<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
<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?
<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
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]