Meeting minutes
Introductions
All: Brief introductions to new (returning) participant Karl Groves.
Karl: 20 years experience in accessibility. Worked for TPG, LevelAccess, SimpleyAccessible, Deque. Based in Maryland, founded Tenon.io in 2014.
WAI Style Guide update
Shawn: Background is that there was a persona in the Content Usable... document with a they/them pronoun ID. References to that in the style guide could use additional guidance. In our minutes, we had some discussion about the difficulty of using plural pronouns for individuals...
… there is proposed wording and there is a diff file
… review the docs, especially the new bullet points, let's take a quick reading break and discuss.
<shawn> draft wording in wiki: https://
<Laura> ready
<Vicki> done
<Jade> done
<JasonMcKee> done
<krisannekinney> ready
<Howard> done
Shawn: The solution that the COGA group came up with was to use the name of the nongendered persona most often instead of any pronoun.
… when you read it you are aware that the name is being used often but it is easy to understand and is an excellent solution.
Kevin: Is it worth calling out who it is confusing for? It was confusing to me - what is a plural pronoun? In terms of the solution, does it undermine the choice of personal pronouns, how is it if we don't use their hoice but only use the name?
Laura: I have a collegue who uses personal pronouns. They have a female name and so I find myself using their name instead. We've been working together for more than a year and still trip over it.
… I understand why it would be easier to use the name than the pronoun, don't think they are offended by that.
Shawn: Is the balance OK since it is mentioned and we are led to use personal pronouns most of the time?
Kevin: I may not be the most typical as an "older" person who does not use personal pronouns.
Shawn: It is an issue among older people who don't understand and can get quite frustrated. I could be talked out of taking older people out of it, but do feel it strengthens the issue.
Brent: I can see the importance of saying non native speaker, but think the cognitive and older reference may not be accurate. I know several young people who also are frustrated. It confuses people especially when referring to them in the third person in the context of project implementation.
<shawn> refresh
<Laura> +1 to Brent's comments
Shawn: OK I can take out the older people reference but think the cognitive may be relevant.
<shawn> [ notes such strong support "pretty OK" :-]
Shadi: Caution about using accessibility as a way to push back, maybe say an overarching comment about language skills. There are broader questions and it reminds me of the discussion s of the difficulty of the phrase "people with disabilities"
<Howard> Would avoid "low"
Shaen: Could look at generic language. What is good use of that? And issue at COGA ocument was not to use "low" language
… or judgemental words
Sharron: atypical
Shawn: jargon
… please continue the brainstorm would like to take a resolution to accept all but that one phrase
<shawn> proposal: accept all wording except "especially some whose native language is not English and some people with cognitive disabilities"
<shawn> - work on general instead
<Vicki> +1
<Laura> +1
<brent> +1
<JasonMcKee> +1
<Howard> +1
<krisannekinney> +1
<Jade> +1 I might change especially to for example.
<kevin> +1
Karl: +0
<shadi> +1
Resolution: EO will accept all wording in the change to the style guide except "especially some whose native language is not English and some people with cognitive disabilities"
WCAG Video project
<brent> Overview: https://
Brent: Overview is posted
… trying to make a set of short quick videos that demonstrate the purpose of each of the SCs and use them to support advocacy and training.
… a subgroup of people are working on these with Shadi to develop and bring scripts to EO for approval. Trying to make them short, concise and focused. The background also has some points about what we are NOT trying to do.
… this guidance is to help you understand what to look for and what not to look for. We are about ready to circulate to EO and some external stakeholders.
… have completed the first four and have another six nearly readty for review. Want to look at the process and make sure it is workable.
… today want to discuss the open issues. Any questions about the overall project or the review of these four before we get to the two open issues?
… the first issue is about the understanding of captions, adding them to pre-recorded video. People can add comments to GitHub if you ahve suggestions
<brent> WCAG Video Issues: https://
<shadi> Script for SC 2.2.5 https://
<shadi> Script for SC 1.2.2 https://
Shawn: About 1.2.2, first is the observaton that this goes beyond the SC requirement and includes things like who is speaking and also has judgement about auto captions that are not actually in the requirement.
<shadi> https://
Shadi: I understand the SC differently than you do. I find the language in the SC - clapping, speaker ID, etc is in fact within the requirement in my judgement.
