Silver Community Group Teleconference

23 Oct 2018


steve, jeanne, Shawn, Audrey, Cooper, Wilco
jeanne, Shawn


Project Management

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page - all Silver prototype links

Shawn: How do we get more people involved and how do we manage it?
... Our biggest challenge today is the Conformance model

Jeanne - we have 4 parts to COnformance: User Agent, Authoring Tool and AT guidance;

scribe: measurability
... point scoring system
... final score and levels

Shawn: Let's put the point scoring system and the levels together
... we also have task based instead full-page
... We have to define what is accessibility and usability. It may be a gray area.
... What do we need for the measurability?

Jeanne: We need more people with experience in writing valid usability tests.
... we need more people with point score experience -- Audrey who has experience with the French system. Anne with the Norwegian experience, but they are working on ACT. We could ask them to comment
... We should enroll Tim Boland from US and Simon Harper in the UK. Simon is a researcher who has written papers on alternative scoring systems.
... it's been working to have small groups, but maybe we need to devote one meeting a week to the small groups instead of the full group

Shawn: I would rather see the small group meeting when they need to.

Project Management upcoming tasks

jeanne: User testing
... we need to confirm the usability testing labs.

Shawn: We need to test the feasibility and testability from the AGWG
... we may not get a lot of participants
... it's a small group to begin with, plus we have to get the people who have the time.
... we have to go to the stakeholder map.

Jeanne: Let's do that today - go to the stakeholder map and figure out who needs to test the information architecture.

Shawn: FOr plain language, we want to have broad participation and tasks and comments. We need to get someone to help us set that up.

Jeanne: We should ask Dave Sloan to help design the plain language test. If he isn't available, he may be able to recommend someone.

Shawn: We could also ask Dave about how to test information architecture.
... Regardless, we need plain language translations.
... we could write the basic information, and then turn it over to the editors. We have a list of people who will help with editing
... if we just draft things, and get halfway there, then the editors can get it the rest of the way there.

Jeanne: We could ask AGWG for volunteers to write plain language following the template and the style guide.

Shawn: we could set it up in Github,with an issue for each WCAG SC, then we can assign it to people and track their progress. They can work in whatever tool they want.
... Since Github is not accessible to everyone, we will only use it for project management. The discussion will not be in Github, it will be in the context of wherever the work is happening.
... To clarify, we are talking about translation to plain language.
... we also need to make a note of how to test translations of the information architecture. That was a valid point raised yesterday that there is a need for some identifier that is cross language.

Jeanne: What is the use case for international translation and need of a unique number?

Reinaldo: I don't think we need a number. People care about the content, not the number.

EO meeting starting now, we will be in their room.

Writing a Method from an ACT test

[brief discussion of which WCAG SC to use as an example. 4.1.2 is too hard/big to start with.

<Lauriat> Draft doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18JyGF-AK8Qgq7DPyVlDYmxoj6814rORxuCf0l0oSb7U/edit

scribe: We are looking at 3.1.1 Language of Page as a starting example.

Wilco: Should there be individual Methods for each tests? I think a Method should have multiple rules, when appropriate. So for 3.1.1 has three atomic rules: HTML has lang attribute, HTMLLang and Xml:Lang Match; Validity of HTMLlang attribute; Specified Language matches reality (to be written).

Jeanne: Specified Language matches reality should be a manual test.

Wilco: We havne't written this one.

Shawn: The Guideline could be "The human language of the environment can be identified by assistive technology"

Jeanne: "Identify the human language for assistive technology."

Shawn: That sounds like you are setting Voiceover.

Wilco: Environment is defined for every technology

Shawn: Applicability of guidelines on technologies from ACT is a good way of identifying the gaps for the platforms (mostly user agent and assistive tech

[discussion of the ability to browser to expose the language to the user. Tools can detect it.

Shawn: If a browser and screenreader combination doesn't support a method, how do we identify that it?

In the example, we have 3 related metods: HTML tag has lang attribute

,,, HTTP Response Header specifies language

scribe: VR town has language specified
... HTTP Response Header the browser can detect, but it doesn't expose to assistive tech. This would be a method that is desired, but itsn't supported by user agents.

Jeanne: Would ACT and Auto-WCAG be able to work on some of the tests to support Silver prototypes?

Wilco: I don't see why not as long as we stay inside the requirements of the funding.

Shawn: The biggest challenge was taking it from HTML specific to generic of guideline
... we had questions about the plain language synonym of "environment"

Amy: In most games, the language comes from the game engine

[the group looks at WCAG2ICT for examples of wording for technology neutral.]

Shawn: Can we have a combination of HTML tag and language on individual elements.

Wilco: Could we say that the content management system has to expose the language for the author to set?

Jeanne: That would be ATAG!

Add a related Method

Shawn: Give users a way to set a language attribute at the environment level.

Set a long description that describes clerly that it is for the authoring tool

<scribe> meeting: Silver TPAC meeting Day 2

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: 2018/10/23 15:06:57 $

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: steve jeanne Shawn Audrey Cooper Wilco
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: jeanne
Inferring Scribes: jeanne
Found Date: 23 Oct 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]