W3C

- DRAFT -

Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference

01 Aug 2018

Attendees

Present
AWK, Jeanne, MichaelC, Kim, Wilco, Lisa
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
AWK

Contents


meeting time and frequency

<jeanne> +1 to first Wednesday

RESOLUTION: We will meet on the first Wednesday of each month at this time, for 60 minutes

Same dial in information

Lisa will check out about moving the personalization planning call 30 min

Silver Update and Asks for Task Forces

Jeanne: Silver finished 16 months of research
... design sprint in March
... lots of good ideas generated
... two projects:
... requitrements doc for silver

<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/index.html

Jeanne: first of three proposed drafts
... after current prototyping phase they will do another draft
... then another draft before working on a charter for rec track work
... invite TF co-fac to put Silver on the agenda to raise awareness and have discussion
... second project
... prototypes for Silver
... putting these out publicly to get comments

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> can you repost the link to the requirments?

Jeanne: these are rough so it is more about testing the ideas

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> and the protoypes

Jeanne: please show prototypes to TFs
... we need to show that the prototypes can address the SC proposals that couldn't make it into WCAG 2.1
... need help finding a good example (one!) of an SC proposal that was deferred to silver
... what is really needed is how the SC would be tested if not constrained by WCAG test model
... for LV
... people could customize the font/size/spacing/etc
... might be a good candidate for a rubric type test - if all items can be adjusted then there is a score
... different score if can pass 2 or 5 or more of the individual tests.
... so, need item that was deferred and how to test it, and the answer doesn't need to be true/false
... John Rochford is working on accessible authentication

LS: For that one, once the web auth spec is done that one should be easy to get in
... The two hardest ones are "easy language" and "familiar design"

JS: would be great to get that information

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WcfVALVq8PS9CLXUuAfV9Op0wXvI2yJYedj5jO23GTk/edit#heading=h.gmpmiu9yrnze

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-gap-analysis/#appendix-making-content-usable-for-people-with-cognitive-and-learning-disabilities

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WcfVALVq8PS9CLXUuAfV9Op0wXvI2yJYedj5jO23GTk/edit?usp=sharing

JS: Can you pick one that might be best and we can use that one?
... The focus now is on testability, so that focus may help deciding which one

WF: how do we figure out what isn't very testable vs things that just need new metrics?

JS: What we are talking about is doing new and broader metrics
... other topics I wanted to discuss can be handled via email.
... interested in thinking about new ways to measure and looking for additional ideas for tests

WF: Challenging but shouldn't be unsolvable
... Thing that might help if the asks are more broken up - e.g. "give us one SC that didn't make it"
... specific questions and challenges is helpful

JS: What we need is "what was important that couldn't make it?"

AWK: Do you know how to see these items in the Github repo?

https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3ADefer+is%3Aclosed

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3ADeferred+is%3Aclosed

JS: next topic - there will come a point that the TFs should be looking at the deferred items and thinking about what should get into silver
... Building the model first and then doing feasibility tests, so collecting the feasibility items now

AWK: AGWG main group needs to focus on WCAG 2.1 T&U first

JS: We won't be ready soon either

<jeanne> Jeanne: 2019 at the earliest.

+AWK

+Jeanne

+MichaelC

+Kim

+Wilco

+Lisa

trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

  1. We will meet on the first Wednesday of each month at this time, for 60 minutes
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2018/08/01 14:51:04 $

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/Lisa is check/Lisa will check/
Default Present: AWK, Jeanne, MichaelC, Kim, Wilco, Lisa
Present: AWK Jeanne MichaelC Kim Wilco Lisa
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: AWK
Inferring Scribes: AWK

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 01 Aug 2018
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]