15:38:44 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #silver-conf
15:38:44 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/08/26-silver-conf-irc
15:38:56 <sajkaj> Meeting: Silver Conformance Options Subgroup
15:39:02 <sajkaj> Date: 26 Aug 2021
15:39:05 <sajkaj> Chair: sajkaj
15:39:09 <sajkaj> agenda?
15:39:16 <sajkaj> Agenda+ Agenda Review & Administrative Items
15:39:16 <sajkaj> agenda+ Media Considerations https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Media_Considerations
15:39:19 <sajkaj> agenda+ Use Cases Redux https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Use_Cases_Index
15:39:22 <sajkaj> agenda+ Other Business
15:39:24 <sajkaj> agenda+ Be Done
15:39:28 <sajkaj>  agenda?
15:39:35 <sajkaj> rrsagent, make log public
15:39:42 <sajkaj> rrsagent, make minutes
15:39:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/08/26-silver-conf-minutes.html sajkaj
15:40:56 <sajkaj> Regrets: Azlan_Cuttilan, Todd_Libby, Bruce_Bailey
15:42:47 <sajkaj> present+
15:44:58 <sajkaj> regrets+ Bryan_Trogdon
15:59:35 <JF> JF has joined #silver-conf
16:00:20 <KimD> KimD has joined #silver-conf
16:00:27 <KimD> Present+
16:00:41 <JF> Present+
16:01:10 <sajkaj> present+ Jeanne
16:01:16 <pkorn> pkorn has joined #silver-conf
16:01:20 <pkorn> Present+
16:02:41 <MichaelC> present+
16:03:34 <KimD> scribe: KimD
16:03:43 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #silver-conf
16:04:13 <sajkaj> zakim, next item
16:04:13 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Agenda Review & Administrative Items -- taken up [from sajkaj]
16:04:57 <KimD> saj: Moving forward with working draft mid-Sept; no alt-text example
16:05:26 <KimD> saj: Conformance needs to be a focus - we have work to do
16:06:06 <KimD> Jeanne: CFCs coming
16:06:43 <KimD> saj: Watch email for CFCs this week or early next week
16:07:03 <KimD> saj: User-generated is probably good.
16:07:57 <KimD> saj: Agenda review
16:08:19 <KimD> Jeanne: for "what's next" - glossary or protocols
16:08:40 <JF> Q+
16:08:58 <KimD> Jeanne: for Protocols - flesh out presentation from JF (people could get points for implementing "other" W3C spec
16:09:21 <KimD> Jeanne: such as "content usable" etc. Get "credit" for doing more
16:09:46 <KimD> Jeanne: incorporate things that are important to a11y but needs more work to flesh it out.
16:09:48 <sajkaj> q?
16:09:51 <sajkaj> ack jf
16:10:18 <KimD> JF: another Protocol is plainlanguage.gov which gives us a resource
16:10:45 <KimD> JF: gives outcomes & objectives. Entity could adopt.
16:10:53 <sajkaj> q?
16:11:09 <KimD> JF: helps frame objective decisions
16:11:56 <KimD> pkorn: if we look outside web context, would a11y features like reading aid be considered?
16:12:11 <sajkaj> q?
16:12:25 <KimD> pkorn: would you get points for those?
16:12:31 <KimD> JF: TBD
16:13:10 <KimD> sajkaj: Asks MC if this would like FPC?
16:13:33 <KimD> sajkaj: how deep do we go?
16:13:37 <JF> Q+
16:13:47 <KimD> MC: we are interested on the needs, not how they're met
16:14:35 <KimD> sajkaj: Other groups (APA) might have some work
16:14:54 <KimD> MC: maybe some items for TPAC
16:15:28 <KimD> sajkaj: Maybe a session on FAST?
16:15:49 <Wilco> q+
16:15:54 <KimD> Jeanne: maybe, but not really a requirement to understand protcols
16:16:18 <KimD> Jeanne: we can review existing protocols first, like Content Usable
16:16:39 <KimD> Wilco: Is there something about FAST?
16:17:14 <MichaelC> Framework for Accessible Specification of Technologies
16:17:33 <JF> ack w
16:17:36 <Wilco> https://w3c.github.io/apa/fast/
16:17:40 <sajkaj> q?
16:17:47 <sajkaj> ack jf
16:17:56 <MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Functional_Needs_Subgroup
16:18:11 <KimD> JF: In presentation, thinking about Moodle testing protocol, etc.
16:18:50 <KimD> JF: Entities could publish a "custom" protocol based on publicly accessible protocol
16:19:10 <pkorn> q+
16:19:35 <sajkaj> q?
