13:51:10 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #coga
13:51:10 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/04/01-coga-irc
13:51:11 <Fazio> Fazio has joined #coga
13:51:12 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:51:15 <trackbot> Meeting: Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
13:51:15 <trackbot> Date: 01 April 2021
13:51:29 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ publication updates
13:51:44 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda?
13:52:03 <LisaSeemanKest> clear agenda
13:52:06 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ publication updates
13:52:14 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ tal
13:52:24 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ other issues from publication
13:52:57 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ overveiw of working with silver
13:54:01 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ reaserch 2nd level prioties at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YH4YETBmAdhfL9p8FK5ATUiXDGibeJh66psQCSUAvLQ/edit#gid=788316971
13:58:02 <Jan> Jan has joined #coga
13:58:03 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ image subgroup
13:59:25 <Rain> Rain has joined #coga
13:59:54 <Fazio> present+
14:00:24 <Jennie> Jennie has joined #coga
14:00:39 <Jennie> present+
14:00:48 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda+ david update on RAUR
14:00:53 <Roy> present+
14:00:59 <Rain> present+
14:01:36 <stevelee> present+
14:01:39 <LisaSeemanKest> scribe: Jennie
14:01:49 <LisaSeemanKest> zakim, next item
14:01:49 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- publication updates -- taken up [from LisaSeemanKest]
14:02:14 <Jennie> Lisa: We have gone to the AG task force
14:02:17 <krisannekinney> krisannekinney has joined #coga
14:02:18 <Jennie> ...There was some discussion
14:02:24 <krisannekinney> present +
14:02:26 <Jennie> ...the outstanding issue is Tal
14:02:31 <LisaSeemanKest> zakim, next item
14:02:31 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, LisaSeemanKest
14:02:42 <Rachael> https://github.com/w3c/coga/pull/281/files
14:02:42 <johnkirkwood_> johnkirkwood_ has joined #coga
14:02:51 <LisaSeemanKest> > We discussed the following options:
14:02:51 <LisaSeemanKest> >
14:02:51 <LisaSeemanKest> >    1. no change
14:02:52 <LisaSeemanKest> >    2. add it in 1 or 2 places in the main persona
14:02:53 <LisaSeemanKest> >    3. Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs
14:02:54 <LisaSeemanKest> >    4. change the persona to remove gender diversity
14:02:54 <Jennie> Rachael: this is a draft pull request that has the changes that came out of conversations with AG
14:02:55 <LisaSeemanKest> >    5. use the pronouns as frequently as would be used naturally
14:02:56 <LisaSeemanKest> >
14:03:18 <Jennie> Rachael: the first changes are just direct links, along with styling
14:03:20 <Chris_Weidner> Chris_Weidner has joined #COGA
14:03:26 <Jennie> ...Next: line 174
14:03:37 <Jennie> ...A slight rework to add additional structure to explain how the document works
14:03:46 <Jennie> ...Then, reordering by alphabet
14:03:50 <Jennie> ...Then, the Tal persona
14:03:54 <johnkirkwood_> present+ kirkwood
14:04:01 <Jennie> Lisa: If you have a problem with it on line 174, let us know
14:04:08 <Jennie> ...I looked over it with Rachael.
14:04:17 <Jennie> ...No information is deleted - it is restructuring
14:04:38 <Jennie> Rachael: Yes. It is more from the perspective of naming the section of the document
14:04:57 <Jennie> Lisa: Let's close 174
14:05:04 <Jennie> ...Does anyone feel a strong need to review this?
14:05:36 <Jennie> ...We can come back to this when Rachael has the raw git
14:05:46 <Jennie> ...The issue with Tal is the pronoun use
14:05:58 <Jennie> ...There was not a way to do this that made everyone happy.
14:06:12 <Jennie> ...There were discussions on the COGA and the AG lists.
14:06:26 <Jennie> ...Some people want the statement "Tal likes to be called"
14:06:45 <Jennie> ...The reason we didn't agree with that at the beginning was we felt that people that did not know about this might find it confusing.
14:06:58 <Jennie> ...We only put it in to Tal.
14:07:11 <Jennie> ...Others just wanted the traditional him or her, and felt this was not the place for this.
