Silver Task Force & Community Group

20 Mar 2020


jeanne, CharlesHall, sajkaj, Chuck, ChrisLoiselle, Fazio, KimD, Lauriat, MichaelC, kirkwood, AngelaAccessForAll, bruce_bailey, JF, Rachael
JanMcSorley, JoeCronin
Shawn, jeanne


<jeanne> discussions on Tuesday?

<scribe> scribe: ChrisLoiselle

<CharlesHall> new issue on last few W3C calls. being prompted: “Don't want to use an extension? Run a temporary application to join the meeting.” so now I have multiple local packages instead of launching a single app. Anyone else?

<Chuck> https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4218676

<Lauriat> Not yet for me, Charles. Still working as usual.

Proposal: Where to put levels of testing info based on

<jeanne2> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ED-VF2F-js/guidelines/

Jeanne: presents link Editors' Draft Accessibility Guidelines (Silver)

Sample text is presented from headings draft. User needs analysis from Access U turned into three functional outcomes.

<Lauriat> 1. Organize text into logical chunks to make locating information easier and faster

<Lauriat> 2. Provide semantic structure for assistive technology users

<Lauriat> 3. Provide visually distinct headings for sighted people with cognitive disabilities

Headings Functional Outcome , probably should be edited to remove the disability group.

How do we phrase something to talk to a functional outcome?

CharlesHall: Phrasing is tense, so statement would say "is organized" vs. instruction.

<CharlesHall> Test is organized into logical chunks to make locating information easier and faster

<CharlesHall> *Text

Jeanne: Is there a way to put this in active voice ?

<Fazio> Maybe we can extrapolate from this https://www.fotoinc.com/news-updates/what-is-meant-by-functional-outcomes

Shawn L: Let us talk to Functional Outcomes in realistic terms , then we can talk to form.

<CharlesHall> “…providing concrete physical ability for the specific task observed”

<KimD> I like this sentence: When using this process, the patient self-reports physical ability through some sort of process that involves rating ability to perform a specific task.

<CharlesHall> so in a digital sense, “providing method to perform a specific task”?

KimD: Specific task and ability to perform are key points that are great talking points to pull out and talk more about

<jeanne2> Semantic structure is provided -- headings are coded as headings.

<jeanne2> Headings are visually distinct so sighted readers can determine the structure.

<jeanne2> Semantic structure is provided to support reading -- headings are coded as headings.

<jeanne2> Semantic structure is provided to support reading -- headings are coded as correctly nested headings.

CharlesHall: Locating information, Reading, distiguishing

<jeanne2> Headings are visually distinct so sighted readers can determine the structure.

Jeanne: I took parts of testing we did and put that into the how to "evaluate" tab.

<jeanne2> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ED-VF2F-js/guidelines/explainers/SectionHeading.html

Headings How-To Guidance

We were doing this by functional need then saying what the test was. I wanted to look at the test, then look at what functional need apply to the test?

KimD: Are we talking to anxiety in cognitive guidelines ?

General answer from multiple people: Yes.

Jeanne: Introduction to new Success Criteria on prototype, I did explore the anxiety potential SC in the prototype

<KimD> https://developer.paciellogroup.com/blog/2018/08/a-web-of-anxiety-accessibility-for-people-with-anxiety-and-panic-disorders-part-1/

<Chuck> https://developer.paciellogroup.com/blog/2018/08/a-web-of-anxiety-accessibility-for-people-with-anxiety-and-panic-disorders-part-1/, by David Swallow

DF: Target vs. stimulus , emotionally unpleasant etc. I.e. car insurance and PTSD as it relates to images

Jeanne to DF: Could you talk to limited cognition with COGA and follow up ? DF: Yes, I'll follow up offline.

Chuck lost, Kim won

<CharlesHall> second bullet: Text uses semantics that are programmatically available. (this removes ‘assistive technology’ allowing it to be technology neutral.)

Jeanne: COGA is right group to contribute more on that topic of limited cognition.

<Lauriat> Fixed URL: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ED-VF2F-js/guidelines/methods/Headings-HTML.html

Headings in HTML How to meet the functional outcomes for Headings guideline using HTML& ARIA technologies. This method contains helpful information, but is not required (informative). , Basic tab.

<scribe> New tab is present for Scoring

Scoring in the main how document may be beneficial as well.

Shawn L: All top level headings vs. HTML, or ARIA specific.

Other Tech can be introduced and not tying directly to HTML etc.

