<scribe> scribe: janina
jgw: Biometrics -- authentication vs teuring
<jasonjgw> Janina: notes the suggestion that there is a digital divide between those who have access to secondary (smart) devices and those who do not - we cannot require Web application developers to assume that secondary devices are available.
<jasonjgw> Scott notes the issue, clarifying that we discuss various types of CAPTCHA alternative - including multi-factor authentication, without clearly recommending any specific approach.
<jasonjgw> Janina agrees, noting that there isn't a single solution and that this should be emphasized.
<jasonjgw> Janina will write some text accordingly on a newly created branch.
<jasonjgw> Janina: biometrics need to be more sophisticated than might be supposed, to prevent foiling of biometric data. There are also privacy issues with single sign-on providers.
<jasonjgw> Janina: there are developing protocols - for example, a protocol could communicate the fact that there is a live user without disclosing identity.
<jasonjgw> Janina will draft changes in response, and Jason will review/contribute as appropriate.
<scott_h> dropped out - will dial back in
jgw: Reviews the issue--People avoiding disclosing info will avoid SSO
<jasonjgw> Janina raises the question of whether the data collection by a third party enables disclosure to the third party CAPTCHA provider of information from which a person's disability could be inferred and may lead to unfair treatment.
<jasonjgw> Janina: we already note the issue of third-party logged in identity providers.
<jasonjgw> Janina suggests also looking at issue #7.
<jasonjgw> Janina notes that we could seek COGA advice, and that we didn't change much from the previous release in this section.
<jasonjgw> Jason will review the text associated with this issue and commence a discussoin on list.
jgw: Can the FAST help us here?
http://w3c.github.io/apa/fast/checklist
jgw: Notes that much that we
document re XR doesn't fit in FAST
... Functional performance statements, e.g., EU public
procurement and U.S. 508, do seem to capture XR
... e.g., challenge to provide descriptions of a virtual scene
without info overload
... So, how to control cognitive load?
... This might help
<jasonjgw> Scott - agrees the FAST document is very good given its draft status. He inquires whether there are sources that could be drawn on to help support this effort.
sh: Also read through, wondering whether there might be more specific resources we could reference
jgw: Unsure whether there's existing guidance for developers of new technology?
sh: Perhaps a list of keywords to use in a search?
<jasonjgw> Scott suggests compiling a list of searchable terms with which to conduct a literature search.
mc: Was unaware of XR guidance in creating FAST, but did try to use available a11y lit
<jasonjgw> Michael is not aware of literature precisely on topic, but he sought to collect accessibility guidance and reflect it in the draft.
<jasonjgw> Michael would be interested in any literature (form research) that would be relevant.
<jasonjgw> Michael notes the list of user needs, which could serve as search terms. The terms are not the same as those originally used, in all cases, in the guidance form which they are taken.
<jasonjgw> Scott: suggests Jason should document some of these issues on list, and Scott will attempt to find furhter references relevant to them.
<jasonjgw> Janina: the users' needs and capabilities are central to accessibility, and the question arises of what is different in this case in the interaction. A challenge here lies in the virtual reality's not being as information rich as actual reality.
<jasonjgw> Judy regards it as a question of adding modalities to the interface. The objects in virtual space could have extensive/complex data that can be represented in multiple (or alternative) modalities - one could be overload with information, in fact.
<jasonjgw> Janina considers this to be the open question, that also pertains to human perceptual capacities and how they're utilized in the interface.
<jasonjgw> Judy maintains we need an understanding of what a cross-disability accessible VR system could be.
<jasonjgw> Judy: notes the need to identify high-quality VR scenarios and how they are experienced by people with disabilities, which are typical from the use cases that are typically discussed.
<jasonjgw> Janina: notes we have already disclosed possibilities that might be unique.
<jasonjgw> Judy notes that there are indeed quality issues in that the virtual reality experience doesn't achieve the same quality of experience as the genuine experiencing of a real environment.
<jasonjgw> Scott: notes our previous VR/AR research; he suggests we could articulate ways in which the experience of VR/AR can be efficacious and valuable to users with disabilities.
<jasonjgw> Janina: sugests there are artificially imposed line breaks imposed by a limited screen size that could be overcome for users with low vision by a VR enviornment.
<jasonjgw> Scott thinks there might be more literature on the beneficial use cases.
<jasonjgw> Judy notes the term of preference is currently XR, but one generally needs to characterie the continuum (VR/MR/AR) as the broader community is not necessarily familiar with XR.
<jasonjgw> Postponed to next week as we're at the very end of the meeting time.
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) Default Present: jasonjgw, janina, scott_h, SteveNoble, MichaelC Present: jasonjgw janina scott_h SteveNoble MichaelC Found Scribe: janina Inferring ScribeNick: janina WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 27 Mar 2019 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]