Silver Task Force & Community Group

28 May 2021


Chuck, Francis_Storr, Jan, jeanne, JF, jstrickland, Laura_Carlson, Rain, sajkaj, SuzanneTaylor, ToddLibby
jeanne, Shawn

Meeting minutes

Update on May heartbeat draft

jeanne: Sliding a bit into June, but ...

<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/

jeanne: Notes new Acknowledgements section in Appendix

jeanne: Several other "new" things

Chuck: AGWG will review Tuesday, if no significant objection, will go to CfC following

Chuck: Error prevention is new ...

jeanne: Asks whether separate CfC? So we can progress with that which passes?

Chuck: No, not believed necessary

jeanne: Both lists?

Chuck: Yes!

Review plan for August heartbeat draft

jeanne: Asking all subgroups for what they would like to see in August draft

jeanne: Notes it's important to plan for new content--timeline implications require that

<Chuck> janina: Is there any guidance on how to include this content?

<Chuck> jeanne: I've asked Michael to document the process of including in github, and he will do so by end of next month.

<Chuck> Janina: I think we have an achievable path for specifying what 3rd party content... how you handle that.

<Chuck> Janina: When someone else controls the markup.

<Chuck> Janina: It's a significant thing.

<Chuck> Jeanne: It's good to have progress on that front!

<Chuck> Janina: Peter will be out of pocket for a short time. He will be back, but he'll be overloaded a bit.

<Chuck> Jennifer: Would love if structured content subgroup could have some content in august, but it's been an effort to get ramped up.

jstrickland: Hope to have something ...

jeanne: Suggest comments from January would be good

jeanne: Anyone else? For August? Will likely ask again!

ToddLibby: Notes AGWG reviewing Errors PR, is that August?

jeanne: We hope that's this next May heartbeat

jeanne: But, if there's significant additional work out of AGWG comments, then it would indeed be August

jeanne: Please do look at the WBS

ToddLibby: Notes desire to expand Errors membership

jeanne: We should remember to invite AGWG to join Errors on Tuesday call

SuzanneTaylor: Notes Childrens A11y CG started

SuzanneTaylor: Hopeful of good contrib for WCAG3

jeanne: Great news

jeanne: Suggest good place to start is in writing the user needs

SuzanneTaylor: It's part of the invite to join the CG. It will be our primary focus at first

SuzanneTaylor: We'll also look at research and research gaps

jeanne: Please let me know when you want to be on the Silver agenda!

<SuzanneTaylor> https://www.w3.org/community/accessibility4children/

Survey to review EO scripts for new videos

jeanne: This is a request from Education & Outreach WG; re new, short videos illustrating user needs, but also how to implement WCAG 2.x SC

jeanne: They're addressing in a way that will also apply to WCAG 3

jeanne: They're asking for review before incurring the expense of creating the profressional videos

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/WCAGvideos_batch2thorough/

jeanne: Please do review and advise if we should have a group discussion

W3C calendar app

jeanne: Notes W3C has a new Calendaring app in beta

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/blog/2021/03/group-calendaring-service-enters-beta-test/

jeanne: Available to every WG -- link to a page of that WG's meetings

jeanne: Gives each individual your "My Meetings"

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/users/myprofile/calendar

jeanne: Proposing to use this app now to send meeting invites

jeanne: Notes that it should work with most calendaring apps, e.g. Google, Outlook, etc

jeanne: Notes that "draft" mode doesn't sent notifications; but once out of that every edit results in another email

jeanne: Would be helpful to have subgroups in the calendar

<Chuck> Janina: Is there a page for each sub-group? How would that work?

<Chuck> Jeanne: If you open your own calendar, go to my calendar link, then you can say add an event. If you want to just have it go to the people in your sub-group, add individual email addresses.

<Chuck> Jeanne: Or you can invite the entire silver list, but that's where there's a risk of spamming.

<Chuck> Jeanne: But you would do it from your own calendar page.

<Chuck> Janina: And I propose we be careful to prevent spamming.

<Chuck> Jeanne: We would have all on Silver page. People in AGWG that we invite to a sub-group, all of these are on the calendar page, and individuals can select what they want.

<Chuck> Janina: I like the notion of having all activity in one place.

<Chuck> Jeanne: ...it's filled up my personal calendar, and I'd like to have it elsewhere.

<Chuck> Janina: We might be able to use this at TPAC. Last year APA had a Google Calendar. Wondering if we can use this creatively for TPAC.