… the auto-caption is borderline but we felt it important in terms of quality
Jade: A point about auto captions, since it is developing and improving quite quickly, might the comment about auto captions become obsolete?
Shadi: We are thinking as well for languages other than English where the quality is far behind.
Kevin: I think I disagree with Shawn. Auto captioning is one way to produce them and due to the inaccuracy is OK to include within the SC requirement.
Shawn: OK I agree with both points.
Brent: There is broad misconception aboout auto captions (like they are already perfect) and it is important to make clear that is not the case.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say integrated description and to say "because of all the technical jargon it doesn’t recognize."
<Zakim> shawna, you wanted to say prioirty
Shawn: It is not only tech jargon that does not get recognized but common language with dialect or accent or something. I would encourage you to prioritize thinking about alternatives like photos and sentence of explaination for the ones that are not well suited to video. Prioritize the ones that are most clear and powerful.
Shadi: Ideally we would have all of the scripts written and be able to priortize among a list. But we are developing them now.
Jade: I actually like the idea of a photo and quote rather than video for some of these. Like the language one.
Shadi: How do you feel about this one on captions?
Jade: It is a nice to have rather than essential.
Shadi: I think in this case we would not have the discussion about clapping, auto-caption, etc
Shawn: We sould use stills
Shadi: Who is "we"
<Howard> I'd vote for video for this SC.
Shawn: Maybe use outtakes from the video to maintain continuity
Kevin: There is a need to prioritize the video production timeline IDing the low hanging fruit. But should it be text and a picture? I don't know does that actually tell the story of the impact on the user?
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to react to kevin
Shawn: Look at What's New in WCAG is a quick user persepctive in short sentences.
<shadi> https://
Sharron: That is my preference, I rarely look at video
Estella: One of my questions is that if you intro the clapping and speaker ID how do you demonstrate it since it is differently approached in various countries?
Shadi: We won't be recommending particluar conventions about how to do it, only to talk about what the need is. The WHAT not the HOW.
Shadi: Is this a video where video matters or is it sufficient to provide a photo and a quote?
Estella: I would prefer to have it as a video.
KrisAnne: I think this does need to be a video because it will help convince people and help them understand it.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to reply
<eoncins> +1 to Shawn most developers actually do not know the perspective videos
KrisAnne: They make proactive decsions without understanding the impact on users.
Estella: One of the issues with captions is that there is no distinction made between captions and live captions.
Shadi: Sharron's point about placement is very important since these videos will be specifically to illustrate the SC.
Brent: Let's look at the script for 2.2.5
<shadi> https://
Brent: The idea is that we want to be sure the language we are using is easily understandable. Maybe we can ask everyone to read it and enter comments.
Shadi: Trying to balance between being clear, having an appropriate reading level, and the actual technical issue of resuming an interaction. If people have thoughts, please comment.
<shadi> https://
Brent: Moving on to 2.3.3 the script is an explanaton of animation based on interaction.
… this issue #21 is what we might need discussion of whether we are pushing the SC too far.
<shadi> https://
Brent: To me the SC says to allow users to disable animation not to avoid animation all together.
Kevin: I agree we whoudl avoid trying to imply that animation is bad and we should elevate the suggestion to stop or pause animation. There is a kick in the tail is that you can lose business with these proactices - is this accurate and on what is it based?
Jason: I agree with Kevin that you can demo the ability to turn the animation off.
Shadi: Adina made that same point that it may minimize the difficulty of the issue.
<JasonMcKee> lol
Shadi: Seems the group prefers to change it back to the original, stick to the requirement to stop animation
<krisannekinney> +1 to the setting
Shadi: anyone disagree? An off switch rather than a diferent app?
Brent: Any other comments aout this script?
<shadi> https://
Shadi: Shawn you mentioned integrted captions, I have added that consideraton
<eoncins> Sorry Shadi do you mean integrated audiodescription?
<shadi> [[ Description of visuals (ie. does the audio sufficiently describe all important visual information?) ]]
<shadi> https://
Brent: let's look at the script for 2.2.7 - same considerations.
<shawn> [ also "ergonomic" is complex work and jargony for many users ]
Kevin: Couple of minor things. Ergonomic keyboard may save a second by omitting "ergonomic." Second is that the form feild reference. Finally, when we talk about keyboard focus most people look at us blankly - so we'd want to be quite sure that the domesntration is clear.
