Silver Conformance Options Subgroup

13 May 2021


Azlan, bruce_bailey, Jeanne_Spellman, PeterKorn, sajkaj, Wilco
John_Foliot, Sarah_Horton, Todd_Libby

Meeting minutes

Agenda Review & Administrative Items

Janina: caught up for the moment
… just finished April report to AG WG
… working on May report, one more after that, focus in on use cases
… to do a substantive report with only weekly meetings, we need to focus on some drafting
… there are some other items in backlog, but we should focus on drafting

Any other announcements?

New and Unreviewed use cases

Janina: As a reminder, longer format joint meeting with Wilco this week and in two weeks, please see wiki.

<PeterKorn> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GyUYTnZp0HIMdsKqCiISCSCvL0su692dnW34P81kbbw/edit#heading=h.gjdgxs

Janina: For third party content, Bruce has some examples with Regulations.gov and Access Board uses that, so he will talk about that at some point.

Peter Korn: Reads use case
… "public comments to government websites"

Janina: Jennifer Delisi shared example of cursive hand-written letter.
… saving as JPEG or image-only PDF is not really going to do it

Peter Korn: For me, all these bypass one potential media, putting the content through an form submission.
… if the comment comes through email or physical mail, the control for prevent non-semantic bold/emphasis format cannot be controlled
… we talked a similar problem with scaling, and needing to screen 100s, 1000s, 10000s hand written comments
… timelyness is in conflict with accessibility

Janina: It does seem like a firehose problem

PK: I don't want to say impossible, but agree it is challenging

Azlan: Even with hand written letter, there still needs to be a digitizing step, where the letter is uploaded.
… There is some form of a person being in the loop, to add to the system. So that is the point where the accessible version should be expected to be included.

Janina: I think the point is that the government has a legal obligation to post the "orginal" version.
… there could be newer mechanism similar to longdesc, but HTML5 and WAI-ARIA has features as well.

<Zakim> sajkaj, you wanted to say the original probably needs to be entered

Jeanie: The way we have envisioned conformance in WCAG3 is that conformance is snapshop in time...
… the way I read Jennies example is over time. So the question seems to me about the process, and would we allow for conformance claims for the process or claim for conformance over time.

Janina: This reminds me of calculus and looking at the area under the curve...
… snap shot over time so agency could demonstrate conformance over time...

<Zakim> sajkaj, you wanted to address conformance over time

Janina: still have difficulty with firehose and continuous accessibility over time

PK: Example does not incude details if there is requirement about how fast something needs to be posted...
… can the JPEG image of the letter be held up until the conforming version is available?
… could be conflict between laws. One law required posting quickly, another that all posting be accessible.
… so there is decision between work load and staff and resources available to do the work.

If there is a requirement to post (inaccessible) content in a short period of time, then the conformance snapshot will show non-conformance.
… so could there be a tolerance for falling below bronze conformance.

Janina: I will follow up with Jennie for more specific about her MN use case.

Janine Spellman: The legal contraints are outside our control, so I am not sure we should focus on that too much.
… the concern is that requirment for timelyness is trumping requirment for accessible formats

Janina: I am not sure we can do more about this.

Peter: Other comments?

Janina: We have outstanding need to document timeliness pressure.

PK: What about the strike through bill?

Janina: I want to look into ePub solution. Seems to be unsolved technical problem.

Janina: Can we broaden this out? There is bucket with several use cases were we did not get consensus.
… What are reasonable things to add to May report?

[Janie asks for outstanding items]

Peter Korn: In last meeting, we did not finish use cases for "all software has bugs"
… mentioned in April report that group had not discussed. Can we spend some time on this, page 3 ?

Janina: We did discuss last week.
… we did discuss that all software has bugs is pretty common, regardless if beta or in full release...
… we came to conclusion that since conformance is expected to be for snapshot in time, not for the process, so situation is similar as we discussed with timeliness
… so lets go to bucket four

Peter Korn: I wlll reads through all four, we can decide which to address
… Bucket 4: group doesn’t agree on bucket 1-3 for this use case

3(A) Whoville, but not clear which guideline should handle this now [so also going on the discuss list] - the bucket placement question was around whether bucket 2 (handled in a guideline) or whether bucket 3 (some other part of WCAG 3 would need to speak to this).

