Meeting minutes
<bruce_bailey> Section 508 is the U.S. law that requires IT to be accessible
<bruce_bailey> i work on the inplementing regulation: https://
<bruce_bailey> 508 is very U.S. centric, and only directly implicates federal agencies
<shawn> zakim clear agenda
Expectations for group
Jon: Talks to expectations of group in IRC and being useful.
Chris: Expectations - to avoid personal situations unless they related to goal. Expectation is that we all have knowledge of low vision.
Chris: Thoughtful on topics that may not be on point and triage when we can. Put topics on github for future topics and stay on topic during a particular agenda item. Welcome low vision topics to be raised on github.
Supplemental Guidance
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
Chris: Difference audiences and approaches that go into requirements with users that have low vision and main audiences and techniques. WCAG is more about broad applicability and testable standard.
Chris: Supplemental guidance should be easy to use for people who are at the start of something in design through development - not required to meet WCAG but allow people to move forward to supporting given user need.
Chris: We'd like to present a list of design pattern - they name could be changed.
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
Bruce: clarify on W3C - is supplemental guidance inclusive of working group notes? How does it relate to EOWG?
Shawn: We are redesigning the WCAG techniques and understanding WCAG and ACT rules and supplemental guidance will be part of that. The same visual design. The current plan is that it would not be a note but nicely linked throughout the WAI site and education materials.
Shawn: COGA did publish as a note - but we would be taking that form for low vision into that format.
Bruce: Hearing you say it's a new paradigm and a work in progress.
Shawn: New - we are excited about this and it will bridge - it's an in between what Education and Outreach has done in their other work. A way to provide better guidance that is easy to get to and looks nice and official but clearly marked as not required to meet WCAG and make more beyond minimal requirements.
Shawn: Can show you what it's looking like.
<shawn> draft in progress https://
Shawn: One of the techniques - same information - better presented information - techniques in this format and understanding pages in this format. Then a link to WCAG 2 guidance including supplemental including COGA.
Shawn: Draft wording from design patterns - placeholder for now. Guidance will include COGA, information from us and information from others. Any other questions?
Sam: Is this about people with severe vision loss or people with old eyes - it seems like it sets scope is for people with disabilities. Could this be the place that is related to age related issues could sit in supplemental guidance.
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
Chris: Good question - how that currently works - there is accessibility requirements for users with low vision as opposed the word disability.
Chris: Supplemental guidance could cover beyond whether they are in a particular segement.
<shawn> Sam and others, see also: Older Users and Web Accessibility: Meeting the Needs of Ageing Web Users https://
Sam: In practical terms - things like a minimum text size requirements. If you allow people to increase size or implement their own style sheet then text size is not relevant. If you are looking at people who are looking with their eyes - font size is probably most critical size.
<ChrisLoiselle> Jon: I think it would be great to have supplemental guidance that goes beyond
<ChrisLoiselle> Jon: Talks to mobile and applying own style sheets. Contrast minimums , etc. Supplemental guidance can go beyond a disability. WCAG is more centralized to disabilties.
<AndySomers> Minimum font size ins important, as it also defines available zoom levels. and 100% of users have visual needs. It's a spectrum that needs to be accomodated.
Chris: A lot of work that Silver has been done - what is WCAG into new WCAG version goes into more of user and functionals aspects of the topic.
Andy: Stylesheets are ineffective and substantial problems. We are pretty much we are saying you don't need standards. Minimum fonts size is needed for low vision - it also defines how big fonts can be zoomed into. 6px font zoomed 5 times won't be big enough for people with 20/100 vision. That is why we are recommending 16px size for important text.
Andy: Vision is a spectrum - who should say where it should start and stop. To encourage wide adoption they should apply in a wide way. Too many unreadable websites on the web. That will help everyone.
