Silver Task Force & Community Group

29 January 2021


Andy, CharlesHall, Chuck, Fazio, Francis_Storr, JakeAbma, jeanne, Jemma, jennifer, JF, joconnor, JustineP, KimD, KimD_, Laura_Carlson, Lauriat, Makoto, Rachael, sajkaj, sarahhorton, Sheri-B-h, Shri, Wilco
Angela, Bruce, David, John, Peter, Sukriti, Todd
jeanne, sajkaj

Meeting minutes

<CharlesHall> have to drop at 2:30p ET

<ChrisLoiselle> I defer to the queen.

Errors subgroup User Needs work

sh: Multiple docs associated with group work ...

<sarahhorton> Errors User Needs Summary: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mTrr0hSsQrApmC4N0tF4fQOF-PiLsK-FNZproi7WQcA/edit#

sh: Mainly want to share the doc and request feedback ...

sh: Group working since October on content creation process

sh: First task was to define user needs when working through error situations

sh: Notes links in summary doc above

sh: Existing Silver docs have helped us work through how things should ideally work in error situations

sh: This is all draft material--not a subgroup consens yet! Please beware!

sh: We do want feedback and additional perspectives though

sh: Pauses for questions

js: Asks for overview of work so far

sh: Is screenshare OK

js: As long as you describe

sh: Intro describes at how we arrived at our items

sh: also background info on group work

sh: also overview of existing guidance then asks content groups to provide more pwd group specific needs

sh: notes next step is where we are now, share and request response

sh: We have 4 specific questions

sh: will come back to that

sh: Identified user needs fall into different categories; and that has suggested guidelines

sh: starting with notification

sh: Outcome would be provided notifications that users would know about

sh: barriers might be no message, or inaccessible message, or somehow else not comprehensible

sh: another common situation is getting at details

sh: or a notification that there's change in autocorrection in values--users should have opportunity to verify

sh: reviews a flow chart ...

<Jemma> "unique" user needs now made sense to me with all the examples. Thanks, Sarah.

js: Impressed with the quality of this work. Will be good example for task force training!

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.
… I also want to get at least one lamp that I can reliably turn off.
… the configuration is not accessible to screen readers
… all the prompts are inaccessible
… there should be disclosure whether or not the device is inaccessible.

<Jemma> yeah. sajkaj's examples are really good ones.

<sajkaj> sj: Explains some WoT stack and process related challenges

<CharlesHall> error notification could be configurable

<sajkaj> sh: Likes the scenarios and agrees need to explore

SH: One of the buckets of ideas are Error Contingencies. These are good scenarios and the configuration scenario as well

<Jemma> First sajkaj's point is related to error identification.

<sajkaj> sh: provides good segue for needs we do have ...

<Jemma> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fix0uwC0vODgiKl09lMF77FMdd52u64KG9_-N86r4UE/edit#

Error FLows Inventory

<Jemma> abov is error flows inventory

<sajkaj> sh: will walk through one ack je

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to ask where Sarah has captured potential outcomes?

<CharlesHall> sorry. have to drop.

<sajkaj> js: Going back to probable guidelines and wondering where you saw potential outcomes

<Jemma> "probable guideline"?

<sajkaj> js: Was that notifications?

<sajkaj> sh: Yes and can show how they came to be

<sajkaj> sh: like the process we discovered

<sajkaj> sh: worked through error flows ...

<sajkaj> sh: first flow was file not found -- click link

<sajkaj> sh: the 404

<sajkaj> sh: error would be no notification--

<sajkaj> sh: user doesn't know why the unrelated response, so tries another way to do the same thing

<sajkaj> js: User needs to know resourdce not available, but is it likely existing via other route?

<sajkaj> sh: we reference all functional needs and walk through our scenario

<sajkaj> sh: eg physical harm or risk

<sajkaj> sh: Doc is output of many individuals and may not yet be fully coherent stylistically

<sajkaj> sh: where we had content in various flows we went to a spread sheet

Errors User Needs Worksheet

<sajkaj> sh: looks at sheet -- each need one row

<Jemma> Sarah's approach is very systematic.

<sajkaj> sh: rows are the functional needs

<sajkaj> sh: not various tabs ...

