<jeanne> Meeting: Silver Task Force & Community Group

<scribe> scribe: sarahhorton

TPAC meetings and someone to help organize?

<Jemma> regret+

jeanne: Needs help in compiling list of TPAC meetings

sajkaj: Will help

Error prevention

<jeanne> scibe: jeanne

<jeanne> SH: We presented the latest verssion of Error PRevention to AGWG. One Guideline, One Outcome, 3 methods

<jeanne> ... overall, people wanted to accept the guideline and had questions on Methods

<jeanne> ... the team revised it in the Google doc with Track changes

<jeanne> ... I think that might be easier to use than Github compare

<jeanne> ... We would like feedback and concerns.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s-wx57F_p1V-ndalMgBjQUZkQU6zN7dnenTx112_C0I/edit#

<jeanne> SH: there was feedback that is out of scope

<jeanne> ...we added a placeholder for the outcome

<jeanne> ... placeholder for writing the language of the outcome

<jeanne> ... features and interface that keeps people from making errors

<jeanne> ... validation and preventing people from making errors -- the system moderates that process to prevent errors

<jeanne> ... we wrote an editors note asking where the Methods and Outcomes came from. The Editor's Note describes that

<jeanne> ... and the process we followed to come up with additional requirements that are not in WCAG2

<jeanne> ... we want feedback on the Editors Note

<jeanne> ... fixed typos

<jeanne> ... comments on the limited set of examples was interpreted as an inventory of what applies, so we added more text to further illustrate the example.

<jeanne> ... there are credits in the Google doc that aren't in Github

<jeanne> Saj: I'm glad to see examples, but I want to see a better example than a date picker, because there are so many inaccessible date pickers

<jeanne> ... [examples of accessibility problems with date pickers]

<jeanne> ... need more context and the ability to escape it

<jeanne> ... input fields are still my preferred way, but we need to better explain the date format examples that are screen reader friendly

<jeanne> SH: That's good feedback and one of the examples is that bad screen reader example (how to tell if it is 2 integers or 3 or 4

<jeanne> Saj: The delimiters are important and need to read out.

<jeanne> ... With a real example, that will help

<jeanne> ... escapable structure

<JF> there may also be a value in differentiating US notation (M/D/Y) versus non-US notation (D/M/Y)

<jeanne> SH: The next steps for review are that we are bringing it back on the 17 August, but if it is ready it can go for 10 August.

<jeanne> ... we could get it to MC by next week.

<jeanne> jeanne: IF you can have the changes in Github by 3 August, we can discuss it in the AG meeting of the 10th, otherwise if you get it to jeanne by the 10 it will be scheduled for AG on the 17

<scribe> scribe: sarahhorton

<Zakim> sajkaj, you wanted to suggest better examples for date input fields

Explainer

<jeanne> https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/Explainer_edits-js/explainer/index.html

jeanne: Major revision suggested, remove duplication, clean up
... survey this week, looking for comments, want to head off things that will come up
... background and development history edited, focused
... goals, because no agreement about what to do about inclusion goal, added editors note to get feedback
... would like group for inclusion goals and processes
... editors note, people asked to remove accessibility supported, reduce burden, requires more discussion
... W3C recommends nongoals
... explanation behind decisions, consolidated and organized, remove repetition
... note that will probably change in future drafts
... several sections have this note
... including scoring, conformance levels, and more
... details to be worked out, objections to be resolved
... explainers want people to know process, where disagreements were, how we resolved them
... links to meeting meetings where discussed

<Lauriat> qv?

JF: Feedback on scoring, would it work to attach milestone/date when plan to have new proposal

jeanne: No idea when that will be, still evolving, won't have proposal in August, hoping for December

JF: Attach targets that we're looking to get to?

jeanne: Avoid milestones we can't meet

Chuck: Concerned, first experience with pushing out working draft, encouraged to get out sooner, need right balance, not ready for this working draft

sajkaj: Milestone important, pushed for them on rechartering, not sure explainer is place for them
... explainer last past next charter, keep and refine, what do milestones mean then

<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to discuss milestones

Chuck: Is going to be asks for that information, makes sense not to include in explainer, where would be an appropriate place
... should note, chairs should discuss options

<JF> +1 to chuck.

<Lauriat> +1

Chuck: Note for future chair conversations

User-generated content review

<sajkaj> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/2021-07-User-Generated-Content/

sajkaj: Scheduled for AGWG this Tues, survey
... 3 questions
... AGWG asked for least controversial aspect of original 3rd party content proposal
... user generated content, still unclear
... meaningful definitions, workable example
... what to do different for text alternatives in user generated content

<scribe> ... new section based on ATAG 2.0 adapted for use in WCAG 3 to explain what's expected of publishers when they allow users to post images

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: text alternatives for images current focus
... next question, conformance section, you're not being held to quality of alternatives but responsible for providing features that support them
... last, glossary definition of what it is
... are they ready for call for consensus

Makoto: Subgroup still working on creating possible items for user-generated content
... list of items based on ATAG 2.0, might make proposal to add more items

sajkaj: Might be more, but does illustrate what is different
... group will continue to refine, other guidelines elsewhere for what's expected in user-generated context vs publisher context
... see the proposed new section, for now new concept, thought important to define, provide examples
... talk about what it is, what it's not
... not all guidelines will have carve out for user-generated content
... e.g., visual contrast, even though users generate social media post, publisher in control of contrast
... steps to conform, publisher point out where things don't conform, what you've done to encourage and help people do right thing
... balance between asking for more from users, providing help and features
... no responses yet, please respond

Chuck: Was bug in survey, fixing

jeanne: Helps to see new requirements

sajkaj: Now we have something concrete, will go through more development, good start
... thanks for Makoto, thanks for ATAG
... will undergo further revision, similar specificity for other guidelines, outcomes, methods

<Makoto> Anytime, Janina!

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: jeanne, sajkaj, Lauriat, sarahhorton, JF, Makoto, Chuck, Francis_Storr
Present: jeanne, sajkaj, Lauriat, sarahhorton, JF, Makoto, Chuck, Francis_Storr
Found Scribe: sarahhorton
Inferring ScribeNick: sarahhorton
Found Scribe: sarahhorton
Inferring ScribeNick: sarahhorton

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)