<scribe> scribe: Wilco
<Chuck> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/labels/WCAG%202.2
Chuck: Issue list is growing. I'd like to invite you to review it. If it is related to your area it would be helpful if it was for the TF to review.
<alastairc> Easier list, sub-grouped: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.2_Issue_tracking_and_resolution
Chuck: If there is anything specific to a guideline from your group, please tackle it
Wilco: Would it be helpful if issues are tagged?
Alastair: This page has a list by success criterion
Kathy: What about the target size?
Alastair: Detlev has gone back to people to show them the update
<Chuck> https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/
Chuck: There has been a lot of updated. If you haven't had the chance, now is the time
Jeanne: There is a lot of
information in different documents. We're brining this all
together into one document that is a style guide for developing
content for WCAG 3. Right now the priority is getting to
FPWD.
... Then we'll have time to do this in a more systematic way.
We want to open this to all the groups, invite ideas for
content for the second draft.
... I'd like to give a quick overview in what's involved.
<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/
Jeanne: First, the current
editor's draft. If you go to the guidelines section. The way
it's structured is the name, guideline, and link to the
how-to.
... This is the highest level of guidance, designed for
non-technical people. For people new to accessibility. Starts
with the "get started" tab.
... We have a development process. Start with identifying user
needs about the process. Everything starts from user
needs.
... Then identify the outcome, then the tests, then the
methods, and lastly the guideline and how to.
... The how-to comes first in the document, but is written
last.
Lisa: Where do we put the user need?
Jeanne: In the "gets started" tab. Particularly, who it helps and how.
Lisa: My suggestion, developers
are familiar with user needs. We start off giving a user need,
linking to a persona. Another thing to bare in mind is a
mapping. Sometimes it is more than one item to meet the user
need.
... There might be different things you need to do to meet the
user need.
... The risk is you're going to write the outcome, then the
user need, instead of the other way around.
Jeanne: That is the way we have
it. Not the order in which it is displayed. In the writing
process we start with user needs.
... The person who designed this setup is a researcher in
cognative disabilities. We can refine this as we go.
... We involved a COGA specialist to do this.
Lisa: I'm not sure getting
started maps. It is normally how to plug it in. What this is
background. The word "getting started" might not be the right
term.
... I find it a bit confusing.
... We use "getting started" in COGA when you don't have a lot
of time.
Jeanne: This is a different use,
for people who've never done accessibility before.
... This involves a summary, why you should do it, who it
helps, and an overview of how to do it.
<stevelee> ac s
Steve: Was going to say the same. It's a different use case.
Jeanne: Next there is a plan tab
for project planners. Trying to encourage people to build
accessibility in from the beginning of the project.
... A design tab for designers. Then developers. The examples
have high-level examples to apply across technology.
... The outcomes tab is a repeat of what's in the TR document.
Then resources will expand as we add more information.
... It would be nice to have a link go back to the actual
guideline.
Michael: Yeah that makes sense.
Jeanne: Then the outcomes. They
start at a testable level. We try to keep them as "plain
language" as we can.
... This repeats the outcome, gives the functional categories.
Most of these are for HTML, but we included one for ATAG to
show we can include authoring tools and user agents into
Silver.
<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG3/2020/outcomes/text-alternative-available
Jeanne: This is the outcome page
for text alternatives available.
... We include the functional categories, this is related to
the scoring. In order to meet the level, you need to meet a
minimum in each of the functional categories.
... We intend to have more balanced guidelines across different
disabilities.
... For text alternatives there are a number of categories for
COGA as well as sensory.
<shawn> [ Shawn wonders why Outcomes separate page from How Tos ? -- and won't interrupt Jeanne's flow to say it now :-]
Jeanne: We need a better place
for outcomes. It's not ready yet, but it is our intention that
all of this information is in a CMS.
... A lot of this information is block-oriented. We can move
the blocks where we need them.
Michael: The branch for moving
outcomes out is not merged yet.
... I think the outcome should have separate pages because they
have multiple methods. That would overload the detail.
... Guidelines have a page, methods have a page, it makes sense
to have outcomes also have a page.
... I can merge this if we're ready.
Jeanne: Yeah that's fine.
Chuck: Is it fine to wait, or fine to merge?
Jeanne: Fine to merge it
... We are still pulling together a lot of meetings. Had a lot
of really good comments. More details to pull together to have
a FPWD that the WG will stand behind.
<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG3/2020/methods/images-of-text/
Jeanne: The last thing I wanted to show are the methods. Looking at "images of text" with this link.
Each method has an introduction, description, examples, tests, scoring, and resources.
scribe: We have two levels of scoring. Scoring on the individual test level. We have broader tests. They are no longer based on true/false statements. We can have rating scales, rubrics, distance from the mean, different types of test to include different guidance.
Lisa: I find it confusing that the method page looks almost the same as the text alternative. Some tab names are the same. Maybe have different backgrounds? Otherwise I think people will find this confusing what the difference is between how-to and methods.
Jeanne: good idea.
<shawn> [ Shawn takes that input for current EOWG work, too ]
Jeanne: Given this, I'd like to talk about resource we're building for all to start contributing to the second draft.
