Silver Task Force & Community Group

09 March 2021


Azlan, Fazio, Francis_Storr, jeanne, Jemma, jennifer_strickland, JF, joconnor, Laura_Carlson, Lauriat, Makoto, MichaelC, sajkaj, sarahhorton, SuzanneTaylor, ToddLibby
jeanne, Shawn
jeanne, sajkaj

Meeting minutes

Daylight Savings time reminder

jeanne: Daylight time starts Sunday in much of North America. Be sure to check the link to get the time right in your locale.

Reminder of APA presentation invite


<jeanne> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2021Mar/0016.html

Janina: Media queries may be a good way to approach ??. The CSS group said the timing is good and they would work on it.
… there will be show and tell of media queries to address personalization accessibility issues

Weekly Issue report

<sajkaj> jeanne: Thanks all around to everyone who helped!


<Lauriat> Jemma: "The call is Wednesday 10, March at 12:00 EST 1700 UTC." (from the email linked to a little further up)

<sajkaj> jeanne: Now 189 github, and 24 email issues

<sajkaj> jeanne: Triage may split some of them into multiple github issues

<sajkaj> jeanne: This is progress from last week!

<sajkaj> jeanne: Next major task is moving comments received by email into github issues.

Planning update


<sajkaj> jeanne: It's been awhile and we should catch up!

<sajkaj> jeanne: Notes we checked attendance this week, vis a vis CSUN, AxCon

<sajkaj> jeanne: Notes the data loss that killed hyperlinks for Silver Research and for the Challenges docs

<sajkaj> sajkaj: Please, if you have pointers, we want them desparately!

<sajkaj> jeanne: Notes how to include inclusive design at some medal (Silver?) in WCAG 3 ...

<sajkaj> jeanne: we will come back to this issue following the conferences

<Fazio> interesting

<sajkaj> jeanne: Also discussion of guidelines for children with disabilities

<sajkaj> jeanne: Would like to do some outreach on that

<sajkaj> jeanne: Notes we've also discussed FPWD comment disposition process

<jennifer_strickland> I'm one of the folks who volunteered to help, Jeanne!

<sajkaj> jeanne: Anything else to note?

Subgroup updates

<Lauriat> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page#Sub_Groups

<sajkaj> MichaelC: Functional Needs meeting again

<sajkaj> MichaelC: Email on list with directions; weekly meetings are resuming

<joconnor> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/FAST_restructure_2021

<sajkaj> MichaelC: Working on DB to store these

<sajkaj> Francis_Storr: Components Architecture Testing -- would like to get going

<sajkaj> Francis_Storr: Potentially useful

<ToddLibby> @Francis I am interested as well

<jennifer_strickland> @Francis I am, too.

<Fazio> very impassioned pitch. Bravo Francis

<Zakim> Makoto, you wanted to share alt text subgroup's update.

<sajkaj> Makoto: No update this week--sorry.

<sajkaj> Makoto: Working on translations of Japanese comments

<Makoto> Japanese comments on FPWD: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kX6DnXftI9VSrK9wgTTOqlkFp9KE4OCGxQqgDiAUcTc/edit?usp=sharing

<sajkaj> Makoto: Am starting with auto translations and then reviewing by hand

<Lauriat> Thank you so much, Makoto!

<Fazio> great work, my friend. Take your time don't stress

<Francis_Storr> Link to "Evaluating The WCAG3 Proposal" Google Docs slide deck: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qoXwyq3Q2uezlAHI0Jn9XL_DD9zDlnF0zegSPdm3hSg/edit#slide=id.p

Thank you Makoto. It is very helpful to have international input on WCAG3. I appreciate how tedious translation work can be and am grateful you are willing.

Jnaina: We have a lot of good information, we have been processing comments and still trying to move the use case work forward.

<sajkaj> jennifer_strickland: Questions arose in outside groups re clear language vs plain language

<sajkaj> jeanne: Very similar but challenging to identify good international sources for plain language work

<sajkaj> jeanne: At the moment plain language is very U.S. Federal specific

<sajkaj> jeanne: But that's not appropriate for our international standard

<JF> https://www.w3.org/TR/2020/WD-coga-usable-20201211/

<Lauriat> Thanks, JF!

<sajkaj> sajkaj: Notes this doc is hopefully soon to be a W3C Note

<sajkaj> jennifer_strickland: Sheri and I are meeting later today to get going on headings

<sajkaj> jeanne: XR still on haeatus

<sajkaj> Fazio: Working still on Maturity Model, nothing specific to report just now

Feedback for the Errors subgroup


<sajkaj> jeanne: Especially feedback request, please

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: Asks Tod to pick up from last Friday's presentation ...

