<Rachael> Proposed Issue Response https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fc7TI8V6dNgFrD6wzGR8CjbbtO7Az0U-zYylrRSy8QQ/edit
<scribe> scribe: Jennie
Rachael: This is one of the SCs
that COGA put forward.
... It did not pass the CFC because it was so close to
3.4.6
... Based on the objections, the chairs met, and we are
suggesting to move the existing SC to A, and move this to
AA.
... Hopefully that suggestion will help get it through.
... If there are questions, please share with Rachael
Abi: Would this be the only change to the existing SC?
Rachael: No. One of the other SCs
had the same thing happen.
... For the other one, it went through because of this.
Abi: Thank you
Rachael: At the Accessibility Guidelines meeting on Tuesday I presented a possible conformance model, and part of that is functional needs.
<Fazio> I'm in the subgroup
Rachael: A subgroup of the Silver Task Force has put together all the functional needs from various documents.
<Rachael> functional needs suggestions from us https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QsiD0Y0lLCXvbmOOC4-EPf-2lFEPoEMaqNomQtPzBQI/edit
Rachael: This is our suggestions
about functional needs, and this was included.
... This does not group all of the cognitive disabilities and
learning disabilities all together - it breaks them out.
... I found a gap: Use with limited ability to comprehend
spoken language"
... Please look at this over the course of this week, compare
it with what we have already provided.
... I will follow up with an email.
... Please share any questions.
... Other areas of the W3C will be using this as well.
Abi: Where to share comments?
Rachael: If you feel confident add into the document.
<Fazio> doc would be good we are meeting weekly
Abi: There isn't anything around
coordination as a cognitive difficulty
... Does the group feel this is necessary?
Jennie: +1 to adding it
<Fazio> add it and we can discuss
Rachael: If it is a cognitive area that is missing, we should get it added, as it will impact virtual and mixed reality
David F: I'm in the functional needs subgroup and we meet weekly.
scribe: Anything missing, please
add! Also if you want to join, please do.
... This is something Michael Cooper has been working on for a
long time. It is not just for Silver.
Rachael: Do you prefer comments in the document, or email?
David F: Just put it directly in the document as a comment, with your name, and as much information as you can.
scribe: We are open to more
people getting involved.
... Charles Hall, Michael Cooper, David F, and one other in the
group
John K: Do we have a reading level in anything, in terms of grade level?
Rachael: I have no strong opinion, but I believe that Lisa does. I think it would be good to discuss as a group in next week's agenda.
John K: Yes!
Rachael: I will put a note in for next week.
<Rachael> Issue: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-coga-comments/2020Jan/0000.html
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-4 - Https://lists.w3.org/archives/public/public-coga-comments/2020jan/0000.html. Please complete additional details at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/track/issues/4/edit>.
Rachael: This is about Content
Usable.
... We received comments from the University of Maryland, about
the previous version.
<Rachael> proposed response: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fc7TI8V6dNgFrD6wzGR8CjbbtO7Az0U-zYylrRSy8QQ/edit
Rachael: We have a draft email to
them
... (reads from draft email)
... (edits done in document)
<Rachael> Jennie: I think the taskforce shoudl be specific. I think we should point out that the extensions should also be safe and accessible
Steve: Content usable is about
content. Whether your site is safe for people to use is a
judgement.
... The are other aspects about safety.
<Fazio> +1 to Steve
Steve: I don't think it is under our perview
<Fazio> +1 to Jennie
<Rachael> Jennie: Maybe we need to be clearer about what safety applies to within content usable
Rachael: So how would you change this text then?
<EA> +1 to what Steve says as this IRC channel has a flagged not secure with a red triangle just before the URL in Chrome
Steve: Why are you mentioning API?
Rachael: The thought on the response was that there could be APIs that help users be safe.
Steve: For example, browsers give you a hint with the padlock.
(Rachael edits in the document)
Steve: Is there a level of
personalization involved?
... It is a bigger issue than the content
(Rachael added information about adding an issue to address scope)
<Fazio> and trust in what form?
<Fazio> As in a secure site?
+1 to edits
Rachael: I will take notes, write another draft, and email the group to review.
Steve: Maybe add to scope within the context of a full system.
Rachael: I can get that tied in.
Other things missing?
... Next comment (reads from document)
<Rachael> Jennie: We had discussed reminders previously.
Steve: It may be that they are
saying this is a way people are simplifying their process
... I'm not sure that we need to respond to this.
Rachael: Do we have a pattern about this?
Jennie: Do we need more information about their question?
Steve: Yes, I agree
... It could be already covered, but we need more details.
<EA> Difference between autopay with direct debit and a credit card type reminder
John K: What were they commenting on?
Rachael: The last Content Usable from February.
John K: I was trying to find the language.
Rachael: Sometimes there is not language it is tied to, just tying it to their research that we may not be aware of
Steve: It could be a list of things they found are missing
Rachael: (edits document)
John K: a more specific example would be helpful
Rachael: (reading the next issue)
+1 to language in doc
Steve: If you get every document at once would make the text very tiny, and could cause overload.
David F: I disagree with the commentor, and can send research.
scribe: Plus how would you find the most important things?
(Rachael edits to request more information)
David F: Do you want me to send the research?
Rachael: We don't need it for this comment, but for future
John K: I'm wondering if this is out of scope for web content
scribe: It sounds more about the user agent, and your interface with your own technology.