<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to respond to "ergonomic"
Estella: Need more description of ergonomic keyboard, it causes confusion.
Howard: It seemed very natural to me and I have a clear understanding, I don't see it as confusing and does not change the point about the requirement.
Shawn: A lot of people will have no idea and maybe use a different word
Sharron: specialized keyboard
Shadi: if I can find another word is it OK?
<Howard> +1 to specialized
Brent: In the US keyboard that are not standard are marketed as ergonomic keyboard, it is a common markting term. When you speak of someone who has specific needs, it may be further specialized.
Sylvie: Ergonomic is clear that it helps you relieve the stress of typing, maybe use specialized but say what for.
Estella: I understand issue with ergonomic and it has been overused as a term and people may not understand it as a specialized tool. There are different types of ergonomic keyboards. Whatever term to use needs to be explained.
Shadi: It is outside the scope to explain what the keyboards do, may be better to remove and just speak of keyboards.
Shadi: Proposal is to keep ergonomic unless a better word is found.
<Zakim> brent, you wanted to say how it relates to first scene
Brent: The description for ergonomic is removed with the needs description.
<eoncins> +1 to keep it or to find a better term
Howard: I would vote to keep it, I don't think it will confuse anyone.
Sharron: +1 to Howard
<Jade> +1 for keeping it
Vicki: I also find the word ergonomic has a wider interpretaton. I would prefer to find another word but not have only "keyboard" it is insufficient. I perfer specialized.
<shawn> [ /me sharing personal experience w/ RSI: mousing is big problem. minimal typing is OK right now. ]
<eoncins> +1 to Vicki
Brent: Anything else? Kevin have your issues been addressed?
Kevin: The last one was the need to explain what keyboard focus is, maybe the focus is shown and so not explanation not needed.
Brent: Please look at open issue in 2.2.5
… one of the things we have gathered is information about what to review for and what not to review for is because we will put this informt of Low Vision TF and COGA etc. So looking at the process, is there more clarification needed to understand the process?
<shadi> https://
KrisAnne: COGA asked me to clarify how to be involved with EO and will appreciate clear guidance.
Brent: At the WAI co-ordination meeting, we announced this video project and made them aware.
KrisAnne: Do any other EO leads want to join a COGA meeting to talk about what EO is what we do how we support other orgs?
<shawn> [ I vote for Sharron! ;-]
Brent: Will do
<shawn> eowg current work https://
<shawn> open issue with COGA Task Force: https://
Estella: In terms of scripts, sometimes you add the age of the person, sometimes not
Shadi: we may remove this, we get some descriptions from How PWD Use the Web
<shawn> open issue with COGA Task Force: https://
Shadi: that resource is also being revised so there are moving parts. It could change so as you review no need to focus on the persona characteristics. As we know more about the priorties for production we can adjust.
Estella: Type of language should reflect a consistent voice.
Shadi: Yes I agree
… will add to that something about reading level and clarity. Thank you excellent point
… this has been very helpful. Appreciate this dry run through the process.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to mention status of COGA comments and to point Kris Anne to current work and open issue with COGA
COGA comment status
Shawn: We have an open issue with COGA to update How PWD Use Web with more clear COGA guidance Kevin is leading that effort right now, ongoing
… timing has been tricky with COGA publishing deadline, and I understand the COGA TF has had trouble how to address our comments especially since some are individual raher than group ubmissions.
… they have been closing issues. Some APA and AGWG comments are also being considered.
KrisAnne: I did not join COGA until January. The process of comments does not happen within the full group but on a sub committee that is the editorial group. I have noticed that they take Content Usable as a very personal expression. They tend to look at it from a personal ownership POV and therefore have a hard time understanding the bigger view.
… while there is comment to move issues to v2, COGA has not actually put v2 on the calandar for addressing the remianing open issue.
<Jade> I also have to go, have a great weekend :)
Shawn: So those of you who have strong feelings about some of the open issue may want to work with EO Chairs aboout how next to have them considered.
<JasonMcKee> gotta run too. have a great weekend everyone!!
Wrap Up
<shawn> [ Content Usable EOWG comments in GitHub https://
Brent: Curricula will post a survey about next modules and the design. When will developer modules be developed?
Shawn: To clarify: A survey is open, specially for the TF but everyone is able (encouraged) to weigh in if you ahve ideas
Brent: Thanks all, see you next time