<lisa> agenda: this

<lisa> scribe: kirkwood

<JohnRochford> Indoor Wayfinding issue paper = https://w3c.github.io/coga/issue-papers/wayfinding-indoors.html

review SC https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/status.html,

Lisa: discussing first item on page, which ones ready for and which number in wCAG and other userful details

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

LS: Minimimize uyschecker areas now have new wrding people should

<lisa> wcag issue 13

LS: people should check

<lisa> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/13

LS: we’ve got a new version of wording and Mike and I thought it would go through but feedback wasnt good
... work with Mike G to try to work it out
... timed events got food feedback but didn’t go through
... try to put together a consensus call

Mike: where should we be looking

Sherry: is there anyone sharing a screen, wondering what should see

LS: we are on IRC channel

<lisa> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/13

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

LS: this is the link with all SC and what we are thinking of doing next
... the plan of what we want to do next for the next two week the plain language one, accessible authentication and help are the most important ones
... accessbile authentifcation for help

JR: last week offered to creat ammaterial and sent to mike when he comes up for ait can continue

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

LS: we have sent it to survey and “accessbile authentification”

<lisa> plain lang, provide support, authifcation, personlization

LS: plain language, provide support, accessible authentification and personalization are the most important , Do we agree?

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

LS: take a look at status document

<JohnRochford> +1

LS: is anything here is more important than the ones above that we are chosing?

Sherry: what is meant my critical features?

LS: if we devide clear purpose into two might be better
... if divide into two might be better to get it through
... issue 26
... i think we agree that this is the ones we should look at right now

<lisa> ACTION: lisa to explain the plain lang sc to wcag [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-211 - Explain the plain lang sc to wcag [on Lisa Seeman-Kestenbaum - due 2017-05-22].

LS: plain language is going to survey now, it will get difficult feedback. There is stuff that needs to be clarified and may be o Hoping we can do that. Maybe write an cation to explain plain language success crtieria
... we will see how it goes after tomorrows call

<JohnRochford> BRB

LS: provide support we need clarity and what is a long document.

Sheey: have done quite a bit of reasrch an trying to define what a long document is. It is defined based upon a partiuclar population. We are looking at the drfinition of an abstract. which is defined as 120 words or less.

Seey / Sherry

Sherry: haven’t had a lot of luck
... originally 300 words or more was definition of a long document
... anyone else have suggestions? I’m kinda tapped out

Rochford: I think I have everything you want and more. I have a wealth of articles and research about this. If you want a separte call I could do that

Sherry: how are they defining long documents?

Rochford: don’t have answer off hand but could do a separate call

LS: all we are asking for rtally is one or two keyword identified, when does it need help, a summary, or something that helps people. Abstracts starting at 150 words could be a start
... going up to three hundred words is a long dcoument. We hust need evidence backing things up

hust/just

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

LS: haven’t submitted review just needs to be done

Rochford: as long as link to most recent,

LS: provide clear support

<lisa> ACTION: John send us some reserch on what is a long document for providing support https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/32 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> 'John' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., jfoliot, jkirkwoo, JohnRochford).

<lisa> ACTION: JohnR send us some reserch on what is a long document for providing support https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/32 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Error finding 'JohnR'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/track/users>.

<lisa> ACTION: JohnRochford send us some reserch on what is a long document for providing support https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/32 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-212 - Send us some reserch on what is a long document for providing support https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/32 [on John Rochford - due 2017-05-22].

LS: review latest draft in issue 32 which i think i9s provide support

kirkwood: the shortname in table is help and it might need to be changed

<lisa> ACTION: JohnRochford to review https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/32, https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/30 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-213 - Review https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/32, https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/30 [on John Rochford - due 2017-05-22].

LS: i think plain language is ussue 32
... John and Mike on accessible authentification to work on it
... set a time and need to draft soonish

JohnR: i have drafted it and thats what I said to Mike

LS: review WCAG surveys

<lisa> review the sureys at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/showq

<lisa> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/minutes-history

LS: the titles are difficult search through emails with keywords to fins survey. Strongly recommend finding the right survey

<lisa> ACTION: JohnRochford and Mike to get new draft of accessible authtification [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-214 - And mike to get new draft of accessible authtification [on John Rochford - due 2017-05-22].

