Cognitive Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

16 Jan 2020


Jennie, stevelee, MichaelC, Rachael, Fazio, kirkwood, JustineP, JohnRochford
Jennie, Rachael


<Jennie> scribe: Jennie

Action review https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage

Rachael: Editor's group did not finish reviewing EA's edits.

Steve: User Stories - next step having reviewed personas in isolation is to check for gaps.

<Rachael> https://github.com/w3c/coga/tree/edits-to-patterns-jan-2020

Rachael: Lisa and I have finished editing in any missing pieces to design patterns.

Steve: Content Usable is in this branch?

Rachael: Yes

Steve: In case anyone wants to know: I updated the read me in content usable to link to a preview in case that is helpful.

<stevelee> https://github.com/w3c/coga/blob/edits-to-patterns-jan-2020/content-usable/README.md

Rachael: OK to move to next action?

Steve: yes

Rachael: Mental Health issue paper. Jennie, Steve, John are reviewing.
... did anyone have a chance to review?

John K: I put some comments into that paper.

Jennie: I will review in the next few days.

Rachael: Lisa is not here today, but she had asked someone else she knew to review it. After some discussion we think it may be helpful to have some other mental health professionals review.
... Does anyone object?

David F: I think it is a good idea.

<kirkwood> +1


<JustineP> +1

<stevelee> +1

<Fazio> +1

<JohnRochford> +1

Rachael: next is the section on policy. Justine, how is that going?

Justine: That section has been released to the list for review and comment. Nobody has had a chance yet, so that is still open.

<Fazio> Listserv?

Justine: I do want everyone to review the table which maps to the Design patterns as that went through a lot of work.

Rachael: Is that reasonable to review by the 30th and provide comments?

David F: The group email?

Justine: yes

David F: if someone could send it again that would be helpful.

<EA> Or can you put it in IRC chat

Rachael: Justine could you resend it?

Justine: yes.

Rachael: Next action is completing the missing design patterns.
... I had the first one, it is complete.
... David F is yours complete?

David F: no, I did not

Rachael: Lisa is not here. Steve you took one?

Steve: no, I have not.
... do they have dates?

Rachael: I think we are trying to get them done this week.

David F: Can you send me a link?

<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k0QpMa2XKB4UIEJKjL98y7Dw7vcbtC41skRmrexGs6M/edit#heading=h.qqgz8tvr0tyj

Rachael: Yes, and we will work on the editor's call.
... it is today in a half hour after this meeting.
... We can then merge them and send it back out to the group for final review.
... if you can have them by the end of the weekend, that would be great.
... by the end of the 19th.
... John and Steve you have one - I need help knowing when a task starts and finishes?

Steve: We drafted the SC text itself, and looking at how it would help. John - you were looking for an example.
... we are about a 1/3 of the way through.

Rachael: will you be able to finish it by Sunday night?
... we can work on this during the editor's call.

<Rachael> Jennie: Two questions on this: there was the word "coping" in the current need. Unsure what that is referring to. The other was how tight the user is on single step sign on.

John R: Why are we talking about this? It seems this is accessible authentication territory.

Rachael: This is design pattern vs the SC. In many cases we tried to get the person working on the related SC to work on this.
... but everyone is so busy.
... I'm trying to find that pattern right now.
... Does anyone have thoughts on Jennie's questions?
... John did I answer your question?

John R: yes thank you.

Steve: We have to be careful if we have SCs that go through, we have to make sure the pattern does not conflict.

<Fazio> In order to form an opinion I’d need to know how we are defining “step”

Rachael: that makes sense. I will add a to-do list to cross check the design pattern.

Steve: yes, and for any of the proposed SCs, not just the COGA ones.

Rachael: ok
... Jennie - will it be ok if I circle back with Lisa?

Jennie: yes please!

Rachael: OK, great.
... the next one is from me.
... the last one is clear labels from Lisa, and we will check on it during the editor's call.
... I see one for John K on personas - status?

John K: Adding quotes to the personas?

Rachael: Yes.

John K: I don't think I did that.

Rachael: OK
... maybe we can dedicate time in a future call for this. If anyone does have quotes they can recommend, we would like to get those.

EA: Can you tell more about the type of quotes you want?

Rachael: We want a quote that would pull together a main concept, main challenge, that a user is experiencing that reflects their goal at the same time.
... it could be restating something in the challenges but from a personal point of view.
... Maybe for something like discalculia, having numbers restated as concepts.
... The more it makes the persona relate-able the better.

<Rachael> Jennie: There are personas written for 2.1 SC. Would they serve as a model?

<Rachael> Rachael: Do they include a quote?

