WAI Coordination Call Teleconference -- 28 Mar 2018

<MichaelC> scribe: MichaelC

Confirm scribe, rrsagent, agenda, next meeting date

Next Meeting: 10 April 2018

<shawn> Shawn regrets for 11 April

actually, 11 April 2018

Reminder of WAI website Beta

<shawn> Here's the starting page:

<shawn> https://github.com/w3c/wai-website/wiki/W3C-WAI-Website-Redesign-Information

<shawn> *Note* on that page the "Planned Changes" and "Known Issues" (so you don't waste time commenting on them :-).

slh: beta is out

major change to navigation still planned

look under planned changes and known issues before commenting

will be mid April before changes appear

jb: what about big comments?

comments that have already been made, but people want to +1

slh: +1 them in the comment

we plan to do pretty much everything that´s been commented

Debrief from CSUN 2018 meetings, themes, networking

jb: 3 WAI meetings, lots of web a11y presentations

trends? stuff for us to take up?

gk: Publishing@W3C presentation packed

a11ycheckerace packed

nfb authoring tools packed

pain threshold in producing epub

want Word to produce, ¨we hear you¨

certification well attended

conference program distributed in advance, put into some reading systems

many people said they liked that

Amazon said EPub 3 great input to Kindle platform

Mike Paciello has started Open Access Technology

wanted to discuss epub and ace

there was competing conference EPub Craft in TO

publishing community split

https://www.w3.org/blog/2018/03/publishing-w3c-goes-to-ebookcraft/

book industry study group

to promote epub in higher ed

need page number navigation synced with print books

remediating (a11y?) of epub

jb: publishing split?

gk: totally behind a11y

js: conference participation split

jb: in a session, accessible math and W3C potential activity came up

also heard in hallway discussion

I´m not convinced there´s nothing more (sic) W3C needs to do

gk: wanna be able to put math in titles

multiple approaches to math: LaTeX, ASCII

jb: can we figure out outside a workshop?

gk: er

jb: the question has felt intractable over the years, think only a workshop can address

which is hard to resource but maybe we gotta

what do others think?

mc: this is a by-the-way, I can´t address now

jb: JD, did Igalia host a session at a conference on this in March?

jd: Chrome still needs MathML support, Igalia could do but needs funds

I plan to attend a workshop hosted by American Institute of Mathmatics

in May

jb: educational only?

jd: yes

gk: where?

jd: San Jose

gk: would like to know more; Benetech are there

jd: already going

jb: can you coordinate?

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

jd: ??? I can report back

jb: yes

CSUN keynote talked about embedding a11y into org practices

request that W3C publish in EPub

mc: MC would like to do, but need tooling to automate, and need to understand what user experience benefit is, don´t want to do for its own sake

jb: GK, tooling?
... epubcheck can build

gk: need to know how many files

need to add metadata

jb: can you send info I can pass to systems people?

gk: ok

interesting to see if having local copy of epub will lead to more usage

jb: next year, conference will be in Anaheim

possible coordination on W3C meetings at that location

<shawn> [EOWG will almost certainly want to meet around CSUN next year]

coordinate via JB to have all meetings on site if possible

khs: +1 to publishing in epub

might constrain at first which docs we do it

also, expect AG WG will want to meet at CSUN

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say I meant W3C tooling for epub

mc: for epub publication, we need *W3C* tools to support

and want to be really clear we know what benefit it brings

jb: yup, W3C tool support was an unstated assumption

GK, should MC read epub to learn what the UX is in epub??

gk: EPub isn´t in epub

to explore, take a document set like WCAG 2.1 and manually generate EPub to see how it flies

jb: timeline?

gk: will check

mc: WCAG a good case study because of inter-related resources, should do guidelines, understanding, and techniques

gk: also there was idea of a a11y pledge

any type of org could take the pledge

have seen that idea floating around in various places

jb: hearing the buzz

gather that Dan Goldstein doing via USBLN

Reflecting on Silver Design Sprint

jb: pre-discussion: lots of good feedback, huge amount of content

let´s keep it short here

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Silver_Design_Sprint

js: result of a year of research with broad scope

to identify areas we wanted to address

invite diverse mix of leaders and stick them in a room for a couple days

had a specialist in Agile Moderation run it

wildly exceeded my expectations

lots of new thinking, suggestions

first day was idea generation

second day was solution prototyping

interesting ideas

we´re writing it all up now

expect to provide a more complete report soon

ack

khs: people said it was fabulous

jb: JS, you´ll report to AG WG soon?

js: yup

jb: visited part of second day

sat at each table

good discussion

nervous about the high hopes

need to manage expectations

but acknowledge creative space

ARIA dependencies

js: ARIA in HTML going to CR

was split from joint work with ARIA WG years ago

promised to stay coordinated

we asked ARIA WG to review

WG didn´t but a participant did, concern that the spec has major differences from actual practice

and would effectively outlaw deployed practices

we think we may see this sort of thing more

when component of technology split into another WG

so want to think of how to stay on top

jb: I been talking with Ralph and PLH

we had opposite worry, that it was overly permissive

now hearing overly restrictive?

