10 Jan 2020


jeanne, janina, Fazio, maryjom, Chuck, pkorn, Lauriat, LuisG, shari, Joe_Cronin, Rachael, KimD
Charles, Angela, Bruce


<pkorn> present_

<pkorn> (this time for sure)

<LuisG> Jeanne: wanted to start with the editor's draft

<scribe> scribe: janina

<LuisG> ah, go ahead

<pkorn> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/conformance-js-dec/guidelines/

js: Lots of layout/look edits
... Worked on filling in guidelines
... Started with visual contrast
... Want to get a sense on this call of what info should go where
... Thinking how to advise agwg on changes we're bringing up

<Fazio> I don't see either

pk: like the formatting and ease of reading

ch: With respect to where, I'm unfamiliar with alternatives
... Very much like the visual contrast
... No substantive feedback yet, but it looks easy on the eye, and that's good

js: Tried to rewrite the "
... how part, it was too complex, imo

pk: Looking at the tabs and wonder about a tab or section that talks about automation strategies
... At current knowledge, what are the good strategies

<Fazio> Interesting thing to me. We do a lot of usability studies, and our blind and low vision participants always speak about their impairment in terms of light perception. So, this is spot on in my opinion

pk: Suggesting an automation tab for each SC to set out best practices
... Suggest expanding the text to make it clear what would go there
... Suggest a bit stronger than just "tips"
... Should convey "here's what's known"

js: It's "tip" because we wanted it to be clear it's not mandatory--but that was discussion a year ago

<Fazio> WCAG 2.0 has "Understanding" and "Techniques" are we adding a section akin to "How it Relates to WCAG" or "Translates"?

js: Weren't planning on that here, though we are expecting transition docs
... This design based on the notion that 2.X eventually goes away

<Fazio> 20 countries rely on it for law

<Fazio> 1.0 to 2.0

js: Once ag is finished, we want to encourage it's use, rather than 2.x

df: notes U.S. law, other law that enshrine 2.0
... Adding how translation occurs might be helpful, because the laws change slowly

ch: Noting two tracks of conversation, have response re format of this presentation, not the content
... Seems presentation is currently most interesting

js: Asks D_Fazio noting 2.0 did not do transition from 1.x to 2.0 directly in the doc; the transition was separate as I recall
... That's W3C SOP
... Of course we could do it differently with good reason, just not the usual approach

df: Not a lot of wcag understanding in general in Latin America, so think transition would be very beneficial

js: Don't believe we ever researched that

df: Latin America relies on wcag by law, but has not been active in W3C deliberations

js: I think we never thought to ask about that during our research period
... Don't believe we asked about transitional materials or integrating them

sl: My understanding is that we would work with EO on how to do the transitional materials; but not in the spec itself
... We should expect that even wcag 1.x will continue in use, let alone 2.x, for some time

js: Back to content of the visual contrast ... to Chuck ...

<Fazio> my bad

ch: Like the simplified lang approach
... 2nd para is definitely dense
... 1st para ...

<Chuck> Authors can use tools to evaluate design elements and adjust the attribute and color to achieve a presentation which meets the guidance.

ch: Trying to keep the voice consistent-- 3rd person

<Chuck> Authors can use tools to evaluate elements and adjust the attribute and color of those elements to achieve a presentation which meets the guidance

js: Done

ch: Want to listen now, not continue reading for review at the moment

js: Other comments?
... Any other comments about visual contrast and how it's being put in? Should we go with this approach?

ch: Yes

df: yes
... Should we say something about giving the user the ability tocustomize the colors they're using?

ch: Not yet introduced customization because we don't have the content yet to support it. But, it is one of the methods we intednt to include

df: Do you mean tech specific method as our new def, or a strategy for achieving

ch: methods list how, which could be tech based, or nontech

louis: Think we could say something generic about user power

js: Would be up to our Co-Chairs
... Lean to put it in methods, because we're really saying browsers need to give users better support here

ch: This may be a reference to OS level customization, not just user agent

louis: Ability of the user needs to be preserved whatever they're using

<Chuck> CAN I HEAR AN AMEN??!!

janina: Proposes the author proposes approach is generic across SC, and gets specific with methods for individual SC

Review draft (including Visual Contrast)

<Fazio> Which has a bunch of COGA presentations this year

register for CSUN F2F

<Fazio> Yes ma'am!

js: Asking whether David's COGA presentations are CSUN?

<pkorn> I'm going to log out & back in again, so I can keep contributing...

js: COGA does want to meet with us end of Tuesday

<Fazio> I will be there

js: If attending, please register!

<Fazio> We've done some exciting work

sl: Apparently no one not in TF can sign up, and we want others, so something to manage

js: Asks whether anyone who's ONLY in the cg has had an issue registering?

Louis: Yes, me

js: Will work on it
... Now updated so everyone can see the results

pk: Dinner?

js: COGA suggested dinner following Tuesday adjournment
... May be tricky, because keynote is Tuesday evening

quality rubric for Headings

updates from subgroups

js: Anyone here for an update?

<Fazio> S in Task Force?

<Fazio> "as

pk: Believe we've made progress addressing some objections to Challenges
... Becoming cautiously optimistic we can make another run at FPWD end of month

js: Other updates?
... Plan of what's next in visual contrast?

ch: Yes, conversations ongoing and need to get back on it; directly related to methods

js: I can report still working on rubric method for testing quality of clear language

<pkorn> Apologies - I need to drop a few minutes early.

quality rubric for Headings

js: Before the holliday break we began discussing a quality rubric for headings

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TgFWsggRNiUYU_N9GPCvU1KUhexiRWjYTelTKZPMAOE/edit

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TgFWsggRNiUYU_N9GPCvU1KUhexiRWjYTelTKZPMAOE/edit#heading=h.i7znkzomudrc

js: This is the template for writing new content and for migrating existing content
... Standard old complaint is that it was hard to know what passes and what fails; two experts could disagree; we want to fix

maryjo: Strict heading nesting is difficult because of mashups
... Agree that structure grouping is important; but strict heading levels possibly not

js: Agree
... Reminder: This is not what you have to do; this asks how good is what you have?

<LuisG> ah, good point

<LuisG> later

maryjo: Needs to be understandable; have a logical layout so users can understand the structure

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: 2020/01/10 20:06:46 $

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/David MacDonald/some/
Succeeded: s/'s//
Present: jeanne janina Fazio maryjom Chuck pkorn Lauriat LuisG shari Joe_Cronin Rachael KimD
Regrets: Charles Angela Bruce
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

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]