<Chuck> Jeanne: Great idea!

<Chuck> Jeanne: One more tip - if you put the url for the telecon info in the field for teleconf url, and a description for how to join, the telecon url doesn't get sent with the information. You need to include in "description".

<Chuck> Janina: It's a beta.

<Chuck> Jeanne: I'm going to suggest for usability. You can get it, but you have to hunt and know where it is.

<Chuck> Janina: This has been very helpful for me. Did I understand that there's a description for every agenda element?

<Chuck> Jeanne: No, for each meeting, there's an agenda tab. The first field is the url for the agenda, then a description where you can put in the agenda topics.

Meeting schedule discussion

<Chuck> Jeanne: I'll review with Janina outside of call to demonstrate the capabilities and features.

jeanne: Notes this our first Silver telecon in weeks

jeanne: Note we're still on Tuesday AGWG weekly, including next Tuesday June 1

jeanne: Current plan is this will be the ongoing weekly schema; AGWG Tuesday for at least an hour, then Silver Friday at 2PM Boston

jeanne: Question: Do we still want a separate Silver call Tuesdays?

jeanne: Or, just the AGWG call

jeanne: Interested in hearing about this

Chuck: It seems there will be Silver content for some weeks at least on AGWG Tuesday

jeanne: Modulo a WBS on the topic, expect AGWG at least the next 4 weeks

jeanne: And this Friday time will also continue

ACT joint meeting followup proposal

jeanne: Notes work with Frances to followup from our joint ACT meetings past weeks

jeanne: One outcome is we need more definitions in outcomes

jeanne: But not agreement these should be "definitions"

jeanne: We need to use less ambiguous language, and make outcomes unambiguous

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vsp1V2hBpU6Y0vNt-AGP-Y6fOxx1-IjoKgBJ_3bPlfg/

jeanne: We're trying to keep plain lang in the main outcome

jeanne: But also a detail section where we need very precise language

<jstrickland> Are y'all able to access that document?

jeanne: So we're struggling with the challenge between plain lang and unambiguous lang

<jstrickland> I can't open it.

jeanne: Reads current work on headings

jeanne: Recalls definition of headings available from HTML, ARIA, PDF, etc

jeanne: ACT agreed to try to create technology neutral outcome testing

jeanne: Also, exceptions requested to be outcome level

jeanne: Notes this is work in progress and feedback welcome

jeanne: ACT suggested exceptions should be normative and at outcome level

jeanne: ACT would like to fully integrate into WCAG rather than keeping their own repository

jeanne: ACT also wants all examples included, all are needed because they're edge cases people need to know about

Chuck: Asks about exceptions in outcomes ...

Chuck: See some challenge there, though not opposed

Chuck: Concerned about burgeoning detail in outcomes

jeanne: perhaps an accordian of the details

jeanne: so plain lang in the summary, then open accordian for specificity

jeanne: thinks this will be a very usable model in may locations

<Chuck> +1 to attempting this!

jeanne: Notes the people who need the details are important but few

jeanne: nevertheless important to have details for them that need it

<jeanne> Method Proposal <- https://docs.google.com/document/d/19FaJF_9V1CayeO92OiPpUil9USOTJWOPLdfgcOIJ6Fw/

jeanne: Turning to method ...

jeanne: Will make each method tech specific, ACT agrees

jeanne: Discusses organization of this in the Google Doc ...

jeanne: Discussion of what goes into summary; could have why? and What to do

<Jan> Is this draft method template supposed to replace the old template? Do you want us to use this for new Silver guidelines?

jeanne: Notes ACT uses applicability section to reach required specificity

jan: Asks whether we should start using this new template?

jeanne: Not yet, still working on it and need review and general approval

jeanne: Rather than tests, we will write expectations

jeanne: Allows people to test anyway they need, but the results could still meet specified expectations

jeanne: We will also try to write a rule with multiple ACT tests -- which isn't easy

jeanne: We'll see how it works

jeanne: Comments? Questions


jeanne: Anyone like to help?

<Jan> The cognitive subgroup would like to be included in that meeting

<Rain> That is Lisa and me (Rain)

jan: Requests for COGA involvement, including scheduling

jeanne: OK

jeanne: Next for us is Tuesday AGWG

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 136 (Thu May 27 13:50:24 2021 UTC).


Succeeded: s/work/work on headings/