<LisaSeemanKest> i would need to understand the template before i acan contribute :(
<shawn> [ we'll think about color, text, icon, etc to help distinguish... ]
Jeanne: We have three documents that we will merge into one after FPWD.
<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page#Silver_Content_Writing_Resources
Jeanne: There is a section on our
wiki on Silver content writing resoruces.
... We have a preliminary style guide. It is work from our
prototype two years ago, adapting plain language to standards
work.
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn point Michael to minimal header for these pages
<trackbot> 'Shawn' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., shawn, lauriat).
Jeanne: Then we have Creating guidelines, methods, and supporting documents.
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn Lawton Henry point Michael to minimal header for these pages
<trackbot> 'Shawn' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., shawn, lauriat).
Jeanne: this gives an overview to
our process. First identify the user need. Guidelines are a
means of grouping related outcomes. As we moved towards
consensus we found we need the outcomes level.
... Depending on feedback, we may get rid of the guideline
level.
... As we worked through the details, we realised outcomes have
an "and" relationship to the guideline.
... For example, you need semantic and distinct headings. When
you work on how to create semantically accessible headings, you
can do it with ARIA or HTML semantics, or PDF semantics.
That "or" relationship is a method.
scribe: All the methods within an outcome apply to the same set of categories.
<Chuck> wilco: we found in ACT that for things like html makes sense to have just one of them and have a deeper abstraction layer, it doesn't matter how you generate the heading level, just that it is computed in some way and spec'd somewhere else.
<Chuck> Jeanne: thank you.
<Chuck> Jeanne: I believe they merged into one method.
scribe: An important part of the
outcome is identifying critical errors. The idea is to address
the problem that organisations need to have the ability to
prioritise how critical a problem is.
... We needed a way to say that one issue is more problematic
then another because it stops people from completing a
task.
... This is a tricky part. Critical errors that will cause a
user to fail. If a critical error occurs, the outcome will not
pass.
... There are three major types of errors. Non-interference,
like flashing and keyboard traps.
... The second is an error that is in a path / process, that
prevents a task from being completed.
... For example a functional image in the navigation that
doesn't have alt text.
... The third one are errors that are cumulative. If someone
consistently gets a low score on clear words, that is a
critical error.
<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/#guidelines-0
Jeanne: If you go to text
alternatives, there is a twisty for critical errors. You
automatically get a 0 if you have a critical error. If you're
only testing conformance, you can stop testing if you hit a
critical error.
... Below is the rating for text alternatives. This is the
score that passes to the final score. In text alternatives we
use percentages because automated tools do that.
... This does not have to be a percentage.
... To summarise: We're working on the style guide. Looking for
volunteers to help us merge the information.
Kim: I'm on board
Jeanne: A lot to put together, we'll have it in a few weeks. Particularly in the content groups, look at what you'd like to work on.
Kathy: Can we set up a call to walk through it?
Jeanne: Sure
Shawn: Lets sync up, there is a WAI style-guide, wonder if we can call it something else to avoid confusion.
Jeanne: Yes, we link to
those.
... This will be the WCAG 3 style guide.
Shawn: That seems more like a writing guide or a development guide.
<shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Style
Jeanne: Sure, I just want it in one place.
Lisa: Not much to update. Heads down to deal with all the issue to get Content usable to a note. Hoping to start that in November. After that we'll be more available to help.
Kathy: We've been answering questions around target size, coming with a new recommendation
Shawn: Jim formally resigned as facilitator. He has a lot going on, sad about that. Looking forward to figure out what we want to do. The taskforce has been inactive for some time. Looking what we want to do to revive it now or later.
<Chuck> wilco: Minor editorial changes that didn't make it in.
Mary jo: Have several surveys going for new rules. We're about to publish rules approved by the AG group. We missed some editorial changes for the review. Trying to figure out what to do with those.
<shadi> +1 to FYI to the list
Alastair: I think we can just do an FYI to the list. Will talk to Michael about that.
Mary Jo: working on the decision making process too.
Shadi: One of the work items is to integrate the ACT rules into the support documents, to make it part of techniques and understanding work. Hoping we can get that soon.
Jeanne: In the methods we're
linking directly to ACT rules. We have a few examples but
haven't matched everything up.
... We're pushing to get FPWD out on time.
<shadi> +1 to ACT in Silver!
Chuck: chairs to schedule
meeting. Has not been done.
... Michael set up a shared document.
Michael: Yes that was set up.
<MichaelC> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JF29AuO-Dv8MVR6cqnh4aGMgUztiM9ZnCPI0nn79uNk/edit
Chuck: Chairs had discuss facilitators. That was done.
Mary Jo: I put in the doc that I talked to David McDonald. Link to the current info, David is willing to help out with this.
scribe: We have to get a group together to work on it.
Kathy: We have a meeting with Judy to discuss further
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) Default Present: MichaelC, Wilco, shadi, Kathy, LisaSeemanKest, shawn, Kim_Patch, Chuck Present: MichaelC Wilco shadi Kathy LisaSeemanKest shawn Kim_Patch Chuck Found Scribe: Wilco Inferring ScribeNick: Wilco 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: henry lawton michael point shawn 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]