<jasonjgw> agendum 2 = Web Authentication 2 specification - first public working draft.

<jasonjgw> agendum 3 = WebRTC: accessibility-related use cases, requirements, and implications.

<Joshue108_> scribe: Joshue108

CAPTCHA Note - updates and discussion.

<Joshue108_> JW: Janina, the first issue is CAPTCHA note and progress.

<Joshue108_> JW: Where does this stand? Can you update?

<Joshue108_> JS: I had a great conversation with Jenny in COGA.

<Joshue108_> JS: I've pushed some changes to editorial branch but somethings are not showing up. Michael?

<Joshue108_> <Michael looks up GH branch etc>

<Joshue108_> <Git foo>

<Joshue108_> <git foo seems to work>

<Joshue108_> JS: I sent Jenny a message yesterday and gave a week for reply.

<Joshue108_> JS: We should run CFC a week later.

<Joshue108_> M-enabling is next week oh well.

<Joshue108_> SN: I read thru Mr Rochfords comments and some of the issues for COGA users and CAPTCHA..

<Joshue108_> SN: I'm happy to add some more language on this, happy to.

<Joshue108_> Where would you want it? Is there something else in the works?

<Joshue108_> JS: Where you think it is missing would be useful to look at.

<Joshue108_> I want a balanced doc without emphasis on any disability group.

<Joshue108_> Don't want to loose that, apoligies that I forgot you had taken this on.

<Joshue108_> With Jenny, we talked about anxiety disorder use cases.

<Joshue108_> We say CAPTCHA can make things hard for this group.

<Joshue108_> More prevalent with age- pre computer people.

<Joshue108_> That would make things work.

<Joshue108_> She made a great suggestion.

<Joshue108_> JB: Be careful of quoting that without checking it.

<Joshue108_> Be careful about assumptions.

<Joshue108_> JS: I agree, she was also urging us to be careful.

<Joshue108_> If you see pieces missing then great to get them into second wide review draft.

<Joshue108_> SN: I just want to get a sense of the number of changes etc

<Joshue108_> and nature etc.

<scott_h> hi everyone - my previous meeting is running overtime and unlikely I'll be able to dial in but will follow along on IRC

<Joshue108_> JW: I was going to ask you, when you are thinking about it. Where are there functional requirements and issues that are not properly addressed?

<Joshue108_> JS: Are there things missing that should be there?

<Joshue108_> SN: Don't know if thats the case beyond COGA type limitations not being mentioned too much.

<Joshue108_> They may feel focus is on visual issues etc.

<Joshue108_> SN: There are many diff types of issues..

<Joshue108_> SN: It sounded like Johns comments were looking at functional impacts and effects and you were looking at clinical type things.

<Joshue108_> Should they be mentioned?

<Joshue108_> JS: I think that helps..

<Joshue108_> JS: We are covering all of that I think however.

<Joshue108_> People in sitation x may have issue y for example.

<Joshue108_> SN: Can we reference certain resources?

<Joshue108_> JS: Yes, talk with Jenny about that.

<Joshue108_> I'll loop you into conversation.

<Joshue108_> JW:So what can we do in the next week or so, to make sure these issues are addressed?

<Joshue108_> Are there additional sentences or phrases etc that we can add?

<Joshue108_> JS: Steve create a GH branch?

<Joshue108_> SN: I can do it in GH?

<Joshue108_> JS: Yes please.

<Joshue108_> SN: I'll have a look.

<Joshue108_> JS: So Janina and Steve will co-ordinate on that? So we an review output?

<Joshue108_> JW: You want this in place before CFC?

<Joshue108_> JS: Yes, want to start CFC early next week.

<Joshue108_> JB: Was looking to see if Roy had input from groups in China.

<Joshue108_> Roy has sent a review and feels the doc captures many issues for typical users in China.

<Joshue108_> Will forward his comments with his permission later.

<Joshue108_> We do still need to get more direct guidenace in the docs themselves

<Joshue108_> I support parallel effort here.. hope to get some stuff into WCAG 2.2.

<Joshue108_> Scott H conclusion of the note would help improve the guidelines - make them robust.

<Joshue108_> JW: Scott was going to help, but we dont have a plan.

<Joshue108_> JW: Sound good?

<Joshue108_> JS: Yes, I thought Scott was to meet with AGWG etc.

<Joshue108_> JS: We can turn this into a concrete statement..

<Joshue108_> I'd like to see if we have formal APA statement, on how AGWG can improve CAPTCHA related guideance.

<Joshue108_> <Janina is AFK>

<Joshue108_> JW: I know Scott wants to contribute, he said he would be late.

<Joshue108_> JW: One side was that non-interactive techniques is preferred, or if you need interactive - offer the user a choice of sensory or cognitive abilities to satisfy the challenge..

<Joshue108_> JS: When there is one..

<Joshue108_> Non interactive is not always non-interactive..

<Joshue108_> JW: We have guidence that there should be a choice.

<Joshue108_> JS: We lay out quite a few.

<Joshue108_> JW: Yes, and we need to turn that into a concrete requirement. Needs work.

<Joshue108_> JS: Thats not different from our conclusions - if people read it they will have the same understanding.

<Joshue108_> JS: We can improve that.

<Joshue108_> JW: Lets do that, review it etc. Any suggestions?