16:19:48 <KimD> JF: Gives legal realm something to measure web
16:19:53 <sajkaj> ack pet
16:20:42 <JF> the "courts of law" example was strawman and illustrative
16:20:45 <KimD> Peter: Protocols: focus on courts of law may be outside our remit
16:20:58 <KimD> Peter: future conversation ok, let's get back to agenda
16:21:18 <sajkaj> zakim, next item
16:21:18 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, sajkaj
16:21:29 <sajkaj> q?
16:21:34 <sajkaj> ack pet
16:21:37 <sajkaj> zakim, next item
16:21:37 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, sajkaj
16:21:40 <pkorn> q-
16:21:46 <JF> @Peter: My presentation was produced as a MSFT PowerPoint dck, which I have uploaded to here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IAQSPv1bGuUAlhO41rPkkfrlijF2uzmF/view?usp=sharing
16:21:46 <sajkaj> zakim, next item
16:21:46 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Media Considerations https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Media_Considerations -- taken up [from sajkaj]
16:22:05 <KimD> sajkaj: New content towards bottom.
16:23:03 <KimD> Peter: not sure what is new - are we looking at diff flavors of media?
16:24:02 <KimD> saj: one type of media is intra-linear media (?)
16:26:36 <KimD> Peter: Media types: newly created; library of content (historical too - pre a11y considerations); intermediary for 3d party media
16:27:04 <KimD> Peter: look each at each - may need sep reviews
16:27:57 <KimD> Peter: CVAA - legal driver, if broadcast after caption date requirement, needs captions.
16:28:22 <KimD> Peter: Not true for audio description real
16:29:24 <KimD> Peter: So 3d party vendors don't have audio descriptions and 3d party may have modified slightly
16:29:38 <KimD> Peter: and audio descriptions don't fully conform
16:30:05 <KimD> Peter: bigger issue: what to do about a11y content failures
16:31:24 <KimD> Peter: "author arranged media" content conformance - doesn't capture which bucket of media it is.
16:32:17 <KimD> Peter: massive variation in costs for remediation
16:32:35 <KimD> saj: something under Steps to Conform
16:32:43 <sajkaj> q?
16:33:00 <KimD> Peter: Do broad media cats make sense?
16:33:49 <KimD> 1. Newly created (in the era of tech for closed captions exist)
16:34:19 <KimD> Peter: 2. Historical content (pre-dates CC or audio descriptions)
16:34:31 <sajkaj> q?
16:34:41 <Wilco> q+
16:34:52 <KimD> Peter: 3. Distributed by 3d party
16:35:10 <sajkaj> q+
16:35:15 <sajkaj> ack wil
16:35:21 <KimD> Wilco: seems like same ideas we've been working with
16:35:50 <KimD> Wilco: seems to line up
16:36:16 <KimD> Peter: historical is a flavor of 3d party
16:36:40 <sajkaj> q?
16:36:43 <sajkaj> ack saj
16:37:13 <KimD> Peter: historical/archive hasn't been reviewed by us
16:37:24 <KimD> Jeanne: Breakdown makes sense
16:37:29 <KimD> Wilco: agree
16:38:06 <KimD> Peter: We need to flesh out. What's the responsibility when you're a 3d party and have archival content?
16:38:14 <sajkaj> q?
16:38:14 <KimD> ... requirement to remediate?
16:38:39 <KimD> Jeanne: We talked about months ago. Could be addressed by time.
16:39:18 <KimD> ... Giving people the ability to make something specific accessible within a certain amount of time.
16:39:38 <KimD> ... make it available after request
16:39:52 <KimD> Peter: what's a reasonable rate?
16:40:06 <KimD> Jeanne: It depends; needs a lot of work
16:40:37 <KimD> Peter: Maybe media for which we don't have good access today is its own category.
16:40:50 <sajkaj> q?
16:41:02 <KimD> ... street view of Google Maps, 3D walkthrough of a house, etc.
16:41:12 <KimD> saj: can't make accessible for everyone
16:41:32 <KimD> Wilco: It's not a category, we just wouldn't have requirements (yet?)
16:41:38 <KimD> Peter: agree
16:41:55 <KimD> saj: agree, and may cut across different user groups
16:42:07 <KimD> Peter: Do we want to call out in WCAG3?
16:42:22 <KimD> saj: Do we need this in the doc - diff headings, etc.