14:07:14 <Rachael> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/suggested_edits_23_mach_21/content-usable/index.html#how-to-use-this-document
14:07:43 <Jennie> ...Then you had people that were happy with the small change: Tal like to be referred to as...then put the pronoun into the top part of the persona
14:07:50 <Jennie> ...That still left it readable.
14:08:07 <Jennie> ...I think someone got feedback from the community, and they felt they were comfortable with that
14:08:33 <Jennie> ...John Foliot objected to that - I think his preference was no pronoun at all
14:08:44 <Jennie> ...He may object to this one
14:08:59 <Jennie> ...Everyone else - if it was not their preference, it might be something they could live with
14:09:20 <Jennie> ...Because AG could not come out with a resolution with strong consensus, they deferred it back to us
14:09:22 <Rachael> q+
14:09:28 <LisaSeemanKest> ack r
14:09:34 <Jennie> Rachael: Their resolution was to send it back to COGA
14:09:39 <Rain> q+
14:09:55 <Jennie> ...I also reached out to the diversity group, and they recommended we reach out to people with this lived experience
14:10:15 <Jennie> ...The AG felt that not having the gender preference statement in there felt to be a good way to go.
14:10:23 <johnkirkwood_> agree with that
14:10:38 <Jennie> Rain: One of John Foliot's biggest objections was his concern for tokenism
14:11:09 <Jennie> ...Could this be addressed by making another one of our personas of a them/theirs, as opposed to working on the Tal decision until the objections are mitigated.
14:11:14 <Rachael> q+
14:11:28 <LisaSeemanKest> ack r
14:11:30 <LisaSeemanKest> ack r
14:11:34 <Jennie> Rachael: I think then we would be debating 2 of these, rather than one
14:11:45 <Jennie> ...W3C came out with recommendations that we do this, but we are the first ones
14:11:54 <Jennie> ...The question is more about what is the right way to do this
14:12:08 <Jennie> ...My personal thought: we diversified on culture, but we don't do a lot more than that
14:12:27 <Jennie> ...Just using the name, with the occasional they, you are giving the same space to the gender-diversity space
14:12:37 <Jennie> ...Then it becomes a normal part of this document
14:12:41 <johnkirkwood_> +1
14:12:56 <Jennie> ...The other option would be a statement in all of the personas
14:13:06 <Rain> +1 and thank you for the answer to my question
14:13:15 <Jennie> Lisa: You would get rid of the statement Tal prefers they/them/theirs
14:13:20 <Jennie> Rachael: yes.
14:13:34 <Jennie> ...If a difficult sentence to read, then add the they/them/theirs.
14:13:36 <Jennie> +1
14:13:52 <Jennie> Lisa: I will do a straw poll, and add Rachael's proposal
14:14:01 <Jan> present+ Jan
14:14:45 <LisaSeemanKest> options:    1. no change     2. add it in once or twice in places in the main persona  and  Tal like to be referred to (pronouns)  as Tal/they/them/theirs  3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal
14:15:05 <Jennie> Lisa: Because of the complexity of the options, I suggest we follow the AG process
14:15:11 <Jennie> ...preference, then what you can live with
14:15:26 <Jennie> q+
14:16:00 <Jennie> ack Jennie
14:16:16 <LisaSeemanKest> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html#tal-a-student-who-has-dyslexia-and-impaired-eye-hand-coordination
14:16:33 <LisaSeemanKest>  Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as they/them/theirs.