<Joshue108_> I'll start a chat..

<Joshue108_> Steve and Janina will talk about cognitive and functional limitations and implications on CAPTCHA discussion.

<Joshue108_> JW: Anythin else on this?

Web Authentication 2 specification - first public working draft.

<Joshue108_> JW: This was brought to us by Janina and Web Auth group.

<Joshue108_> This is the spec that supports hardware => web apps auth

<Joshue108_> They've just released version 2 and want to look at that here.

<Joshue108_> I've had a look in prep for meeting and it is difficult to tell where the changes are without deeper knowledge.

<Joshue108_> JS: No change log or diff?

<Joshue108_> JW: Didn't find it..

<Joshue108_> JS: Thats a comment!

<scott_h> Leaving IRC to travel home, apologies again. Will be fine for next week

<Joshue108_> JS: Michael, are you about to validate any of this? Missing diff or change log.

<Joshue108_> MC: There may not be one for this, but the intro should outline.

<Joshue108_> JW: For this TF, if there are things we should be looking at - determining what they are planning to change would be good.

<Joshue108_> Could APA take this up and refer back?

<Joshue108_> JS: Yes.

<Joshue108_> MC: Normally we wouldn't but groups should have requirements etc. Am looking at diff now..

<Joshue108_> They have added a few things.

<Joshue108_> JS: Sounds like quite a bit.

<Joshue108_> JW: We did some background work in this previously..

<Joshue108_> Want to bring to TF attention that this work is ongoing and APA are looking at it.

<Joshue108_> JW: Keeping an eye on new features and requirements.

<Joshue108_> JS: We do have an interest - and John Rochford is active there. Will try to get John more involved with APA.

<Joshue108_> JS: We may not have sent out the horizontal review request to this group.

<Joshue108_> JS: Dont want to create confusion between Auth and Log in.

<Joshue108_> There is a need for Turing testing.

<Joshue108_> Further discussion needed.

<Joshue108_> MC: Reviewing our history with Level 1. We sent questions in Sept 2017. There was a generic review request.

<Joshue108_> We failed to reply - bad comms in both directions.

<Joshue108_> We should refresh ourselves and then ask for a new meeting to discuss new stuff in Level 2 and what is missing in Level 1.

<Joshue108_> JS: You (Jason) would be an important missing person in any APA discussion.

<Joshue108_> JS: There are not always issues with the base spec but in implementations.

<Joshue108_> JS: This is a pattern a la Joshs work with WebRTC for example..

<Joshue108_> JW: We need to look at the kind of docs that APA can create in terms of guidance.

<Joshue108_> I can join some APA discussion on that, that we can bring to the TF

<Joshue108_> I appreciate APA bring it to our attention.

<Joshue108_> MC: One incomplete understanding Ive had is if WebAuth will remove the need for CAPTCHAs.

<Joshue108_> JB: I think it could.

<Joshue108_> We have had difficulty getting into this space.

<Joshue108_> There is untapped potential.

<Joshue108_> JS: Our CAPTCHA doc puts us in a good place.

<Joshue108_> MC: Are we confident that we've something substantial here?

<Joshue108_> JB: Not so much.

<Joshue108_> MC: Should we look at this again?

<Joshue108_> JS: I'm mindful of the interactivity, anonymizing, trust brokerage.

<Joshue108_> JS: need to be careful - additions will slow it down.

<Joshue108_> JS: A VPN could recast itself as a trust broker.

<Joshue108_> JW: So you can disclose your authenticity without identify.

<Joshue108_> JW: very interesting.

<Joshue108_> JW: These patterns are noteworthy, fixes without CAPTCHAS.

<Joshue108_> JS: This is done with a trove of tokens etc.

<Joshue108_> Like finance and banking in the 15th century via letters of credit being invented.

<Joshue108_> JS: I'll just do it.

<Joshue108_> JW: Happy to be a part of this, the topic will return to the TF shortly.

<Joshue108_> JW: All good?

<Joshue108_> JS: Yes.

WebRTC: accessibility-related use cases, requirements, and implications.

<janina> scribe: janina

jgw: Josh has been digging into existing docs, W3C, other standards groups, also legal/regulatory

jo: Suggesting levelset review
... Some of our issues are handofss of WebRTC to other groups because not problems with the WebRTC specs per se
... Identify Caller

<Joshue108_> https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-identity/identity.html

jo: Is there a use case here we need to keep?

jgw: Do we have a list of which are and aren't covered yet?

jo: Done some of that
... Next incoming call
... How does one know? In an unobstrusive way?

js: WCAG

jgw: Also OS level notifications to take advantage of

mc: Does WCAG address notifications?

jo: WCAG addresses status notifications

jgw: How it works may need to support personalization

js: Notes smart devices are making audio notifications--but providing no way to know which audio event corresponds to what type of notification

jb: Notes this needs to be generalized for other disability situations

jgw: So also an issue of what interrupts, and what is not allowed to interrupt

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/some more comments/his comments with his permission/
Succeeded: s/@@/Scott H/
Succeeded: s/anonymising/anonymizing/
Default Present: Joshue108_, SteveNoble
Present: Joshue108_ SteveNoble

WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list!

Found Scribe: Joshue108
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina
Scribes: Joshue108, janina

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

Found Date: 12 Jun 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.)