<Rachael> Jennie: Yes, they are very effective for people. I've seen they are effective for people.

John K: I agree with that. Is it in a google doc as well?

<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NKJP-DTpAl_K_MTBCkpvlwHbcg5YEW-nGx12y6Jenas/edit#heading=h.uytlqp1wwpz5

Rachael: It is.
... Maybe next week in the editor call, Jennie if you can join us, and EA if you have time, maybe we can compare the two persona types, we can change them to shift them to be more like those?

<EA> +1 to next week as this week I am marking projects!

Jennie: please put day/time in IRC and I can check.

John K: Are there actually quotes at this time?

Rachael: There are not, that's what we want to add.

<Rachael> Rachael: Potentially looking at 11:30 am EST on Thursday (30 minutes after COGA call).

John K: If someone could add a sample quote, that would help me.

Rachael: I will take an action to do that.
... the last action is the wiki page for CSUN that Steve was doing.

<stevelee> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/CSUN_2020_conference

Steve: I created a starting page. It is a community page, so anyone can add information they think is useful.
... I have added searches that are relevant for the schedule.
... The education and outreach team is also having a meeting, and we can get more details on that.

David F: I'm chairing a conference on Computers being Used by People with Disabilities. Could we do something like this for this conference as well?

scribe: Could we invite people to submit?

Steve: I'm not sure how well the wiki pages are viewed by people outside of the task force.

David F: for both.

scribe: I think it would have more clout if it was on a W3C page.

Steve: Can people just view that page without logging in to the wiki?

David F: I don't know.

Steve: I'm happy to help out with that. Shall I start a page?

David F: that would be great. I'm finalizing the verbage.

Steve: Once you have that, drop me a line, and I will put that in.

David F: The conference is in September.

Rachael: Steve, before we do that, I would like to talk about this on Tuesday with Michael to ensure we take the right approach.
... We may want to create a page for all conferences, so we are equal. The CSUN page is because we are attending/presenting/meeting.

Steve: That is a good idea. There may be a question about impartiality.

David F: I thought this was to promote the sessions.

Steve: no, this is just to make sure everyone from the group is on the same page.

David F: oops, ok, now I understand.

<stevelee> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/CSUN_2020_conference

Rachael: I think that is a good idea, we just want to be sure we do it well.
... ok just a reminder, while we are not having a formal meeting at CSUN for ourselves, for those there we will attend the last hour of the Silver meeting.
... There will also be a dinner

<Rachael> Jennie: Where should we sign up?

<Rachael> Rachael: Sign up for Silver if you are going to more than just the 1 hour session. Sign up on teh coga page for dinner.

<Rachael> Janina: I don't expect it to be a problem.

<Rachael> Jennie: If I'm attending the silver session adn coga dinner, I should sign up for silver for the day and the coga page for dinner.

John R: How do I sign up for the COGA meal?

Steve: we don't have that yet.

Rachael: I will have that up a half hour after the call.

John K: I won't make it to the conference. Will there be call in ability?

Rachael: Not for dinner <wink>
... If there is for Silver, then I will share that.

Steve: on the Silver page, they are saying there will be, but it is not yet set up.

John K: Thanks.

Janina: It will be the usual WebEx thing.

Status on Design Patterns (Editing and Missing) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k0QpMa2XKB4UIEJKjL98y7Dw7vcbtC41skRmrexGs6M/edit

Janina: the tricky thing is proper equipment to pick up all the different types of voices.
... we are looking at different devices.

Rachael: Anything more on CSUN?
... Moving on to the next agenda item - status on design patterns.
... To summarize - editing is done for checking missing.
... our goal is to have the next pieces done by Sunday night.
... I will do a full review, and a consistency of language check.
... then I will send to the editor's group for review, then to the full group for review and comment.
... we are still on track to get it ready for wide review before CSUN, which was our goal.
... any questions or concerns?
... OK

What other sections of content usable need to be rewritten? https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/

Rachael: Justine, we talked about the policy for review.
... Lisa had a question for the group: are there other sections of Content Usable that need to be rewritten.

Steve: I was confused about the first section - we may need to clarify the audience.
... partially because of repetition.
... Do we need to define the audience, and check that it is meeting their needs?
... That is a big task.
... There is also a question of whether the 2nd part would be interactive.

<Rachael> Jennie: Given the number of documents available, be very concrete about it. Intended Audience: [who it is].

<Rachael> ...for those who come in including those with cognitive disabilities, it will help understand.

Steve: It does try and say at the beginning who it is for, but it is not as clear as you are saying.

