Silver Task Force Teleconference

06 Apr 2018


chaals, Charles, Jeanne_Shawn, Luis
Jemma, Jan, Shari, JohnR, JohnK
Jeanne, Shawn


<scribe> scribe: jeanne

update on table summaries from the CSUN Design Sprint

Jeanne: Finished Table 2 including the summary

Shawn: I added the summary for Table 5, what we were trying for Strictly Testable, but we got beyond it in a complementary way.

<Charles> So, there is a pattern here, where table prototypes addressed more than one problem.

<Lauriat> Table 5 looked at how testers would go about assessing a web application using measurements along a gradient of accessibility as opposed to a strict pass/fail result. The tool to put together a report of the assessment puts an emphasis on:

<chaals> [that is helpful. We have a lot of problems to address...]

<Lauriat> 1. personas: users’ needs come first

<Lauriat> 2. task-based assessment, rather than component-based assessment. A properly marked up button doesn’t help anything if the user can’t complete the task at hand. Note: this also makes a good midpoint of grading between component/tag assessment and full page / complete processes compliance in the WCAG conformance model.

Jeanne: We did the same at Table 2. We had also discussed Difficult to Read, and added some elements from that discussion into Accessibility Supported prototype.

layout of Design Sprint report and invitation to further work?

Jeanne: I was thinking of organizing it by problem statement, and asking people for ideas or prototypes where we need more.

Shawn: There is too much detail. We could put all the HMW in a wiki page

Chaals: We should put a summary of the pathway that we want to go down, and include all the places where we don't know where we want to go.
... I would put it at the beginning. Here is our conclusion and this is how we got there.

<Charles> A possible prioritization of those paths may be based on degree of completion. So that means we have (at least) 5 prototypes that are in-progress, and (at least) 10 ideas for prototypes that are conceptual.

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to organize the rough first draft of the report

<trackbot> Created ACTION-168 - Organize the rough first draft of the report [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-04-13].

Chaals: Degree of completion and who is doing the work is always a good first cut.

Shawn: Pull together the summary, the next steps and how to investigate the feasibility of doing it.

AccessU meeting?


Sharron Rush invited us to have a room to meet there.

Jan McSorley suggested that people could drop in the room and work on a prototype or do user testing and put things in front of it.

Chaals: We need to get prototypes in front of people and then be prepared to make changes based on the feedback.
... then the person who designed the prototype has to commit to moving it forward.
... If people come in and hack on it, then you get a lot of value, and other people can add to it.

<Charles> If the goal is contribution, then the prototype(s) must be somewhere that contributors can access, like GitHub

Chaals: It should be somewhere that people can see.
... having something where people can see what you have done on the first day, so I can poke it and make comments the next morning.

<Charles> Then we also need a place and method for comments

Shawn: Who can be there?


Jeanne, yes. Jan & Shari are yes. Shawn is no. Chaals and Charles are remote possibilities.

scribe: Luis is not attending.

Charles: Even if we don't have progress on prototypes for people to interact with, it can at least be a recruiting effort, where we show what we have done so far and talk about our needs for the summer.

layout of Design Sprint report and invitation to further work?

<Charles> It is also on CodePen already: https://codepen.io/hallmedia/full/zWpoEd/

Chaals: I could move the prototype from Table 4 into Github.

<Charles> https://github.com/w3c

Chaals: I'll make a repo and hand over the ownership later when we have a Silver repo
... both Github and Google docs cause problems for some people. We do end up shuffling things across different systems and accommodate people.

Plain language vs Simple language for writing Silver

Charles: I gathered a bunch of resources that can be pasted into a working draft of research on the topic so we can easily access the sources if we want to cite them
... the fundamental thing that must be sorted out first is whether or not we adopt and existing standard or whether we create them.
... in order to make that decision, we need to look at the existing standards. Globally, there an almost infinite number -- some of which are hard to find.
... in the US, there are models that go back decades that maps plain language to an education grade level based.

Chaals: We have the option of using what they actually say and adapting that to the best of our ability. We aren't required to use someone else's standard.
... my experience is that writing simple or plain language is very hard and we shouldn't get to caught up in the "how-to" of it. We need to make it, and let people comment on it.
... we don't want to spend months on it.

Charles: Let's have the people who have expertise in this area advance it to the next step.
... I just prepared resource materials.
... do we need to create a style guide to continue writing to meet that standard?
... Jeanne mentioned a volunteer effort to convert existing WCAG 2.1 to plain language.
... the Alan Dalton article last November converted each success criteria to plain simple language.

<Charles> https://24ways.org/2017/wcag-for-people-who-havent-read-them/

Shawn: ANy discussion of needing a style guide should be held with someone who has expertise in the area.
... let's get a general overview from John Rochford and have him guide us through the discussion. Then work on the details of whether we should have our own style guide.

Charles: My hope is that he takes an action item to organize and lead that effort.

Jeanne: We have five people who have volunteered. I hope one of them would be willing to organize it.
... we could write the style guide as we go, so we can be responsive to what works and what doesn't.

Chaals: I think we should write the style guide as we go.

Other concurrent work

Charles: I'm going to see Peter Morville next Wednesday. He is one of the top 5 IA people in the industry.

Jeanne: Invite him to sign up for the CG. We should have the draft of the Design Sprint Report for him to look at.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to organize the rough first draft of the report

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2018/04/06 19:05:20 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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/rssagent, make minutes//
Present: chaals Charles Jeanne_Shawn Luis
Regrets: Jemma Jan Shari JohnR JohnK
Found Scribe: jeanne
Inferring ScribeNick: jeanne
Found Date: 06 Apr 2018
People with action items: jeanne

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]