maryjom: we're gonna be publishing the ACT Rules repository, we need an explainer about that
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/
<Shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/
Wilco: we have an overview page, which links to our first rules
<Shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/#act-rules-repository
Wilco: we need to build this out, put more information (how to reuse, what to expect, etc)
shadi: no news about the new website yet
... I hope to have news this week
... it would be good to align the two, we have new resources
... we have the old ACT overview page on the wiki
<Shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/conformance-testing/wiki/ACT_Overview_-_What_is_ACT
shadi: there are bits and pieces there, although it was more of a project description. lots of things in different places
... it would be good to have a better description
... I don't know exactly what information is missing, what do we expect?
... it explains ACT overall, but in the future we'll have more rules, maybe a listing that can be filtered. what do we need?
Wilco: there is some document about how the techniques work
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/understanding-techniques
<Shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/docs/
Wilco: the Techniques have a document explaining what they do, what are they for. I'm wondering if something like that can be useful
Shadi: the WCAG also have an overview of what the various documents are about, we may want something like that too
Ryladog: it's useful to understand which part is what, which are normative
Wilco: we probably want to have the rules added to this overview page as well
Shadi: the supporting documents for WCAG will be redesigned (information infrastructure)
... right now they are looking like TR documents, there's room for having a more integrated approach
... but ti's a bigger project, involving other TF (COGA, low vision, etc)
Wilco: does that prevent us from adding anything now?
Shadi: no, we can take baby steps
Wilco: I think we need something similar to Understanding Techniques, but for ACT Rules
... what are atomic, composite rules, etc. it will probably be an explainer for the rule format too
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/
Wilco: we can link to that from various rules, from the overview page, etc.
... are there other things? e.g. on the overview page itself?
Shadi: we may need a small micro site
... what pieces of information do we provide and how we can put them together in a micro site (or set of pages)
Wilco: it sounds we need a small set of pages: description of what a rule is, a list of the rules we have, and a list of implementations
Shadi: we need to think of the different audiences
... the people who want to develop rules will be sent to the CG
... then there's the people who implement rules
... and the people who use the rules, via a tool, or as a manager, etc
Wilco: right, we need to come up with a plan
kathyeng: you sent out a survey, some people haven't answered yet (I asked folks to answer it)
... some fresh eyes might be able to provide some good feedback
... I agree with the idea of aiming the content at various people
Wilco: someone wants to take an action item of coming up with an outline?
... I don't mind working on it if it's OK with everyone
maryjom: happy to help and start thinking about it
Wilco: you want to start creating an issue?
maryjom: should I just start a proposal in an Word document, or start with HTML markup, or?
Shadi: I think we need to identify the audience, and start an outline of what we need for each group. It can be on a wiki page
Wilco: good!
shadi: the document uses the usual structure for work statements
... the most interesting part is the "Scope of Work"
... and also a little bit of information on the approach
Wilco: we didn't send this doc much in advance of the meeting, so people need extra time to read it
... my first impression is that I like it, it's a good direction
Ryladog: so this is basically a charter-like thing for the TF, right?
Wilco: correct
Shadi: the AG chairs are aware that we're working on updating this
Ryladog: I have a question about the EPUB stuff coming in
romain: there's no community effort in place. DAISY is intending to document our rules as ACT rules. I think it woud be great to have a community effort too, but nothing started
Wilco: back to the document: I was wondering if there is enough emphasis on community support?
... is there enough room for us to support a community of rule authors?
... we could provide guidance to rule authors, work with them to get them more familiar with the format, help them getting questions to AG, things like that
... basically, shouldn't we include "community building" somewhere?
Shadi: isn't it the last point, "Community Support"?
Wilco: it sounded to me more oriented towards the users
Shadi: I think it includes what you meant
... a lot of that has happened or is happening in the CG
kathyeng: when an implementor has questions, would they go to the CG? that where the support would be
Shadi: I think there would be implementors in the CG that could give information, and also implementors waiting for rules to be published. we need to think about that
kathyeng: if some implementors implement the rules, would they ???
Shadi: in the CG we keep track of implementors, but then we would have another list of implementors that are not in the CG. We need to pull the information
... we can have two data sets and need to keep them in sync
... for the rules published by the CG, we'll have a separate listing.
Wilco: I don't know if the data in the CG is stable enough? the rules get updated pretty frequently
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/conformance-testing/wiki/Draft_Work_Statement#Scope_of_Work
<Wilco> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/conformance-testing/wiki/Draft_Work_Statement
romain: I'm wondering about the "promote the ACT Work externally" part, what does that entail? presentations as well? do we have the resource?
Shadi: good question, the pages and documentation already do that. it doesn't necessarily have to be deliverables, but more generally a commitment for us to reach out to people
Wilco: shadi, did you get any feedback from the AG chairs?
Shadi: no, I just let them know that we had this coming
Wilco: OK. let's do a survey and see if we can get more feedback on this!
Wilco: we don't have any results yet
maryjom: not being a rule implementor, I don't have much feedback, but forwarded it to people
Wilco: your direct feedback is still valuable
maryjom: I will provided it. At first sight some things look heavyweight. But need to read it more.
Wilco: we went fo the WCAG-EM Report Tool as it already exists and we could talk about it, but we could also build something
... Kathy, was it you who filled up the Trusted Testers work?
kathyeng: yes. I wasn't sure if you had to fill in all the information.
... last time I submitted the results, it said the info was incomplete, I'm not sure what was the problem
maryjom: it seemed to me that if you're doing an automated test you had to submit an EARL format?
Wilco: yes
maryjom: OK, I don't know what our tool does, but it doesn't produce EARL, so it would take some work to do it
... I don't know if it's easier to translate the results to EARL, or translate it and report it with the manual testing process
Wilco: there is also no other common a11y data format that we can use
... any other comments on these pages?
[no comments heard]
Wilco: please take a look at the surveys!