Silver CG & TF

21 Apr 2020


jeanne, sajkaj, MichaelC, Chuck, ChrisLoiselle, CharlesHall, JF, JakeAbma, kirkwood, Makoto, Rachael, KimD, Chuck_
Chuck, Rachael


<jeanne> planning

<sajkaj> We're on Zoom, right?

<sajkaj> https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/04/security_and_pr_1.html

<ChrisLoiselle> Sorry group, can't scribe today.

<Chuck> I'm fending off a bad headache, but if no volunteers then I'll scribe.

<CharlesHall> link?

<Chuck> scribe: Chuck

<Rachael> scribe: Rachael

Virtual "face"-to-"face" session

<Chuck> I will take over at half hour, hopefully pills kick in.

Shawn: Originally we were talking about having this next week but that is short notice at this point. Looking at pushing that out a week. Does that work for folks? What is the tentative call timing?
... We are considering Wednesday May 6 and Thursday May 7th.
... we wanted to have some calls friendlier for Europe. Last time they were not. Also West Coast as well - not starting at 5am. Tentatively, to start the discussion, we are looking at 2 two-hour calls each day. Similar to prior to CSUN. 11-1pm EST and 2-4EST
... that starts slightly early for west coast and end slightly late for europe.

Janina: the 11 time is problematic for me and Michael because of APA. We have a stacked agenda tomorrow that we won't get through so I don't want to cancel.

Michael: we could look at moving APA. Its been in that call slot for 20 years

Janina: As long as it doesn't keep shifting.

<Lauriat> Placeholder virtual face-to-face page: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Virtual_F2F_May_2020

Janina: Call 12-1.

Jeanne: So if we shift it 1 hour earlier, we would have 10-12 which would be hard but not impossible.

JF: The pronounciation taskforce is at 10 on Wednesday.
... if we are talking a one time I don't see it as problematic but we canceled a few weeks ago and we are trying to avoid falling behind.

Jeanne: Wednesday May 6 10-12, 2-4 and Thursday May 7 11-1 and 2-4

Michael: Will we also have regular calls that week?

<jeanne> +1

Shawn: I would like to keep the Tuesday call but cancel the Friday call that week

<jeanne> +1 to canceling Friday and keep Tuesday for planning

Shawn: Tuesday can be more planning where everyone would be welcome but it wouldn't need everyone to dial in unless you want to help plan.

Jeanne: Any objections?

RESOLUTION: Face to Face Wednesday May 6 10-12, 2-4 and Thursday May 7 11-1 and 2-4

Jeanne and Michael: Discussion of dial in information

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/2017/08/telecon-info_silver-ftf

<KimD> Just to verify - all times above are eastern?

Jeanne: All times are EST

Shawn: Updating wiki page w/ dates and times
... Anything else on this topic?


<Lauriat> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tQHgVFaJYS1WWs9BKucZxWboMNVuclvdNqnQuzPbWwY/edit

Shawn: Link is above in IRC

Jeanne: I haven't seen the new comments. We discussed this in the chairs meeting yesterday. Jake has suggested adding a framework section.
... A framework with consistent tabs is defined for the guideline ‘pages’ where each tab and its content is build up from templates clearly and constructive defining the guideline. If there is some disagreement on the details of the tabs and templates, the consensus status is communicated in an editor’s note.

Jake: The last two weeks I spent days reviewing what is out there at the moment. We have a good basis but there is a lot of inconsistency of content under different tabs. I have questions about combining tabs. Inconsistencies between 3 guidelines. I thought it would be good to get consensus on the tabs, the structure of the tabs, and how we build content within the tabs.
... Current WCAG has a set structure so we might want to do that with this. Set up a template and define what content goes into the template.

Jeanne: I think you see inconsistencies because as we work on the scoring, we change things on an experimental basis to show what it will look like. We've been working a lot on headings but each one has work pushing forward in a different area but we haven't gone back to make them consistent.
... I like the idea of putting in an explanation of how this all works.

<sajkaj> +1 to an intro/overview

Jake: I would like to work on that with you offline. I think there is duplicates and inconsistencies. I have some ideas on how to do those tabs. Can we set a next step to create those templates so we can bring them back to discuss?

Jeanne: There are complete templates for each one but I'm happy to work with you on it offline.

<JF> +1 to Rachael

<Chuck> rachael: When we did this the first time, we had a base template. They have evolved. Having a clear template that takes lessons from last 6 months would be useful.

<Lauriat> +1 to Rachael

Jeanne: at this time, I would like to see us finish the method tab to support conformance. We learn a lot every time we do it. If there are people who are good at github who can help me, that would be great.