<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to mention lv history w/ 1.0 and 2.0
Bruce: For context - WCAG 1 didn't say anything about fonts. 2.0 has a little, 2.1 add a better reflow - user orientated stylesheets never materialized. Folks assumed that it would be supported. It makes well for some people.
Bruce: Work is for people with disabilities -- all of those people are groups of people with disabilities - don't see why in 2.x model that it could not be in scope.
Sam: not sure if people actually set text in browser or if it works.
Andy: I zoom all of the time - choose browser based on font size - there are limitations - that is why we need minimum. We need to get browsers to support getting font size to specific pixel size.
Andy: Increase font size up 72px body font size and no large than 120px.
Shawn: Be careful to not get into detail on one topic. We should figure out scope of this include user agents. I hope that it can but we need to figure that out.
Andy: I think it needs to include user agents.
Chris: May be useful to map this to WCAG 3.0 as well.
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say that I think the Supplemental Guidance could fit into the new proposal for WCAG3 protocols
<shawn> +1 for supplemental guidance informing WCAG 3
<bruce_bailey> link for content useable please
Jeanne: Good idea and very interested in what you do with supplemental guidance work and content usable document has been powerful and has gotten a lot of interest in accessibility industry and overall community.
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
<AndySomers> smallest fonts up to 92px, largest fonts up tp 120px
<shawn> s/ smallest fonts up to 92px, largest fonts up tp 120px//
Jeanne: New idea without a lot of details that has been proposed for WCAG 3 - that we include the ability to allow people to reference they are implementing other W3C docs, notes, or specs - and how you could get points - still in idea stage - hope it progresses. This could also be a document that could be referenced - whether in WAI or TR doesn't matter.
Jeanne: Hope it could also fit into WCAG 3 - or give people bonus points for implement it - another possibility in how it can work in future.
<shawn> example of COGA Design Pattern in new design https://
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
Chris: List of design pattern and potential topics.
Chris: A list of items are available for us to look at and prioritize as a group to ramp up. It would be good to have people put their name next to a topic and start in a write up of guidance write up based on interest. A group can work together an item.
Shawn: to comment on template - 2 starting places. 1 we could use template - headings and basic information on how we are going to organization. We could choose to use like COGA patterns or we could choose to go route of understanding document or techniques.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to comment on template
Shawn: Look at pros and cons of each - if anyone wants to write up
Chris: Any coments?
Bruce: Want to know what the priorities are - sort terrible topics strictly. What are the buckets - everything on the web.
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
Chris: Within IRC there is a list -heading - list of broad topics we could potentially move forward on. If you would like to add that and work toward that. Low vision is broad by it's nature - if there is something to work on.
<bruce_bailey> https://
Andy: Who is the audience for the supplemental guidance document?
Chris: Shift left to make it understandable from designer to developer and beyond.
Andy: This is non-normative - like a best practice document? Is this limited to certain visual acuity like 20/70.
Chris: Relationship to advisory type techniques.
Shawn: it is also related best practices and shift left although we did not use best practices. The audience is defined. Agree that we all need clarity on.
Andy: So far in tests that are being developed - could these items I've been working on be appropriate for this document?
<shawn> Linked to from today's agenda "Understand goals linked to in Supplemental Guidance Requirements Analysis" https://
Shawn: Link to motivation and background and proposal.
<shawn> Here is wiki page where we can document that better https://
Chris: Accessibility Guidelines group would review before publication.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to mention overlap with COGA needs
<bruce_bailey> https://
Shawn: several of the things we might want to say about people with vision. There is overlap with COGA design patterns - we don't want to duplicate information - do we want to have one and state with COGA and low vision.
<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask about list again
Bruce: Many of the things are also obstacles encounter and not well covered by current 2.2 model and prior - they are issues but things you may not say don't do all of the time. Also would like to see things like minimum fonts size that we could use normative phrasing for WCAG 2.x
<shawn> +1 that some of these will be migrated to WCAG 2.x and WCAG 3. First do supplemental guidance now, so we can get the info out now, while working on getting some into WCAG
Chris: Within the old info - some items we can raise for talking points - for 2.1 we had some criteria and what was proposed to Silver - such things as text style, margin, justification, user settings. There was a gap analysis that would need to be updated.
