18:52:08 RRSAgent has joined #silver 18:52:08 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/01/29-silver-irc 18:52:10 RRSAgent, make logs Public 18:52:11 Meeting: Silver Task Force & Community Group 18:52:17 jeanne has joined #silver 18:52:24 agenda+ Errors subgroup User Needs work 18:52:30 agenda+ results of the scheduling survey 18:52:35 agenda+ FPWD Comment triage system 18:52:37 agenda+ Proposal for Enhanced Acknowledgements 18:55:57 kirkwood has joined #silver 18:57:06 CharlesHall has joined #silver 18:57:17 present+ 18:57:59 present+ 18:58:14 have to drop at 2:30p ET 18:58:18 Present+ 18:58:34 regrets+ Bruce, Todd, John, Peter, David, Angela 18:59:12 present+ 18:59:18 scribe: sajkaj 18:59:25 Francis_Storr has joined #silver 18:59:32 present+ 18:59:32 ChrisLoiselle has joined #silver 18:59:49 I defer to the queen. 19:01:43 zakim, take up item 1 19:01:43 agendum 1 -- Errors subgroup User Needs work -- taken up [from Lauriat] 19:02:12 sarahhorton has joined #silver 19:02:19 present+ 19:02:26 present+ 19:02:43 sh: Multiple docs associated with group work ... 19:03:04 Errors User Needs Summary: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mTrr0hSsQrApmC4N0tF4fQOF-PiLsK-FNZproi7WQcA/edit# 19:03:29 sh: Mainly want to share the doc and request feedback ... 19:03:46 jennifer has joined #silver 19:03:47 sh: Group working since October on content creation process 19:04:02 Wilco has joined #silver 19:04:03 sh: First task was to define user needs when working through error situations 19:04:03 present+ 19:04:05 regrets+ Sukriti 19:04:22 sh: Notes linkages in summary doc above 19:04:33 s/ages/s/ 19:04:51 present+ 19:05:09 sh: Existing Silver docs have helped us work through how things should ideally work in error situations 19:05:32 sh: This is all draft material--not a subgroup consens yet! Please beware! 19:05:36 KimD has joined #silver 19:05:45 sh: We do want feedback and additional perspectives though 19:05:52 sh: Pauses for questions 19:05:53 Present+ 19:06:10 Jemma has joined #silver 19:06:14 kirkwood has joined #silver 19:06:17 q? 19:06:40 present+ 19:06:50 agenda? 19:07:05 js: Asks for overview of work so far 19:07:12 sh: Is screenshare OK 19:07:19 js: As long as you describe 19:07:52 sh: Intro describes at how we arrived at our items 19:08:00 sh: also background info on group work 19:08:02 present+ 19:08:43 sh: also overview of existing guidance then asks content groups to provide more pwd group specific needs 19:08:59 sh: notes next step is where we are now, share and request response 19:09:18 sh: We have 4 specific questions 19:09:24 sh: will come back to that 19:10:03 sh: Identified user needs fall into different categories; and that has suggested guidelines 19:10:10 sh: starting with notification 19:10:36 sh: Outcome would be provided notifications that users would know about 19:11:15 sh: barriers might be no message, or inaccessible message, or somehow else not comprehensible 19:11:56 sh: another common situation is getting at details 19:12:23 sh: or a notification that there's change in autocorrection in values--users should have opportunity to verify 19:13:15 sh: reviews a flow chart ... 19:13:25 "unique" user needs now made sense to me with all the examples. Thanks, Sarah. 19:14:29 q? 19:14:30 q? 19:14:58 js: Impressed with the quality of this work. Will be good example for task force training! 19:15:29 scribe: jeanne 19:17:07 janina: I think this is excellent work. I want to ask about scoping about what one does when things that go wrong and you have to re-iniitalize -- like adjust the temperature for the IoT thermostat. Is that information available in an accessible form. I had to find a hard to find USB port on the thermostat. If therew was a loose wire, it could be dangerouis. 19:17:50 ... I also want to get at least one lamp that I can reliably turn off. 19:18:37 ... the configuration is not accessible to screen readers 19:19:15 ... all the prompts are inaccessible 19:19:43 ... there should be disclosure whether or not the device is inaccessible. 