<sajkaj> sh: looks at some of the specifics identified by the process -- that's how we got to our outcomes

<sajkaj> js: Great!

<sajkaj> sh: Note we also worked on a scope doc for our subgroup

<sajkaj> sh: Notes related guidelines column -- either from 2.x or our emerging 3.0

<jennifer> This spreadsheet is fantastic!

<sajkaj> sh: very handy that this is sortable!

<Lauriat> +1, awesome work, this really helps to follow it all!

<sajkaj> js: Wow!

<sajkaj> js: Very powerful and like it a lot

<sajkaj> jema: Got me to look at unique user need definition ... may be helpful to have uniue functional need definition

<sajkaj> jema: maybe something more specific than "unique"

<sajkaj> sh: That's the kind of feedback we need!

<sajkaj> js:Notes good question -- Should contrast be different for error notifications?

<sajkaj> sh: There are several like that and we need to identify those. It's among our next steps

<sajkaj> andy: Contrast is definitely context sensitive. Understand one some things will need to stand out

<sajkaj> andy: People frequently use red to help--but that's not fully a11y

<sajkaj> andy: ample luminence also important -- but what do you do when everything is actually already high contrast

<sajkaj> andy: should all else become dimmer? We sometimes see that technique

<sajkaj> sl: want to build on this topic a bit ...

<sajkaj> sl: scope for errors interesting, but also andy's points

<sajkaj> sl: using errors as defining increased severity of not following guidance

<sajkaj> sl: this may be about rating workflow and how well workflow follows guidelines

<sajkaj> sl: a button "click here to fix the problem" button not in tab order would be a big problem

<sajkaj> sl: we need to keep this on our agenda for building up these kinds of workflows

<sajkaj> sl: and a walkthrough for how to interpret

<Jemma> great suggestion, Shawn.

<Jemma> This is great discussion!

<sajkaj> js: Notes we have time to incorporate these things as they develop

<Lauriat> 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!

<sajkaj> sh: We'll take feedback in any form. February for us is building up guidelines

<sajkaj> sh: Also notes thanks to subgroup who've worked on this so hard

<sajkaj> js: Notes a tweet following FPWD which noted 3.0 is very ambitious

<sajkaj> js: I see that here! A great description

results of the scheduling survey

<sajkaj> js: Trying to followup on loose ends post FPWD ...


<sajkaj> js: Changing meeting time js: No one solution fits -- rather as expected

<sajkaj> js: have variety of answers which the bot gives us multiple views of; esp ranking details

<sajkaj> js: no answer yet

<sajkaj> js: Now also reminded to review scope statements from subgroups

<sajkaj> js: Asks for responses to WBS

<sajkaj> js: OK. Current plan is discussion in leadership next week and back on agenda soon

<sajkaj> js: Notes need to plan vis a vis steps beyond 2.2

Errors subgroup User Needs work

<sajkaj> js: Process draft will be forthcoming ...

Process: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Procedure_for_Processing_Comments

Github issues ->

<Jemma> https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/

<sajkaj> js: suggest to look at "simplify wcag doc" you'll se tagging we applied. NOT YET APPROVED -- working on it!

<sajkaj> js: Actions; Sections; Guidelines

<sajkaj> js: should help us map to subgroups, then what to do with it ...

<sajkaj> js: Editorial: fix/don't-fix

<sajkaj> js: changed color coding

<sajkaj> js: Should develop into a consistent Tuesday agendum

FPWD Comment triage system

Proposal for Enhanced Acknowledgements

<sajkaj> js: Notes this is just a proposal and an early response. Responses welcome!


<sajkaj> js: Proposal is for subsections under Acknowledgements for "How people contributed"

<sajkaj> js: Pushed for useful categories that would help show how work was accomplished

<sajkaj> js: Ex: Authors; Subgroup leaders and participantsjs: Ajother category is research -- Andy, Josh, etc

<sajkaj> js: We should work out our definitions, of course

<ChrisLoiselle> I was just looking for a w3c t-shirt :)

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


Succeeded: s/ages/s/

Succeeded: s/accojmplished/accomplished/

Maybe present: janina, js, Process, sh