Meeting minutes
Cancel meeting of October 22 because of TPAC presentation?
<Chuck_> +1
jeanne: Cancel next week because Maturity Model presenting breakout, would like Silver people to attend
… okay? Meet anyway? Shawn and Jeanne could split up to run both if needed
<Rachael> +1 to canceling
Janina: epub meeting
… TPAC should be TPAC, lots of accessibility stuff, should take advantage
<Chuck_> proposed RESOLUTION: Silver meeting on October 22 is canceled
Resolution: Silver meeting on October 22 is canceled
to remind to comment on the WCAG3 process email thread
jeanne:
… email thread about WCAG3 process proposal
… participate as able, send email with thoughts on proposal
Rachael: Conversation of process on email, recognize not everyone can follow, will finalize proposal and put out for survey
Register for TPAC (may take 24 hours) and suggested Breakouts
jeanne: Register, may take up to 24 hours to get code to register for meetings, do in advance
<jeanne> https://
<jeanne> * Accessibility & CSS - 20 October 12:00 pm
<jeanne> * How to work with COGA - 20 October 8:00pm ET
<jeanne> * Accessibility for Children - 21 October 10:00 am ET
<jeanne> * COGA Content Usable: user needs to specifications - 21 October 11:00 ET
<jeanne> * WCAG Maturity Model - 22 October 10:00 am ET
<jeanne> * Others?
jeanne: list in email of interesting breakout sessions
jeanne: agenda page, look at it
… can set own timezone on page
… shared interesting ones in email and above
… others of interest?
sajkaj: APA personalization, outgrowth of COGA, simplify, allow additional semantic, known symbol set, looking forward to exploring annotation, nexus
<jeanne> Personalization at Monday at 10:00
<sajkaj> https://
sajkaj: CSS and APA will be specific agenda
… joint meeting, week 1 only breakouts but this one is joint meeting
Review of WCAG3 Schedule
Rachael: shares screen
<jeanne> https://
jeanne: Created by chairs based on input from different meetings, analysis of different steps needed to get WCAG 3 completed in timely manner
Rachael: Not final draft, will share accessible final draft, apologize not prepped to be accessible, in process
jeanne: Go to estimate tab
Rachael: Shared scheduled at joint meeting few weeks ago, took points from minutes, went through issues mapped to conversation points in doc
… putting in estimates from leadership about numbers, dependencies
… review key pieces, parts missing?
… walk through pieces so can understand final version
… first column is tasks, setting up foundational work, subgroups of different levels of formality, pieces of work people are preparing for larger group
… then meetings, pieces need to be discussed, e.g., scoring, measurement, usability testing
… then foundational work, to have deep conversations, come to consensus, develop details
… next section, comments and review
… would end up being around 20 years, overlapping pieces
… asking for participation in subgroups
… then wrap-up and publication
… focus on set-up foundational work, scoring, deliverable list
… look for issues you're following
JF: Scoring section, noting, don't see protocols, group meeting, scoring came up, critical errors, etc, would like to see prototocls
Rachael: Put in foundational, can put in scoring, too, expect overlaps
JF: Did come up as being significant part, scoring
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to speak to the conformance schedule
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to talk about the content creation pause - many subgroups may not have heard that
jeanne: Mentioned content creation on pause, haven't talked about before, decision that's up to each subgroup
… clear language meetings, working on testability
… every group that chooses to keep working, will be changes, esp to scoring
Rachael: Joint group is pausing looking at content and focusing at conformance now
… subgroups are continuing
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to note that sub-groups come back with *proposals* and not decisions
JF: Subgroups working on proposal, no consensus
jeanne: Make decisions in subgroup, not for entire group
Rachael: Final version will be different link, questions, trouble navigating, contact Rachael and will do whatever needed to get access to data
Defining Conformance
jeanne: In schedule, highlighted text is new addition
… what is part of definition of what is conformance, what should it look like
<jeanne> https://
jeanne: most people should have edit rights, if not do have comment rights
… goal, create proposal for defining conformance
… what it is, why do we have it, Where are the lines between measurement, conformance, and regulation? Do secondary goals exist that a conformance secion is attempting to achieve? How is the WCAG conformance section used in the real world?
sajkaj: Scoping big issue, have we added to do yet?
