Silver XR Subgroup

22 Oct 2020


jeanne, Joshue108


<scribe> scribe: bruce_bailey

White paper describing XR strategy




<jeanne> Introduction that includes describing the groups we are working with


Types of XR

<jeanne> Types of XR

(Susan working on that)

Jeanne: then area or functional needs that need to be addressed by XR

Charles Hall voluntold to develop 1st draft

<SuzanneTaylor> Types of XR would outline all of the types: such as full Virtual Reality with Headset, with or without hand tracking, Augmented Reality with a Just a cellphone, etc

<SuzanneTaylor> In addition, the purpose of the type of XR, entertainment vs information could be significant

[catch Josh up call]

Suzanne volunteers to write first draft on types of XR (including VR and AR)

Jeanne: consensus that white paper a good immediated objective

purpose of XR very singificant, recreation vs education vs work

functional needs document has a lot of relevant material

google doc for initial work

<CharlesHall> i need a link to where this will be edited

pull from qtf

pull from maur

Josh: nexus with other groups important to document

mikec: one thing we notice right away is the linkages with all these other groups

josh: important near term priority is a gap analysis
... what is not in wcag ?
... XR is also an enviornment for competing needs, probably moreso than with other areas of accessibility

<jeanne> Blank document for drafting the White Paper <- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1om7h7HE-9sIPeBRmJrBSESQWsMGH8PysiWCpAUWXBUQ/

mikecrabb: gap analysis might need to be later on in the document or maybe even a follow-up activity
... the competing (or even conflicting) needs really are going to be challenging
... ex w/ MS augmented reality current work
... there best practice is that object NOT be fixed in VR environment, but that seems to be conflict with what we have discussed with regards to captions
... the MS design patters also conflict with what we thing people want/need for cogo issuss

[Joshue and Mike discuss]

scribe: maybe we can do short waterfall approaches
... on paper looks like separate sections, but we would be building up regularly as we go along

<CharlesHall> requested edit access to the draft doc

Joshue: agrees, look at different parts, like structured semantics, see we go
... this makes me want to address COGA sooner than later since it effects so many areas
... it is hard, but benefit to starting with most challenging aspects first.

MikeCrabb: then we want to figure out how we can get guidelines into WCAG3 sooner than latter
... we can start writing those up even as we develope white paper

Jeanne: We will want to have this in early draft format, kind of strategy document, how we are approaching this work

<CharlesHall> unrelated. event tomorrow: Designing Augmented Reality Systems to Empower People with Low Vision https://www.meetup.com/a11yvr/events/273466936/

MC: Challenge with gap analysis is that we will be doing things in chuck
... competing needs will be tough, but writing out the conflicts and ways to deal with things will help us make progress
... We also have issues with dependence on technolgy
... very fews APIs and the like
... we also have all the cross fertilization with other W3C groups

[discussion that XR LV conference is "tonight" and using VR "hubs"]

CharlesHall: There is live streaming on YouTube as well

MichaelCrabb mentions VR poster halls.

Josh: Do we want to address users groups (KB, LV, etc.)?

MC: I would like for us to look for academic papers that address specific aspects and see if they are addressing cross disability issues

Josh: Coga is certainly one important issue, but there are others

[group discussion on paper review]

scribe: Review is very different approach from writing a white paper.
... worth while exercise for what is needed in this space.

Jeanne: There are other groups that have their outcomes we want to include: Immersive Web, Immersive Captioning
... but what is our plan for keeping Silver updated around immersive environments?
... then we see what kind of interest there is with our work.

Josh: How about identifying about what SC are relevant to XR
... and where there are obvious gaps
... and if some SC really need to radically reconsider for XR.

Jeanne: Need to also look beyond WCAG SC.

Josh: And the personalization space also has lots of interesting development we will want to leveragel

Jeanne: We have broad perspective, so we can bring lots of insight to others work as well.

MichaelCrabb: More than enough for one call
... please everyone take a look a the Google Doc, add where you can, and we will discuss next week.

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: 2020/10/22 15:01:04 $

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)

Succeeded: s/COGO/COGA/
Succeeded: s/ but lets not let that block us from progress/ but there are others/
Present: jeanne Joshue108

WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list!

Found Scribe: bruce_bailey
Inferring ScribeNick: bruce_bailey

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: 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]