11:37:48 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #silver-protocols
11:37:48 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/09/24-silver-protocols-irc
11:38:20 <trackbot> trackbot has joined #silver-protocols
11:46:12 <JF> Agenda+ Intros & Administrivia AGenda+ Defining Goals (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols) Agenda+ What is a Protocol? (Round-table discussion)
11:46:37 <JF> zakim, next item
11:46:37 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Intros & Administrivia AGenda+ Defining Goals (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols) Agenda+ What is a Protocol? (Round-table discussion) --
11:46:41 <Zakim> ... taken up [from JF]
11:46:43 <JF> zakim, close item 1
11:46:43 <Zakim> agendum 1, Intros & Administrivia AGenda+ Defining Goals (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols) Agenda+ What is a Protocol? (Round-table discussion), closed
11:46:46 <Zakim> I see nothing remaining on the agenda
11:47:00 <JF> Agenda+ Intros & Administrivia
11:47:11 <JF> Agenda+ Defining Goals (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols)
11:47:26 <JF> Agenda+ What is a Protocol? (Round-table discussion)
11:47:52 <JF> Topic+ Protocols Sub Group
11:49:01 <JF> Title+ Protocols Sub Group
11:49:08 <JF> agenda?
11:50:42 <JF> zakim, this is Protocols Sub Group 9/24/2021
11:50:42 <Zakim> got it, JF
12:01:10 <JF> zakim, remove item 1
12:01:10 <Zakim> agendum 1, Intros & Administrivia AGenda+ Defining Goals (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols) Agenda+ What is a Protocol? (Round-table discussion), dropped
12:01:17 <JF> agenda?
12:55:47 <JF> zakim, start this meeting
12:55:47 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
12:55:48 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), JF
12:55:59 <JF> Meeting: Protocols Sub Group
12:56:10 <JF> Present+
13:01:30 <SuzanneTaylor> SuzanneTaylor has joined #silver-protocols
13:02:57 <JakeAbma> JakeAbma has joined #silver-protocols
13:03:23 <JakeAbma> present+
13:03:48 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #silver-protocols
13:05:45 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #silver-protocols
13:07:02 <JF> scribe: JF
13:07:17 <jeanne> scribe: jeanne
13:07:25 <jeanne> agenda?
13:08:56 <jeanne> zakim, take up item 1
13:08:56 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Intros & Administrivia AGenda+ Defining Goals (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols) Agenda+ What is a Protocol? (Round-table discussion) --
13:08:59 <Zakim> ... taken up [from JF]
13:09:11 <jeanne> [introductions]
13:09:51 <JF> zakim, item 2
13:09:51 <Zakim> I don't understand 'item 2', JF
13:09:54 <Jaunita_George_> Jaunita_George_ has joined #silver-protocols
13:10:00 <JF> zakim, take up item 2
13:10:00 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Intros & Administrivia -- taken up [from JF]
13:10:10 <jeanne> wiki page for group is https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols
13:10:30 <jeanne> JF: We will be storing our work items on this page
13:10:38 <jeanne> zakim, close item 1
13:10:38 <Zakim> agendum 1, Intros & Administrivia AGenda+ Defining Goals (https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols) Agenda+ What is a Protocol? (Round-table discussion), closed
13:10:41 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
13:10:41 <Zakim> 2. Intros & Administrivia [from JF]
13:10:43 <jeanne> zakim, take up next
13:10:43 <Zakim> agendum 2 was just opened, jeanne
13:11:16 <jeanne> JF: What is a protocol? is a key item.
13:11:41 <jeanne> ... to my mind, Content Usable from COGA is a good example of a protocol
13:12:01 <jeanne> ... how does each group member defines protocol?
13:12:32 <jeanne> ... why did you join?
13:12:59 <jeanne> ST: To design something compelling that would inspire groups to improve accessi bility.
13:13:28 <jeanne> ... example is a memory group home that writes up a list of best practices for org that would want to share it.