Jake: I hear you talking about methods and scoring. That is a different topic. That content in the tabs could have the next step, more mature.

Jeanne: Do you want to create a new branch and update it with the changes you are recommending? Then we can discuss it and just update it.

Jake: Lets take it offline and talk and then I will work on it.

Jeanne: Awesome. Thank you!

<Lauriat> +1 Thanks, Jake!

Jeanne: We've had a number of comments on the essentials for publishing. In the guideline section, people have recommended changing the text for plain language. I think we want to say that the text is written in plain language but has not been through a plain language editor.

Jake: We don't have a published guideline at the moment

Jeanne: We have 3 guidelines written.

JF: Everything is in draft.

Jeanne: We have trained plain language editors who help us smooth out our attempts.

<Chuck> scribe: Chuck

<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to ask about scribe change

<Rachael> Jeanne: We can send it through plain language.

<sajkaj> https://plainlanguage.gov/

<KimD> +1 to getting an editor review to the whole doc

Shawn: I think we should go through plain language edit, for key things like guidelines and methods.

<KimD> (for consistency)

Jeanne: We don't want all the method tabs to go through plain language edit. Methods have technical information into it. How about guidelines and functional outcomes and how to?

<sajkaj> +1 to Shawn. Things should be simplified as much as possible--and no more

<Rachael> Jeanne: Alastair changed the consensus being noted in the editorial notes throughout

<Chuck_> scribe: Chuck

<Chuck_> Jeanne: Was getting hard to read.

<Chuck_> Jeanne: I will take your section on the framework Jake and make it part of the intro. Seems like intro material to me.

<Chuck_> Jeanne: Next thing that's important. Michael had commented that we need 6 guidelines, 3 ported and 3 new.

<Chuck_> Jeanne: We are leaning towards 4 ported and 2 new use cases. I want to through that out for discussion. Is Makoto on the call?

<Chuck_> Jeanne: What's the status on alt text? Where's your group currently? What do you need from us?

<Chuck_> Makoto: I'm not done anything for last month. I will be back to work on it. Last week I did... I started writing the explainer.

<Chuck_> Makoto: Not sure what to call it. We did gap analysis.

<Chuck_> Makoto: By using current doc, understanding and techniques, and moving to explainer tabs.

<Chuck_> Jeanne: Great! Nobody has been meeting. Not just your sub-group. Not to worry.

<KimD> ``kokk

scribe Chuck:

Jeanne: Not directed at you makoto. Everyone else should look at another sc and see if it's one that can migrate. We originally had a list of 6 on the wiki.
... Not directed at you makoto. Everyone else should look at another sc and see if it's one that can migrate. We originally had a list of 6 on the wiki.
... we had headings, visual contrast, also had pause stop hide, language of environments, sensory characteristics, and timing.
... Sensory characteristics never started.
... Should we get new groups to advance those?
... does it appeal to anyone?
... Bruce, you interested in audio description and get help?

Bruce: Yes, I've time between now and end of month.

<jeanne> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1BJzDxztJhd_hRBQSO0UtWECmUegA-hwucedrayB9VEs

Jeanne: Anybody who knows right now that they can help Bruce?

Janina: Yes. If I'm not alone I'd be happy to work with Bruce.

Jake: I'd like to do it on the side.

Jeanne: I will contact the people who are working on clear language and get started on doing an update on clear language...
... to match the tabs we have been working on.
... To get that updated to where we are.
... And ....
... What would you need to get visual contrast updated?

<ChrisLoiselle> SURE!

Chuck: Chris Loiselle will take over for me.

Jeanne: That's the one where we will see interesting opportunities for scoring, and not just pass/fail.
... The most interesting question, what would we like to do as new content? We discussed in chairs meeting. Alastair was particularly interested in...
... New technology. I looked at the guidelines for silver, where we have stored ideas for years. There is a...
... ...a link to new technology coming out of Research Questions TF. One of the topics on that was ...
... We were first looking at VR, but we don't have technical expertise to do it well. Another topic was e-learning, and we do have expertise.
... I thought that would be a better topic to pursue. I'd like to open for discussion.

JF: That feels like a category of content, not a specific technology. e-learning about various topics. It feels like class of content than a collection of technologies. Can you expand?

<Lauriat> +1 to JF, I think something more like apps or mobile make more sense.

<ChrisLoiselle> I need to drop. sorry.

JF: Are you talking about platforms?

Jeanne: Not necessarily. They do have accessibility needs. Let me find RQTF.

Shawn: +1 to John. I'm saying that as someone who worked on google platform. It's a content management system with focus.
... Not anything strange or different about it from technology. Focusing on single page apps or mobile would be better fit.