… foundational
… different expectations between how much to qualify how much is machine testable and what needs human testing
… permeable, maybe should not be in global conformance definition, but maybe by outcome / method
… example, Obama's letter, on verge of OCR for handwriting, becomes achievable to require rather than rope off
Rachael: Scope goals, rather than solving, aiming for list of key challenges, conversation points, maybe recommendation but not final solution
jeanne: List of pros / cons for goals? What's deliverable
Rachael: Key conversation points that need to be agreed on, probably a decision that will result, rather than the decision, share the conversations and thinking behind it
jeanne: Maybe start with goal questions, start discussing, capture answers
JF: Conformance reporting, jump ahead, scoping and reporting scope, work on protocols and assertions, declarations
… total package will include conformance report
sajkaj: Kinds of reporting to discuss, testing results (machine/human), concepts (rights), attestation
<JF> +1 to Janina - attestation
sajkaj: expectations, let WCAG rope things off, don't have same expectations of users
… details left to regulatory adjudication, provide guidance but don't do details, need that conversation
… comes after scope and details
jeanne: What is conformance, what are ideas people have, perspectives from members outside US
… not putting on spot, open discussion
… conformance is how do people know that they have met guidelines
<sajkaj> +1 to Jeanne
Chuck_: How does everyone know guidelines have been met?
<JF> Conformance is how well something, such as a product, service or a system, meets a specified standard and may refer more specifically to: Conformance testing, testing to determine whether a product or system meets some specified standard. (source https://
jeanne: Important distinction, separate points
sajkaj: Glad separate, everyone knowing is really difficult, do we mean ordinary mortals
… don't know who's responsible, what's behind, know the experience, will admit not good with computers
… everyone is really hard
… interested and capable 3rd party can judge, esp to support regulatory
… clear on musts and shoulds
… informed everyone
… will be lack of transparency, licensing terms? May not be able to require
… how does 3rd party figure out
JF: Look at formal definition
… how well something, such as a product, service or a system, meets a specified standard
… "how well something" measurement piece
… measuring your output against perfect scenario, you measure against ideal
<Zakim> Chuck_, you wanted to say I'm going with "people" and not "everone" :-)
Chuck_: Go with "people"
jeanne: People want public accountable reporting
Makoto: In Japan not legal law but have conformance claim, Japanese translation, added informative section on how to make claim
… if JIS testing results will be able to find many conformance claims by public sectors, companies
… want to show how they achieve level of accessibility for websites
jeanne: Helpful, easy to only look at US conformance
… conformance used differently, need to be careful
sajkaj: Channel Shadi, distinguish between conformance vs compliance
… may work internationally
… agree with JF talking about quantitatively specify
… how do you measure opinion
… may be able to quantify clear words, text alternative, quantitative judgements, need way to disambiguate
JF: Understand, make distinction, measuring and declaration, gap between them
… statement of measurable and unmeasurable and scoping
… conformance to W3C recommendation, statement will report on measurable, protocols, scoping
… big picture, reporting document part of WCAG conformance
sajkaj: Not saying different things, what constitutes reasonable
JF: Is including conformance document reasonable for WCAG 3
sajkaj: Can conform without making claim
JF: Do not have standardized way to make claim
sajkaj: Considering what those might look like, first looking at sampling, first build use cases, not there yet
JF: Have been given examples, Japan, posting docs, Jake mentioned in Netherlands, statements, given examples of it happening
… ask if this is part of model?
… get answer then can start defining what looks like, etc
<Makoto> FYI: Search results for "JIS X 8341-3 Testing results" (in Japanese) https://
Jake: Statement generator in Netherlands
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to caution competition with VPAT
jeanne: Complex topic, approach with caution, others in business of creating statements, some required
… don't want to compete with VPAT
JF: VPATs are US-centric, not taken up in Europe
jeanne: Not meeting next week
… following week, discussing process of getting new content in WCAG, talk through errors guidelien
… will work more on this work if there's time
<JF> VPATs do not seem to be used outside of the US. Draws comparrison between Section 508 and WCAG 2 - W3C eventually won out
<JF> our work may obsolete VPATs if we do it right