Jeanne: To JF, how do you want to approach this on various functional needs ? We have "X" amount of functional outcomes, if you met 2/3 you'd be at 66 percent. Or we can do in more sophisticated way as well.

JF: Equitable as all for all users is important. Whether 7 or 9 or expanding more, those are part of legislation, thus should be part of scoring metric.

<Lauriat> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ED-VF2F-js/guidelines/explainers/SectionHeading.html

Different user groups are impacted in different ways in my example. I.e. non sighted users vs. other users. Great for screen readers vs. not everyone else , how do we score that ? It helps a user group but may not help all user groups

Test Responsibilities by Functional Need , 1. Ensure text is organized into logical chunks to make locating information easier and faster 2. Ensure there is semantic structure for assistive technology users 3. Ensure there are visually distinct headings

JF: How do you gain most points? Is there an Not Applicable which would be weighted as 100 percent met?

Shawn L: We don't want to punish for people for not doing something that doesn't pertain to a particular user need.

JF: Composite score and math would need to be introduced as some point.

Jeanne: How they met functional outcome vs. user need topic...how do you balance out what doesn't matter? I.e. no flashing for example.

If we are in the long run, do we look at it from how well do we meet functional outcomes vs. grey area of what disability is graded higher or not.

<KimD> +1 to score tied to functional outcome

JF: Section 508 and EN 301 talk to this in the opposite way, how do those legislators map to that? How do they move forward?

Scoring for bronze is tied to this, then for silver and gold : We open up to broader discussion. We can adapt scoring to greater for silver and gold ?

Jeanne: if guidelines scored, then totals are gathered, may be simpler option.

Bruce: No opinion currently.

<bruce_bailey> +1 to chuck

Chuck: WCAG doesn't have a scoring currently, however if we don't reference these, are we throwing anything out?

JF: VPATs and support with exception criteria report , i.e. functional user group is not supported. The reporting templates may be ahead of WCAG in some ways.

<bruce_bailey> if wcag3 had additional FPC categories, i dont think that is a bit deal for EN301 549, nor 508

<bruce_bailey> +1 to 110%

JF: can we get greater than 100 percent? can we get 110 percent?

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to mention my additional currencies question

shawn L : I think we should get away from percentages.

<Lauriat> Away from percentages if we would go above 100.

BruceB: Multiple currencies , gold, gems, etc. can never be turned into a score. Things can go over and above 2.x structure. You don't want someone to negatively impact bare minimum though.

JF: If I had two gold nuggets, plus two gems, I can achieve "X" (i.e. I met silver, or gold , or bronze) or something of the like.

<CharlesHall> if they go beyond the need

DF: Person of functional need , testing needs to be met by a person . Is it individual vs. high level?

JF: I'm not sure if we can get that granular?

Charles Hall: Cognitive walkthrough would help with functional test, the gem would come into play where I go over and above on a particular area.

DF: A person in general public is a lot cheaper vs. a skilled user. A cognitive walkthrough needs to be looked at in more detail as to how that would relate to testing in general.

<CharlesHall> right. small businesses do not have a usability testing budget

<Chuck> Mom & pop and local city council with low budget will have issues trying to perform those tests.

JF: Bringing in people is best , however most people may not be able to review. Scaling issue. Mom and Pop shops vs. massive enterprises , what point is the cut off?

DF: State by state issue , which source can be used to introduce a method of validation.

Shawn L: validating with people with disabilities is one method of validating and we should reward that, but is not only way of validation.

<jeanne2> DF, the people with disabilities is the smallest cost in user research testing. I used to cost that testing out professionally.

<Chuck> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Upcoming_agendas#Upcoming

Jeanne: What would we like to bring to AGWG?

<CharlesHall> i can’t attend meetings #3 & #4 and #1 is super early for me.

Jeanne: We want to go through examples of normative vs. informative within an exercise.

For Wednesday, what do we want to present for conformance?

<CharlesHall> Note for any unaware: Kim Paciello passed away last night. https://twitter.com/mpaciello/status/1240951749491535872?s=20

Chuck: Let us show people where we are on process.

JF: I want to compare master table on my heading examples altogether.

Jeanne: Can you make meeting minutes?

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: 2020/03/20 19:02:01 $

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 CharlesHall sajkaj Chuck ChrisLoiselle Fazio KimD Lauriat MichaelC kirkwood AngelaAccessForAll bruce_bailey JF Rachael
Regrets: JanMcSorley JoeCronin
Found Scribe: ChrisLoiselle
Inferring ScribeNick: ChrisLoiselle

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]