19:20:07 yeah. sajkaj's examples are really good ones. 19:20:11 sj: Explains some WoT stack and process related challenges 19:20:21 error notification could be configurable 19:20:23 sh: Likes the scenarios and agrees need to explore 19:20:27 SH: One of the buckets of ideas are Error Contingencies. These are good scenarios and the configuration scenario as well 19:20:58 First sajkaj's point is related to error identification. 19:21:03 sh: provides good segue for needs we do have ... 19:21:08 q? 19:21:39 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fix0uwC0vODgiKl09lMF77FMdd52u64KG9_-N86r4UE/edit# 19:21:48 Error FLows Inventory -> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fix0uwC0vODgiKl09lMF77FMdd52u64KG9_-N86r4UE/edit# 19:21:49 abov is error flows inventory 19:22:46 q+ 19:22:56 sh: will walk through one ack je 19:23:12 ack Jemma 19:24:56 q+ to ask where Sarah has captured potential outcomes? 19:28:16 ack jeanne 19:28:16 jeanne, you wanted to ask where Sarah has captured potential outcomes? 19:28:27 sorry. have to drop. 19:28:36 js: Going back to probable guidelines and wondering where you saw potential outcomes 19:28:49 "probable guideline"? 19:29:19 js: Was that notifications? 19:29:25 sh: Yes and can show how they came to be 19:29:33 sh: like the process we discovered 19:29:34 Andy has joined #silver 19:29:42 present+ 19:29:44 sh: worked through error flows ... 19:30:20 sh: first flow was file not found -- click link 19:30:28 sh: the 404 19:30:42 sh: error would be no notification-- 19:31:03 sh: user doesn't know why the unrelated response, so tries another way to do the same thing 19:31:34 js: User needs to know resourdce not available, but is it likely existing via other route? 19:31:55 sh: we reference all functional needs and walk through our scenario 19:32:08 sh: eg physical harm or risk 19:33:06 sh: Doc is output of many individuals and may not yet be fully coherent stylistically 19:33:29 sh: where we had content in various flows we went to a spread sheet 19:33:57 Errors User Needs Worksheet -> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1BEzSKUsoMQZAwLY5uM5T4Jk7vqKruQT8EaheijQJ7nk/edit 19:34:05 sh: looks at sheet -- each need one row 19:34:16 Sarah's approach is very systematic. 19:34:41 sh: rows are the functional needs 19:35:44 sh: not various tabs ... 19:36:38 sh: looks at some of the specifics identified by the process -- that's how we got to our outcomes 19:36:48 js: Great! 19:37:02 sh: Note we also worked on a scope doc for our subgroup 19:38:15 sh: Notes related guidelines column -- either from 2.x or our emerging 3.0 19:38:19 This spreadsheet is fantastic! 19:38:28 sh: very handy that this is sortable! 19:38:43 q+ minor suggestions - can "unique user need" vs "common user need" be "unique functional user need so that it can be more intuitive without reading through examples? 19:38:44 +1, awesome work, this really helps to follow it all! 19:38:49 js: Wow! 19:39:08 js: Very powerful and like it a lot 19:39:48 jema: Got me to look at unique user need definition ... may be helpful to have uniue functional need definition 19:40:13 jema: maybe something more specific than "unique" 19:40:24 sh: That's the kind of feedback we need! 19:41:44 js:Notes good question -- Should contrast be different for error notifications? 19:42:04 sh: There are several like that and we need to identify those. It's among our next steps 19:42:05 q+ 19:42:14 ack Andy 19:42:42 q+ 19:42:51 andy: Contrast is definitely context sensitive. Understand one some things will need to stand out 19:43:05 andy: People frequently use red to help--but that's not fully a11y 19:43:36 andy: ample luminence also important -- but what do you do when everything is actually already high contrast 19:43:49 andy: should all else become dimmer? We sometimes see that technique 19:44:17 sl: want to build on this topic a bit ... 19:44:20 ack laur 19:44:32 sl: scope for errors interesting, but also andy's points 19:44:46 sl: using errors as defining increased severity of not following guidance 19:45:05 sl: this may be about rating workflow and how well workflow follows guidelines 19:45:57 sl: a button "click here to fix the problem" button not in tab order would be a big problem 19:46:11 sl: we need to keep this on our agenda for building up these kinds of workflows 19:46:23 sl: and a walkthrough for how to interpret 19:46:27 great suggestion, Shawn. 