<Rachael> zakim takeup next item
<scribe> scribe: Jennie
Steve: everyone once in a while COGA gets a Github message that there is a message which requires a response.
Steve: I will monitor this, and
add important discussion pieces to the list and bring it up in
meetings.
... e.g. 1 was about a missing link.
... we should not just remove URLs, and we will in the future
be careful how we do that.
Lisa: I think the response of the
issue should go through the task force.
... then people can say "hang on, I'm not ok with that."
Especially when you get rid of a URI
... the old URI needs a note.
Steve: that's what I asked Roy to do.
Lisa: it should say this has been moved to here.
Steve: Has he done that?
Lisa: I don't know. Then the
response can just be "Thanks for pointing that out. We have
followed up."
... and in general I think it is better that whoever is doing
the issues, it is a 2 second discussion, indicating which ones
you want to answer and how
Steve: How long should I wait?
Lisa: it depends on the
issue.
... It depends on what you have put as the title, which helps
me understand if I need to read it in depth.
... If you are writing an issue to the list, maybe that is how
we want to handle it. And Rachael and I should decide if they
get closed.
Rachael: is everyone else comfortable with this?
+1
Steve: I created a work flows page, and can add this to the work flow.
Lisa: I didn't know there is a work flow page.
Steve: I always state that I have created them, so I'm not sure what has gone wrong. I post it on the list.
Rachael: maybe this can be an issue for the planning call?
Lisa: yes please.
Rachael: Sounds like we will post the issue to the list, bring it up in the meeting once, and then close the issue.
Lisa: that sounds good.
Steve: what about when something can be resolved on the list?
Lisa: I think it is better to bring it up on the call.
Rachael: I think it can be part of the actions so people are aware. It doesn't have to be a detailed review - just a "heads up."
Lisa: I agree.
+1
Justine: that sounds reasonable.
Steve: it would nice to have people be more engaged.
Rachael: item 9 - none of those people are here.
Lisa: Thadeus worked on this in
the past, and he added some comments.
... is there anyone else we want to reach out to, like
Renaldo?
<stevelee> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Workflows
Lisa: I can take the action to reach out to those who have been involved.
<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11IKqjRFvkRd2dAfUiyc5whhB3yIYXvSiirWct7KQIB0/edit#gid=0
Rachael: we are doing very well,
in my opinion. We are in second drafts on most of these.
... we have a 1st draft on the no memorization, but there was a
conversation about this at the AG meeting.
<Rachael> jennie: At the AG meeting (which had technical difficulties dropping people) they asked for a reference to research on cognitive fatigue.
<Rachael> ...they were discussing the SC on do not rely on user memory. One member asked if there was reserach on the phrase about mental fatique. They would like 1-2 studies referenced to back up the statement
<Rachael> https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#pattern-do-not-rely-on-users-memorizing-information
Lisa: we had things like with Dyslexia, your skills decrease as you get more tired.
+1
*that +1 was accidental
<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e46eqQnVYqdSyqo29pyJoY1QynRH9v95YW8soTTbfsU/edit
Justine: I was reviewing the
SCs
... the part I was questioning in particular where it says
"stress blocks the brain..."
Rachael: it is a plain english
summary from the SC
... David wrote this, and we can ask him to clarify.
Lisa: I'm not sure why this is
here.
... it does not seem to be related to cognitive
disabilities.
Rachael: it may be worth you
reviewing this SC.
... I was going to set up a meeting for you, me and David.
Lisa: yes.
... he might be getting at is in brain injury when people are
relearning mental skills, so they may not be able to do.
<Rachael> jennie: I did previous research on cognitive load and stress. I wonder if David is trying to demonstrate that in certain situations with hard forms it can increase the issue that the person has. I wonder if this needs rephrasing.
*looks great!
Rachael: I'm going to set up a
meeting with Lisa, Rachael, Jennie, David
... we can look at the wording and see if we can adjust it to
meet the concerns.
... I don't think any of the SCs proposed are in danger of
being cut.
<LisaSeemanKest_> can u put a link in the channel
Steve and I worked on updating the SC for Findable Help, and removed some language that we knew would not pass.
We need the group to review, and give feedback. If by end of Sunday, that would be great.
Rachael: I can review
... we will put out a note by end of day on Sunday.
Lisa: what was removed?
Jennie: the location
Rachael: what we did with ours
was to add an either or
... location on the page, or personalization.
... I met with Alastair on this, and John Folio
... personalization should have a draft out, and a secondary
spec does something similar.
Lisa: what is the date for this? There is actually only module 1.
Rachael: the current schedule
worked - there was enough information to use it for the
SC
... it was tight, but it was ok.
Lisa: what is exactly needed? I think we have consensus on those modules.
Rachael: for us it was marking
the importance.
... for Jennie it would be location.
... John Folio is aware.
