.

Mike: Agrees to work with JohnR on testability language.

the supplement

JohnR: Agrees to Lisa's request to work with Mike as much as possible on testability language, to discuss on next Monday's call.

Lisa: Nothing's been agreed upon regarding the supplement.
... There will probably be a follow-up call. Perhaps there will be a Google doc.

<Lisa> the google doc only until we have a first editors draft

<Lisa> then a git doc

Lisa: Do people agree with this process?

+1 to process

+1 from Mike and Jan

<EA> +1 from E.A.

<Lisa> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2017Apr/0064.html

Lisa: We could try to make normative as much as we can, as well as research that may not be normative.
... Should include guidance for policy makers.
... Language abouit keeping people in workplace longer and access to services could be added to that section.

JohnRochford: No comment from me.

Lisa: I don't want the supplement to be just good advice.

familiar design

Lisa: With what can we move forward then?
... How about Issue # 32?

<Lisa> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/32

<Lisa> Content is provided that helps users understand complex information, long documents, numerical information, relative and cardinal directions, forms and non-standard controls

Jan: Can we change wording without consensus?

Lisa: We change wording all the time.
... SC managers have been confused about what they are supposed to do. They are meant to negotiate language with everyone.
... WCAG has its own consensus.

Jan: I asked our researcher to define long-document size. She said that is difficult to determine.

<Jan> new wording (done with Jan) based on feedback: Complex information, long documents, numerical information beyond simple referencing of whole numbers, relative and cardinal directions and non-standard controls have available supportive content of at least one of the following: A summary; instructions, a supportive graphic or chart ; a table; at least two emphasized keywords; non-numerical representations of numerical content. define "simple referencing of whole numb

Jan: For those who researched plain language, was there a definition for a short document?
... or a short passage?

JohnRochford: In my research, I have not come across an operationalized definition of "short" or "long".

Lisa asks Jan about getting rid of complex information.

Jan: Yes, it should be removed because there is no way to define it.

EA references European Easy To Read, but acknowledges it too does not define "short" and "long".

<EA> http://easy-to-read.eu/

Jan: In response to a question from JohnR, says she is attempting to not conflate "short" and "long" with complexity.

<EA> The European guidelines from the easy to read group http://easy-to-read.eu/european-standards/

<Lisa> does educational matirial have a guidline of when you need a keyword or summary in the side bar

<Lisa> Jan will look into it

<Lisa> ACTION: Jan to look into what is a section lenght that needs a summary sentece in eduaction matirials [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/08-coga-minutes#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-210 - Look into what is a section lenght that needs a summary sentece in eduaction matirials [on Jan McSorley - due 2017-05-15].

<EA> easy surfing guide http://www.west-info.eu/easy-surfing-a-guide-to-setting-up-websites-for-people-with-disabilities/guida-14/

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Jan to look into what is a section lenght that needs a summary sentece in eduaction matirials [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/08-coga-minutes#action01]

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
    $Date: 2017/05/09 13:58:43 $