<sajkaj> ToddLibby: Got to persistent session data ...

<sajkaj> ToddLibby: Have included User Needs in our doc

<sajkaj> ToddLibby: Also Functional Categories, including "All"

<sajkaj> jeanne: Notes what we've done so far can still be changed!

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG3/2020/how-tos/text-alternatives/ Text alternatives

<sajkaj> jeanne: This example for Text Alternatives

<sajkaj> jeanne: A long ago design, and we should consider does it still work well?

<sajkaj> jeanne: Else, we should come up with a more functional design

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: We've focussed on guidelines -- that level

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: We can try to see how what we have fits

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: Thinking certain methods will be more helpful to certain functional categories

<jennifer_strickland> I attended an outside group that brought up the How-to's and there was a lot of appreciation of the format of these.

<sajkaj> jeanne: Very interested in what we all think about how this fits

<Jemma> +1 to work on critical errors

<sajkaj> jeanne: Recommendation had been to actually write tests, as that would reveal more of critical errors

<sajkaj> jeanne: Might be good to try both ways, critical first, or tests first

<Jemma> +1 to Jeanne's suggestion - attempt to use the structure

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to talk about user needs


Addressing common needs: In defining user needs, we identified common user needs and unique needs based on functional categories. Now we have a designation of “all” for functional categories that isn’t used in the current Guidelines content. If we convert “all” to listing all functional categories and subcategories, each outcome will list all functional categories, which may blur

the focus. Do you have suggestions of a good approach to noting when an outcome addresses functional needs of all users?

<Fazio> very ambiguous

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: We found it helpful when defining user needs and translating them into functional categories

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: when we said "common need" we didn't have the breakdown for greater/lesser impact, or unique addressing of needs

<sajkaj> Fazio: Should help with multiple disabilities?

<sajkaj> Fazio: But unsure whether it also refers to nondisabled needs

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: Not so much multiple disabilities, but more one functional need in each category

<sajkaj> jeanne: Believe we wanted to identify needs shared across all pwds, but then also particular needs for certain groups -- so that we could find conflicts

<sajkaj> Fazio: Could be a problem for people objecting to various success criteria

<Fazio> I think so Janina

<sajkaj> sajkaj: Asks if there's a need, but addressed differently (methods?) for different functional categories

<sajkaj> sarah: Not yet come up for us, but sounds like Jeanne's comment

<sajkaj> jeanne: Yes, example contrast may be unique; sometimes increase the contrast; other times decrease it

<Fazio> argument for personalization

<Lauriat> +1 to Fazio

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask if those needs across different functional categories are also deemed "equal"?

<sajkaj> jf: Asking about impact/severity: "Essential for some, useful for all" from EO

<sajkaj> jf: Do we have that metric here?

<Fazio> JF sounds like a better way to start

<sajkaj> jf: Are you looking at severity/degree of impact

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: A helpful conversation for our work

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: Believe we've also been talking severity in Conformance

<Fazio> +1 to Sarah

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Creating_Guidelines,_Methods,_and_Supporting_Documents Creating Guideliens, Outcomes and Methods

<sajkaj> jeanne: May be a helpful reference

<sajkaj> jeanne: Identifying severity is very helpful at user needs level

<sajkaj> jeanne: Notes this group is the first new guideline drafting group since the current conformance model

<Fazio> quantifying severity will be difficulty. Important but difficult

<Fazio> forgive my typos. Darn butterfly keyboard

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to follow on re: scoring

<jennifer_strickland> +1 to JF

<Fazio> +1 to JF

<sajkaj> jf: Notes some things will be more critical from some users than others

<sajkaj> jf: How to handle that?

<sajkaj> jeanne: Asks JF what's missing in severity of critical errors?

<sajkaj> jf: Everything will be critical to someone; believe our scoring model needs to be more granular to catch this

<Fazio> +1 JF

<sajkaj> jf: Text alternatives / descriptions critical for blind; important for coga

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to mention tying this to context of the app/path/task

<sajkaj> seaImportant to tie this kind of severity consideration in the context of the user doing something--working on how to express that more cleanly

<sajkaj> Fazio: Believe this kind of severity analysis can be a very helpful result of Sarah's work

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: Yes, hoping to do something more nuanced; and please join our work!

<sajkaj> sarahhorton: We need more perspectives in our work.

<jennifer_strickland> Bye y'all!

<laura> bye!

<Azlan> Bye all

<Makoto> Sayonara!

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


Succeeded: s/thinking//

Maybe present: Janina, Jnaina