Silver Task Force & Community Group

26 January 2021


CharlesHall, Chuck, Fazio, Francis_Storr, JakeAbma, jeanne, jennifer, JF, joconnor, JustineP, KimD_, Laura_Carlson, Lauriat, Makoto, Rachael, sajkaj, sarahhorton, Sheri-B-h, Shri
jeanne, Shawn

Meeting minutes

<CharlesHall> have to drop at 10a ET

Editorial change to the Decision Policy

<Lauriat> Link to the change: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1601

Jeanne: Decision policy clarification on one sentence. Shawn provided link in IRC.

AGWG is discussing today. Then it will go into policy.

Leadership updates

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Leadership_Team#26_January_2021

Jeanne: Leadership updates. In order to facilitate that, I added a new page to subgroup list.

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Leadership_Team is the parent link

<CharlesHall> and there is still much rejoicing

Jeanne: We published first public working draft, thank you to everyone.

Jeanne: If you have written anything, I can link to what I have published.

Jeanne: February 26 is the date for comments to be made by on FPWD.

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Procedure_for_Processing_Comments

Jeanne: Provided link on processing comments.

Jeanne: I can help anyone that may have issues with accessibility and reaching and reading comments.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to note this is a draft plan, chairs havenĀ“t had a chance to review yet

MichaelC: We will review with Chairs and make sure that this is consistent with the viewpoint , thus it is a draft for procedure.

<Fazio> you the man, Makoto!

<JF> +1 to Makoto the rock star!!

<Lauriat> Thank you! Domo arigato!

Makoto: Experts are reviewing the FPWD , however most of them don't speak English. Comments in another language, I will be able to translate into English. Can we welcome comments in other languages? I.e. Japanese ?

MichaelC: Let us add this as a discussion point with Chairs.

Jeanne: Any other comments ?

Chuck: Wordsmithing is worthwhile activity, however want to prioritize time appropriately while on calls.

<JF> +1 to Janina

<CharlesHall> +1 to Janina for a goldilocks solution

<Rachael> the final wording would also come back for review again

Janina: On wordsmithing , I think it is worthwhile to an extent. It is a delicate balance to use time correctly, there's a balance on needing to do this on call.

<JF> Groups should favor proposals that create the weakest objections. This is preferred over proposals that are supported by a large majority but that cause strong objections from a few people

MichaelC: The goal is for us to communicate correctly and get through action items. There will be a goldilocks area where we wordsmith but don't get caught up on entirety of call on that particular subject.

Jeanne: It is more a looking forward to move through comments and how we can do better moving forward.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to address tangled and to say which is presumably Rapunzel to the Goldilocks...

MichaelC: Proposals by a few trying to resolve may be better use of time and then come back to group to provide the untangled review of concerns.

Janina: Identifying concepts of disagreement is worthwhile.

Jeanne: Agreed. Groups working on issues outside then coming back to group to work through the items in question would be a good process. We recognized that wordsmithing was an issue.

We are trying to address it effectively.

Updates from sub-groups on January goals

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Goals_for_January_2021

<CharlesHall> would like to revisit Functional Needs work now that we published FPWD that references them

Janina: We have been working on use cases. We started looking at principles that describe WCAG3 conformance model. We are now looking at use cases and have interesting ones and can make them available soon.

DavidF: Currently working maturity model and moving toward a word document type deliverable. We are talking to stakeholders , etc. We are making good progress.

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to ask about stakeholders

Jeanne: What was purpose of stakeholders and how do you intend to use this?

DavidF: Dimensions apply to stakeholders. It will help flush out dimensions and artifacts and activities.

Sheri: Measuring whether or not a dimension is met, based on artifacts.

Jeanne: Can you clarify dimensions?

Sheri: Categories. To look at corporate or organizational behavior is and then impact on accessibility.

Support, knowledge and skills, etc. 8 in total. There will be score for each dimension and will roll up.

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask about scalability and small shops

JF: You mentioned corporate structure...how does it scale for small businesses and legal obligations ? Scaling down vs. up?

