Silver Conformance Options Subgroup

10 Jun 2021


Azlan, JF, PeterKorn, ToddLibby, Wilco

Meeting minutes

<PeterKorn> https://blog.aboutamazon.in/working-at-amazon/people-with-disabilities-are-enriching-the-talent-pool-at-amazon-india

Agenda Review & Administrative Items

Janina: Worked with Jeanne and Peter. We have a draft on third-party content
… I think views is something we haven't talked about enough yet.

Janina: We are discussing the proposal on tomorrow's Silver call.
… We'll discuss with AGWG on June 22nd.

Third Party Proposal https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Proposal_on_Third_Party_Content

<sajkaj> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Proposal_on_Third_Party_Content

<sajkaj> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Proposal_on_Third_Party_Content

Janina: Start at definitions

Wilco: Wonder if there are gaps. There might be some overlap between them too. We could define one and have the second be defined as everything not the first.

Peter: There is a range of author arranged, depending on market power

Janina: Some of that is intended for the conforming steps

JF: For media, there is both content and the player. Do we make a distinction between the two?

Peter: What's tricky with that, depending on the media, the player may be bundled with the media, or it may be developed by the author

JF: There are two buckets. There is content, and there are players

Janina: One thing out of scope of WCAG 3 is normative requirements on user agents
… We're probably more focused on what is normative

Peter: There are now three steps to conform, fairly similar, but different enough

Wilco: So it is built on the accessibility statement?

Peter: Its to take strong steps to clearly indicate what we do and do not own.

Jeanne: Suggest we remove "under contract"

Wilco: Hard to test too

Wilco: It doesn't provide much recourse

Wilco: This doesn't feel like a solution, just pointing out what parts aren't accessible.

Janina: That is the hard problem. Not sure there is a solution to that.

Janina: We're asking people to pester the people who aren't cooperating

Peter: This stuff only has teeth when it gets adopted. By clearly highlighting where the problem is we're giving a roadmap

Janina: The notion of providing metadata fell off. Shouldn't have to start them to find out if it is available.

JF: schema.org has a collection of accessibility metadata. Not sure if it has everything

Peter: Amazon relies on the studio to tell when AD exists. We require it when it exists. We've started creating AD for third-party content.
… We did that for some content where the contract allows it.

Wilco: Am concerned we're opening the gates. There are some scenarios where an organisation has no choice, but there are lots of cases where they might and they need to do the research. This doesn't distinguish them.

<Azlan> Peter go ahead of me though

JF: I believe WCAG 3 will have to require some metadata assertions. In terms of accountability, making those declarations is going to have to be part of a solution. When we make those decisions we'll have to have a mechanism.

Peter: I think it's important to also do it in a user findable way. Accessibility statements are buried somewhere. On the page it has to be clear. I should know before I purchase / start watching

<sajkaj> ak a

Azlan: Who do you report to when there is an intermediate / aggregator

Janina: Switch topic to user generated content

Jeanne: Suggest we don't use prompting. ATAG has a different approach called equal prominence.

Peter: I would like to explicitly apply this to use cases A and B

Janina: Lets do that next week

<JF> Bye All

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


Maybe present: Janina, Jeanne, Peter