<Charles> lurking in IRC only. cannot join call.

Welcome

We're talking about the keeping the POUR acronym thing.

Lauriat: We have things like activity/planning/developing. With other IA prototypes, we're already kind of incorporating that. I would argue against including those types of tags for now.
... partially because it would get a bit speculative and up for interpretation really quickly.

Jeanne: That's one of the things that came out of the needs from the research.

<Charles> I would prefer to keep the principles but not the acronym, so that we can add principles

Lauriat: I'm talking about what to have in th tagging prototype in two weeks.
... We're already including that information, but I don't think we need the tags.

Jeanne: We will need them

Lauriat: In time, but I don't think we need them now.

<kirkwood> I’m a little confused now about the stated purpose of the tags?

Lauriat: The tags help for navigating and understanding "Success Criteria" in Silver.

<kirkwood> “Filter by tag” would be a functional way of interacting with Silver?

Lauriat: If you're trying to account for all the things that are "perceivable" and you notice the tag, it gives you a quick way to find all things that would need to be addressed

Jeanne: Which do you think are the most appropriate tags to have in two weeks?

Shawn: POUR principles...because a lot of people find them very helpful. Not necessarily in terms of architecture, but in terms of understanding the success criteria themselves

Lauriat: POUR principles and functional need

Note: Shaun replied to Jeanne...I just misscribed

thanks, Jeanne

Jennison: If there's interest in what people thought of the other tags, you could add that as a question. "We're thinking of these other tags, what do people think?"

Lauriat: One reason for not including disability or functional need in the tags. Charles created a document...and there's a lot. There would be the potential for the list to explode. by listing some, we'd be excluding some

Jeanne: In that case, we're better doing just POUR for now.

Lauriat: Why not include the high-level activities as well?

Jeanne: Yeah, good. Thank you.

Lauriat: So, given that. How do we want to construct the tag prototype?

Jeanne: I think we're going to use the plain language prototype files to mock show how it fits together.

Lauriat: On Friday, Cyborg was going to write an invite for developers to help write the methods for the plain language prototype..I need to look at that

Jeanne: We should look at the EasyChecks. We could pull stuff right out of that.

We've sort of drifted a little to the Plain Language Agenda Item

<jeanne> Jeanne: We needto credit EO for anything we take from EasyChecks.

Lauriat: Looks like we're good on plain language and tagging. Can we move on to Conformance.
... we should have something for conformance. We're not going to have a big solid prototype in time for TPAC. We need to be prepared.

Jeanne: We need to have some tests.

<jeanne> Jeanne: My priority will be working on tests - I will write up the "does the alt text make sense" example and at least one COGA example

Lauriat: So for those tests, would it make sense to tackle the same success criteria as we have for the plain language prototype?

Jeanne: Yes, then we could show how it all goes together.

Lauriat: Not necessarily all one big thing, but just reference the others.

Jeanne: We're deep diving a little into tests
... In the Plain Language, we have headings...

Lauriat: Name, Role, Value
... I have the document
... Sensory Characteristics, and Pause, Stop, Hide

Jeanne: If you look at the document, in each section there's an original and the proposed.
... I think Name, Role, Value will all be pass/fail stuff, so we don't need to do a lot with that one

Lauriat: There are times when you have a toggle button, checkbox, and switch...and they're not necessarily wrong, but some are better than others.
... In Google Docs, we have a "Star" icon. What role should that have?
... it's to mark the document as important.
... it could be toggle button, but we went with checkbox; because toggle buttons don't work with VoiceOver
... it could also be a switch. I'd argue that checkbox is the worst option because typically it's associated with a form and checking a checkbox doesn't have an immediate interaction

Jennison: I think that role is going to be important the more widgets we have

Lauriat: Yeah, like it may be better to use table instead of grid...so I think there's a lot of room for interpretation when it comes to these
... and for Heading, it can be complicated. Like on a news site, there may be subsections within another section.
... do you add another heading, or would that just add more noise to the page?
... if you're getting to heading level 6, you've probably gone too far
... We need to balance between meeting the letter of the law, but failing the user; not meeting the letter, but helping the user; and meeting the letter and making it work for everyone

Jennison: We need to be forward thinking about new technologies and understanding that they don't support everything in the beginning.

Lauriat: And this raises a question from my perspective. If we tie tests to the technology...and what the technology supports, it very rapidly continues the accessibility-supported aspect of WCAG

Jeanne: Keep in mind, we have three structural things that intersect. The guidelines, the methods, and the points system in conformance which allows us to associate methods with technology.
... We have the ability with this system to continue the methods into new technologies without having to do an update of Silver in theory
... the principles and guidelines will go into guidelines. The techniques and some success criteria will go into methods.
... and the methods can be "assigned" or something by the points system.
... we could have methods that are more appropriate to certain technologies. Or certain types of web technologies. Like more appropriate for static or eCommerce sites.
... so we have a lot of flexibility on how to make them work together

Lauriat: I think that's more than a solid enough start for what we can do for TPAC

Jeanne: Is anyone good at drawing diagrams? We're going to need some for TPAC
... that's a good start for now.

Lauriat: Anything else we need to discuss related to conformance?
... If not, we get 10 minutes back

Jeanne: well how about we think about Sensory characteristics?

<Lauriat> 1.3.3 Sensory Characteristics: Instructions provided for understanding and operating content do not rely solely on sensory characteristics of components such as shape, size, visual location, orientation, or sound.

Jeanne: And what about pause, stop, hide?

<Lauriat> Auto-updating: For any auto-updating information that (1) starts automatically and (2) is presented in parallel with other content, there is a mechanism for the user to pause, stop, or hide it or to control the frequency of the update unless the auto-updating is part of an activity where it is essential.

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)

Succeeded: s/Jeanne: POUR principles/Shawn: POUR principles/
Succeeded: s/We just need /We need/
Present: Lauriat Jennison LuisG_ kirkwood Charles jeanne Shawn Angela
Regrets: Jan Mike Shari Charles
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: LuisG_
Inferring Scribes: LuisG_

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.

Found Date: 02 Oct 2018
People with action items: 

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


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.)