13:13:51 <jeanne> JG: I joined to find ways to provide more helpful guidance
13:14:10 <jeanne> ... Content Usable is a good example of a protocol and flesh out more in the same vein
13:15:17 <jeanne> GV: I am looking up the definition of a protocol, but can't find one applicable
13:15:48 <jeanne> ... I think it is for giving guidance where the measurable and testing are not really possible.
13:16:24 <jeanne> ... THinking about sentences where something incomprehesible passes and clear plain language can fail
13:17:09 <jeanne> ... I joined the group because I am upset where people can't get their needs met,  but we haven't found a path for doing that
13:17:26 <jeanne> ...
13:17:39 <jeanne> ... I joined to find a path if there is one.
13:18:18 <jeanne> JA: For this group I took John's idea of putting a protocol as additional guidance to show or put in a conformance statement
13:18:34 <jeanne> ... you are working toward a specific protocol
13:18:43 <jeanne> ... there are protocols for writing
13:18:51 <jeanne> ... very concrete approach
13:19:11 <jeanne> ... Maturity Model has proof points where you show that you are following a protocol
13:19:21 <jeanne> ... it's not something completely separate
13:19:39 <jeanne> ... In the EU there will be monitoring for private websites
13:20:16 <jeanne> ... govt agencies must publish an accessibility statement for what they follow and measures to improve accessiiblity including planning
13:20:39 <jeanne> ... not only could apply WCAG, but what other processes are being implemented and planned.
13:20:57 <jeanne> ... I think the protocols has the ability to implement that.
13:21:39 <GreggVan> q+
13:23:00 <JF> scribe: JA perhaps mispoke, protocls are side-by-side
13:23:48 <JF> GV: think the goal is to incorporate the two as tightly as possible. If it is off to the side it would be ignored
13:24:01 <jeanne> JF: Should protocols be "extra" -- should it sit on top of other protocols
13:24:07 <jeanne> scribe: jeanne
13:24:58 <jeanne> JF: Bruce Bailey had the idea of different currencies - one measure for regulatory and another measure for best practices\
13:25:09 <GreggVan> q-
13:25:09 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #silver-protocols
13:25:16 <Rachael> presen+
13:25:39 <JF> present+ Rachael
13:25:41 <jeanne> JA: In Netherlands, when you put in an accessibility statement, you have to put process, but they don't proscribe what to do and what the timeline is.
13:25:41 <Rachael> present+
13:26:13 <jeanne> JF: A question I had early on, are their specific protocols that have been defined?
13:26:25 <jeanne> JA: It depends on our definition of protocols.
13:26:27 <jeanne> q+
13:26:49 <JF> Q+
13:27:00 <jeanne> JA: We don't have guidelines or critiera, but we are using the COGA protocol in our definition
13:27:32 <jeanne> ... should we have set of well-known protocols to be used, like ISO standards
13:28:30 <SuzanneTaylor> jeanne: I think this has the potentially to solve a key issue in silver.
13:28:51 <SuzanneTaylor> ... initially Bronze was going to be something like WCAG 2.0 AA
13:29:08 <SuzanneTaylor> ... silver would be Bronze + usability
13:29:17 <SuzanneTaylor> ... gold would be maturity model
13:29:27 <SuzanneTaylor> ... we struggled with what silver would be
13:30:04 <SuzanneTaylor> ... and JF's suggestion could take in APA's user requirements documents, etc
13:30:36 <SuzanneTaylor> ... aria authoring practices, W3C technical reports and spec
13:30:48 <SuzanneTaylor> ... it would be a good thing to be able to reward people for following these
13:31:11 <SuzanneTaylor> ... it could be a middle place for more advanced accessibility
13:31:13 <JF> Q?
13:31:20 <JF> ack jea
13:31:24 <SuzanneTaylor> ... that is how I see it, but I'm flexible
13:31:47 <SuzanneTaylor> ... I think it would be helpful to start by making a list of acceptable protocols would be
13:32:00 <SuzanneTaylor> ... I have some concerns about custom protocols
13:32:41 <jeanne> scribe: jeanne
13:33:03 <jeanne> JF: I think the starting points is defining what a protocol is.
