Meeting minutes
<LisaSeemanKest> publish minets
Check in with all sub-groups and action requests https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage
JohnK: Update on Guardianship policy. Working on drafting a doc for companies to share.
Lisa: Working with Jan to input additional patterns into Clear Words. Would you (Chris) want to help with that?
Chris W: Sure. I have a colleague working on this as well and I'll share.
Lisa: If anyone is interested doing lit reviews reviewing research papers or user needs please reach out.
John K: Is there a central lit review hub?
<LisaSeemanKest> form: https://
<kirkwood> Lit review form
<kirkwood> and tracking ov papers:
<LisaSeemanKest> tracking what pepers are done https://
Lisa: Have we completed adding emails to the participant page?
Roy: Yes, that's complete.
Lisa: Progress on anonymous participation?
Rachel: Taking it to management.
Rachel: Draft process in development, will be sharing with this group when more final.
Reminder, next two weeks are off and present+ yourself before the meeting ends
<LisaSeemanKest> close item 2
Continue working on WCAG 2.2 actions including common objects
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
Lisa: A few open issues, but the only one that immediately needs our feedback is common objects.
Defining common objs has gone back and forth a bit.
<kirkwood> defining common objects issue being discussed
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
<kirkwood> is there a way to summarize where we are at?
<Rachael> current text: If the test is based on something the website has set such as remembering or transcribing a word, or recognising a picture the website provided, that would be a cognitive functional test. Recognising common objects, or a picture the user has provided, would not be a cognitive functional test.
Lisa: COGA perspective on what is considered to be a functional test was challenging for Silver group to accept
*cognitive functional test
Concern that there needs to be a block for internet spam, bots, etc. Banks and other legal entities are looking for another check. Would be difficult to move forward if forbidding CAPTCHA-type solutions.
Rachael: Conflict is between balancing security vs accessibility
<kirkwood> potentially alternative method(?)
John: Common objs is not just an accessibility problem. It is wider than just an accessibility issue.
EA: Agree. Objects aren't necessarily common across international audiences.
<kirkwood> +1 to EA on all points
<kirkwood> I hate the bridges!
David: Often there is a lack of clarity between similar objects
John K: Agree with all. From the perspective of limited FoV, clicking on the boxes is also a challenge.
Lisa: I've also failed these as well.
John K: The WORD test Captcha is also a challenge. I have difficulty recognizing the characters.
<EA> +1 to appreciating the security problem and the need to reduce spam, but we still need to improve the systems offered
<JohnRochford> Google reCAPTCHA v3: https://
<JohnRochford> No cognitive function test.
Lisa to Rachael: Suggestion as to how we move forward?
<kirkwood> +1 that works JR
<LisaSeemanKest> the tick here if you are not a robort seems to work for all of us
Rachael: I will take it back, and provide some alternatives like the latest version of reCaptcha. However, as I understand it as written if they want to use images and provide an alternative without a cognitive function test, we should be ok.
Lisa: How hard of a stand do we want to take on this issue?
John R: I've been identifying this as an issue since 2014. I strongly believe that we should take a hard stand. If we are presented with an ultimatum that success criteria won't go through without this, then I think we should stand firm.
<LisaSeemanKest> agreement that this is realy important
<EA> +1 we cannot say it works for people if it doesn't
+1
<LisaSeemanKest> +1 this important
<JohnRochford> +1
outreach email to get people to join the community group
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
Lisa: I will be sending out an email to people who join the community group welcoming them and ask them what they want to be getting out of it.
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
LIsa: We want to recruit users. We're not limiting who can join.
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
Lisa: We're also keeping the above spreadsheet to keep track of who we're inviting.
Lisa: Biggest priority group to recruit is mental health experts.
Rachael: Do we have a plan for setting groups up and getting conversation going?
Lisa: I would like to send a welcome email to the list and invite folks to introduce themselves. Once we get that dialogue going, we can consider an open Town Hall.
<LisaSeemanKest> close item 5
Do we want every 6 months a “get to know you” sesion?
<kirkwood> +1
+1
<Fazio> id prefer the beer
Rachael: From a facilitator standpoint in AG, we had success with picking a light topic to chat around. We've had success with that.
<kirkwood> agreed
<stevelee_> +1
+1
<Roy> +1
<Rachael> +1
EA: I'm looking at forms for Mental Health orgs in the UK. I am wondering if we are allowed to use your email to get in touch with them?
<EA> https://
<LisaSeemanKest> public-coga-community@w3.org
Lisa: They can get in touch with Rain or myself if they want someone to speak to.
can we each do a mental health reasech paper?
<LisaSeemanKest> form: https://
<LisaSeemanKest> tracking what pepers are done https://
EA: I'm a bit snowed under at the moment unfortunately, so I'm unavailable for review.
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
<Rachael> Enjoy everyone!