14:16:33 <LisaSeemanKest> 6.9.1 Tal Scenario 1: Logging In
14:16:56 <LisaSeemanKest> options:    1. no change
14:17:11 <LisaSeemanKest>  2. add it in once or twice in places in the main persona  and  Tal like to be referred to (pronouns)  as Tal/they/them/theirs  .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally
14:17:26 <Rachael> Option 4: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/suggested_edits_23_mach_21/content-usable/index.html#tal-a-student-who-has-dyslexia-and-impaired-eye-hand-coordination
14:17:31 <Fazio> 1
14:17:34 <LisaSeemanKest>  2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona  and  Tal like to be referred to (pronouns)  as Tal/they/them/theirs  .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally
14:17:55 <Fazio> q+
14:17:56 <EA> EA has joined #coga
14:18:04 <LisaSeemanKest> ack d
14:18:12 <LisaSeemanKest> ack f
14:18:22 <Rachael> q+
14:18:23 <Jennie> Fazio: Now that I look at this, #1 has the pronoun at the end. This is more universally readable
14:18:43 <Jennie> ...they/them/theirs often indicates plural, and can be potentially difficult in translation
14:18:48 <LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal
14:18:52 <johnkirkwood_> sorry don’t feel comfortable w/ understanding what language we are voting on
14:18:52 <Jennie> ...I think this is a great compromise
14:19:12 <Jennie> Rachael: option 1 - current state, we will get an objection
14:19:21 <LisaSeemanKest>     1. no change
14:19:28 <Jennie> ...We do not have an option for adding the pronoun to all of it
14:19:30 <LisaSeemanKest>  2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona  and  Tal like to be referred to (pronouns)  as Tal/they/them/theirs  .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally
14:19:37 <LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal
14:19:46 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #coga
14:19:47 <Jennie> Rachael: we were given the authority to make the decision. If we get a formal objection, it will delay publication
14:19:55 <LisaSeemanKest> 5. add pronouse to each one
14:20:20 <Jennie> Rachael: 2 come with known objections. 1 - John Foliot. 3 - I will object
14:21:07 <Jennie> Lisa: We don't have to be afraid of an objection - I think it won't be too bad
14:21:20 <Jennie> 1. is no change, but will get objection
14:21:48 <LisaSeemanKest>  2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona  and  Tal like to be referred to (pronouns)  as Tal/they/them/theirs  .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally
14:21:48 <Jennie> (read options above)
14:22:20 <johnkirkwood_> 2 they will add thye in appropriate places with flow
14:22:21 <LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal
14:22:35 <Chris_Weidner> +q
14:22:36 <johnkirkwood_> s/thye/they
14:22:47 <LisaSeemanKest> 5. add pronouse to each one
14:23:13 <Rain> q+
14:23:21 <Jennie> Chris: I'm confused between some of the options
14:23:25 <Fazio> 1
14:24:05 <LisaSeemanKest> ack r
14:24:14 <Jennie> Rachael: I think 1 and 2 are the same at this point
14:24:17 <Rachael> ack Rachael
14:24:19 <Jennie> Lisa: I disagree
14:24:36 <Jennie> ...1 does not have they in the 1st paragraph, and does not have Tal in the pronoun statement
14:24:51 <Jennie> ...2 gets rid of the objection from John Foliot, I think
14:24:56 <Jennie> Rachael: I am not sure
14:25:03 <LisaSeemanKest> ack c
14:25:17 <Jennie> Rain: I agree that 1 and 2 will get an objection from John Foliot
14:25:32 <LisaSeemanKest>     1. no change
14:25:36 <LisaSeemanKest>  2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona  and  Tal like to be referred to (pronouns)  as Tal/they/them/theirs  .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally
14:25:41 <LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal
14:25:44 <LisaSeemanKest> 5. add pronouse to each one
14:26:08 <LisaSeemanKest> 4 then 2
14:26:18 <Fazio> 1
14:26:20 <LisaSeemanKest> (just to get rid of the bjection
14:26:20 <Rachael> 4 then 2 then 5
14:26:26 <Chris_Weidner> 5 then 1
14:26:29 <Rain> 4 (can live with 5, and am personally happy with both 1 and 2 but would like to get past the objection)
14:26:37 <stevelee> 4
14:26:49 <EA> +1 to Rachael's 4  then 2
14:26:50 <krisannekinney> 4
14:27:08 <Fazio> 1 or 0
14:27:10 <MichaelC> 4
14:27:11 <Jennie> 4
14:27:23 <johnkirkwood_> 4
14:27:24 <Jennie> Lisa: I see 4 getting consensus
14:27:36 <Chris_Weidner> I can live with 4
14:28:17 <Jennie> Lisa: #4 puts it in where it falls in naturally
14:29:04 <Jennie> RESOLUTION: go with #4 in order to not have an objection
14:29:18 <Jennie> Lisa: can anyone not live with #4?
