Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference -- 10 Jun 2021

<scribe> scribe: Jennie

Rain: The planning page has been updated

<Rain> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage#Actions

Jennie: Jennie is attending the XR Access Symposium today, and will be able to connect with more people during the conference

David F: I have reviewed some of the documents. They are waiting for some responses.

scribe: For example: mono stereo - why is this included.
... I'm not sure who's comment this is
... I'm not sure how this can affect people with cognitive disabilities

Rain: Joshua from APA and XR group did reach out expressing an urgency around 3 of the issues.
... I think we should take a look at the github links
... I have added them to the list of actions

<Rain> https://github.com/w3c/apa/issues/183

Rain: I let Joshua know that tagging us on github might be difficult as a way to communicate with us
... The first one is issue 183

REQ 3c: Allow user to set the pace, or speed, of movement through an environment.

Rain: It says that David F and John K made the suggestion
... They are looking for more input on this

original request URI https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa-admin/2021Apr/0024.html

David F: If this is sent to me in an email I can respond to it this weekend

<LisaSeemanKest> and cc me please

Rain: I can do that - and will copy John K and Jennie as well
... I will include Lisa as well

Justine: David, John and I met on Monday for our 2nd mental health subgroup meeting
... We discussed research methodology and what approach to take for work on the issue paper.
... I reached out to Jason White who works on the research task force for guidance.
... His feedback: member organizations within the W3C should conduct independent research and feed this to the W3C if there is work done with individuals

David F: I wonder about bias studies - will the general public have issue with company directed research

scribe: I know we want to gather research that is already out in the public.
... It sounds like an easy ask.

Lisa: You are asking W3C to perform a bit of independent research?
... I know they have been part of W3C research consortiums
... It is really long-term
... What we did the first time around - we all took a different disability and collected research on it.
... Some members have the ability to do some interviews
... We learned a lot
... It was a bit of community outreach
... An example was work with people in day centers with dementia
... More of it was literary review

JohnRochford: If you are speaking about the early days of the task force?
... If we are talking about involving people with disabilities, in this case people with mental health issues
... In the United States that is very controlled and expensive

<Zakim> JustineP, you wanted to ask if W3C has an IRB

JustineP: John Rochford just addressed my question in terms of having a controlled study with an IRB review

Rain: Do you feel that your initial question has been addressed around next steps for the mental health subgroup?

JustineP: I think we still have some questions that need to be answered if we are considering including people with mental health issues
... the W3C may have preferences around how we do that

Lisa: I know that Shadi coordinates in the European-wide research.
... Who is coordinating it in the United States?

Steve: I do not know

Rachael: I am not sure either. But we should talk with the Research Task Force. They may not be able to do it, but they may have recommendations.

Lisa: Since Justine is working already with Jason sounds like there are multiple approaches
... What grants are available? Can the W3C access those grants?
... They sometimes are in a grant proposal with others

David F: There are currently running grants that could apply for things like this

KrisAnneKinney: What might the research look like? Actual interviews?
... Would it be a survey that could be open and possibly get a broader audience?
... This might sway how we could do it, how much it would cost.
... There still would need to be IRB approval.

<Fazio> I could easily get interviews conducted in san francisco

<EA> We would need to get ethics approval if it was a survey

JohnRochford: In the US it will still need to go through IRB approval, but it would be less expensive.

<JustineP> +1 John R

JohnRochford: When you survey people - security is a big deal.
... That, too, is very expensive.

<EA> Data can be kept save on a university server with the ethics approval

KrisAnneKinney: Reviewing data could be expensive as well.

Rain: I think some of these specifics can be worked out by the team.

JohnRochford: A big reason we have the IRB in the US is because of a long-term institution serving people with intellectual disabilities

<JustineP> another +1 to John R

JohnRochford: People were fed radio active food - and that is why we have the IRB

KrisAnneKinney: I support the IRB, but if it is not an in-person interview

<EA> +1 to requiring ethics approval and work carried out by those have worked with individual who have mental health difficulties.

