15:31:09 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #coga
15:31:09 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-coga-irc
15:43:11 <JohnRochford> JohnRochford has joined #coga
15:44:37 <lisa> agenda: this
15:44:39 <lisa> agenda+ review SC, and timelines show status table.sc status: https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/status.html,  issues: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3ACOGA
15:44:40 <lisa> agenda+ proposed new wording personlization : https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6
15:44:42 <lisa> agenda+ proposed new wording undo: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/38
15:44:43 <lisa> agenda+ wording for understanding sections
15:44:45 <lisa> agenda+ new issue papers!! updates on bots and navigation
15:44:46 <lisa> agenda+ proposed new wording
15:44:48 <lisa> agenda+ the supplement, moving forward
15:56:41 <Pietro> Pietro has joined #coga
16:02:44 <lisa> zakim, next item
16:02:44 <Zakim> agendum 1. "review SC, and timelines show status table.sc status: https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/status.html,  issues:
16:02:45 <AWK> AWK has joined #coga
16:02:46 <Zakim> ... https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3ACOGA" taken up [from lisa]
16:03:54 <shari> shari has joined #coga
16:04:32 <lisa> scribe: kirkwood
16:04:45 <JohnRochford> present+ JohnRochford
16:05:05 <lisa> i will ping u
16:05:36 <Pietro> Present+ Pietro
16:05:45 <kirkwood> present+
16:05:52 <Pietro> I'm connected only by IRC because I'm travelling by train
16:06:14 <kirkwood> first action item what success criteria dealing with
16:06:17 <lisa> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/status.html
16:07:03 <kirkwood> not hearing echo
16:07:59 <kirkwood> LS: interupitons and successful authenitification
16:08:15 <kirkwood> LS: talkeabout undo and support personalization
16:08:28 <JohnRochford> correction: accessible authentication
16:09:19 <kirkwood> LS: the one for next week thinking of putting for   confirm important information
16:09:31 <kirkwood> LS: its something feel we can get through
16:09:34 <AWK> That one is https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/33
16:09:40 <kirkwood> LS: the other is error prevention
16:09:41 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #coga
16:10:00 <kirkwood> LS: Andrew said would help put together time to help work onit
16:10:06 <gowerm> gowerm has joined #coga
16:10:07 <Mike_Pluke> Present+ Mike_Pluke
16:10:10 <gowerm> present+ MikeGower
16:10:31 <kirkwood> LS: anything else needed to go forward?
16:10:37 <lisa> q?
16:10:41 <EA> EA has joined #coga
16:10:56 <kirkwood> LS: next item
16:11:32 <kirkwood> LS: put link to attachment here in irc
16:11:41 <lisa> zakim,next item
16:11:41 <Zakim> agendum 2. "proposed new wording personlization : https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/6" taken up [from lisa]
16:11:45 <lisa> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2017Jul/0023.html
16:12:05 <lisa> application/octet-stream attachment: Support_Personalization_proposal.docx
16:13:07 <lisa> Personalization Metadata (AAA)For pages that contain user interface components, personalization metadata is used to provide contextual information for content, except where the technologies being used do not support personalization metadata.
16:14:05 <kirkwood> Andrew: we have found having conversation on working group calls is difficult. We suggested and Lisa agreed that a few should get together on what issues are and what to accomplish in order to move forward. Ultimately think the vision is in line with what the COGA group wants. As Lisas says not whole lot of disagreement there
16:14:14 <Jan> Jan has joined #coga
16:14:56 <kirkwood> Andrew: currently you can used some semantics to get some amount of personlization. aira landmark elements, specialized tools can provide a wide vairiety of transformation
16:15:24 <kirkwood> ANdrew: if you  have paragraphed content tools should be able to replace complex words or make sentence structure simpler
16:15:42 <kirkwood> Andrew: there are things possible today but maybe poor toooling
16:16:25 <kirkwood> Andrew: todo  more there are addtional challenges revolve around additional semantics in dradft documsnt tha tmy be farmiliar with if involved with ARIA group
16:17:05 <kirkwood> Andrew: showing reduction of list of items. we don’t have standardized ways of acccomplishing that
16:17:16 <kirkwood> Andrew: testability concern
16:17:49 <kirkwood> Andrew: there is no way you could fail if author needs to demonstrate pass or fail, some concerns about that
16:18:09 <kirkwood> Andrew: best approach in end four things  one look closely at existing crtieria
16:18:32 <kirkwood> Andrew: wor creating new techniques were existing  criteria
16:18:48 <kirkwood> Andrew: clarification document for current SCs
16:19:22 <kirkwood> LS: not taling about changing the wording on the document
16:19:35 <kirkwood> Andrew: understanding documents are for people implementing WCAG
16:20:00 <kirkwood> Andrew: in praticular relations and vaule can do more to dclarify to benefit user with cognintive diwsabioites
16:20:22 <kirkwood> LS: information and relationships
16:20:43 <kirkwood> LS: coud you extend it sto say the help page?
