IRC log of silver on 2021-08-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:58:53 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #silver

13:58:53 [RRSAgent]

logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/08/06-silver-irc

13:58:55 [Zakim]

RRSAgent, make logs Public

13:58:57 [Zakim]

Meeting: Silver Task Force & Community Group

13:59:11 [jeanne]

Chair: jeanne

13:59:18 [jeanne]

present:

13:59:26 [jeanne]

present+

13:59:29 [jeanne]

q?

13:59:34 [sajkaj]

present+

13:59:40 [SuzanneTaylor]

SuzanneTaylor has joined #silver

13:59:46 [sajkaj]

scribe: sajkaj

14:00:22 [jeanne]

agenda+ review timeline and outstanding items for the August heartbeat

14:00:22 [jeanne]

agenda+ TPAC meetings

14:00:22 [jeanne]

agenda+ TPAC Inclusion fund

14:00:22 [jeanne]

agenda+ WCAG3 Update presentation?

14:00:23 [jeanne]

agenda+ Updates to the User Generated Content proposal

14:02:10 [JenniferS]

JenniferS has joined #silver

14:02:13 [JenniferS]

present+

14:02:31 [sajkaj]

zakim, next item

14:02:31 [Zakim]

agendum 1 -- review timeline and outstanding items for the August heartbeat -- taken up [from jeanne]

14:02:46 [jeanne]

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Project_Plan_for_Q3_Working_Draft

14:02:54 [sarahhorton]

sarahhorton has joined #silver

14:03:10 [sarahhorton]

present+

14:03:16 [JF]

JF has joined #silver

14:03:45 [JF]

Present+

14:03:48 [Makoto]

Makoto has joined #silver

14:03:51 [JF]

agenda?

14:03:55 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes there's an impact on all subgroups working on outcomes, so will discuss ...

14:04:04 [Makoto]

present+

14:04:21 [jeanne]

https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ACT_Method_proposal/methods/decorative-images/index.html

14:04:25 [SuzanneTaylor]

present+

14:04:41 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Example ACT format at above link

14:05:04 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Would like existing methods moved to the new format for the 4th Quarter draft slated for December

14:05:21 [Francis_Storr]

Francis_Storr has joined #silver

14:05:28 [Francis_Storr]

present+

14:06:06 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes some technical issues about where on w3.org things can be published, which impinges somewhat on what's where

14:06:37 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes new Description TAB; a Background Tab; i.e. reorg of Tabs

14:06:51 [sajkaj]

jeanne: We're using more ACT where we can

14:08:33 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes a method specific glossary tab for terms used in that method which is nonnormative; but there's still the main glossary for the overall doc

14:09:00 [sajkaj]

jeanne: helps when we need more specific definitions to explain methods; provides more flexibility

14:09:06 [sajkaj]

q+

14:09:20 [jeanne]

https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ACT_Method_proposal/methods/decorative-images/description.html

14:09:58 [sajkaj]

jeanne: looking at whether we can use the accordian design

14:10:09 [sajkaj]

jeanne: balancing needs of experts and newbies

14:10:39 [sajkaj]

jeanne: So, new tools for groups working on guidelines ...

14:10:45 [jeanne]

https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ACT_Method_proposal/methods/decorative-images/background.html

14:11:21 [jeanne]

https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ACT_Method_proposal/methods/decorative-images/tests.html

14:11:45 [sajkaj]

jeanne: ACT will be helping -- so we're not on our own to get this done right

14:13:06 [jeanne]

https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ACT_Method_proposal/methods/decorative-images/glossary.html

14:13:07 [sajkaj]

jeanne: we now have applicability and expectations rather than expected test results in order to support more unique testing situations

14:14:07 [JF]

Q+

14:14:15 [jeanne]

ack saj

14:14:55 [JenniferS]

+1

14:14:58 [SuzanneTaylor]

janina: is it okay that we are using "glossary" to label two different things

14:15:13 [JenniferS]

+1 to Janina's point

14:15:28 [SuzanneTaylor]

jeanne: let us know if think of a good alternative

14:15:34 [jeanne]

ack JF

14:15:49 [sajkaj]

jf: Also have glossary concern -- worried about nonnormative?

14:16:22 [sajkaj]

jeanne: where we can, we will use normative glossary; the only nonnormative are specific terms specific to a particular method

14:16:53 [sajkaj]

jf: But that's my concern, a mix of normative and nonnormative definitions itself could be concerning

14:17:16 [sajkaj]

jf: especially if normative and nonnormative are intermixed in a particular location

14:17:22 [sajkaj]

jeanne: will it matter?