13:33:24 <jeanne> ... where do protocols start to show up in the larger context?
13:33:38 <jeanne> ... I wouild rather see protocols be integrated across the board
13:33:39 <Rachael> q+ to suggest we document options for where to integrate with pros and cons
13:34:00 <jeanne> ... I want to see protocols integrated at  bronze levels
13:34:42 <jeanne> ... Lainey Feingold Structured Negotiation shows that "we know we know where you want to be, but know what we need to do to get there."
13:35:22 <jeanne> ... we know that we give people a way to conform if they aren't perfect.
13:35:25 <jeanne> q+
13:35:31 <JF> ack jf
13:35:31 <jeanne> ack JF
13:35:36 <jeanne> ack Rac
13:35:36 <Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to suggest we document options for where to integrate with pros and cons
13:35:41 <GreggVan> q+
13:35:58 <GreggVan> +1 to that
13:36:26 <jeanne> RBM: Sometimes coming in with a final decision doesn't work with the entire group because AGWG doesn't understand the undkerlying arguments
13:36:44 <JakeAbma> q+
13:37:00 <jeanne> ... I recommend we make a list of the options with the pros and cons to seed the richness of conversation that we want to have over the next 9 months
13:37:16 <jeanne> ... we can stay in line with AGWG
13:37:36 <jeanne> JF: Are we just going to develop a guided framework?
13:37:57 <JF> q?
13:38:05 <JF> ack jeanne
13:38:17 <SuzanneTaylor> Jeanne: really like idea of documenting the options/thinking
13:38:29 <GreggVan> we might structure our  report along something like    Goal, hopes, concerns, constraints, ideas, options --- all for discussion.
13:38:29 <JF> ack g
13:38:39 <jeanne> RBM: We don't want to have a hard and fast decision -- with more
13:38:59 <jeanne> GV: Goals, Hopes, Constraints, Options
13:39:45 <jeanne> q+ to say that if bronze supports regulatory, then putting non-testable items in bronze might not fit the regulatoruy model.
13:40:54 <jeanne> GV: Concern that COGA would not lkike that non-testable would not fit at the  required level.  It would be a problem if it issn't required
13:41:19 <jeanne> JF: I think that if Protocols aren't at the regulatory level, then people will not do them
13:41:24 <SuzanneTaylor> q+ to suggest that untestable collections of guidance encapsulated in just 10 ir 20 percent of the score might be acceptable in a regulatory environment
13:41:32 <jeanne> ... they aren't critical to meeting the broader goal
13:42:04 <jeanne> ... We might have protocols that aren't testable,  measurable and repeatable
13:42:20 <jeanne> ... how do we fit that into the WCAG3 framework?
13:42:58 <jeanne> JA: I want to answer the question we started with.  You have the option of defining and telling which prootcol will fit.
13:43:09 <jeanne> ... that planes a lot of burden on your shoulders
13:43:37 <jeanne> ... we don't write the protocols, we don't control if they change, they may vary from country to contry. That would be very hard.
13:44:13 <JF> Q?
13:44:18 <JF> ack jake
13:44:43 <jeanne> ... we had the conversations with the  Ministry of Affairs, what measures need to be in planning?  Your measures nad your planning is ocmpletley up to you. The Dutch govt does not want to say which protocol you have to do.
13:45:25 <jeanne> ... why should you use a protocol, and the matureity of the protocol -- like building your own car won't be a good as the car company
13:45:37 <jeanne> ... maybe it is good to have a discussion on that.
13:45:43 <jeanne> ack ja
13:46:03 <jeanne> JF: Do you have any documentation on the Netherlands regulations?
13:46:09 <JakeAbma> https://www.digitoegankelijk.nl/toegankelijkheidsverklaring
13:46:26 <jeanne> JA: It's a page for your Accessibility Statement
13:46:45 <jeanne> ... there is an accessiiblity statement generator with reporting of what you can do.
13:47:00 <jeanne> ... it's simply written so the translation should be good.