2(D) Error on login where there isn’t a message as to why the login was in error - the bucket placement questions was around whether bucket 2 (handled in an error guideline) or whether bucket 3 (too complex to handle in the error guideline).

4(A) five-point Likert scale, never got the author (Detlev) to attend the meeting, speak to the use case

5(A) multiple distinct use cases rolled up into one; need to ensure all are broken out
… popular website with frequent travellers.
… this was included with April report. Can we drop this one now?

Janina: Agreed, there was quite a bit of overlap. The example with "Payment Friend" had use case with large and small customer.
… there have not been comments, so may have been overlooked.

PK: Agreed that no pressing reason to discus. I wll delete this one from the "To Be Discussed"
… I would like to return to Whoville example.

Janina: Agreed, and I had a recent example with new W3C calendar tool that references time-and-date

PK: What can we bring back to AG WG that scoring is very difficult to integrate.

Janina: Agree, how central is the calendar to the process?

PK: This was 3A, so we have the right groupign.

Jean: This questions is very much on point. Scope and processes very much a topic of concern.

PK: Login seems part of Errors, can we kick that to them.

Janina: Sarah is in the Errors group, so she might be able to followup.

PK: Can we through problem over the wall to Errors?

Wilco: Does not seem like Errors to me.

PK: Okay, lets discuss.
… this is 2(D), we last discussed back in February

[reads]2(D) Error on login where there isn’t a message as to why the login was in error - the bucket placement questions was around whether bucket 2 (handled in an error guideline) or whether bucket 3 (too complex to handle in the error guideline). [13May21 discussion - Janina to bring to Sarah / Errors group, to see if they would like to pick this up. Include in our May report, but invite errors to deliver proposed solution(s)]

Wilco: Error is not really there.

PK: Is this too literal a read of existing 2x SC?
… if I am having a problem logging in, prompts probably do not say what the exact error is

Jannina: I think the authetication folks would be too concerned with too much information about the problem.
… Response would not want to even say there is no user by that name, let alone that the third character in your password is wrong.
… I have had example with capslock stuck on, which a human might notice immediately, but the system will not give me a clue!

Wilco: But is this isn't just errors, and not authentication?
… consider simplier example, just a form with image submit button with no alt text on the image. Is this about the same situation.

PK: I am remind about discussion around essential and security.

<PeterKorn> A user is trying to log in, and there is an error on login. The user doesn’t receive an error message - they are simply prompted again to log in at the login prompt. The context indicates what should be done next - to correctly enter their username/password - even without an explicit error message

PK: Recognizing the image is not essential, but assertion is that need for security is, so owner thinks error messages cannot be robust.

Wilco: Still seems not specific to errors to me.

PK: The distinction is that currently for errors, there is an additional requirement for an explaination of errors
… so that is different than what we have for other requirements for programmatic determination

Janina: Seems to be a weakness with this use case that it so tied to authentication, when really we are trying to call out errors more generally.

PK: We have example with tables and fixed width presentations.

Janina: We addressed these pretty well in April report. So I would like to pass over to Errors group.

[Wilco volentold to expand use case.]

PK: That leave likert scale example.

Jeanne: We also got interesting use case this week for children, when its a childrens website.

PK: What is the implications?

Jeanne: There is an early-education community group, and they want their needs to be included.
… I have asked them to write up some requirements that they would like to see.

Jeanne clarifies that we do not have an example that can be included in conformance doc.

Jeanne: How do we want to handle special requirements for child's accessibility?

PK: Reminds me of situation like with health care sites where accessiblity requirments need to be quite high.

PK: ... that expectations for accessibitliy need to be high

PK: Action item to Janina to start working on outline for next report.

PK: Are there some more things we need for AG WG.

Janina: We have a short list.
… from April and May report. We are looking for directly.

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 131 (Sat Apr 24 15:23:43 2021 UTC).


Succeeded: s/poing/point/

Succeeded: s/errrors/errors/

Maybe present: Janina, Jannina, Jean, Jeanie, Jeanne, Peter, PK