<sajkaj> scribe: sajkaj

announcement and invite for next two AGWG meetings (Chuck)

<CharlesHall> the tribe acknowledges mutual admiration

ca: Reminder of AGWG sessions on Silver conformance model alternatives
... Next Tuesday 28 August is Rachael
... Tuesday 4 August is John Foliot

<Fazio> so be on best behavior :p

ca: This will be the standard AGWG teleconference at 11:00 Boston
... Presentations will be first agendum, and may not take entire meeting on the 28th and 4th
... Tuesday 11 August will be daylong deep dive
... Page under construction--so be kind!

<chuck_> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Meetings/Silver_Deep_Dive_2020-08

ca: We do expect to follow AGWG published decision policy on testing for consensus on a model to move forward
... However, no timeline yet
... Rachael will recuse herself as she's presenting one of the options

Functional Needs subgroup presenting the list of Functional Needs

<CharlesHall> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eJkgXqbh7dx3uD6XAy8XAANmwfbbVZ5GKb_gbsUdkVs/edit#heading=h.4jiwp8jpc143

<MichaelC> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-a11y-functional-needs/2020Jul/0012.html

ch: and summary link ...
... discussed how there may be conflation of concepts as no agreed definition of funct outcomes yet
... also re order of operations
... it's rather hard to come up with mappings as we don't yuet have written guidelines
... easier to relate to methods

<Fazio> +1

<bruce_bailey> list in doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eJkgXqbh7dx3uD6XAy8XAANmwfbbVZ5GKb_gbsUdkVs/edit#heading=h.4jiwp8jpc143

<bruce_bailey> list in slides

<bruce_bailey> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc9f88081_23_6

jf: compares process to 2.x ...

ch: sure, my context is Silver and not any WCAG legacy
... Yes, we have a lot of known knowns ... all our existing guidelines are there to satisfy a need
... in 2.x we can start from guidelines, and that's easier, but not in Silver
... Trying to use content creation as our reference point -- pulled captions as an example

<Lauriat_> WCAG to Silver Outline Map Charles mentioned: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aCRXrtmnSSTso-6S_IO9GQ3AKTB4FYt9k92eT_1PWX4/edit

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to say that I so appreciate that the functional needs listings are consistent between two documents cited for this meeting

bb: Wanted to appreciate having these two lists so well made

<bruce_bailey> https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/#guidelines

<ChrisLoiselle_> +1 to JF's point on multimedia vs. captions / user needs / functional outcomes.

bb: Notes draft only has 3 guidelines so far
... suggest we might want to work from broader perspective

<ChrisLoiselle_> +1 to Bruce's recommendation on organization aspect

bb: Believe the google doc had only 3 categories, and that's easier

ch: will respond as we go through the list

mc: we'll be going for functional needs that apply across all of WAI work
... suggest we not over-worry this level definitions just yet

df: believe maturity model should help exactly on this -- to tie the pieces all together

ch: responding to mc and bb -- re length of the list might be outside our scope/ability -- we believe not best perspective
... volume of work/guidelines based on how we expect our funct needs will map
... there may be a single method that accomodates perhaps 30 needs
... begins working through the collated list per above URI

<Peter_Korn> Rats.

<Peter_Korn> Working on it...

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to ask about Deaf vs deaf

<Peter_Korn> Keep going without me. My intent was to speak when the recitation was completed.

js: In sensory do you distinguish between "deaf" and "Deaf"?

ch: Absolutely

<Peter_Korn> OK, I think my mic has returned to the living.

<Peter_Korn> (as much as any microphone can be alive [vs. live])

<Fazio> thighs can be how we award bonuses talked about last year, set gold silver bronze levels even etc

pk: Asks whether we expect all of these funct needs to be covered by one or more guidelines and an "accessible" site would need to meet them?

ch: don't know yet

<Fazio> Think of a way granular version of POUR

ch: Any guidelines we come up wich don't apply, would not map to a particular one

mc: we expect our funct needs to apply across all W3C specs

pk: Notes we have key exceptions in 2.x; and wonder how some essentialness should come along
... e.g. it's hard to make the function of creating a movie caption track accessible to a deaf person

ch: the mapping ex3ercise plus how prioritization might apply is not something we've taken up yet

pk: not disagreeing, just want to note we should do that -- and not just push it off on the guidelines

<Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to ask if I am missing one under language and literacy "Use with limited ability to comprehend spoken language"

<Fazio> Could be part of the Maturity work

rm: have cross mapped these against ACT tests
... under lang/lit don't see COGA for written lang -- need to followup

ch: part of the purpose of bringing this draft to the group

df: think COGA should be able to help with that

<Fazio> AgainThe list isn't final yet

jf: notes lack of "use with impaired comprehension;" and notes APA's Personalization TF is trying to address that

ch: Notes one about comprehension of written lang and a couple about understanding; phps a comment in doc for now?