19:46:41 This is great discussion! 19:47:07 js: Notes we have time to incorporate these things as they develop 19:47:23 I feel like I just complicated things a little, but this work just has so many angles to it. Thank you for walking through it all, Sarah! 19:47:49 sh: We'll take feedback in any form. February for us is building up guidelines 19:48:06 sh: Also notes thanks to subgroup who've worked on this so hard 19:48:35 js: Notes a tweet following FPWD which noted 3.0 is very ambitious 19:48:48 js: I see that here! A great description 19:49:04 zakim, take up item 2 19:49:04 agendum 2 -- results of the scheduling survey -- taken up [from Lauriat] 19:49:29 js: Trying to followup on loose ends post FPWD ... 19:49:45 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/94845/schedule-Jan2021/results 19:49:59 js: Changing meeting time js: No one solution fits -- rather as expected 19:50:20 js: have variety of answers which the bot gives us multiple views of; esp ranking details 19:50:26 js: no answer yet 19:51:07 js: Now also reminded to review scope statements from subgroups 19:51:16 kirkwood has joined #silver 19:51:26 js: Asks for responses to WBS 19:51:48 js: OK. Current plan is discussion in leadership next week and back on agenda soon 19:52:19 js: Notes need to plan vis a vis steps beyond 2.2 19:52:26 zakim, take up next 19:52:26 agendum 1 -- Errors subgroup User Needs work -- taken up [from Lauriat] 19:52:33 zakim, close item 1 19:52:33 agendum 1, Errors subgroup User Needs work, closed 19:52:34 I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 19:52:34 3. FPWD Comment triage system [from Lauriat] 19:53:11 js: Process draft will be forthcoming ... 19:53:31 Process: -> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Procedure_for_Processing_Comments 19:53:58 Github issues -> 19:54:06 https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/ 19:54:34 js: suggest to look at "simplify wcag doc" you'll se tagging we applied. NOT YET APPROVED -- working on it! 19:55:20 js: Actions; Sections; Guidelines 19:55:43 js: should help us map to subgroups, then what to do with it ... 19:55:50 js: Editorial: fix/don't-fix 19:56:01 js: changed color coding 19:57:03 js: Should develop into a consistent Tuesday agendum 19:57:37 zakim, take up next 19:57:37 agendum 3 -- FPWD Comment triage system -- taken up [from Lauriat] 19:57:50 zakim, take up item 4 19:57:50 agendum 4 -- Proposal for Enhanced Acknowledgements -- taken up [from Lauriat] 19:58:38 js: Notes this is just a proposal and an early response. Responses welcome! 19:58:49 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Joc5F6YfYPDOK5ryBUsPVP-xUtrrhoQ2Uf7iKGpbLnM/ 19:58:57 Francis_Storr has joined #silver 19:59:19 js: Proposal is for subsections under Acknowledgements for "How people contributed" 19:59:52 js: Pushed for useful categories that would help show how work was accojmplished 20:00:09 s/accojmplished/accomplished/ 20:01:26 js: Ex: Authors; Subgroup leaders and participantsjs: Ajother category is research -- Andy, Josh, etc 20:02:14 js: We should work out our definitions, of course 20:02:14 I was just looking for a w3c t-shirt :) 20:03:03 rrsagent, make minutes 20:03:03 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/29-silver-minutes.html jeanne 20:25:04 zakim, bye 20:25:04 leaving. As of this point the attendees have been jeanne, Chuck, Shri, Francis_Storr, Lauriat, sajkaj, JakeAbma, JF, Makoto, JustineP, CharlesHall, Fazio, jennifer, Laura_Carlson, 20:25:04 Zakim has left #silver 20:25:07 ... joconnor, sarahhorton, Sheri-B-h, KimD_, Wilco, KimD, Jemma, Rachael, Andy 20:25:10 rrsagent, make minutes 20:25:10 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/29-silver-minutes.html sajkaj 20:31:11 kirkwood has joined #silver 20:52:35 jeanne has joined #silver 21:43:37 kirkwood has joined #silver 22:51:56 kirkwood has joined #silver 23:36:09 kirkwood has joined #silver