<Judy_> scribe: Judy_

MC: both could be true
... in some cases it could be too permissive, in other too restrictive
... common issue is that there was probably too little coordination
... resulting in problems
... hard to cite examples
... more time-consuming to do an after-the-fact review
... leading to this agenda.

<MichaelC> scribe: MichaelC

jb: have discussed many times with PLH & Ralph over past months

about concern of not specific dependencies on ARIA WG of WGs that have ARIA modules in their deliverables

Ralph & PLH seem to support this concern

what kind of dependency would work from ARIA WG perspective?

jd: would like to ask the WG the question

js: +1, just wanted to start conversation, not ready with a solution

we are rechartering, and expect it will come up again

jb: come up with a specific request asap

charters go forward all the time

when one goes forward without necessary dependency, there is higher coordination burden later

jd: for ARIA in HTML, having it standalone makes it easier to review, but the concerns being raised were there since HTML 5.0

so not supporting holding up CR

mc: thinks this was never implemented

which allowed emergence of practices that didn´t conform

if implemented, could break existing patterns

jb: another argument for full due diligence

Update on WCAG 2.1 Implementation Testing

<Judy_> scribe: jb

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG21/CR/scorecard

<Judy_> mc: so ag wg is collecting examples of sites to meet each of the new sc in 2.1 and also site that would conform at AA and AAA

<Judy_> ...we need 2 for each SC and 8 for AA and 2 for AAA

<Judy_> ...gathering of sites happening over the past couple of weeks

<Judy_> ...testing didn't start mostly till last week when could do hands-on orientation

<Judy_> ...see scorecard link

<Judy_> ...if higher than 2, met our target, [more detail about how to read it]

<Judy_> ...gotta evaluate 50 SC for AA and higher for AAA

<Judy_> ...walked through all of this w the WG yesterday, assigned everybody to different tasks

<Judy_> ...we have 7 of 8 AAs under evaluation need at least 1 more

<Judy_> ...probably have 2 AAAs

<Judy_> ...official deadline is this friday (for collecting)

<Judy_> ...and for evaluating as well

<Judy_> jb: clarification collecting vs evaluation

<Judy_> mc: so we will reconciliation....

<scribe> scribe: MichaelC

jb: anybody else have AA sites to offer?

gk: inclusivepublishing.org

mc: could add, don´t know if it´s viable

<Ryladog> https://inclusivepublishing.org/

gk: we can probably fix things if issues raised

also sent an EPub to AWK

this site is a hub

epubtest.org has scores on reading systems

<Ryladog> http://epubtest.org/testsuite/accessibility/

there´s a test book: #300

jb: others?

js: TPG?

mc: not in the list, could be one that couldn´t be updated in time

jb: last round, we accepted sites that might work but be slightly late

mc: need to prioritize efforts on sites likely to pass

but a site that *is* likely to pass *and* only a few days late, could probably use

Update on ePub 3.2 development

gk: Publishing business group has approved work on epub 3.2 to be taken up by community group

current rec is 3.1

has backwards compatibility issues with 3.01 and 3.0

3.2 would address that

would come out as a W3C Note

publishing summit in May in Berlin

mc: CG cannot publish Notes

who publishes?

gk: CG hands over to BG

jb: we need to catch up on the publishing process wrt these groups

Upcoming APA WG rechartering & possible normative docs

jb: heads-up that i'm expecting that multiple people staff-side at least will be favorable to this so assume there might be a friendly reception

mc: let´s tell everyone else what that is

js: the discussion, at APA and ARIA chair level, is that personalization not fitting as an ARIA spec

<Ryladog> +1 to that

so thinking it fits better in APA

for incubation, for eventual Rec track development by APA

APA and ARIA recharter soon

haven´t yet discussed with personalization TF facilitators

(sorry guys, MC will follow up)

khs: need wider web involvement

doing in APA supports that

personalization crosses many technologies

jb: so might also take through strategy funnel

want to ensure there continues to be strong a11y involvement, wherever it ends up

khs: some orgs getting behind, would support this path

- DRAFT -

WAI Coordination Call Teleconference

28 Mar 2018

Attendees

Contents