16:42:35 <KimD> saj: we can add or reformat
16:42:53 <JF> Q+
16:43:19 <KimD> Peter: Archival and "upon request" - seems right
16:43:32 <KimD> ... new should be more accessible
16:43:40 <sajkaj> q?
16:43:40 <Wilco> q+
16:43:43 <sajkaj> ack jf
16:43:47 <KimD> ... remaining one to discuss is 3d-party
16:44:09 <KimD> JF: Protocols: might help this too
16:44:32 <sajkaj> q?
16:45:00 <KimD> ... example: entity publishing things; we will make things available w/in x number of days, etc.
16:45:03 <sajkaj> ack wil
16:45:41 <KimD> Wilco: WCAG2 doesn't always incorporate/update with new tech or spec
16:45:46 <sajkaj> q?
16:46:03 <KimD> ... If tech didn't exist at time of content, but does now, do we need to address?
16:46:35 <KimD> Peter: look backwards and forward
16:46:52 <KimD> saj: Methods can continually update
16:46:55 <sajkaj> q?
16:47:29 <KimD> Jeanne: Let's be thoughtful/careful about adopting protocols.
16:47:35 <KimD> ... might be easy to game
16:47:46 <KimD> ... need to close lots of loop hole
16:47:57 <KimD> ... focus first on things that we know are established standards
16:47:58 <sajkaj> q+
16:48:26 <KimD> sajkaj: process implications about entity protocols
16:48:47 <KimD> ... is it normative? When? How?
16:48:48 <sajkaj> ack saj
16:49:11 <KimD> Peter: In plan to look at protcols, can we come back to rest
16:49:29 <KimD> ... We worked on 3d-pary and did some work.
16:49:57 <KimD> ... Can we develop something more focused that might pass consensus?
16:50:44 <KimD> saj: Draft has idea that not everyone has authority to make changes to remediate
16:50:52 <pkorn> q?
16:50:58 <KimD> ... have to let users know what's available
16:51:05 <KimD> ... would that fly?
16:51:12 <KimD> Peter: asks MC
16:51:43 <KimD> Peter: looking at where responsibility belongs
16:52:20 <KimD> ... author who holds (c) and doesn't remediate is the problem
16:53:20 <KimD> ... since laws are relatively new, 3d party who offers old content - what's the responsibility?
16:54:09 <KimD> MC: Example: Video if legal, there is a responsibility to add captions, etc.
16:54:37 <KimD> ... If (c) owners refuse, then content providers may not be able to use
16:55:01 <KimD> ... library of videos might be an issue
16:55:20 <KimD> Peter: WCAG removed from section 255.
16:55:43 <KimD> saj: More accessible version may exist, but vendor may not make it accessible
16:55:53 <KimD> saj: pass-through isn't there
16:56:23 <KimD> Peter: Intersection between archive and new
16:56:50 <KimD> ... things that were made for broadcast TV could be pre-audio discription laws
16:57:18 <KimD> ... none audio-described at the time, 255 not required to be described
16:57:33 <KimD> ... should WCAG require description?
16:57:56 <KimD> MC: should set out a11y requirements
16:58:20 <KimD> ... we don't want to make things unavailable
16:58:32 <sajkaj> q?
16:58:32 <KimD> ... because they're not accessible
16:59:13 <KimD> Peter: We're not saying if something is NOT accessible, we're saying what you have to do
16:59:22 <KimD> ... we're setting out requirements
16:59:36 <KimD> MC: Makes sense
17:00:02 <KimD> ... however, even lowest conformance level is likely to require cc
17:00:18 <KimD> saj: if you can't - identify the entity that's blocking
17:01:15 <KimD> Peter: every minute 50 hours are uploaded to YouTube; requires a min staff of a million
17:01:39 <KimD> MC: this is addressed in requirement
17:01:53 <KimD> ... if impossible or nearly, that's harder
17:02:26 <KimD> Peter: setting out minimal requirements
17:04:01 <KimD> KimD has left #silver-conf
17:04:41 <sajkaj> zakim, bye
17:04:41 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been sajkaj, KimD, JF, Jeanne, pkorn, MichaelC
17:04:41 <Zakim> Zakim has left #silver-conf
17:04:46 <sajkaj> rrsagent, make minutes
17:04:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/08/26-silver-conf-minutes.html sajkaj
17:08:19 <Jemma> Jemma has joined #silver-conf
17:13:06 <sajkaj> sajkaj has left #silver-conf
17:13:19 <sajkaj> sajkaj has joined #silver-conf
17:13:23 <sajkaj> rrsagent, bye
17:13:23 <RRSAgent> I see no action items