Jennie: Could they be thinking about a web application?
Rachael: (reading edits)
John K: I think we are opening up a large concept of what a web page is...
scribe: I would be curious as to what the higher ups in the W3C would say
Rachael: Web applications are in content
<Rachael> Jennie: Other examples may not be folders specifically but general ways of organizing content.
Steve: There is a big of issue as to what is a page
Rachael: What I am also hearing
is that we should pass this to personalization because we might
have conflicting cognitive needs
... Exposing everything vs not
... Next one (reads from document)
<Rachael> Jennie: To EA, when I worked with AAC user studies in some cases the location on the screen aided the motor planning.
EA: If you think the printer will
always be top left, that's where you will go. I have found this
with those with aphasia, dementia
... They over learn it
... We teach that motor experience
... So I think there is something there we need to look at
Rachael: I think we will add an issue to this
<kirkwood> +1
<Fazio> true for tai also
EA: The recent Norman video covers both usability and accessibility, and I think that is the other issue we have with it
<Fazio> tbi
EA: Are we straying into usability?
Rachael: I will say from the facilitator point of view, we can step into usability when appropriate
John K: I would back up the point of where something is on the screen, especially with the aging community
scribe: Using multimodal interface to get to the top right, the physical movement ties into memory.
EA: I think this is the problem
with different browsers.
... The elements you put on your webpage, and people do have
great differences, and if you speak Arabic, you may need things
in a different location than those in the West.
Rachael: (reads edits)
<kirkwood> +1
Steve: I think the conversation about desktop is out of scope. But then the visual hierarchy being important is not something we have covered. I don't think we have added that.
<kirkwood> +1
Abi: I agree that we should be
but I think we do cover it. We had a pattern on group, but we
struggle with usability, finding research for this.
... And it is slightly covered in WCAG - consistent navigation,
consistent identification.
... We know from the discussions about 2.2 - visual indicators
are hard to define.
Steve: Your group concept is part of it, but it is also a relationship between hierarchy.
Abi: and when things move
Steve: But that may be different
<Rachael> Jennie: Going back to conversation on where we straddle usability. We should more concretely call out where we straddle usability and where we overlap WCAG. Important in government that we have clear lines between accessibility and usabilty.
<Rachael> ...with regards to spatial, I think we could rely on AAC research about where symbols are placed within a grid and how the consistency within the grid is managed across time. We could definitely pull the research. Even though there is a usability component there is research out there.
<Fazio> consistenvisual salience?
EA: I am concerned using the grid pattern, because that is based on syntax, rather than an overall grid
<Fazio> visual salience I mean?
EA: And therefore you tend to
have the pronouns in one place. You have groupings of
vocabulary, and these will depend based on the device and
language
... But I agree it is about use
Rachael: I do think this is an issue, and we can create that.
+1
<kirkwood> consitency and placement which can relate to heirarchy
EA: Where is something, the nearest to you that David said earlier, we should include.
Rachael: (reading the next issue)
David F: I think it is important to share that this document continues to be updated.
scribe: That we will continue to do more research, and then will update it.
<kirkwood> +1
Rachael: I have added that
comment
... (reading next issue)
... (reading response draft)
David F: I think again we should figure out which things need to wait for the next iteration.
Rachael: We do. The final address to the issue might be - we need to address this in the next version, and that new issue let's us track it in future versions
David F: ok
Rachael: (reading next issue)
<Fazio> that's my brain
Rachael: (reading draft response)
John K: I have a difficult time pushing it to just low vision
David F: +1
Jennie: +1
<EA> +1
Steve: there is a difference between what is processing vs vision
<EA> Same with Aphasia etc
David F: agreed.
Steve: I'm wondering if all of this is already covered in WCAG?
Rachael: The contrast is
Steve: But it is not clear from what she says if this needs to be addressed differently
Rachael: (reads new draft with adding an issue)
+1
John K: I'm wondering if we should use the term visual processing
+1
<kirkwood> +1
Rachael: Is the group comfortable with this trend, I can review, word smith, email it to this group to review
+1
<kirkwood> +1
RESOLUTION: Cleanup and email out for final review
<Abi> +1
<Fazio> +1
<kirkwood> could you put me on as well ssteve
Steve: The W3C in the last week
of September is having a hackathon
... Geek Week
... For staff
... I want to look at how we could improve the editorial work
load for those with less technical skills
... I have added a bit of text on our wiki
Steve: If anyone has problems not identified, please add into the wiki
Rachael: If it gets to a point where we need to do the glossary in a separate meeting please let me know
David F: I emailed an issue with persona names
Rachael: I created an issue
number around this
... I think we need a subgroup to create a more diverse set
EA: I think we need one or two
people that understand those personas
... more personally
Rachael: I agree. I will try to put together a group
<Rachael> ACTION: Rachael to get together diverse group to make sure the personas are representative
<trackbot> Created ACTION-328 - Get together diverse group to make sure the personas are representative [on Rachael Montgomery - due 2020-08-06].
Rachael: If anyone knows a person that may be interested, please contact Rachael
John K: I'm speaking locally in New York about cognitive accessibility. I can share this request there
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: Jennie Rachael Fazio Abi kirkwood stevelee 1 Found Scribe: Jennie Inferring ScribeNick: Jennie 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: rachael 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]