<Kelsey> is the line open yet?

<Charles> y

Game Accessibility Gap Analysis survey

Thomas: From Stockholm University, we have a gap analysis we've worked on between game accessibility and WCAG.
... We have a survey available that we'd like you to answer.

<Kelsey> Could someone send me the WebEx direct link or meeting number to join? I'm on a new device and it's giving me a hard time.

<jemma> You find the survey here: https://goo.gl/BB4sqa

Thomas: The idea is that games are different from other applications, for example game rules.

<jemma> this is gap analysis survey between GAG and WCAG

Thomas: with the canvas tag, webgl, any browser can then be a game console.

<Kelsey> I can't login. It normally doesn't require me to.

Thomas: I sent the survey out to the list, and we'll send it to the webex chat as well.

<jemma> you cannot login the the survey, Kelsey

Thomas: We'd very much appreciate you filling this in, as we've a tight deadline for this, 20 March.

Jeanne: Could you quickly walk us through the questions?

Thomas: Sure. First, some demographic info.
... Then, the questions are divided into sections, like the game accessibility guidelines.
... Covering vision, hearing, motor, cognition.

Jemma: We made the survey based on the GAG rules, but targeting the questions to WCAG people.

Jeanne: Good to see! I was thinking a lot of people on the list wouldn't have the experience with games.
... Is there a way to offer open responses?

Thomas: Yes.

<Kelsey> Guess I'm locked out because I don't remember my W3C password that it requires to login to the WebEx.

Jemma: And we have one who volunteered to be interviewed.
... I got permission from Andrew to send the survey to the WAI mailing list, and another mailing list, so hopeful we'll get a number of responses.

Jeanne: If you like, also people on this list would be…I'd certainly be willing to tweet it to my followers.

Charles: About to say the same thing.
... Does it need to be group participants, or can it be shared socially?

Jemma: Targeting the group familiar with WCAG, but we ask about their level of expertise with WCAG.

Thomas: So, it's okay to distribute.

<jemma> You find the survey here: https://goo.gl/BB4sqa

Jeanne: We also have a list of people who have expressed interest in filling out surveys that I can share with you.
... This looks really good, excited to see the results!

Key Findings of the Conformance Survey

Charles: Not sure if everyone's had a chance to read the document, but last Friday I took the action to put together the key findings from the conformance survey.

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iOut3_i1JBQu5_16plZ8u7xCd66T4TbW2zPR1KmWWF4/edit?usp=sharing

Charles: The 30,000 foot overview, is among the audience, change is needed and valued, but we don't have agreement on the degree of change.

<Kelsey> Thank you Shawn! That worked.

Charles: We asked the question on declaring conformance in a reliable and trusted way, and then about managing change when claiming conformance. Most thought self reporting was fine, provided verifiable.
... When asked about managing change, we got different results. We definitely have perceived challenges around conformance.

Jemma: Can you explain the conflict between the two in more detail?

Charles: Those two principles of claiming conformance and managing change when claiming conformance seem at odds.

Kelsey: I missed your introduction to those two items, could explain a little more?

<jemma> this is the interpretation section I asked the question

<jemma> "It is clear that even among specialists, managing change – which is perceived as a constant – is difficult. These responses are at least somewhat at odds with the previous response to claims being reliable and trusted. If a conformance claim is only valid at the time it is made and inherently subject to change, it is hard to see how that can be trusted.

Charles: When we asked those two open response questions in that specific order, claiming conformance and then managing change. Based on the responses, it's clear that managing change is difficult.
... but if a conformance claim is only valid at the time it is made, and it is subject to change, then it's hard to see how that is trusted and reliable.
... so if it changes regularly, then it seems at odds with trusted and reliable.
... so I think we might've received a different response had we ordered the questions differently.

Kelsey: Thanks for explaining, I see what you mean.

Jeanne: I think this is great. The only suggestion I have: finish the summary and link to the opportunities section, or move the conclusions up.

Charles: I think it's still in a relevant order, but we'll put a table of contents in here so you can easily skip.

<jemma> good point regarding geography, David

David: If you segment the data by country, you could say things like the group from the US found the legal conformance applicability higher than those elsewhere, like the UK.

SC Usability Survey

David: Thank you Charles and Kelsey, a really good model to follow for the report.
... I talked with Jeanne earlier about how we could expand the findings from the usability survey, and we concluded that we could segment by experience and focus on accessibility in order to find why different SC are difficult to learn, understand, and teach.
... It does allow us to say "For this group, what explanations do they give for the difficulty of something in relation to another group?"

