W3C

– DRAFT –
Accessibility Functional Needs

01 April 2021

Attendees

Present
JakeAbma_
Regrets
-
Chair
-
Scribe
joconnor

Meeting minutes

trackbot, this meeting is Functional Needs

<trackbot> Sorry, joconnor, I don't understand 'trackbot, this meeting is Functional Needs'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.

trackbot, this is Functional Needs

<trackbot> Sorry, joconnor, I don't understand 'trackbot, this is Functional Needs'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

trackbot, this will be Functional Needs

<trackbot> Sorry, joconnor, I don't understand 'trackbot, this will be Functional Needs'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.

<trackbot> Sorry, but #silver-functional has no configuration.

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

Continued exploration of user needs restructure

MC: Jake has stuff to show off

JA: I've taken Jakes adjustments

Looking at categorisations etc - I have bells ringing

Put all into a spreadsheet

JA: Tried to come up with others, there is also overlap with FAST

Some new ones for Personalization and more

Question is, do we need a flat list, or categorised - how deep to go?

Have also asked for feedback and suggestions for presentation.

JA: Are there gaps in things we do with technical products etc?

Presents work and categories that may over lap

It would be helpful to look at what user needs cover a topic

What belongs to navigation, or different categorization?

Dont think the question of categorization or flat list is useful - lets see what fits and feels good

MC: My DB allows for multiple categorizations

MC: These categories are interesting

JA: I like the flat list too

Did this get a grip on the flat list - to see where they are at.

MC: This does look good - we can use this.

Helpful to find gaps

JA: People can find what they like and need

MC: I like the types etc

Interaction types etc

MC: Where we see something that doesn't have user needs associated then we have a gap.

JA: We may also agree some categorizations may not make it to the end

My first review of FAST the structure of user needs was different to the checklist

MC: We can start from scratch

MC: <groks categories>

I dont know what cat 4 is for..

JA: Cat 5 and 6 could be merged

They are keys tp change etc

Providing alternatives

MC: Useful in technique guidance phases..

These are types of approaches to writing guidance

JOC: I'll need some time to parse

DF: I'll also need to take it in.

MC: Whats a good next step?

JA: We'd need to make sure this is what we want.

JA: We could try to fill this in as an exercise.

JOC: +1 to Jake having a test run

MC: Sounds good as long as it isn't a lot of work, just filling applies or N/A

I think this would be useful. Ready next week or need more time?

JA: I'll have more answers, but only starting - hope to make progress.

MC: Can this be put on Google Sheets?

JA: Yup

MC: We could use the shared drive

<MichaelC> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B0YCWfzZeWMuM2VxdFREV0FkUWM

JOC: Good work Jake - I'll update the dupe user need in user-needs-restructure branch

Review draft WBS about the user needs

<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/2021-03_user-needs/?login

MC: This is still not complete - we need to propose a definition of user need

Josh added stuff about context

but needs to be filled out

Can we all have a look?

MC: We need to define user need

DF: Looking at functional capacity assessment a la US gov Social Security and Admin

<Fazio_> user need - functionality necesssary to provide functional capacity

Here is the definition in RAUR https://www.w3.org/TR/raur/#user-needs-definition

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

Diagnostics

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: joconnor

Maybe present: DF, JA, JOC, MC