14:17:30 [JenniferS]

+1 to JF. I had a helluva time with design leads, project managers, product owners, dev leads with this type of detail difference.

14:17:55 [sarahhorton]

q+

14:17:56 [sajkaj]

jf: concerned that people will trip over that and take away the normative expectation

14:18:05 [sajkaj]

jeanne: certainly something to think about

14:18:46 [SuzanneTaylor]

janina: perhaps "terms of interest in this method" might totally avoid that kind of clash

14:19:26 [SuzanneTaylor]

janina: but should not deep dive today

14:19:34 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes we can discuss, and it's for December in any case

14:19:53 [sajkaj]

jf: will log a github issue

14:20:18 [sajkaj]

jeanne: rather likes "local terms"

14:20:28 [sajkaj]

jeanne: though perhaps not good "plain lang"

14:21:10 [jeanne]

ack sarah

14:21:33 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: question about this new struct; understood our CfC was on struct; but am seeing different content

14:22:05 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: are we changing content to meet the new structures as well?

14:22:24 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Yes, broadly speaking

14:23:10 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: Had not thought that impact of CfC would be change of content

14:23:32 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: Had thought discussions were more superficial ...

14:23:49 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: Notes ACT will be helping get it right

14:23:54 [JF]

Glossary Terms in Methods (Normative versus Non-Normative) #545: https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/545

14:23:58 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: So what's the plan moving forward?

14:24:31 [sajkaj]

jeanne: that each subgroup take time on revising into this format and republishing methods in a future draft; realize this is a big job and we will need ACT's technical help

14:24:43 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: also have concerns about a11y of content

14:25:22 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes the very technical explanations are a small audience; but an important audience

14:25:53 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Another way to consider is our testing could be our plain lang of what we're explicating more fully

14:25:56 [kirkwood]

kirkwood has joined #silver

14:26:00 [Makoto]

q+

14:26:29 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: Suggests we go after one by way of example and getting accustomed as a good first step

14:26:34 [sajkaj]

jeanne: yes, very much agree

14:26:53 [SuzanneTaylor]

+1 to polishing one first, so that everyone is not polishing in different ways/directions

14:26:59 [sajkaj]

jeanne: thought we had example for decorative in github, but not seeing right now; will check

14:27:13 [sajkaj]

q?

14:27:17 [sajkaj]

ack mak

14:27:18 [jeanne]

ack mak

14:28:13 [sajkaj]

Makoto: Seeing new pieces in work I previously did but unsure where it came from; would like traceability

14:28:35 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Came from ACT and ACT rules for decorative images

14:28:38 [sajkaj]

Makoto: OK

14:29:10 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes we're working to arrange a joint meeting with ACT and Makoto's group to get coordinated

14:29:22 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Asks Francis ...

14:29:31 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Who's todo list?

14:29:34 [sajkaj]

Francis_Storr: unsure

14:29:53 [sajkaj]

Francis_Storr: in email discussion somewhere

14:30:15 [sajkaj]

jeanne: moving forward

14:30:37 [sajkaj]

jeanNotes errors back on AGWG for 17th, so needs to be ready next Thursday for WBS

14:30:41 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: Ready now

14:31:00 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: Michael has merged the PR; just one outstanding heading issue

14:31:22 [sajkaj]

sarahhorton: We'll not be doing more revision

14:31:27 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Excellent!

14:31:50 [sajkaj]

jeanne: next Explainer Note; have actions and will return to AGWG

14:32:11 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes also User Generated revisions following this week's review

14:32:22 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Also will have Text Alternatives with new methods

14:32:32 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Asks when might be ready for AGWG?

14:32:40 [sajkaj]

Makoto: will take a couple more weeks

14:32:56 [jenniferS_]

jenniferS_ has joined #silver

14:33:14 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Hmmm, may miss 3rd quarter WD, but let's still try to get it in ...

14:33:48 [sajkaj]

jeanne: if goes to AGWG on 24th, would probably be last chance for 3rd quarter; might that work

14:33:51 [sajkaj]

Makoto: will try

14:34:00 [sajkaj]

Makoto: we're close to the final version

14:34:08 [sajkaj]

jeanne: also thought that you were close

14:34:22 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Let's set 18th as target

14:35:16 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes also AGWG on 10th has proposal from JF that could be adopted for 4th Quarter draft -- new material presentation on the 10th

14:35:35 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Also Maturity, Visual Contrast, XR, several others for 4th

14:35:39 [sajkaj]

zakim, next item

14:35:39 [Zakim]

agendum 2 -- TPAC meetings -- taken up [from jeanne]

14:36:21 [sajkaj]

jeanne: notes Silver page for TPAC; it's a wiki; please annotate

14:36:40 [jeanne]

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/TPAC_2021_Meeting_Overview

14:37:18 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Looks at current TPAC meeting thoughts ...