Rachael: Any other thoughts or comments?
... we have already redone section 2 for user needs. Sounds like we need to rewrite the introduction.

Steve: I was thinking it was only for developers.


<Rachael> Rachael: We've covered that

This is me typing to satisfy Zakim

Rachael: This next part is on essential controls. This is one of the ones we knew would be hard and may fit better in Silver.
... and that has been found to be true.
... The one part everyone feels pretty secure on is persistence.
... controls that progress a process should not just be available on hover.
... the question I am coming back to the group with, is not things being hoverable be its own SC

<Rachael> Jennie: I keep trying to post this to the list. I find the webex interface perfect for this conversation. There are controls only avialable through hover and time out after they get focus. They are not clearly available the part on the upper left menubar. The fact that the chat box text area does not have an outline. Its unclear that you type there - different SC but I am curious if the group feels the new interface causes challenges.

<Fazio> W+

Steve: the problem is, if you don't have the chat panel on the right, there is no control anywhere apart from the menu.
... And if you wait again, they disappear.
... It is a good example.

Rachael: At one point this was around initiating a process.

David F: That was my question - is there a reason why we are only looking at controls for continuing a process?

Rachael: It is the difficulty of defining the controls we are talking about.
... I think we could expand it

<kirkwood> are these “essential controls” or “important controls” ?

<Rachael> Jennie: For me, I wonder if its the definition of a process that we could modify or define within the SC. The process here is that I'm participating in a taskforce meeting and need to type something into a chat. I want to share and I need to find the button and I need to enter the text and submit it. That is all a process as defined in a teaching sense. I think we can be more descriptive around process that woudl enable it to be included.

Janina: Are those functions in the user interface?

Steve: I think the process term is the number of steps.

EA: I think a process is a journey.

Steve: There is another SC that came up through David M which overlapped with the patterns we had.
... Visual identifiers. Like Jennie was saying about the chat box.
... It was pushed off to Silver as well.
... There are a number of related things here which need discussion with Silver.
... Another aspect that came in - there was discussion about personalization but there should be a lot of patterns around those.
... heads up!

EA: I think it is getting so complex, and it is hard to tell students what is coming up. I'm struggling with some of the SCs.
... they want to know how to check them. The amount of detail is hard for students.

Steve: Maybe some concepts need to be better described.

EA: Some of the automated checks are making mistakes because of the different techniques used to create things.

Rachael: I do want to bring us back to the original question.
... I heard that defining the process broadly, being more inclusive, being more descriptive about what is essential.

John K: the title and text is not the same.

Rachael: I didn't want to change the document link name.
... Would everyone plus 1 if the hover requirement in and getting it to 2.2 is worthwhile?

<Fazio> +1

Rachael: Controls persisting on the page. Is that enough for COGA to think it is worth putting it into 2.2?

<Rachael> Jennie: Question: Is it that they have to persist or that a toggle is available that make them persist. If the toggle option exists it would be an easier sell.

+1 if there was a setting to make them persist

<Fazio> Lol

<Rachael> Scribe: Rachael

Steve: If we say yes to the having to persist, then we find out we have to change it, would it be difficult to change in silver?

<stevelee> +1

<Fazio> +1 to steve

<EA> +1

WCAG 2.2 Is persistence enough? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPtCqWHjrhj3QZ4afsqzmWDd-zMSf39RsMqSpR2QGCg/edit

<Fazio> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y_HOyuMKltOQoZr0Gk7hMQXi3Jd8Mc5fyr-XkH7kZQY/edit#heading=h.8h5xei6fw2my

Fazio: Proposal to run automated tests against all pages but only sample manual tests for 10 pages. My concern is that for some COGA guidelines, this approach won't be enough.
... it was fairly well received that for COGA SC this should apply to? Should this only apply to Clear Language?

How big should it be?

steve: should it only be content related?

David: That is one solution
... these are the questions we need to answer.

Steve: maybe only content related ones

<JohnRochford> +1

<kirkwood> +1

Rachael: If everyone is comfortable with the questions, we will move the discussion to the list and then make time for it next week.

trackbot end meeting

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: 2020/01/16 16:10:29 $

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)

Default Present: Jennie, stevelee, MichaelC, Rachael, Fazio, kirkwood, JustineP, JohnRochford
Present: Jennie stevelee MichaelC Rachael Fazio kirkwood JustineP JohnRochford
Found Scribe: Jennie
Inferring ScribeNick: Jennie
Found Scribe: Rachael
Inferring ScribeNick: Rachael
Scribes: Jennie, Rachael
ScribeNicks: Jennie, Rachael

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

Found Date: 16 Jan 2020
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]