LS: there is a good chance after looking at survey and have a bit of a call about plain language tomorrow. If so what do we put forward of those really important ones?

LS provide support or help

LS: going to get rid of complex contante
... just need to define how something is ‘long'
... John if you can get theat to the list to Sherry and Me tomrrow so we have anouth SC to put forward in case plain language doesn’t move forward
... send the long defintiion document to the list
... the COGA list

<JohnRochford> I'm departing now before I am assigned another action item.

LS: in the meantime Sherry think what I will do is write c a comment about the different things we looked into put them into the gitub issue so can see the research and if necessay will close that issue and that this is an outstanding thing what the right number is

Sherry: thant make sense

<lisa> ACTION: lisa to add comment on long dosument to issue 32 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-215 - Add comment on long dosument to issue 32 [on Lisa Seeman-Kestenbaum - due 2017-05-22].

Sherry: yes its issue 32

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

LS: does anyone have any other comments on that SC ‘help’ latest version
... Mike: its unusual to have a broad scope and then something very specific seems out of character
... i’d be comfortable putting out and seeing if there is a problem with that

Mike; if someone has a system for navigation think specific language about cardinal dirctions

LS: do we want frms? going back to the issue
... just seeing correct for forms and context sensitive help
... giving form for former heading, multipage or dynamic forms, maybe this needs to be rethought very critically to see what we could cut
... context sensitive help for search form is rather tricky might need to revisit
... Sherry would you want to set something up to take this over

Shrry: Jan and I willcontinue to work together on it

LS: probably should have somone else to work on it to get more perspective of what is likely to make it fail consensus
... for instance what is on form might be problem
... we could do multipage form
... think need followon call for this

Sherry: we can set a time now

LS: could do tomorrow before WCAG call

Mike: i think I could do that one

LS: it would be nice if John Rochford to joing
... set that time for tomorrow to see if can put in place so it can go to surevey
... keep in on skpe

the supplement - next steps

<lisa> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19CvGpbNn1MecK9iRO7MOhafCaVjIajyV2BjNz2OZZZY/edit

LS: next ttem is supplement which finding link for here
... wondering if we want to do any next steps?

LS; there is a question of having nomnitive sections, mobile and low vision don’t need it to look like this, but might want to do them anyway, not sure how it will play out

LS: hope ther will be nomnative sections, don’t know it supplement should be this format
... do we want it to look like a nomnative doc

Mike: be careful to change language and might need to do a bit of rewording,

Michaeal; ddon’t think it should be nominitive document. Should be well structured

LS: do we want to wait with supplement until we have a nominite section and non-normanitive section

Michael: it will slow down, trying to put nomrmnitive into it will just mess us up. thinke attmept will have poor cost benefit. If it turns out can add normnaive we techniclally could add. Don’t see how it work with niminitive section

Janina: this is janina

LS: the other issue there were criteria mad by WCAG doesn’t mean its nomnitive but allow for user testing there is a lot more leway
... a supplement could be a place where things are for cognitive issues, its still worth having a well wrtitten document and a company could have some guidance
... think personally like to have it be able to incorporate into policy
... for critical service do everything that is testable such as critical servies and emergency services

Michael: a few quick reactions, no concerns guidance if we use normnative or conformentce may cost some things. One reason can do supplemental guidance can work foaster and lose speeding up possibilty

LS; need a diffierent name for best practice

LS: ask people like to be usable by policy makers?

Michael: willing to be usable by policy makers, but not written for it

JR: don’t think it should have normative material

<lisa> we dont have quarum now

<lisa> pick this up next time

Michael: information as long as we don’t have normative wording

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152  of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Present: JohnRochford kirkwood lisa Mike_Pluke janina
Regrets: Pietro jan
Found Scribe: kirkwood
Inferring ScribeNick: kirkwood

WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 15 May 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/05/15-coga-minutes.html
People with action items: john johnr johnrochford lisa mike

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.