16:21:02 <kirkwood> LS: 1.3.1 if you have a link to help text for example
16:21:38 <kirkwood> LS: if available in text need extra support here, but completely conforms 1.3.1.
16:23:17 <kirkwood> Andrew: in that specifi exmaple having object type or link type meta data availble would be of benefit. right now you could have tool that would make a good guess by loooking at text. loike in one of your example sitempa could be site nvigation and tooolls could make guesses by programtic association and add a icon for sitempa, home, or suppport, thatw where havein metat adat standardized it would be valuable
16:23:30 <kirkwood> Andrew: probale  a s use case that wouldnt get support
16:24:01 <kirkwood> Andrew: suggesting AA criteria for three
16:24:22 <kirkwood> Andrew suggesting AAA criteria for 3
16:24:43 <kirkwood> Andrews: help prepar developers to have SC move up to AAA
16:24:52 <kirkwood> Andreew: four thing supplementary doecument
16:24:57 <lisa> Q?
16:25:49 <kirkwood> LS: thanks all for helping us try to work this out.  i think in line with 3everything we are trying to do. cn see if put in understanding document and everything elso in a supplement
16:26:11 <kirkwood> LS: orignially wanted to be put indraft as roles and taken out and want to ptu it back in
16:26:39 <kirkwood> LS: it got voted out on condition we’d get it back in
16:26:54 <AWK> q+ to say that the group never said "
16:27:20 <kirkwood> LS: as can see in gap analysis you cn see proposed techniques. and putting it as a preferrred technique woudl help
16:27:21 <AWK> q+ to say first let's solve the problems of the blind
16:27:45 <kirkwood> LS: don’t think there is any contradiction in saying what we can do in supporting techniques
16:28:10 <kirkwood> LS: we wanted to say contextual information is available and then we sxoped it out to reduce author burden
16:28:12 <AWK> q-
16:28:29 <AWK> q+ to say that the group never said first let's solve the problems of the blind
16:28:36 <kirkwood> LS: we added first bullet point to address Mikes issue we ant relay too much on COGA
16:28:53 <kirkwood> LS: use supporting met adat when availble that cogt thrown out
16:29:05 <kirkwood> adat/data
16:29:20 <kirkwood> cogt/got
16:29:31 <kirkwood> LS: I do mind that its a AAA
16:30:15 <kirkwood> LS: I think we all agree this is a complex issue. if its down grading to a AA lets get rid of it
16:30:33 <kirkwood> LS: I’d be happy to cut that out if gets it down to AA
16:30:48 <kirkwood> LS: rather its in rather than not in
16:31:20 <kirkwood> John: in terms of getting it in not in cards?
16:31:49 <kirkwood> LS: roles has been defined as functionlity
16:31:56 <kirkwood> LS: in aria
16:32:22 <kirkwood> LS: I am throwing it back to you
16:33:00 <kirkwood> LS: do you not see it a problem when first proposed lots of kickback
16:33:23 <kirkwood> LS: what has to have contextual information. seems we are ignoring all of Alastair’s feedback
16:33:46 <AWK> ack AWK
16:33:46 <Zakim> AWK, you wanted to say that the group never said first let's solve the problems of the blind
16:33:50 <kirkwood> Andrew: seems broader
16:34:13 <kirkwood> Andrfew: working group doesn’t solve issues of blind
16:34:24 <kirkwood> LS: ARiA group did at the time
16:35:32 <kirkwood> Andrew: proposed woridning for meta data AAA
16:35:41 <AWK> Personalization Metadata (AAA): For pages that contain user interface components, personalization metadata is used to provide contextual information for content, except where the technologies being used do not support personalization metadata.
