<scribe> scribe:ChrisLoiselle
<Fazio> I shI was just going to ask that. thx Michael
Jeanne: Charles or Michael C on functional needs? MichaelC: We are working to pull everyone together and look at resources we have to date.
CharlesH: Adding to document and formatting. Adding background information at this point. DavidF: Same.
<CharlesHall> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eJkgXqbh7dx3uD6XAy8XAANmwfbbVZ5GKb_gbsUdkVs/edit?usp=sharing
Jeanne: If you have the document, we can add that to minutes.
Jeanne: Clear language met on functional outcomes. Tags were reviewed and how we would use them, as part of content writing process. Clear language guideline may be broken into three.
Jeanne: Talks to document , Part 2 - Write Functional Outcomes.
Tags for Information Architecture table provides writer with where to place tags.
We wanted to explore Disability groups served. Tags would be used in search for what guidelines relate to what disability group served.
<Fazio> disability groups served will need disclaimer saying not limited to
I.e. what are the items related to people who are Blind, the Silver guidelines would populate results related to Blindness.
Should we include all terms that relate to Blindness or limit to an extent somehow.
DavidF: Omar and Kim D and I
researched , the Justice link I had sent is very US centric.
https://zeroproject.org/practice/pra191322usa-factsheet/
... I can reach out to zero project on this effort to see if we
can make it more international based rather than strictly
US.
... We also may want to look into a matrix for tagging
structure to make it consumable but not overly complex.
Jeanne: We can look into those points.
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask if the tags are aligned with the 7 functional reqs in EN 301 / Sec. 508
<Fazio> +1 JF
JF: Disability groups / types are
talked to in this setting. I would rather talk to functional
outcomes / functional requirements.
... There was talk off the cognitive section expand a bit and
have consensus between 301 and 508 for functional outcomes /
needs?
Jeanne: In the table , Functional user needs from EN 301 549 is mentioned as a possible tag. within https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Smly4XDxfzfXHa7AoUxoLXLy_3PdOXMkh0ZwtgksSPk/edit# part 2, section 2 table.
JF: I think those tags would be
beneficial. Also, to your other point, I would vote for "all"
returned search items rather than filtering.
... Impact of major, minor and moderate may also be beneficial
for tagging efforts as well.
<JF> +1 to 'Draft or Tentative'
CharlesH: +1 to JF's comments on functional needs and work I'm doing on that. On info architecture , I think parking these as a proposed tag structure, but start with the quick ref guide.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/quickref (CharlesH's reference point)
<Jan> ... or "low vision"
CharlesH: Without vision, vision, limited vision, Blindness. JF also adds similar comments on this topic.
JF: I would love to see this on the cognitive level. There are subgroups or filtering on that broad topic.
Jeanne: MichaelC is working on
that group, if available people can contribute to this
group.
... For tags, would there be a ranking or order? CharlesH: I
wouldn't necessarily rank via priority. DavidF: Needs thorough
review before general release.
... For functional needs, that will evolve from the group
working on it.
Jeanne continues to talk to table in document she references for tagging. Meta-organization (if applicable). For readability, we'd want to find all guidelines related to this topic. Technology, i.e. XR for example.
Impact on user (proposed) is a possible tagging structure, as is activity or role.
Jeanne: To do, link to EO roles list.
<JF> Notes that EO just updated that Roles resource (formally RACI Matrix)
<Jan> Yes
<Jan> Having trouble unmuting
<JF> https://www.imsglobal.org/activity/accessibility
Jan: Talks to imsglobal.org's accessibility roles and access for all.
<Jan> https://www.imsglobal.org/accessibility/afav3p0pd//AfA3p0_DRDinfoModel_v1p0pd.html#toc-5
Jan: There's a group that is working on this? Jeanne: Yes, it is the functional needs sub group.
MichaelC is leading this. It is not just a silver project.
Jeanne: Any other questions on
tagging?
... Next section , to develop tests.
<JF> Interesting. The following individuals contributed to the development of this document: Anastasia Cheetham - OCAD University (Canada), Andy Heath - Axelrod Access For All (UK), JoAnna Hunt - Blackboard (USA)., Madeleine Rothberg - WGBH (USA), Richard Schwerdtfeger - IBM (USA), Colin Smythe - IMS Global (UK)
Part 3 of document Template for Content Creation Process for Migrating WCAG SC (component-based) what Jeanne is talking towards in terms of developing tests. Known solutions, examples, exceptions, user needs, etc.
Jeanne: Transition to user needs
to this is what the product has to do, to here are the tests
that test the functional needs are being met.
... prior tests may be in understanding or techniques, which
would be brought into this document.
... On writing tests, what kinds of questions have come up
within the sub groups?
Are there any tests developed?
Jeanne: We can talk to this more on Tuesday's call if that works for all.
Jeanne: Migration guideline to work on, we need another one to provide to AGWG. We have a list of migration plan.
Jeanne, is this it? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aCRXrtmnSSTso-6S_IO9GQ3AKTB4FYt9k92eT_1PWX4/edit
<Jan> Perhaps we should try to get headings done since part of our clear language guideline will likely be chunked into that?
Clear instructions were possibly talked to on including into headings and labels...
Jan: I'd like to hear thoughts on other's point of view on feedback on SCs that could be migrated.
Jeanne: The XR group have been exploring how captions would work in XR. Part of the audio description is done and group is exploring on audio description in XR. Perhaps also adding captioning to that area would be worthwhile.
<CharlesHall> can we tap Thomas Logan to join if captioning in XR is a goal?
Jeanne: Thomas Logan could join as a community member and help out if possible.
CharlesH: He is working on
directionality in XR and captioning.
... Also , to the number of guidelines , the AGWG is asking for
6 , I don't see it in wcag.
Charles, https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page#Sub_Groups talks to this.
There's 8 listed out in an numbered list.
Drafts of individual WCAG success criteria to migrate to Silver
1 section headings, 2 visual contrast, 3 audio description, 4 alt text, 5 pause stop hide 6 language of environment, 7 sensory characteristics, 8 timing. Some are not active.
Jeanne: Pause stop hide may be beneficial, same as language of page.
Language of environment , authoring tools etc. Methods could be written for user agents, authoring tools, and emerging technologies.
We will raise this on Tuesday for a group to start working on this possibly.
Jeanne: Would be beneficial to have someone who works for a user agent or an authoring tool...
This is scribe.perl Revision of Date 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 OmarBonilla MichaelC Fazio JF ChrisLoiselle jan Regrets: Shawn Bruece Peter Chuck Janina Rachael 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]