27 Sep 2018


Jennie, LisaSeemanKestenbaum, kirkwood


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

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> scribe: kirkwood

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> takeup item 2

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> agenda item 2

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> agrend?

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> agrenda?

alistare - review of wag feedback

alastair: about feed back. bascially we have been working on process builiding to TPAC and agree to changes how working gorup process works, github, consensus, how we work, amake sdesiciions

<alastairc> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/process-results-pt1/results

alastair: how we make decisions

Alastir: distallation of feedback

Alastair: comment if major issue has not been included
... these were all the solutions we could think of to address those problemsw
... please leave comments
... we will put to the group at TPAC
... overaching one is wether we centralize editing

Alastair. core group of editors to use for this which would be quite a big change

scribe: that is the only one I would call out

LS: the only thing missed out is asked for

Alastair: ended up being 40 pages of comments
... we tried to distill them
... if you think something is missing please leave a comment

LS: we need more time, everyon should look through it

Alastair: yes

LS: did you write to list, lets send a reminder next week

Alastar: did send to list

Alastar wanted to make sure have a chance can send through a rminder to list

AC: this week

aprove https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/coga/lisas-cahnges-such-as-easyread-abstract/content-usable/index.html

LS: was my point inluded or not would then be covered, thanks AC

AC: sure

LS: we should do things and send to list, I think. We’ll see

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/coga/lisas-cahnges-such-as-easyread-abstract/content-usable/index.html

LS: I put into document for making content usable what we discusse3d last wekk, including an abstract
... easy reading abstract, made the first bit easy reading and then W3C context stuff at bottom
... abstract is what we discussed laszt week pretty much
... status is W3C status
... summary of user needs put in there, make diference between making usable site, including Glenda’s ummary of table
... want to make sure we have difffernet user needs in there
... section 5 isdifferent, igot rid of section 5.1 wasnt that helpful
... put sentence at end see design requirments for…
... we can say we are approving this doc with more editorial work needed
... not wanting to hold off process
... anyone see any problems with document?
... if approve this doc put in plus one

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> resultion , aprove the useabilty doc as a first working draft

<Jennie> +1

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> +1

AC: approve to give as first working draft to go through to AG working group

<alastairc> +1 (although I'd like to add a para based on Bruces comment)


AC: couple of useful things that were comments from survey can put in text after call
... the digram in usability testing could you explain it more was a comment

LS: could you send to list

AC: yes

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> passed :)

LS: typos, underlines, double dots etc are typos we can ingnore for now for sake of consensus


LS: goung to send also to list
... will try to do today to give 48 hours to oject

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> "https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aNl2uIkNlbch1QXoBHY675DC9vnOuoKFq20arP1q3Oo/edit#

LS: next is design requirements doc
... design requirment doc is pretty much ready to go and get converted. I tried to resolve all comments. If there any comments people see let me know
... anyone aware of other changes?
... comment boxes need to come out, peoples names need to come out
... but we can carryon working on this version
... if pwople are comfortable add editors note to continue working but shouldn’t take it out. Its first working draft tso there are bound to be changes
... Jeannie I have one are two comments on your thing

Jeannie: comment away, wasnt sure paramaters for putting in examples

AC: must be other places W3C uses images

LS: might create images all the time

AC: might be difficult with images

LS: would a screen shot be usable?

AC: not sure from a W3C point of view
... Roy can you ask Michael regarding screen shots

LS: should I take out screen shots?

AC: leve in for now

LS: Jennie took wording form WCAG. But maybe we should avoid interruptions

Jennie: feel free to go ahead and change

<Jennie> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WcfVALVq8PS9CLXUuAfV9Op0wXvI2yJYedj5jO23GTk/edit#heading=h.gmpmiu9yrnze%22

LS: tried to crop out logos so no identifiable
... next one make controls easy to identify
... my concern was that people wont know what to do
... use clear design using common dtyle and design pattern, make all borders clear,

Jennie: use a common style, how woould use innovative styles, maybe like a hamburger menu

LS: good point about hamburger menu. we also when not possible provied instructions
... problem with hamburger menu is a lot of people can’t use them. we recomment user testing, thats fine
... that’s the intent

Jennie: so we recommend using common contols but if you have somehting new or good have instructions
... I was misunderstanding vocabulary ‘not possible’

LS: sometimis it not

Jennie: agreed

LS: we could copy this

and move it into detalis

LS: if you are designing a new control make them easy ro find

and insturctions

LS: and to test with people with different cognitive abilities
... its a first version we can make better as we go

seems fine to me can work on it we can editors note

Jennie: think just grabbed from github to dimlify, an idors note for now is fine

I agree

LS: I just added a sentence and an editors note. make it easy to find we discussed

Jennie: what about always let user go back?

LS: I put edits in

Jennie: i put some comments on side to show when i agreed

LS: anything else you wanted to add?

Jennie: not at this point

I am concerned about forms in process that seems to work in the forms

LS: i think we have the covered
... if we have ready for today at least useful for TPAC
... editorial may continue

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> reslovition, to publish the design rewuirments as a first working draft (editorial will contiune)

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> +1

LS: problems with what we have got




<Jennie> +1

<alastairc> +1

LS: I need to put resolutions to list
... anything else feel need to review, challenged?

aproving hanges for the gap anlisis: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aNl2uIkNlbch1QXoBHY675DC9vnOuoKFq20arP1q3Oo/edit#

LS: does anyone have an issue with us pulishing this next version of the gap analysis?

no problem

LS: I think Jan and Sherry said they were ok with it

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> reslovition, to publish the gap analisis s as a next working draft (editorial will contiune)

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> +1

AC: I’m fine given others

<Jennie> +1


Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
$Date: 2018/09/27 14:54:05 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
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: Jennie LisaSeemanKestenbaum kirkwood
Found Scribe: kirkwood
Inferring ScribeNick: kirkwood

WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting

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

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: 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.)

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]