Silver Community Group Teleconference

07 Dec 2018


LuisG, Cyborg, KimD, Makoto, jeanne, Shawn, Jennison, Angela, MikeCrabb, Charles, AngelaAccessForAll, kirkwood, Lauriat, JF, shari, johnkirkwood, Scott, Cooley, scottcooley
Jeanne, Shawn


holiday schedule

Jeanne: Can we agree on our Holiday schedules? Christmas is on a Tuesday, so I would assume we wouldn't have meetings on the 25th and Jan 1, but would we meet on the 21st and 28th.

<jeanne> No meeting on 28.

Working on the draft of the conformance prototype

Lauriat: We could just ask folk on the Tuesday before.

Jeanne: Let's plan to meet and then ask on the Tuesday before.

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wTJme7ZhhtzyWBxI8oMXzl7i4QHW7aDHRYTKXKELPcY/edit#

Jeanne: Around when WCAG was published, W3C dropped the conformance requirements. They kept it in WCAG since it was already done.
... That said, we want to do conformance because WCAG is used in regulations. And people need to show that they meet the guidelines.
... what we've been thinking for conformance is a larger picture of conformance. I took some time to take what was in our slide deck and update it based on conversations we've had.
... I want to go through to it make sure I've put it in here correctly

Lauriat: When we were talking about heuristic evaluation, I don't think we need a catch all method to go along with it
... I'm not totally confident about it, but that's what I'm feeling at this point
... I can't think of a way to implement it that would just be restating of the guideline

Charles: What about technology agnostic? At the beginning we say that methods are technology specific. If there are 5 technology specific methods is there room for a technology agnostic method?

Lauriat: I don't think so but the opposite might work. A technology specific catch all method.

Charles: Does that suggest the methods outside of this are not only tech specific, but implementation specific?

Lauriat: I think that's the direction we were going.

Charles: So method is almost synonymous with implementation. How you did it.

Lauriat: It was almost like the current techniques.

scottcooley: Sounds like methods are synonymous with "how to" regardless of technology

Charles: I think it was specific to technology though

Jeanne: They're the Silver equivalent of the techniques; although we anticipate some of the existing success criteria will become methods since they're technology specific.
... the guidelines are the technology agnostic advice
... and the methods are how to do it

scottcooley: So there may be several methods to satisfy a guidelien

Jeanne: ... yes

Charles: Do we need to identify what technology means within this?
... technology seems to imply content technology and not delivery technology

Lauriat: Maybe earlier than what I originally thought, but don't need to identify that yet
... I think we're thinking more of...things that are different enough that they would warrant having separate methods or guidelines
... like "a website" "a web application might be different..."VR" would definitely be different

Cyborg: How does IoT fit into that? Or would that be a category?

Lauriat: Maybe a category, but this is where the lines blur a lot.

Charles: Because we know it's on the horizon and we need to define; does the statement "methods are technology specific" hold true?

Jeanne: We're getting in the weeds a little bit, so let's move on.

Lauriat: I've made a note in the doc so we don't lose track of this thread.

stevelee, we're looking at this doc right now https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wTJme7ZhhtzyWBxI8oMXzl7i4QHW7aDHRYTKXKELPcY/edit#heading=h.6oetdyu21wzd

Jeanne: The points system, we worked on this right after TPAC. One of the issues was that it's too easy to game, so we talked about ways to reduce the harm of gaming.
... in each category of user need, someone needs to get points in that category. There would be a minimum for Bronze, Silver, Gold in each category. There's a diagram of a hypothetical example.

JF: I'm still worried about points attached to methods. You might be able to do a test that gets you a lot of test but not address all the needs.
... what about a minimum number of tests that need to be performed?

Jeanne: We had talked about this about the interference SCs. Saying those would need to be required.

JF: I can see that as a "minimum tests that must be done and you must score X"

Lauriat: For the points sytems basics, I see different category of user needs and points in each level, but don't understand the connection between points and bronze silver gold

Jeanne: They're arbitrary and they're just demonstrating that the points don't need to be the same for each category.

Charles: So this is basically a scoreboard of what you've ended up with.

Lauriat: Why are there points at all? With the "you must get all bronze to get bronze" it seems how conformance works now for A, AA, AAA and it looks like we've renamed them

JF: That kind of matches my understanding as well. For the categories there, you had to have a minimum number of tests for each disability type would give you the medal level.

Charles: So the points might not be related to your conformance claim.

JF: They could be. Consider a VPAT where you usually provide a good amount detail. You could publish the points there.

Charles: I'm concerned if you put actual earned points into public conformance claims, that's more bad behavior for gaming the system.

<jeanne> trackbot, end meeting

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: 2018/12/07 22:00:09 $

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)

Succeeded: s/preesnt+//
Succeeded: s/sorry it was me going on mute, just joined//
Default Present: LuisG, Cyborg, KimD, Makoto, jeanne, Shawn, Jennison, Angela, MikeCrabb, Charles, AngelaAccessForAll, kirkwood, Lauriat, JF, shari, johnkirkwood, Scott, Cooley
Present: LuisG Cyborg KimD Makoto jeanne Shawn Jennison Angela MikeCrabb Charles AngelaAccessForAll kirkwood Lauriat JF shari johnkirkwood Scott Cooley scottcooley
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: LuisG
Inferring Scribes: LuisG
Found Date: 07 Dec 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]