<Charles> added a “What Was Learned” section to the Summary section at the beginning.

David: with that, and with a little more time, I'll spend some time next week expanding what's in Drive right now into what some groups might think about the SC so we can starting thinking about what we might change around them.

Jemma: I think it makes sense, but I think we need more context to understand why something is hard or not.

<jeanne> Key Findings Draft <- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ESlNcehaYoP8C3R_WSPkuuB17_c94cL6ih7ml4rpjsw/edit?usp=sharing

David: I've shared the free text responses people gave, but they're not ordered or segmented in any way.

Jeanne: This is very important work, it gives us an order of priority for what we'll work on this Summer and what we should tackle first.

David: It's going to give insight into the specific characteristics of SC, hopefully, of those usable or not.
... thinking forward to the design sprint, if we could design and new and improved SC, what would it look like and how would we measure the improvement?

<JohnM> I was just lurking today, because I have to leave early for another meeting. Thanks! Have a great day!

Jeanne: Do you think you could get this done before the design sprint?

David: I'm going to devote a serious amount of time to this in the coming week. I don't have the same kind of deadlines as I've had lately, so hoping to make good progress there.

Jeanne: I'd very much like to have this to inform the requirements document.

David: I'll also try to get the translated versions of the survey out the door.
... Do we need to be explicit in the translated versions of the survey, do we ask about their translated versions of WCAG or the English version of WCAG? If the latter, it'll likely confound the usability of WCAG in that context.

Jeanne: You could ask which version they're most familiar with at the start?

David: That'd create a different survey, though.

Jennison: For some people, they may find the English version the most familiar for technical reasons. You may want to specifically say interested in translated versions of WCAG, specifically.

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/translations.html

Jeanne: Concerned, as I don't think we used the same languages covered by WCAG translations.

David: Looking through, we're covered. Some official and some unofficial, but not sure if that makes a difference.

Jeanne: I think we should check the translations in the survey against the translations of WCAG. If it'd hold things up for a lot longer, then we should just move on. If fast enough, then we should check.

Jennison: We can just ask the translator how they worked, yes?

David: Yes, I'll ask them.

tying up loose ends on research

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ropTpocIdthjnkaGILjZRPrerAFGDNGXVstSOny45Zo/edit?usp=sharing

Jeanne: Looking at the research summary.
... I ran into some technical problems in moving the papers over to the community group. I got some advice on what to do, and I'll give that a shot soon.
... If anyone is good with HTML, I'd really appreciate some help converting.

Aiden: Depends on exactly what you want, but I can help.

Jemma: I can help, too.

Jeanne: Working now on getting all of the problem statements into the wiki.

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

Jeanne: I struggled with how to link to the research.
... I started by adding the themes from the research, but the wiki doesn't have a way to do footnotes. I put it into an appendix, with links to all of our research.
... Jemma, somehow I lost the link I had to the literature, if you could send me a link to that, as I don't know how, but I couldn't find it.
... I have a numbered list of research papers and need to put them in with the themes from research so that people can follow everything from there.

Jemma: It sounds ambitious for one week of work.

Kelsey: Is this list something that everyone attending the design sprint will receive?

Jeanne: They've already received it. I meant the list in the appendix.

<Charles> For future reference, I too am capable of authoring clean accessible HTML/CSS. I simply cannot commit to too many tasks at the moment due to other demands on my time.

Lauriat: Likewise, same boat as Charles right now.

<jemma> yes. I hear you guys too

Kelsey: Is the goal on the wiki to link to all of the papers once on the public site?

Jeanne: Yes, and today they link to documents in Drive.
... (runs through remaining items)

What comes after the Design Sprint?

CSUN literature review slides

Jemma: Basically, this is my conceptual model for the literature review.
... Lots of areas in here, talking about different aspects of WCAG as well as different technologies.
... If we use WCAG well as a tool, then it can apply well.
... Going to slide three, this is the scope of work.
... focusing more on the conformance issue.
... Going back to slide 2, methodology.
... Jumping to key applications, 8, I could put only these two things right now.

Jeanne: I love the graphics, nice job on those!

Kelsey: Fascinating moving from problem based approach to design principle approach.

Jemma: I'll keep working on the second draft, but we can at least use the slides for now.

Jeanne: It's different from the other papers, so I'll need to think about it, let's talk about it on Tuesday.

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: sloandr Jan Aiden Charles Jeanne Jennsion John Kelsey Shawn Sweta Thomas
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: Lauriat
Inferring Scribes: Lauriat
Found Date: 09 Mar 2018
People with action items: 

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.)