16:35:43 <janina> present+
16:35:45 <kirkwood> Andrew: I want to get peoples feedback
16:36:16 <AWK> Contextual information definition: Information which provides additional meaning for an object, such as the object’s purpose, level of importance for page comprehension and use, position in a process, relationship to other objects and processes, etc.
16:36:16 <kirkwood> Andrew: its quite broad. it would mean applies to all content on the web conforming with AAA
16:36:38 <lisa> Q+
16:36:43 <janina> q+
16:36:48 <kirkwood> Andrew: I think it is in line with what the tadk force has duggested
16:36:56 <Jan> q+
16:37:16 <kirkwood> Andrew: main diffenendce is based on feedback, we’re thinking we can get it through at AAA not AA
16:37:17 <lisa> ack l
16:37:44 <kirkwood> LS: is ther any addtional information such as relative importance that we can do to get it through at AA
16:38:11 <kirkwood> Andrew: AAA is less used than AA no doubt.
16:38:25 <MichaelC> q+
16:38:35 <kirkwood> Andrew: it from working group calls it is less likely
16:38:39 <MichaelC> q+ to talk about stake-in-the-sand and AAA
16:38:46 <lisa> ack ja
16:38:55 <lisa> Personalization Metadata (AAA)For pages that contain user interface components, personalization metadata is used to provide contextual information for content, except where the technologies being used do not support personalization metadata.
16:39:58 <kirkwood> Jan: sorry came in las reading. like meta data very much. We have at least one other big pary in W3C that gets somewhant involved they may want The publishing working group. There are mulitilple stakelholders and need to civer multiple stkahloders
16:40:11 <lisa> janina
16:40:21 <lisa> jan/janina
16:40:26 <kirkwood> Jan: good start AA versus AAA doesn’t trouble me as much
16:40:41 <AWK> q+ to talk about DPUB meeting this morning
16:40:56 <kirkwood> jan/janina
16:41:17 <lisa> ack ja
16:41:54 <Pietro> Pietro has joined #coga
16:42:14 <kirkwood> Jan: a SC manager interested in personalization wnated to thank you for taking a shot at rewording and want to stress personlaizaton in education and critical in our industry
16:43:03 <kirkwood> Andrew: i haven’t done any of that work but have identified existin that support congintive use case
16:43:39 <kirkwood> Jan: i’d like to be involved would appreciate to get some people and persopectives from a technical persopecitvie and would be happ to help coordinate
16:43:55 <kirkwood> LS: part of ARIA group not WCAG and you are on the list
16:44:09 <kirkwood> LS: this is taling about SC for SCAG
16:44:16 <kirkwood> taling/talking
16:44:52 <kirkwood> LS: using headers help, knowing a link is a link, or a button is a button. what is missing is the context
16:45:06 <kirkwood> LS: if we downgrade to AAA can boraden the scope
16:45:12 <lisa> ack m
16:45:12 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to talk about stake-in-the-sand and AAA
16:45:19 <kirkwood> boraden/broaden
16:45:56 <lisa> q+ l
16:46:19 <AWK> ack AWK
16:46:19 <Zakim> AWK, you wanted to talk about DPUB meeting this morning
16:46:27 <kirkwood> Andrews: the fact that its new will send a message. given goal is to provide a hook at AA can serve reaonably well for that. Hopefully will encourage technology development and in fueture can see to lower conforence level
16:46:40 <kirkwood> Andrews/Andrew
16:47:23 <kirkwood> Andrew: less about enableing access to content more about enabling descrition to integrate meta data into conformance statements. you may be right about 2.1
16:47:31 <lisa> ack l
16:48:09 <kirkwood> LS: i see we are broading scop and downgrading to AAA means very few sites will do anything
16:48:29 <kirkwood> LS: any chance move foreward at AA so people actully get content
16:48:58 <kirkwood> LS: think the efffect of helping people on the ground would be negligible
16:49:43 <Jan> +q
16:50:06 <kirkwood> LS: it might help move forward suggest three things option 1 best we can do the second go to WCAG with these proposals and here is the difference
16:50:09 <MichaelC> q+ to repeat myself
16:50:35 <kirkwood> LS: do you chooose it at AAA or AA
16:50:40 <MichaelC> q+ to say even if AAA doesn´t help many users right away, it moves the needle so we can help more sooner
16:51:14 <kirkwood> LS: which to you want option 1, option 2 which would be ask WCAG list do they see a way forward at AA
16:51:39 <janina> +
16:51:45 <janina> q+
16:51:52 <kirkwood> LS: question should we put clear language at AAA
16:51:54 <lisa> q?
