Jeanne - Design sprint scheduled for March 19 - how will we prioritize, and what do we need to get done?
Jeanne: we need a list of
abilities and barriers to help us with design sprint
... what's in play, and what can we get done before the design
sprint?
Jemma: plans to complete paper
before the sprint - issues relating to aging
... no time for other issues
... will complete draft by this Monday
... we can look at the accessibility guideline to adapt for
WCAG, the conformance review
Jemma (gaming accessibility guidelines)
Jeanne: the gaming guidelines are
a great example of plain language
... so you'll have a draft of the conformance review in early
Feb, the earlier the better
... I think we need to have all the research info in a cogent
form by March 1st, before the design sprint
Jemma: my concern is we don't have anything for the maintenance issue
Jeanne: I'll ask Pete McNally to
return, because we didn't have time for him to present last
time
... we have a Research Results spreadsheet from Pete, and below
that is the research analysis of Pete's survey
... Shari, please check that and polish it
<jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne with Shari to look at the Pete McNally Analysis
<trackbot> Created ACTION-152 - With shari to look at the pete mcnally analysis [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-01-26].
Jemma: I could finish the survey questionnaire by the end of next week
Jeanne: 3 weeks is the minimum
W3C time for surveys/comments
... this is a survey about conformance issue, to feed the
conformance discussion at the design sprint
... Jemma, I think you should focus on the literature
review
... let's try to get help from researchers on the survey,
otherwise we might not be able to get it done
Shari: who is the target for the survey?
Jeanne: people with standards experience; we do have a list we need to work on a bit
Charles: I'm recruited 9 people, 2 of whom have participated in calls before
Jeanne: we are looking for people
with research experience to take the lead on the survey; I can
help them get started
... Survey Monkey is the most accessible of the survey
tools
Charles: I will ask the people who have expressed interest
Jeanne: If we don't have the resources for the survey, we may have to let it go.
We need to have all info ready by March 1st, so participants of the design sprint will have two weeks with it.
Shari: Tyson's work will not be ready by the design sprint.
Jeanne: That's ok, his work is
more structure than content; we need to focus on content
now
... Scott's Internet of Things work could be a model in the
design sprint, to see how it fits in, as a test for the
maintainability of what we're proposing
... The next priority is the interviews. I would like to have
someone organize and drive the interviews, so I can keep the
task force on track. I'm happy to be a resource for it.
<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cn6I1MSVIfiWKcR5ms3NfoHop2ZVaYR4d6LUmnvRMPY/edit
Jeanne: Legacy interview research questions are ready to go. It's just a matter of organizing it to make it move.
Jeanne: There are Legacy questions, and Conformance questions.
Charles: If we can get 5 or 6 individuals for each category, that would be sufficient. I will try to find someone to do the interviews.
Jeanne: I can do the interviews, if someone else can schedule them.
Jan: I can do the scheduling with some coaching.
Jeanne: What else do we need before the March 1 deadline?
Jemma: We can give out a11y tote bags.
Jeanne: We can list people as contributors to the spec.
Charles: Public acknowledgement is great. Let's give people something in the tote bag with the Silver art.
Jan: We can reach out for contributions.
Jeanne: We can recognize sponsors
who contribute. I can make a poster.
... The W3C also recognizes sponsors.
... I have the Silver logo that Glenda made.
<Charles> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/File:SilverStickerDesign.png
Jeanne: Are there other strategic issues we need to be thinking about?
Charles: How about public statements that come out of the design sprint?
Jeanne: yes
Charles: We could announce that we're making progress, and what the progress is.
* ok thanks :)
<jemma> shari: I can edit the video once it is recorded
<jemma> jeanne: I can ask either Janison or Shawn whether they have resources
<jemma> jeanne:
<jemma> jeanne: next meeting agenda 1. researcher update 2. invitation responses
<jemma> s/2. interview response/ 2. invitation response
<jemma> 3. problem statement
<jemma> s/jennison/jennison
<jemma> regret:Jennison, Shawn
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) Succeeded: s/I talked to Leoni and we may have a framework, which is easily testable. it is part of conformance discussion - percentage rather than pass and fail// Succeeded: s/interview response/invitation responses/ FAILED: s/2. interview response/ 2. invitation response/ Succeeded: s/statment/statement/ FAILED: s/janison/jennison/ Succeeded: s/people as major contributors/people as contributors/ Succeeded: s/janison/jennison/ Present: Jan JaeunJemmaKu Shari Charles Jessica Regrets: Jennison Shawn No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: JohnM Inferring Scribes: JohnM WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 19 Jan 2018 People with action items: jeanne shari with WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]