Janina: RQTF hasn't taken up that topic in last 2 years. If there's a paper, it never went anywhere.

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to talk about elearning and tech

Jeanne: OK, glad I brought it to the group.

<jeanne> Here's the link of https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/research-questions/wiki/Virtual_Reality_and_Accessibility_References#E-Learning_Standards_and_their_Necessity

Janina: RQTF report, Zour is the hot topic of the moment.
... has gotten a lot of comments.

<CharlesHall> Xaur

Jeanne: We don't have expertise to do it well.

Janina: Nobody does.

Jeanne: We have less!
... Do you think people who worked on Zour will give us a few months of time to work on one?

Janina: I think we can negotiate.

<CharlesHall> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Xaur_draft#XR_Checkpoints_DRAFT

Jeanne: That would be really cool.

Janina: There are issues to consider. We can talk offline, get key people and move from there.

<Lauriat> Thanks, Charles! First I heard that name for it.

<CharlesHall> I am working on the humane factors in the user needs of the Xaur

Jeanne: that would be really cool.

Janina: We almost have to do something, when 3.0 goes to recommendation. Assuming it goes in the next year.
... Unless Zour is a flash in the pan.

<jeanne> Xr

<jeanne> xR

Jeanne: Zour is a new acronym. for augumented reality, virtual reality, other new "realities:. the X is a variable.

<CharlesHall> and I am now the Chair of the Inclusive Design for the Immersive Web Community Group

Jeanne: Congrats Charles!

Shawn: Awesome!

Janina: We have emerging resources after all!

Jeanne: Charles, is that something you would want to organize and run, to do that work here?

Charles: I need to talk offline to make sure we are aligned. Possibly.

Jeanne: Great!

Janina: Let's set something up.

Jeanne: OK. After this call.
... I'll set up a call between myself, Charles and Janina.
... To figure this out. It would be very cool to have this as a new guideline. Concerned about time required.

Janina: may not need a lot of time. Captions as an example factor in. Are the captions showing up where you are looking, where speaker is speaking? 360 environment.

Jeanne: Wouldn't that go with captions?

Janina: That's part of the issue, popups with XR.
... It's an example, there are others like that.
... We do have some actual researches coming into RQTF. With experience working with low vision and blind.

Jeanne: very cool!
... Trick is deciding on the actual guideline.

Janina: That's why we are doing classic user stories.

Jeanne: That has to happen in silver writing process.

Janina: We should coordinate. This is good!

Jeanne: What else needs to happen on a plan to go forward to get us to publishing?
... We will be talking about it with AGWG, they may have other suggestions, and we can modify plans as needed.
... I feel better we have a plan!

Shawn: Do we want to talk about line in sand on conformance?

Jeanne: OK. I'll go back to my position, I want more content first before we figure out where conformance is. We need to have content to test it with.

Shawn: for fpwd, how much do we need on conformance in addition to content.
... My take, together, we have a fairly solid proposal for how scoring would happen and how this would work with something resembling task completion, and how scoping would work.

Janina: I agree, we don't need to have conformance worked out fully for fpwd. Just overview of what we are working with. task completion...
... What we want from FPWD is wide comment from community. I don't think it hurts to lay out where we've been and ask for reactions.

Shawn: We've had comment from WG that we don't have enough for those who have not been in the process.

Jake: Quick q: About scoring. I think Tuesday is not the call... Does that happen on Friday?

Shawn: We've put aside formal distinction on calls. We've talked on Tuesday's

Jake: Trying to get scoring done based on Bruce, Rachael and JF. I have a lot of info to share, but not sure if it's the proper moment.
... I wonder when to share and with whom. With Jeanne? Other people?

Jeanne: Put on agenda for next Tuesday.

Jake: There are so many variations. I have interesting results to share before we procede.

Shawn: Looking forward to it.

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

  1. Face to Face Wednesday May 6 10-12, 2-4 and Thursday May 7 11-1 and 2-4
[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
$Date: 2020/04/21 14:31:30 $

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/agumented reality./augumented reality, virtual reality, other new "realities:. the X is a variable./
Present: jeanne sajkaj MichaelC Chuck ChrisLoiselle CharlesHall JF JakeAbma kirkwood Makoto Rachael KimD Chuck_
Found Scribe: Chuck
Found Scribe: Rachael
Inferring ScribeNick: Rachael
Found Scribe: Chuck
Inferring ScribeNick: Chuck
Found Scribe: Chuck
Inferring ScribeNick: Chuck
Scribes: Chuck, Rachael
ScribeNicks: Rachael, Chuck

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

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]