<Fazio> It's in content usable

jf: points to symbols and notes Personalization TF is attempting to provide for that

ch: Invites comment now, or in doc, or on list

<Fazio> word

Scoring discussion continued

<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc2ef29b6_3_54

<Lauriat_> Direct link to slide 12: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc9f88081_11_128

mc: /me I'm back, am I still scribing?

<ChrisLoiselle_> sajkaj , I'll do last 15 minutes

<ChrisLoiselle_> Scribe:ChrisLoiselle

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say (after presentation) guidelines have both 1:many and 1:1 relationships

<ChrisLoiselle_> Rachael: Mapping against functional outcomes and differences are what we are looking at in diagram

mc: concerned from db experience that a one to many plus a many to many is a recipie for trouble

<ChrisLoiselle_> MichaelC: If one to many and many to many , things may get confusing. Many to many guidelines would be difficult to map

rm: agree, and it's what makes this hard
... asks whether I've captured the relationship correctly?

pk: don't understand def of "atomic"
... distinction between atomic and contextual

rm: atomic intended to be a test comparable to 2.x

<bruce_bailey> i agree that slides 14 and 15 convey the conudrum

rm: something testable based on an item within whatever we're testing; e.g. about a web link which can be tested regardless of anything else on a page

<Fazio> More subjective tests?

rm: we've tried affordances in 2.x; e.g. plain lang; where there's a reference outside the environment; that's what contextual is trying to do
... still working on defining that well

pk: not seeing any notion of friction?
... e.g. is the missing alt (atomic) actually impeding someone travcersing a particular path

<Fazio> criticality of barriers?

rm: all done with scoring
... points to slide #28

<bruce_bailey> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc9f88081_11_146

rm: Oops, try #36

pk: yes, i was looking there

<bruce_bailey> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc9f88081_11_164

<bruce_bailey> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc9f88081_11_164

pk: there's no determination whether the missing alt text is actually necessary

rm: if it's unnecessary, it wouldn't be scoped within the path
... a missing alt in a footer

pk: coming back to contextual ...
... if the body text addresses needed info, is that a failure?

rm: content test still potentially in the atomic area, but still to be ironed out
... but needs to be assessed on a quality basis

pk: would be helpful to try to capture some of this nuance
... phps also some made up examples

rm: yes, I have in various spread sheets -- coming soon!
... hope to have those out by Monday
... notes coming tests including failures small and large on and off path

<Rachael> Tests I think we need: 1 critical failure on path, 1 big failure off path, 1 flashing off path, many small errors off path

<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc2ef29b6_3_13

rm: moving to slide #16
... and the hierarchy ...

<bruce_bailey> @rachael maybe add several small error ON path

rm: my concepts of how this prioritizes

<jeanne> 16

rm: for this proposed model to work we need functional outcomes groups correctly against tests
... notes some of the nuances vis a vis function need categories

<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1zUqVZnSKEmQuRpd7aTLvVeI_A-IV0ly3qt3glqqpNBc/edit#slide=id.g8dc9f88081_19_24

rm: notes she put mental health under essential ... all my understanding so far

df: wonders how we update in the future based on use and experience?

rm: not sure how much the categories would change; but certainly the guidelines/tests etc
... asks people to look through this to figure where outcomes fit

<Rachael> particularly slide 21

Ciao!

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 sajkaj JF ChrisLoiselle_ Francis_Storr bruce_bailey CharlesHall OmarBonilla Fazio Caryn-Pagel chuck_ KimD W244C Julia Crispy Lauriat_ Peter_Korn
Regrets: Angela Jake
Found Scribe: sajkaj
Inferring ScribeNick: sajkaj
Found Scribe: ChrisLoiselle
Scribes: sajkaj, 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.)