<kirkwood> hello i can hear but mic not working... argh
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2018Jun/0036.html
Jeanne: happy vacation to all vacationing.
Comments from AGWG: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11eSnUw9iBf_07GZsna5ozj--zZx6DTATguaTv8uauEo/edit#heading=h.e4f7qe4qdp34
<scribe> New draft of Requirements: https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/
<KimD> The 2.0 abstract does say "WCAG 2.0 success criteria are written as testable statements that are not technology-specific.
<kirkwood> sounds fine to me
<kirkwood> its nicer and shows depth
<kirkwood> I like onramp
<kirkwood> introduction is fine too
<kirkwood> I don’t see how a standard can not be technology neutral
<kirkwood> html is a standard though
<kirkwood> so extend the standard, in essence. i see the core be neutral. I see what you are saying
<kirkwood> makes sens
<kirkwood> sens/sense
<kirkwood> Agreed. That is what facilitates innovation.
<kirkwood> I was just worred about how specify technolgy turns people away from innovation
<mikeCrabb> MikeCrabb : I like the idea of having these different 'flavours' of what the silver guidelines could be. There would be a general 'core' version and then dependant on what technology a person was looking at there could be different options that people could enable to see specific advice
<mikeCrabb> ... one of the issues with current WCAG is that there are Guidelines linking to Success Criteria linking to Techniques, so as a user you have to go quite deep in order to get to it. So in part, this is just another way of changing the view that people see
close item 1
<mikeCrabb> jeanne: will be doing a presentation Thursday night at accessibility Toronto. Slide No 14 has a new section called prototypes
<mikeCrabb> ... added in what is happening with plain language, one for IA. We are looking for 3-6 prototypes for what silver can look like and members are looking at existing work for ideas to go forward
<mikeCrabb> ... one thing we haven't talked about is how to get silver to be scalable and how to get accessibility experts to add their own code/design patterns etc.
<mikeCrabb> ... this is something that a lot of people got excited about last year, but as we're going back this is something that we should be talking about too
<mikeCrabb> ...related to IA as we need to know how this can work and see if anyone wants to come and work on it
<mikeCrabb> ... conformance. Only a proposal, not a decision.
<mikeCrabb> https://w3c.github.io/silver/
MikeCrabb: It would be very helpful to have IA prototypes.
Roy: I could share this with the
China Accessibility Community Group. THen I could bring their
ideas to the Silver Task Force.
... there are Community Groups for other countries. Use those
to contact people who are interested in accessibility.
Jeanne: Jemma, do you have contacts in the Korean Accessibility Community? Could you ask people to work on a prototype?
Jeanne: I will look for the draft of the invitation email that we worked on and update it.
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/title: Silver Task Force and Community Group//'/ Succeeded: s|/'|| Present: KimD jeanne Jennison AngelaAccessForAll Roy mikeCrabb kirkwood Regrets: Peter No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: jeanne Inferring Scribes: jeanne WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: 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]