Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

20 Aug 2020


Jennie, JustineP, Fazio, stevelee, Roy_, Abi, kirkwood, JohnRochford, 1


<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Scribe_list

<LisaSeemanKest> scribe: Fazio

updates and actions review https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage#Actions

<LisaSeemanKest> ok

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f4NhQMtQthDbShVje3evTqELBa9eR6eSyoA31Jjlgm4/edit#heading=h.38pppwromd4r

LS: Follow up call with AGWG to decide on final wording of Content Usable willl be scheduled
... requesting comments ahead of time. Will label issues

<Abi> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1f4NhQMtQthDbShVje3evTqELBa9eR6eSyoA31Jjlgm4%2Fedit%23heading%3Dh.baiza4kngsyy&data=01%7C01%7Ca.james%40soton.ac.uk%7C5ea77f9dbf4b4e15ef2a08d8448ac1b1%7C4a5378f929f44d3ebe89669d03ada9d8%7C0&sdata=uf54p2fIMsq5mW543cEUACBz6r%2F2%2Fxo%2BUERZYKHd5fA%3D&reserved=0

LS: put together draft glossary for review "New Draft of Our Decision Process"

<Abi> Sorry wrong link - new draft of decision process https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f4NhQMtQthDbShVje3evTqELBa9eR6eSyoA31Jjlgm4/edit#heading=h.baiza4kngsyy

LS: asking Abi, Jennie to review process

<LisaSeemanKest> COGA strives to have a review by a representative of each disability group or minority affected by important decisions.

Abi: "should review by rep from each disability group"... Concerned that that might include from multiple countries because will differ culturally

<Jennie> One or more?

LS: change wording to "strive" or "why"

Jennie: "one or more" might be better

LS: should Internationalization TF review Glossary?

MC: Could take 3 months

LS: Main Doc - Content Usable would be good to have reviewed by internationalization, requesting support for personas, etc would be good

MC: should treat as horizontal review

Rachael: reached out to Shaawn. Recommended educational outreach as right person to review glossary

LS: will send draft to EO for review

Abi: broken glossary into 3 sections priority 1 - in Content Usable Priority 2 - not mentioned until patterns Priority 3 agreed on terms, moved to bottom. 5 terms priority 1. Should concentrate on those.

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lWTTYjzoCDx6goBCMH7pI72nsuIGu35JDu1hYGlyCwY/edit#gid=0

SL: Editorial reviewed style guide

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/List_for_final_edit

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/List_for_final_edit

Betsy will review style guide for content usable by next week

<kirkwood> yes

<EA> Q

<EA> +q

LS: make mock up page for each objective - good & bad contrasting example

<Jennie> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TeSP612Z9Zf7Srojdbq0te615CE0g5wB6puCBVLXziw/edit#heading=h.8716h010w8q

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Image_examples

<LisaSeemanKest> zakem, next item

Rachael: issues coming in on WCAAG 2.2. Chairs will reach out to original leaders to manage SC issues

<Jennie> +1 great question John R!

JR: has been responding to accessible authentication comments. Wants to know if he should respond immediately. Rachael: we need to formally address as AGWG

<LisaSeemanKest> zakem, next item

<LisaSeemanKest> zakem, next item

glossary https://docs.google.com/document/d/1poEoQjuWdAfWM3aOGPCwJRx7EvBsAtQ_99sGyS9Jlgc/edit#heading=h.uytuzlswdejq

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AuM-06Alk5VgVgFPTsJD2DcadIrcGIRVDcNgFwPiQRc/edit#

Abi: do we need definition for cognitive, learning disabilities? critical, wants to discuss today

LS: putting definitions in a comment is difficult. Prefers the previous approach of adding comments below

Jennie is ok with that but would like date stamp

JK agrees

<LisaSeemanKest> ackl

<Jennie> +1

LS: we have section dedicated to cognitive disabilities so we may not need a definition

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#background

Cognitive and learning disabilities is aa phrase

Cognitive and learning disabilities meant different things in different places. LS now agrees we should define

Abi: beginning of cognitive learning disability has a definition

LS: might want to tweak, but sure

Abi: lots of comments on learning disabilities

LS: we never use "learning" by itself" without "cognitive". Problematic because of cultural differences

+1 LS

<Abi> q

Jennie: we should explain how we use word and also how others use it

<kirkwood> link to the second one:

<Abi> Learning disabilities nvolve difficulties with processing auditory, tactile or visual, or information, often accompanied by poor working memory, that impact the ability to learn and apply certain skills. These processing problems can interfere with learning basic skills such as reading, writing and/or math. They can also interfere with higher level skills such as organization, time planning, abstract reasoning, long or short term memory and attention. S[CUT]

<Jennie> (2nd half): Specific learning disabilities cover a spectrum of conditions which often overlap including dyslexia (reading), dysgraphia (writing), dyscalculia (processing numbers), auditory processing disorder and dyspraxia/developmental coordination disorder (spatial and temporal coordination and orientation)

LS: is it localized. Abi: US definition, does have some specific disorders. We can edit out

<EA> Is one allowed to use the term 'literacy skills'

LS: not a fan of short word/sentence definitions accompanying specific conditions

<kirkwood> seems like an educational context don’t cover the aging realm? is that the intent?

<EA> acquired dyslexia after stroke?

<EA> Sorry not all people with 'learning disabilities' such as dyslexia have above typical levels of ability in other realms

<JustineP> What about saying the list "includes but is not limited to the following examples"?

<EA> +1

Jennie: priority is to finalize terms we already have majority consensus on so we have some ready by deadline

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version (CVS log)
$Date: 2020/08/20 15:12:22 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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 JustineP Fazio stevelee Roy_ Abi kirkwood JohnRochford 1
Found Scribe: Fazio
Inferring ScribeNick: Fazio

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

Found Date: 20 Aug 2020
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]