DavidF: I work with several agencies that could support this, help us work this out
... I can definitely start the coordination

+1 to following proper processes for ensuring we have ethics approval

Rachael: I do think we should look at universities to partner with that can have proper security/storage, and IRB process.
... Before we approach any research we should do a thorough lit review
... We need to have a storage approach for curating these studies, and making them available for our group

Lisa: I was going to say something similar: we need to do the state of the art review
... We need to be very specific about what we would be applying the grant for

<EA> +1 to Rachael comments - again universities can offer that type of storage behind fire walls

Lisa: Once we have done the literary review and know what is missing
... We might not be the right people to do the research - it might be better to have a partner

<johnkirkwood> +1

<Rachael> +1

Lisa: A survey as an example: it was about people with paranoia
... According to initial feedback - they have a problem using certain tools
... It may be due to worry about sensitive data
... They were very worried about how the information might be available
... If we do an online survey - we almost immediately have excluded this group from participating
... We have to test drive the mechanism being used
... Personal interviews have worked better with other groups as well
... We need to be very careful that we don't exclude people by our methodology.

JohnRochford: If we want to pursue a university partner with experience, that is me.
... My group has been working with these groups for decades.

<johnkirkwood> sorry lost my connection

JohnRochford: If you want to do that, knowing it can be time consuming and expensive, we can do that.

Rain: I will try to see if we can wrap this conversation up for now
... From what I understand, the next steps are
... Continue with the lit review that has been initiated
... Figure out what the knowledge gaps are
... The next step would be to talk with the research task force and Michael to find out what policies and grants are already available within the W3C
... Could they help with research, or funding, for working with groups like John Rochford's
... Have I missed anything, or is this sufficient for the subgroup?

<Zakim> JustineP, you wanted to say that we've initiated the lit review

JustineP: You mentioned that we have initiated the lit review
... I think we have enough guidance.

<EA> It may be important to include university groups from other countries preferably with very different cultures to ours in US and Europe

JustineP: As the subgroup takes on efforts to find other participants
... We discussed the concern of working with some individuals with specific mental health issues that may be concerned with so publicly participating
... We were wondering if there is a way to participate more anonymously

Rain: This came up last week as well

Rachael: There is a little bit of precedence. It is complicated, causes some challenges, but is possible. It needs to be handled at the chair level

Lisa: I think the place to discuss this is at the coordination call
... Sounds like the literary review is still the right way to start

JustineP: We are looking for people with mental health issues to participate with that task
... I spoke with Jason, and he was not aware of a precedent for participating anonymously

Lisa: The best place to do this is the coordination call

<Rachael> +1 to moving this particular conversation to the coordination call

Lisa: The logistics could be worked out there

<stevelee> +1

Rain: I have an action item to follow up with you and see which of those calls you would be able to attend so we can talk with them to see what might exist

JustinP: That sounds good. Thank you

Rain: Lisa do you have an update?

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RbjN7fLaucSzVfTqQdoCHoX3GFEoyHz2iiz3ap9Yd6k/edit?ts=60af6fe6#

<Rain> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RbjN7fLaucSzVfTqQdoCHoX3GFEoyHz2iiz3ap9Yd6k/edit?ts=60af6fe6#heading=h.gsausbyr9qj2

Lisa: We are asking people to put what their initials next to what they agree with
... That is the link
... Please review
... We can change some of the wording to "some people prefer" where there is disagreement
... I'm asking that the group stay focused on COGA specific needs ...Example: don't assume we have read long github threads

Rain: Does anyone else have anything to add?
... We have one more wireframe
... Once approved these will go on to the designer
... This will support making the hierarchy easy to understand and navigate

(Rain reviewed the content in the wireframe for the group)

<Rain> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WSveIdFrI62C_7Brteh_fyzWNuQZYrHTnp6eqrFJbp4/edit#slide=id.gdf2d58a0e2_0_0

Lisa: I find the site hierarchy confusing
... What is on the top doesn't match
... The page is nice and clear

<Rain> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WSveIdFrI62C_7Brteh_fyzWNuQZYrHTnp6eqrFJbp4/edit#slide=id.gdb437de6f1_0_186

Rain: I posted the link here to a different wireframe

Lisa: It feels like this is the wireframe for the pattern, but I don't feel comfortable

Rain: That was the effort, so it is good to know that this doesn't yet meet that need.
... I propose that we hold off on this one, and we will continue working on this one. And that we ask the designer to move forward with the other 2 that had support.

