Silver Task Force & Community Group

06 August 2021


Francis_Storr, jeanne, JenniferS, JF, Makoto, sajkaj, sarahhorton, SuzanneTaylor

Meeting minutes

review timeline and outstanding items for the August heartbeat

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

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

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

jeanne: Example ACT format at above link

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

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

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

jeanne: We're using more ACT where we can

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

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

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

jeanne: looking at whether we can use the accordian design

jeanne: balancing needs of experts and newbies

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

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

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

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

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

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

<JenniferS> +1

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

<JenniferS> +1 to Janina's point

<SuzanneTaylor> jeanne: let us know if think of a good alternative

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

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

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

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

jeanne: will it matter?

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

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

jeanne: certainly something to think about

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

<SuzanneTaylor> janina: but should not deep dive today

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

jf: will log a github issue

jeanne: rather likes "local terms"

jeanne: though perhaps not good "plain lang"

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

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

jeanne: Yes, broadly speaking

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

sarahhorton: Had thought discussions were more superficial ...

sarahhorton: Notes ACT will be helping get it right

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

sarahhorton: So what's the plan moving forward?

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

sarahhorton: also have concerns about a11y of content

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

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

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

jeanne: yes, very much agree

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

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

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

jeanne: Came from ACT and ACT rules for decorative images

Makoto: OK

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

jeanne: Asks Francis ...

jeanne: Who's todo list?

Francis_Storr: unsure

Francis_Storr: in email discussion somewhere

jeanne: moving forward

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

sarahhorton: Ready now

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

sarahhorton: We'll not be doing more revision

jeanne: Excellent!

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

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

jeanne: Also will have Text Alternatives with new methods

jeanne: Asks when might be ready for AGWG?

Makoto: will take a couple more weeks

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

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

Makoto: will try

Makoto: we're close to the final version

jeanne: also thought that you were close

jeanne: Let's set 18th as target

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

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

TPAC meetings

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

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

jeanne: Looks at current TPAC meeting thoughts ...

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

jeanne: Please annotate or send me email

TPAC Inclusion fund

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

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

jeanne: Applications open to August 15th

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

WCAG3 Update presentation?

Updates to the User Generated Content proposal

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

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

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

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

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

<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.

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

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

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

<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.

<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.

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

<jeanne> Outcome

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

<JenniferS> agenda

WCAG3 Update presentation?

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

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

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


<sarahhorton> Good idea!

jeanne: Probably need to do this regularly

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

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

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