14:30:05 <Jennie> Lisa: Rachael - is the other thing we need to do to get to publication is to resolve the issues that you posted to the list?
14:30:30 <Rachael> We can discuss on the list
14:30:39 <Jennie> ...Has anyone read the email and feel they need more discussion?
14:30:54 <Jennie> ...Hopefully we can pass it on the list.
14:31:15 <LisaSeemanKest> zakim, next item
14:31:15 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- tal -- taken up [from LisaSeemanKest]
14:31:31 <LisaSeemanKest> topic: jan and silver
14:31:36 <Jan> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p-FayvZYonpDIlojblFSofi_KzjNdY5SrBOKauvV0u8/edit?usp=sharing
14:31:41 <LisaSeemanKest> zakim, next item
14:31:41 <Zakim> agendum 2 was just opened, LisaSeemanKest
14:31:52 <LisaSeemanKest> zakim, close item 2
14:31:52 <Zakim> agendum 2, tal, closed
14:31:53 <Zakim> I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:31:53 <Zakim> 3. other issues from publication [from LisaSeemanKest]
14:31:54 <Jennie> Jan: this is the link to the clear words deadline that was submitted for WCAG 3 in the 1st public working draft
14:32:05 <Jennie> ...I'm here to talk about how to build a bridge between COGA and Silver
14:32:06 <LisaSeemanKest> zakim, take up item 4
14:32:06 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- overveiw of working with silver -- taken up [from LisaSeemanKest]
14:32:25 <Jennie> ...There was a lot of work done by different groups of people
14:32:33 <Jennie> ...They started with clear and common words
14:32:46 <Jennie> ...We were in the midst of doing that work, and then the draft of Making Content Usable was released
14:32:57 <Jennie> ...We proposed that we stop and rethink what we were doing
14:33:06 <Jennie> ...Our public working draft was coming out.
14:33:21 <Jennie> ...We decided to align with the work COGA was doing in this area.
14:33:23 <Fazio> +1 to the alignment with Content Usable
14:33:57 <Jennie> ...I want you to see the template that was used, and the type of content we would have to provide.
14:34:11 <Jennie> ...The idea is that your group would give guidance on the next proposed guideline we would add
14:34:18 <Jennie> ...Silver wants to have one publication per quarter.
14:34:42 <laura> laura has joined #coga
14:34:50 <Fazio> 6 have been approved for wcag 2.2 choose one of those
14:34:54 <Jennie> ...COGA can identify guidelines that they want in the next publication, then we can work with COGA subject matter experts
14:35:08 <Jennie> ...for example, those with expertise in the use of symbols
14:35:20 <Jennie> ...I know it won't be simple, but these are examples of how we will work this out.
14:35:43 <Jennie> ...Once COGA identifies a guideline for the next Silver/WCAG 3 publication, then we will pull together a smaller group working for 3 months
14:35:57 <Jennie> ...at an additional time each week, to complete this document
14:36:13 <Jennie> ...The group would need research, examples for how they will be implemented, as well as ways to test the guideline
14:36:39 <JohnRochford> JohnRochford has joined #coga
14:36:49 <Jennie> ...I met with Lisa and Rachael - they suggested that we look at the possibility of using the user stories to be the guideline, then
14:36:58 <Jennie> ...the patterns could be the outcomes
14:37:01 <LisaSeemanKest> q+
14:37:06 <LisaSeemanKest> ack l
14:37:38 <Jennie> Lisa: Working with Silver, we would have to prioritize the user stories
14:37:42 <Jennie> q+
14:37:52 <Jennie> Lisa: for each objective we have 2 or 3
14:38:03 <Jennie> ...COGA would do the prioritization of what to do 1st
14:38:09 <Jennie> ...We won't have time for everything
14:38:32 <Jennie> ...Then the 2nd thing we would do is with a subgroup, we would put the user story into the Silver template
14:38:49 <LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p-FayvZYonpDIlojblFSofi_KzjNdY5SrBOKauvV0u8/edit
14:39:11 <Fazio> q+
14:39:13 <Jennie> ...If COGA members volunteer for one subgroup, they aren't volunteering for all of them
14:39:19 <Jennie> ...It would be a 3 month commitment
14:40:05 <Jennie> ...I think the first thing we want to do is be sure people understand the request
14:40:09 <LisaSeemanKest> ack j
14:40:09 <JohnRochford> present+
14:40:17 <LisaSeemanKest> present+
14:42:15 <JohnRochford> present +
14:42:33 <Jan> I am having some audio issues
14:42:44 <Jennie> Jennie: the state of Minnesota reviewed the working draft, and then look at the everyday use of it - will there be further tasks that subgroups can do to address this?
