WAI Coordination Call -- 14 Feb 2018

<Ryladog> Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea

<Ryladog> Scribe: Ryladog

JB: Organizing call, asking for agenda additions

Confirm scribe, rrsagent, agenda, next meeting date

Nexyt meeting date is 28th

<Judy> NEXT MEETING IS FEB 28

Personalization Semantics wide review

JB: Please check that out from ARIA group

<Judy> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2018JanMar/0148.html

Joanie: this is a FWD
... the goal is to make is possible to personalize or customize web content. To filter out distrations
... Not yet sure how that will be implemented, may via ARIA, but is being debated

JB: Do you need architectural feedback

Joanie: Yes, eventually
... we dont want to stop energy

JB: I want to be sure you dont go too far down the road without feedback if you're going to need feedback

Joanie: It is hard to get TAG review currently as we are getting other specs out the door. JF is helping the group

JB: Getting feedback from TAG may be needed if there is an architectural question
... Is Silver looking at Personalization Semantics at this time?

Jeanne: We are not looking at content at this time
... We can add it to the bin

JB: is there overlap with ePub?

George: Charles is the Co-Chair

Graphics modules wide review

<joanie> https://w3c.github.io/graphics-aria/

<Judy> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2018JanMar/0142.html

<joanie> https://w3c.github.io/graphics-aam/

<joanie> https://joanmarie.github.io/test-results/graphics-aam/

<joanie> https://joanmarie.github.io/test-results/graphics-aam/all.html

JB: There are two pointer here. Joanie can you explain

Joanie: 3 new rols, simple spec
... SVG is very dependent on these 3 roles
... AAM is the spec which states what the accessibility API mappings should be
... Browsers seem to be passing
... where there is an actual ARIA implementation, I am ob top of testing implementation even tho they are not in CR. Implementers feedback are not needed at this time

JB: The need for more accessibility support in SVG. I would live to be able say what kinds of needs will be supported by this work
... I feel like it is starting to address a need that has been there for a while

Joanie: The ARIA WG has a bunch of spec below it. I personally do not know alot about graphics authoring. I know the mapping, not author stuff
... I am hoping Amelia will write an intelligent blog post

JB: ePub interaction?

George: Yes, we are very interested. Issues arounfd math and SVG as a substitute for MathML - it is a very difficult issue

<Judy> [JB: thx Joanie in advance for blog on accessible graphics documents]

JB: Last meeting we talked about Math stuff. Joanie had a link to an event for accessible Math in California

<joanie> https://aimath.org/workshops/upcoming/webmath/

George: There continues to be lots of folks trying to figure this out
... we have meeting independent of the Math - peters meeting

JB: You'd said graphics may help math?

Joanie: No

Goerge: MathML is extensively used in ePublishing. If we can couple SVG and MathML we hope it will work

JB: Would you like to ccordinate this?

Goerge: Not sure where this should take place

JB: Where would you like it to take place

George: come up with a small set of options. Use Joanie, Tzviya, etc

JB: Can you all coordinate? We cn help this happen

George: I will take an action for us to get together

Any updates on upcoming CSUN meetings

JB: Jeanne maybe flag some of these things as they come bye over time
... for Silver
... Silver is meeting Mon and Tues

Jeanne: at the U of San Diego. Half hour away from hotel

JB: Hard to find your way around there

George: Do we want to coorinate travel from the Hyatt?

Jeanne: we have somebody working on that

JB: U of California, San Diego right?

George: Different Sessions

JB: EO and AG are meeting Monday and Tuesday

Jeanne: AG has a location

<jeanne> Jeanne notes that the Silver meeting is at San Diego State University

George: Judy and I on Publishing at W3C

JB: I have one on Standards harmonization in Eurpoe and Japan

George: I have one on the ePub checker based on aXe

JB: Send to WAI-IG

WAI IG Charter

<Judy> [JB: Feel free to list presentation notices to WAI IG if you'd like]

<Judy> DRAFT: https://www.w3.org/WAI/IG/charter6

JB: WAI-IG Charter we have a draft. Key things edited: no comments
... I changed the focus of how to help WAI groups - this is more now about to help with all W3C groups
... I would like to change the 2 or 3 year, talk about the size of the group, about back and forth
... last time folks thought this might be a location for horizontal reviews of eowg deliverables, but we don't seem to get many comments back from that forum
... I left that stuff as is mainly
... this would be going forward for AC frevoew soon. Any comments?
... when WG have had their document announced on WAI IG, do you get feedback when you ask for it?

Joanie: I have no way to see if one has lead to the other
... We would have to secretly put it on WAI

JB: It is just hard to tell basically?