13:47:04 <jeanne> ack jea
13:47:04 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say that if bronze supports regulatory, then putting non-testable items in bronze might not fit the regulatoruy model.
13:48:10 <SuzanneTaylor> jeanne: I wanted to mention early that if we say that Bronze supports regulatory, then putting protocols in Bronze might conflict with regulatory - we have to have that conversation with regulators, maybe starting with Bruce
13:48:22 <jeanne> JS: I worry about gaming and our requirement of regulatory use
13:48:28 <jeanne> ack S
13:48:28 <Zakim> SuzanneTaylor, you wanted to suggest that untestable collections of guidance encapsulated in just 10 ir 20 percent of the score might be acceptable in a regulatory environment
13:51:08 <jeanne> ST:  I thought that 20% of your score could be protocols and help reach gold, but I was wrong, that it could be anywhere.  In the 10-20% might not be regulatory.  There are so many banks that are WCAG 2.1 compliant, but the PwD can't use them.  Then they could be required to accommodate people with disabillities because it could be encapsulated -- did you do the protocol or did you
13:51:09 <jeanne> not?"
13:51:27 <jeanne> q+ to suggest making a list of acceptable protocols and see the common themes
13:51:55 <jeanne> JF:  I like GV's suggestion of defining Goals, Hopes, COnstraints
13:51:58 <jeanne> ack
13:52:18 <jeanne> ack je
13:52:18 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to suggest making a list of acceptable protocols and see the common themes
13:52:23 <SuzanneTaylor> Jeanne: just wanted to suggested a list of acceptable protocols and common characteristics as a place to begin
13:53:09 <jeanne> JF: That would be a good homework task for the group.  Point to examples.  COntent Uaable and Plainlanguage.gov
13:53:30 <jeanne> ... Plainlanguage.gov has guidelines and the government requires it.
13:53:43 <jeanne> +1
13:53:51 <JF> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols
13:54:00 <SuzanneTaylor> +1
13:54:08 <jeanne> JF: We have the wiki which is a useful place to start putting ideas
13:54:37 <jeanne> ... Please put info in the wiki
13:55:09 <jeanne> ... concern for gaming -- is there a place  of entities creaating private protocols? Should nations be able to create protocols?
13:55:56 <jeanne> +1 that I like allowing nations to publish protocols?
13:56:02 <JakeAbma> q+
13:56:19 <GreggVan> q+
13:56:26 <jeanne> 'JF: What about large organizations? COuld we make stanards for protocols? Should W3C vet them?
13:56:55 <JF> Q+
13:56:59 <jeanne> JA: COncern for European Accessibility Act that forced harmonization across nations having their own rules
13:57:02 <JF> ack ja
13:57:31 <jeanne> ... the more you allow others to contribute to protocols, the less harmonization.  You could have rubbish protocols
13:58:09 <JF> ack gr
13:58:13 <jeanne> ... If 200 countries have 10 protocols each, we have  2000 protocols.  No harmonization.
13:59:37 <jeanne> GV: We are not appointed by the world to do anything.  To do that would require bringing people into the W3C.  We can only talk about the framework for a protocol
14:00:35 <jeanne> JF:  I reference PlainLanguage.gov as a US example, EU has a similar requirement.
14:01:07 <jeanne> JF: Homework assignment: think about the definition of prootcol and point to examples.
14:01:12 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
14:01:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/24-silver-protocols-minutes.html jeanne
14:01:34 <jeanne> JF: My goal is to have a working definition and key components of a protocol  for next week.
14:01:39 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
14:01:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/24-silver-protocols-minutes.html jeanne
14:02:08 <JF> zakim, end meeting
14:02:08 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been JF, JakeAbma, Rachael
14:02:09 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:02:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/24-silver-protocols-minutes.html Zakim
14:02:13 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, JF; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
14:02:17 <Zakim> Zakim has left #silver-protocols
14:04:10 <JakeAbma> present+
14:04:33 <jeanne> present+
14:04:38 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
14:04:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/09/24-silver-protocols-minutes.html jeanne