DavidF: We have discussed roles as well as functions and responsibilities. We will be focusing responsibilities.

Someone has to manage the web property. That person will fall in to "X" categories.

Sheri: We will tailor the questions and have threshold questions. This will help one person shops.

JF: I'd like to see this in practice as I'm concerned about scalability.

Sheri: We've been designing with these questions in mind.

Jeanne: I'm interested in how you are doing the scoring.

<CharlesHall> sorry, have to drop

MichaelC: Josh and I have been working together and hope to have something for demonstration soon.

Jeanne: Errors group?

Sarah: We are working on error user needs summary and should have that by Friday.

<Chuck> Chris: we didn't meet last week (for visual contrast).

<Chuck> Chris: We are migrating Andy's tool into github. I don't think we have Bruce, Andy or Todd.

<Chuck> Chris: Meeting regularly, making strides in scope of applying to more than just visual contrast for text, looking to broaden that.

<Chuck> Chris: Work has been around the formula that Andy has worked on, tweaking that. More technical and granular work.

<Chuck> Jeanne: I've been handling the twitter comments on fpwd (been a bit of a struggle), on a thread where people talked about the contrast tools, noting that the tool is too compex.

Here is the information we've been working on to date, https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Visual_Contrast_of_Text_Subgroup

<Chuck> Jeanne: he's a single researcher, and tool vendors are critiquing the tool. Someone said "you hope that this happens". Next day I was shown where Chrome has a beta version coming out that already implements WCAG 3 algorithm.

<Chuck> Chris: Very cook.

<Lauriat> Issue 1121900: DevTools: update contrast calculation logic per new spec https://crbug.com/1121900

<Chuck> Sheri: Google has reached out to me on details for maturity model. I declined, a bit too early, but they are trying to be early adopters.

Sheri: Google has also reached out on maturity model as well, which is good to see that they are invested and interested.

<Chuck> Michael: Extra pains should be taken to impart that these are subject to change.

<Chuck> Shawn: I've been sharing that in all my communications.

<Chuck> Shawn: Hopefully everyone is aware at Google.

Shawn: The this is subject to change comment is referenced where noted, so we are aware of that part of process.

<Chuck> Michael: We've had cases where someone will implement and then later state that it's too late to change.

<Chuck> Jeanne: I'll update my slide deck to include this.

<Chuck> Jeanne: Any q for visual contrast?

Makoto: On Alt text, we are working hard on rest of methods for HTML images.

We should be able to share next Tuesday meeting.

Francis: We were reviewing tools in November 2020. We adapted simple words tool to be more specific for WCAG 3.

<Francis_Storr> https://fstrr.github.io/clear-language-experiment/

I've moved this into GitHub and placing the link here in IRC

You can copy and paste words into this tool and will tell you how simple or not simple the words are.

<Francis_Storr> https://fstrr.github.io/accessibility-tool-audit/index.html

<Francis_Storr> https://fstrr.github.io/login-form-experiment/

Francis: Also pasting the UK Gov tool as well, which is a reference point for us.

<Francis_Storr> https://fstrr.github.io/escape-room-experiment/

The Login Form Experiment URL is also available as well as Escape Room URL. These were referenced in the research to see whether or not we could use these tools to reference clear language.

I'm open to comments.

These can be used and are available.

Jeanne: I hope to promote this work as we do more outreach on this topic.

Jeanne: We want to have something that we can point people to and is important for people researching the details on this topic.

Sheri: On XR , I had a question on volunteering. Did you want me to follow up on captioning methods?

Jeanne: Yes, that would be great.

Sheri: Happy to work on captioning as it directly supports my daughter.

Jeanne: Suzanne was working on some methods as well. Sheri: I will start with three and will go from there.

Jeanne: Josh O'Connor is a great resource.

Josh: I am happy to help, Sheri.

Jeanne: Thank you everyone !

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).


Maybe present: DavidF, Francis, Janina, Josh, MichaelC, Sarah, Shawn, Sheri