14:38:37 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes Method Template Breakout aimed at groups outside AGWG that might want to write methods

14:38:45 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Please annotate or send me email

14:39:05 [sajkaj]

zakim, next item

14:39:05 [Zakim]

agendum 3 -- TPAC Inclusion fund -- taken up [from jeanne]

14:39:37 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Notes there's funding available to increase inclusion and participation for people who might otherwise not be able to attend

14:39:42 [jeanne]

https://www.w3.org/blog/2021/06/diversity-and-inclusion-at-w3c-inclusion-fund-and-fellowships-for-tpac-2021/

14:40:42 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Applications open to August 15th

14:41:05 [jeanne]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/InclusionFund2021/

14:41:18 [sajkaj]

zakim, next item

14:41:18 [Zakim]

agendum 4 -- WCAG3 Update presentation? -- taken up [from jeanne]

14:41:34 [sajkaj]

zakim, close this item

14:41:34 [Zakim]

agendum 4 closed

14:41:35 [Zakim]

I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:

14:41:35 [Zakim]

5. Updates to the User Generated Content proposal [from jeanne]

14:41:41 [sajkaj]

zakim, next item

14:41:41 [Zakim]

agendum 5 -- Updates to the User Generated Content proposal -- taken up [from jeanne]

14:43:23 [JenniferS]

Janina: we went through the survey responses, made attempt to clarify & simplify our language

14:43:50 [JenniferS]

Janina: there's an incorrect link in the first questions, #2. it will be fixed soon.

14:44:28 [JenniferS]

Janina: hopefully this is simpler language, responded to issues that were raised, and esp on how we described text alternatives expectations.

14:44:49 [JenniferS]

Janina: hope language is simpler, helps folks with providing better text alternatives.

14:45:11 [JenniferS]

Janina: there was an objection to things received by mail as user-generated content.

14:45:55 [JenniferS]

Janina: a US state govt that is required to post things received by other than online, and so we pointed to that use case to explain changes involved.

14:46:13 [JenniferS]

Janina: hopefully this clarifies who is creating user-generated content.

14:46:27 [jeanne]

https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/User_Generated/guidelines/index.html#user-generated-content>

14:46:32 [JenniferS]

Janina: user-generated is not only about text alternatives, this is only one example of how it applies.

14:47:03 [JenniferS]

Janina: there will be other method implications for the guidelines. Text alternatives is an example of the kinds of things you can expect in other guidelines.

14:47:33 [JenniferS]

Janina: that's the overview. Should we go into more specific details? there's a list at the top of what we looked at and tried to change, that hopefully captures those changes.

14:48:32 [jeanne]

https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/User_Generated/guidelines/index.html#dfn-user-generated-content

14:50:34 [jeanne]

Outcome -> https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/User_Generated/outcomes/text-alternative-available-UCG.html

14:51:27 [jeanne]

Definition <- https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/User_Generated/guidelines/index.html#dfn-user-generated-content

14:51:58 [JenniferS]

agenda

14:52:16 [sajkaj]

zakim, take up item 4

14:52:16 [Zakim]

agendum 4 -- WCAG3 Update presentation? -- taken up [from jeanne]

14:53:36 [sajkaj]

jeanne: First question, is this a good idea? There are quite a few people who have joined AGWG since our FPWD was published; these could use an intro to WCAG3

14:54:23 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Many WBS answers appear to have a loack of comprehension of what's different about WCAG3

14:54:48 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Suggest we can do it for our AGWG group first; then repeat as a Breakout during TPAC

14:54:53 [sajkaj]

+1000

14:54:55 [sarahhorton]

Good idea!

14:55:21 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Probably need to do this regularly

14:58:25 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Reminds about open WBS all to get 3rd Quarter WD ready to publish

14:58:56 [sajkaj]

jeanne: Very important over the next 3 weeks to get a good WD through CfC

15:01:17 [sajkaj]

zakim, bye

15:01:17 [Zakim]

leaving. As of this point the attendees have been jeanne, sajkaj, JenniferS, sarahhorton, JF, Makoto, SuzanneTaylor, Francis_Storr

15:01:17 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #silver

15:01:23 [sajkaj]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:01:23 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/08/06-silver-minutes.html sajkaj

15:01:59 [sajkaj]

rrsagent, make log public

15:02:04 [sajkaj]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:02:04 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/08/06-silver-minutes.html sajkaj

15:02:21 [sajkaj]

rrsagent, part

15:02:21 [RRSAgent]

I see no action items