<bruce_bailey> thanks Chris, that sounds very useful
Andy: overlap with cognitive and neurological aspects of vision. Good question here- carry over and think about ways that can be best effectuated.
Sam: Talking about contrast of 4.5 to 1 for light on dark vs. dark on light - model doesn't work as well in reverse contrast. Perhaps reverse contrast threshold is higher. 4.5:1 is minimum. In reverse maybe need to be higher or perhaps get rid of ratio - 3 possible options. Do something new might be silver or related.
Sam: Cross cutting triage needs to be done.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to answer Bruce and to say benefit of supplemental guidance not have limitations of WCAG
Andy: More complicated issue with darkness of background - need to put on table to discuss.
Shawn: Comment on supplemental guidance - there is strict parameters for WCAG- testable, apply to all technique and address edge cases and convoluting wording. Even for things we want to get into WCAG it would be smart for us to start with supplemental guidance. That will enable us to work it better for designer and developers. We can define user needs and have that to say ok - we do want to try and get this to be a WCAG requirement - here is the [CUT]
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to comment on level of detail and wordiness
<shawn> https://
Andy: current contrast model is problematic if false fails and false passes.
Shawn: Point to other stuff - keep it focused.
<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to discuss gap analysis on current contrast metric
<ChrisLoiselle> On https://
Bruce: Would like to see gap analysis on 2.x contrast method. There is wide support for dark on light and light on dark - we could document these. Current metric is mediocre - not terrible - it was using industry consensus - I think we need a gap analysis - not using language that is inflammatory.
Andy: We have established where the issue are. Maybe there are ways we could give guidance and we could show validation for that. Sometimes I'm hard on contrast - in 2008 there was not Google fonts and the CSS we are using today. With thin fonts and fonts smoothing that people are using - no way that folks have forseen where things were going.
Andy: You can get away with more contrast issues on thick fonts like Verdana. Been the focused of last 2.5 years of my life.
Chris: Current link of what was done at one point of time on main wiki page and then off of that it is a link off of github of gap analysis - user need, alignment, user agent, coverage/gap, links to various meeting where it was talked about previously. Use this table as a starting point and start with user needs to combine the efforts to stream topics of discussoin.
<bruce_bailey> thanks chris for those links
Chris: Creating the guidance first into AG world give that a starting point to segue.
<bruce_bailey> will need to digest
Next meeting and next steps
<AndySomers> And to add: I do have short plain language summaries that I have been working on that might be appropriate for the sup. guide
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
<shawn> reminder here is where to put "regrets" https://
<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask chairs preference for preliminary drafting
Bruce: What is the preference for drafting - Google docs, wiki, github, Wiki is preference for now as it's highly editable. Github issues could track back to a wiki page. Haven't found it great for drafting when it's very drafty. Some other feature on github.
<ChrisLoiselle> https://
<ChrisLoiselle> Speaks to netlify app and tracking changes, etc.
Shawn: The WAI site have been using Github with previews - work - preview within the design itself. It can be a draft document. Certain people can edit direclty and others can submit pull request. Like to try
<bruce_bailey> very excited to see what you are doing with Netlify
Shawn: will create page and mark as a draft - does take minute or 2 to generate.
Shawn: We could define who directly editing vs. a pull request.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to comment on previews
<bruce_bailey> fwiw we have netlify with our current host
The COGA format is here: https://
Sam: ICS file has it in for every week rather than every other week. Can someone please fix that.
<shawn> Upcoming teleconference list https://
Shawn: Try to keep ICS for now - use survey to reply if you will be able to attend future meetings.
rssagent, draft minutes
rssagent, draft minutes