<Judy> JB: You mean specifically? (e.g. not secretly)

Document usage or feedback on FAST checklist, expanding cross-links

JB: Janina thabk you very much for your detailed comments. Here is the FAST checklist

<Judy> w3c.github.io/apa/fast/checklist.html

JB: Fast Checklist

<Judy> Framework for Accessibility in the Specification of Technologies (FAST)

JB: It os intended to help people develop specs to be mindful of Accessibility Requirements to help other W3C groups
... a self study from the design stage forward. This was a goal from a year ago
... trying to figure out how I can help. It doesnt look ready (because marked "editors' draft"). I think it is meant to be a NOTE
... it is several links in. I am talking with folks about it. It is ready but doesnt look it

George: in the implementation, when we have two features, are they tested for accessibility. Is that a common practice?

JS: I think that is a no. Maybe a different issue. This for WG in the beginning processes to work with APA

George: I understand the division, looking for landmines. Yes my question is different

JB: Yes, I can speak to that. What you are raising is something we are persuing internally. and there has been no progress at all
... Right there there is not a systemized way that specs are tested, maybe this document is a link to that need

JS: I would love that. Here is how to identify where there are likely to be issues. We think it is pretty baked, but havent had people use it yet.
... so we are thinking about using it ourselves in APA when we do a review. We use this Fast Checklist

George: with the WG on publishing, we are in the early stages, there are alot of people who will be testing the accessibility of that implementation. So we will use this

JB: I can think of ways to get broader review, Should AG be looking at it, and COGA, and WAI IG.
... I am also wondering it has been out for 10 months or so - and most people do not know it exists
... version it up if you andvertise and get feedback. Can we call it good enough
... is the confidence level weak?

<jallan> https://w3c.github.io/apa/fast/checklist.html

JS: No, we just think there is a lack of experience using it. We think it is good
... we would like this to be a very useful tool

JB: It is currently listed in the wrong place for later stage specs
... Lets get a promotion plan is place and neaten it up
... Kathy, Jim, Jeanne is this something to look at and put in your content bin?
... This was drawn from a User Needs checklist from a JTC-1 WG

<kim_patch> I am too

JB: It has an interesting origin. The APA group had adapted it from the user requirements checklist of the JTC-1 SWG on Accessibility

JS: It was largely MC
... We are not pretending that it will identify all accessibility issue, just bring the topic to the fore

JB: It is meant to dispell the myth that accessibility is is UI based only

<jallan> update for WCAG21 SCs and concepts?

JB: Jim, Kathy and Kim -do you think your TF should look at it
... That is a good point. We shoul align with WCAG 2.1
... thanks Jim

Kim: It looks like a good resources, We probably shoudl look at it

JB: Would your TF have time to provide some comments?

Kathy: Timewise we are pretty stretched

<jallan> echo kathy for LVTF

JB: There are some sensible things that need to happen to it first, can you put it on your agenda at APA and cosider doing a 1.0, noting that it is planned to be update in perhaps the next two quarters
... thank you all for your replies on this. I want to socialize this

JA: I was just looking at it, cells are off makes it difficult to read as a low vision user

JS: I didnt notice, haha, will convey

Warning: Misaligned cells...

<jallan> for readability top align and right align content

<jallan> ... expecially the centered black spanned cells

<Judy> agenda order is 9, 10, 7

Silver update

<jeanne> Silver wiki <- https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page

Jeanne: Update here
... we have a number of projects on the structure of Silver
... we are very busy doing the data analysis to make a package for the design sprint meeting at the State Universsity in CA at CSUN
... we would like to have it all ready my March 1

we are doing a conformance project

scribe: for those on the policy and legal side to meet the needs of PWDs
... we have a survey on the usability of WCAG SC, that is wrapping up
... we have 4 research partners and have concluded their work

<jeanne> Progress Update <- https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Progress_Updates#Silver_Update_for_4th_Quarter_2017

<jeanne> Stakeholder Job Stories <-https://www.w3.org/community/silver/stakeholder-job-stories/

<scribe> ... new, the progress update was stakeholder stories, we are creating a report in the CG

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: more personas, modern,
... hoping it will be apowerful tool to evaluate prototypes
... we are doing a design sprint prior to CSUN
... problem statement
... we have a moderator from Google
... three areas for problem statements
... shoudl be public soon

JB: I was surprised that there are that many stakeholder roles

Jeanne: I sent the wrong link

JB: How do we get the right link?

Jeanne: I sent the next day

JB: I had looked at the wiki. Is this wrong? The group has deliberatly been thinking about structure
... not yet about the scope and content yet
... also do a structure that would be flexible for updated guidelines

<jeanne> Bucket for future Silver content ideas <- https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Progress_Updates#Silver_Update_for_4th_Quarter_2017

Jeanne: There are two bins. An AGWG group has on, very detailed, and our bin, just links to AGWG until now

JB: Can you give us links to both bins?

Jeanne: Yes

<jeanne> AGWG bucket for future content <- https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Potential_Accessibility_Guidelines

George: for the F2F you can send out what we will need to read beforehand

Jeanne; That is our goal

<Judy> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2018Jan/0017.html

<Judy> Data Workshop accessibility relevance...

<Judy> scribe: Katie

- DRAFT -

WAI Coordination Call

14 Feb 2018

Attendees

Contents