14:42:54 <Jan> Can Jenni repeat the question about testing or type it into IRC?
14:42:56 <LisaSeemanKest> ack f
14:43:14 <Jennie> Fazio: Is this template COGA specific, only for COGA? Or for all success criteria?
14:43:44 <Jennie> Here is my point again for Jan's benefit:
14:43:57 <Jennie> The state of Minnesota reviewed all of the working draft.
14:44:06 <Jan> The template is not COGA specific - all guidelines use this template.
14:44:08 <Jennie> ...Some of the concerns were about how this will impact everday use
14:44:21 <Jennie> ...how to test, how to use as part of procurement...
14:44:38 <Jennie> ...Will a task of the subgroup, or could a separate part of the subgroup tasks be
14:44:57 <Jennie> ...To walk through the everyday use of this - to support adoption, acceptance - right from the beginning?
14:45:04 <Jennie> (end of recap for Jan)
14:45:15 <Jennie> Lisa: Jan - do you have audio now or prefer to type?
14:45:18 <Jan> I have spotty audio
14:45:22 <Jan> I am watching IRC
14:45:36 <Jennie> Lisa: Do you want to type in a response to Jennie?
14:46:07 <Jennie> ...Rachael and I looked at making content usable, and thought it might be better to start with one that isn't too hard
14:46:11 <Jennie> ...to see how it works together
14:46:19 <Fazio> I'll work on Reedundant Entry which requires processes not relying on memory
14:46:19 <Jennie> ...We have a lot of the research already
14:46:29 <LisaSeemanKest> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html#help-user-story
14:46:48 <Jennie> Lisa: We were thinking of starting with the first subgroup on findable help user story
14:46:54 <Rachael> q+
14:47:00 <Jennie> ...Then we could get the hang of using the template
14:47:19 <Jennie> Rachael: Part of what meant "easy to do" - something that worked with the 2x process
14:47:32 <Jennie> ...It is fairly familiar in our minds because of the 2x process
14:47:42 <Jennie> ...We could show the pieces that had to be left out at this time
14:47:49 <Jennie> ...Whereas clear language would be more difficult to test
14:48:13 <Jennie> Lisa: Jan - maybe the answers can come by email?
14:48:24 <Jan> Yes - I am sorry
14:48:33 <Jennie> ...For everyone else - does this sound like a good process? Priorities decided within COGA
14:48:34 <Jan> Please email me your questions
14:48:36 <johnkirkwood_> +1 to the process
14:48:38 <Chris_Weidner> +1
14:48:39 <Fazio> +1
14:48:41 <Jennie> +1 to the process
14:48:42 <Jan> jan.mcsorley@pearson.com
14:48:43 <Rain> +1
14:48:46 <krisannekinney> +1
14:48:52 <EA> +1
14:48:59 <Jan> I don't know what happened to my audio.
14:49:09 <Fazio> lol
14:49:12 <Jennie> Lisa: I think we can work out the process for the first one, and that may address Jennie's question
14:49:26 <Jennie> Lisa: Thank you Jan
14:49:45 <Jennie> ...Is everyone comfortable with this subgroup being the first starting point for findable help?
14:49:52 <Jennie> +1 - I would like to be on that subgroup
14:50:04 <Rain> +1 - I would also like to be on the subgroup if there is room
14:50:24 <Jennie> Lisa: Does anyone have any objections?
14:50:37 <Jennie> Lisa: I think I would like to be on at least the first subgroup
14:51:00 <Jennie> John K: When the subgroups are created - can everyone be invited to the initial call to get an understanding of the process?
14:51:13 <Jennie> ...Then they don't have to join, but can better understand what is expected
14:51:30 <Jennie> Lisa: We will prioritize together, then can understand what the interactions will be with the subgroup
14:51:47 <Jennie> ...What I was thinking - the subgroup makes a first draft, then brings it to COGA
14:51:51 <Jennie> ...Would that work?