<Rachael> Jennie: Feedback from EA was interesting. Why I'm hoping more people will comment. There are other user groups who have identified other locations. Screen reader users are used to finding help in the footer.
<Rachael> ...EA's point is that there is a standard practice in use that this would disrupt.
<Rachael> ...if we go to the root of this, the intent is that it is reliable. That reliable would be something most people would find. Taking the risk of personalization. If that becomes what stops this from being passed, would we be better going for the intent that help is findable?
Steve: I think EA is correct,
that contact is typically in the footer
... I think we state following existing patterns.
... this may apply to the other SC as well. If there is an
explicit standard/pattern, we don't want to tell people advice
that stops them from doing that
Lisa: how about something like "on every page help can be programatically determined or as it at the top of every page."
Steve: that then breaks it
Lisa: in general, you never get
it ever at the extent that you want it, so getting it in at all
is fantastic.
... you can put a lot in the advisory, and if you are using
testing, always test that people can find the help and use it
properly, but that can't be in the SC. Having something in is a
really good hook.
... don't feel too bad if you get it into the SC.
Steve: we did clarify the types of help.
Lisa: WCAG 1.0 got criticized for being too vague.
Steve: you showed me SCs that said context help is available, but this would provide more information.
Lisa: there is the understanding
section, so people read this.
... even just ask someone you know with forgetfulness to see if
they can find the help.
<LisaSeemanKest_> steve here is wcag 1.0 https://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/
Justine: a related comment is that we might want to consider an essential exception. Examples like testing - how to respond when accessing the help during timed questions may need to be addressed.
+1
Lisa: can you explain more?
Justine: in the example of standardized assessment, a student with a cognitive disability may have an accommodation like extra time; and if the timing of the assessment negatively gets impacted by them accessing the help
Lisa: I don't think that will be a factor
*I just lost connection
<Rachael> lisa: I wondering why we should say. There are a lot of shortcuts. you don't have to access it but its available.
*I'm back
<Rachael> Justine: the help might be avaible through another mechanism like labeled buttons.
Lisa: I know that this example
you want to is not a requirement, you don't have to use the
help.
... this one is often where people use but people who need the
help often can't find it.
... they have an online option for practicing sometimes but
this may not enable them to practice with their AT
... and people do worse because of it.
... FAQs, for example.
<Rachael> Jennie: I had +1 to Justine's comment but Lisa makes a good point. How to use the interface causes problems here. I wonder if we need to go back to the standards document but then usability testing needs to occur.
<Rachael> stevelee: Justine had suggested help buttons but does context specific help address that?
<Rachael> Jennie: It is different.
Justine: there seems to be an overlap here, between the context specific help. We may be able achieve some of this the same way.
Steve: I think this is when a
person is stuck beyond what they can find in that context
specific help.
... not how you use the user interface.
<Rachael> steve: How long do we give the group to respond?
<Rachael> Jennie: It sounds like we'll give it to Sunday and then review it Monday.
<Rachael> ..I think we agreed that would be ok.
<Rachael> Lisa: Ask for an agenda item in the call when you need review.
<Rachael> ..and tell us it needs to be this week.
Lisa: I had something that I wanted to note: I would love it if it would say instead of just human contact details, details that take you directly to a human, self help option,
Steve: what do you mean direct? A telephone number that would go directly to a person?
Lisa: like a telephone system that goes into a menuing system
Steve: we have an item about chat bots
Lisa: but I am referring more to another system
<Rachael> Jennie: Concern it will be difficult to implement and the phone system is out of scope
<Rachael> Lisa: Can we add it to the understanding document.
<Rachael> Jennie: Please provide more comments through any mechanism
<Rachael> Zakim take up item 12
Lisa: I sent an email to the list
about what the EU commission wants to fund as research and
innovation projects.
... I can make suggestions
Lisa: we should think: if this
got funded, this could make a huge difference to us.
... we wouldn't personally get the funding, but a university
somewhere would fund it.
... if there are automatic testing tools for this, authoring
tools, it is that much more likely that it would go through the
WCAG process.
... we would be in a stronger position to get through WCAG
process next time.
... are there other things like this that people feel we
need.
Rachael: are you including personalization, tools that take advantage of it?
Lisa: yes.
... that is unlikely to get in because it was funded by the
Easy Reading project.
Rachael: we will wrap this up.
Lisa: comments on the list would be great.
Rachael: I will have a hard time making the editors meeting - shall we cancel?
* I have to sign off - can someone else wrap up the minutes?
<Rachael> Steve: Action update, working on the divs
<Rachael> trackbot end meeting
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: Fazio, stevelee_, Rachael, Jennie, stevelee Present: Fazio stevelee_ Rachael Jennie stevelee Regrets: John Kirkwood Abi EA Found Scribe: Jennie Inferring ScribeNick: Jennie WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 12 Sep 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]