16:52:33 <AWK> ack Jan
16:52:35 <kirkwood> LS: put in at AAA might be best way to proceedc
16:54:37 <lisa> ack mi
16:54:37 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to repeat myself and to say even if AAA doesn´t help many users right away, it moves the needle so we can help more sooner
16:54:39 <kirkwood> Jan: WCAG is not sufficient at a minimal level. we have to meet. Having somehting in at AAA , dont  see it is worst thing. do like presseing for AA
16:54:44 <EA> Does this mean we can go back to other SCs that failed and try to get them in as AAA?
16:54:54 <lisa> maybe - trying to find that out\
16:55:14 <Jan> +1 to Michael
16:55:29 <lisa> q?
16:55:38 <kirkwood> Miichael: it helps to put a take in the sand if it doesn’t help users right away. not going to issue an opinon on giving up on AA we shoud see values in AA
16:56:17 <kirkwood> Janina: content when there isn’t user agent support that bar of AA is possible too low. Don’t think eventially this will bgo to single A
16:57:03 <kirkwood> LS: if AAA don’t know if can get funding to get plugins at a deployment level
16:57:15 <kirkwood> LS: market driver the content won’t be there
16:58:36 <kirkwood> Janina:  if you don’t do this thats single A and that we aren’t talking about it isnt ready
16:58:57 <kirkwood> LS: I’d like people to vote
16:59:07 <kirkwood> LS: should we dslide to AA or puch one more time
16:59:23 <EA> I have concerns that our coga users will not be supported in this versions
16:59:29 <kirkwood> JR: I’d like to get in at AA
16:59:35 <Jan> I would like to go ahead and discuss the difference between the AA and the AAA with the WCAG group, but not if people think that it would damage our ability to get it in at AAA.
16:59:36 <kirkwood> +1
16:59:44 <kirkwood> for AA
16:59:53 <EA> +1 for AA
17:00:14 <EA> It is hard but we know that so many are missing out at the moment
17:00:24 <JohnRochford> The +1s are for me saying I think we should push for AA.
17:00:42 <kirkwood> LS: see divide between cognitve disability working people and larger group
17:01:20 <kirkwood> LS: if you see no further retriction to get us in at AA thaen we go for AAA. if anyone is uncomfortable with me drafting let me know
17:01:33 <kirkwood> LS: people could please give feedback today
17:01:38 <EA> +1 lisa and happy to read
17:01:40 <kirkwood> LS: does anyon abject
17:01:49 <kirkwood> LS: i’ll try and get it out in the next hour
17:02:03 <kirkwood> LS: people can say if they have an objections to that
17:02:36 <kirkwood> LS: we need to mindful of people with cognitive diabilites and no one is going to be completely happy
17:02:54 <kirkwood> LS: can we look through ones that failed Mike?
17:03:14 <kirkwood> LS: is ther any process Andrew and Mike Cooper if we can have a converation
17:03:35 <kirkwood> Andrew: happy to look at it and dig into other topeics not prepared at this moment
17:03:49 <kirkwood> LS: Andrew if can help move forward
17:04:09 <kirkwood> LS: Andrew Mike thank you and appreciate efforts
17:04:59 <lisa> rrsagent, make logs public
17:05:07 <lisa> rrsagent, create minutes
17:05:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-coga-minutes.html lisa
17:05:39 <lisa> zakim, please part
17:05:39 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been JohnRochford, Pietro, kirkwood, Mike_Pluke, MikeGower, janina
17:05:39 <Zakim> Zakim has left #coga
17:05:45 <lisa> rrsagent, please part
17:05:45 <RRSAgent> I see no action items