<Rain> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WSveIdFrI62C_7Brteh_fyzWNuQZYrHTnp6eqrFJbp4/edit#slide=id.gd94e60504d_2_26

<Rain> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WSveIdFrI62C_7Brteh_fyzWNuQZYrHTnp6eqrFJbp4/edit#slide=id.gdb437de6f1_0_124

Rain: The purpose of your page - just focuses on the content area; and consistent visual desig

Lisa: Have we looked over the patterns?

<johnkirkwood> purpose of page, and consitent visual design are the two links.

Rain: Would you like another week to review? I have reviewed the patterns, but if you would like another week we can hold off on this

Lisa: Would anyone else like to do that with me?

Rain: I will certainly do that as well

Lisa: Shall we continue collecting information and including those somewhere?

Rain: Yes.
... here's the link

<Rain> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TeSP612Z9Zf7Srojdbq0te615CE0g5wB6puCBVLXziw/edit#

<johnkirkwood> google doc of examples above

Lisa: It might be helpful to have people add comments, or send thoughts to the list

Rain: If you send it to the list, I will be sure to add it to the document
... We will give another week for the first 2 so the group can review. We will hold off on the third one
... If we can get the first 2 over that will help us move this forward

JohnR: We have been in communication this week, and we have a plan.

<EA> Happy to work with John R on the plan

Lisa: When is the meeting?

JohnR: Jan hasn't scheduled it list.

Lisa: EA and Abi should be on the list

<EA> We are happy to be updated with items that John feels are important to contact us about

JohnR: They are on the list. Lisa would you like to reach out to Jan to ask to be added to the list?

Lisa: yes

CWeidner: I have group members interested in contributing. Can I be added as well?

<EA> Q

<EA> +q

Rain: Chris Weidner and a few other members from Understood will join the call. Lisa will email Jan to ask to add Lisa and Chris for scheduling and coordination

<cweidner> ack

<EA> Yes sorry just to say that I am happy for John just to get in touch when time

*EA is muted?

<EA> Sorry microphone just broken

<EA> I have written it above

Rain: the individuals working on the help document are meeting on Thursdays immediately following this call.
... If anyone else wants to be part of that, please let us know.

<Rain> Help template: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ln6p0kWEwodCktzhgtx_zYAtgX5lnAEhr6KSstbPFKo/edit?pli=1#heading=h.eyvpz3nieh2l

Rain: Steve has asked about the web design document

<stevelee> had last minute technical problems

Rain: Checking in with Albert

Albert: I don't have any updates. I know that in the next orientation we will work on filling out the questions more.

Rain: the APA/XR are the most urgent. I will follow up with an email to the individuals on that group.
... The other immediate one is with EO - reviewing the video script. This has a deadline of Monday.

KrisAnne: the deadline has passed, but the survey may still be open

<Rain> Link to survey for review: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/WCAGvideos_batch2thorough/

Lisa: It looks like it is closed

KrisAnne: If you want to send feedback to me, or to Shadi

Rain: The links on the survey still work - so those can be used as a way to look over the video scripts

Lisa: Are any of them very relevant to us?

KrisAnne: I tried to go through them as a member of EO - based on feedback from last time.
... Being more straight forward, reducing complexity of sentences
... Based on the previous feedback - this really informed how the new scripts were written.
... But any feedback is always helpful.
... If you want to look forward, then send me any relevant information, I can forward that along.

Rain: Is anyone able to take a look at these in the next couple of days even though the actual review process is closed?

Lisa: I don't want to be the only one

Rain: I will try to look at that as well
... I can review by the end of the weekend

KrisAnne: The first 4 (say updated): those are ones they have already showed.
... The ones on the bottom (6) they are all the new scripts they have created.
... If there is feedback by Monday I will forward it along, and let EO know as well.

<EA> +q

EA: for the pronunciation - action requests does not have a date.

Lisa: I added your task

EA: I wanted to check that we had done what we were meant to do

Rain: From the table itself, it appears that status has been updated to done

EA: I didn't get feedback

Lisa: Yes, there may be follow up

EA: I wanted to check with John that he is happy to be told what to do with Clear Words

<krisannekinney> \me apologies, need to drop.

EA: Are we going to be doing Clear Words across all of these new documents

Rain: I think we are helping with the Clear Words method

EA: Yes, but the actual process
... But the help files, for example, are really important in terms of clear words