Silver Conformance Subgroup

03 Mar 2020


jeanne, sajkaj, KimD, AngelaAccessForAll, Makoto, PeterKorn_, joecronin, Chuck


<scribe> scribe: sajkaj

js: Discusses keeping face to face engaging as many participate via telecon
... Working to get best available audio
... Asking people to stay muted while not talking

CSUN F2F agenda & logistics plan

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/2020_March_F2F_Meeting_at_CSUN#Agenda

js: Notes several attendees are not regularrs in Silver, so will start with high level overview
... Next to work through the scoring example, possibly in small groups
... First with the current example site, then allow people to pick sites to see what works and what needs to be improved
... AGWG has had concerns about declaring scope of conformance claim
... We will want to evaluate how well scoping nonweb content will work
... Other things?
... e.g. we need to know how well scag-em will work with nonweb content
... Then there's scoring -- also web as well as non web
... We'll want to know how well our contrast approach really works
... Believe we need to discuss whether we want to include a minimum; personally believe it isn't helping; but we need to discuss
... Also, how to do task completion scoring. It's not in the doc and I'm unsure how we do it.

pk: Might the draft doc include that the site owner lays out what's included?

js: Absolutely

pk: Ex: make a purchase; Find a library book and purchase it; ...

js: Very helpful
... We should be able to identify main tasks from looking at sites

pk: Believe that site owner should be doing this
... I see this as akin to quality assurance where this is standard analysis process
... Suggests running some examples during the f2f

js: Think that would work but should keep in mind all our various stakeholders
... So to address a11y test businesses

pk: Perhaps the contracting entity asks help to define this

js: It's likely there will be desire for guidelines or rules on how to select and identify tasks; perhaps airline regs may be helpful

<KimD> The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA)?

kd: Starting now to work with a11y vendors who have always deferred to us on identifying priority path tasks
... So do we want to the group to think of categories of things to consider?
... Identify categories of available content; purchase path; some list of suggestions?

js: One of the expressed concerns has been keeping people from cheating, so having common tasks that show up on many sites defined might be helpful
... Above for Monday --
... Monday afternoon will be normative vs informative
... Which will include whether or not to include/rely on RFC2119 MUST, SHOULD, etc
... Tuesday on new content
... Tuesday afternoon on incorporating ACT tests
... End of Tuesday joint with COGA

pk: Asks whether might be time on agenda to ask what information gathering would be most helpful to Silver from the Challenges pFPWD
... e.g. what strategies are most promissing for the described challenges? Might be a question to ask in the publication announcement
... Clarifies Challenges won't publish until after CSUN
... What feedback to Challenges pub would be most helpful to Silver's further development

js: Very good idea. Sill look for slot with SL

pk: What challenges did we miss? Then, what approaches would mitigate?

js: Wonders what we do about our F2F if CSUN itself cancels the conference?
... Asks who will go even if CSUN itself is canceled?

[several on the call answer affirmatively]

js: Asks about other topics for the F2F agenda? Goals for the F2F? Scoring?
... Asks about any conformance issues to cover in the presentation?

pk: Would love to have this covered; Would like to see the drafts and provide suggestions
... Recalls a series of items discussed last week, e.g. "substantial conformance."

js: Haven't yet worked on it
... Will do and it's on the list to cover
... Believe I have good notes ...
... Other issues?

Scoring goals for F2F

Scoring example

<KimD> Do you want this doc? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LfzTd_8WgTi0IUOOjUCRfRQ7e7__FRcnZow4w7zLlkY/edit#heading=h.qenaldiie00y

<jeanne> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LfzTd_8WgTi0IUOOjUCRfRQ7e7__FRcnZow4w7zLlkY

js: Probably the same doc

kd: Seems so

js: These are the specific requests to cover in the FPWD from Alastair
... Believe it was taking an example of nonweb
... Notes lang changed to include nonweb (in the steps)
... Hopefuly my language is more tech neutral

<jeanne> Step 2.a: Identify Common Elements

<jeanne> Step 2.c: Identify the Variety of Screen Types

<KimD> "functional elements" components?

<jeanne> repeating content?

<jeanne> IDentify common screens?

<jeanne> identify repeating templates or components

js: Hoping there will be a TF to update wcag-em along these lines as WCAG 3.0 is developed

<jeanne> Step 2.d: Identify Web Technologies Relied Upon

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: 2020/03/04 01:00:29 $

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)

Present: jeanne sajkaj KimD AngelaAccessForAll Makoto PeterKorn_ joecronin Chuck
Found Scribe: sajkaj
Inferring ScribeNick: sajkaj

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: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

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]