14:52:33 <Jennie> ...I think the 1st one will be experimental
14:52:37 <Chris_Weidner> I would love to have a document I could get more feedback on from subject matter experts in my organization.
14:53:02 <Jennie> Lisa: For the 2nd one we would be able to say what was the most helpful
14:53:13 <Jennie> John K: Sounds good to me
14:53:16 <LisaSeemanKest> agenda?
14:53:19 <Rain> +1
14:54:06 <Jennie> Rain: Alert
14:54:17 <Jennie> ...We will be sending an email to the COGA group with a link to a slide deck later today
14:54:18 <LisaSeemanKest> topic: image subgroup
14:54:27 <Jennie> ...This includes wireframes we want to turn over to the designer
14:54:41 <Jennie> ...To create an image or images that meet our needs
14:54:52 <Jennie> ...Please look at it before the next meeting, before we turn it over to the designer
14:54:58 <Jennie> *Thank you to John K too!
14:55:02 <LisaSeemanKest> topic: iraur
14:55:07 <LisaSeemanKest> topic: raur
14:55:11 <Jennie> Fazio: In the APA meeting yesterday
14:55:18 <Jennie> ...we talked about COGA's objections
14:55:41 <Jennie> ...Janina suggested that if it will take longer to resolve, that we let it go to publication, and then edits could be made in a future release
14:56:04 <Jennie> Lisa: Can we ask them to put in a note that comments that there will be changes from us?
14:56:13 <Jennie> Fazio: yes, she had said we could do that
14:56:24 <Jennie> Lisa: Does she have a draft of the note?
14:56:35 <Jennie> Fazio: No, but we can send an email to ask for the draft
14:56:47 <Jennie> Lisa: Chair-hat off - I think it is reasonable, depending on the note
14:57:12 <Jennie> *Can someone take over scribing at 1 minute before the hour - forgot I have a hard stop
14:57:28 <Jennie> Lisa: What do other people feel?
14:57:43 <Rachael> q+
14:58:02 <Jennie> Lisa: We have a google doc started to collect our feedback
14:58:16 <Jennie> Rachael: I am inclined to let them publish with the group
14:58:24 <Jennie> publish with the note
14:58:37 <Jennie> ...then we have a couple of months to put in our agenda
14:58:56 <Jennie> Fazio: the XAUR and the RAUR - are we saying this for both docs?
14:59:03 <Jennie> Lisa: We have not discussed the other one
14:59:35 <EA> Yes I can scribe
14:59:38 <LisaSeemanKest> scribe: ea
14:59:41 <Jennie> Thank you EA!
15:00:05 <Chris_Weidner> I also need to drop. Thank you, all!
15:00:20 <Rachael> +1 to coordinating on the note but letting them move forward
15:00:22 <EA> Lisa said it depends on the note - wants them to link to Coga resources - only agree if the note is liked and linked to page of comments
15:00:29 <Fazio> +1 upon agreement to a note
15:00:38 <EA> No ojections
15:00:39 <Rain> +1
15:00:41 <krisannekinney> +1
15:01:28 <EA> If any one objects please send a note to the list.  Provisional Ok but note needs to be linked to comments.
15:01:42 <EA> please can you do it LIsa
15:07:00 <Rachael> rrsagent, generate meeting
15:07:00 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'generate meeting', Rachael.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:07:05 <Rachael> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:07:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/01-coga-minutes.html Rachael
15:13:35 <Rachael> zakim, end meeting
15:13:35 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Albert, JustineP, Jennie, Rachael, Rain, LisaSeemanKest, stevelee, krisannekinney, johnkirkwood, Fazio_, kirkwood, JohnRochford, Fazio,
15:13:38 <Zakim> ... Roy, Jan
15:13:38 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v1
15:13:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/01-coga-minutes.html Zakim
15:13:40 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Rachael; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:13:45 <Zakim> Zakim has left #coga
15:14:37 <Rachael> trackbot end meeting
15:14:37 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:14:45 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:14:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/01-coga-minutes.html trackbot
15:14:46 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:14:46 <RRSAgent> I see no action items