15:10:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #silver-conf
15:10:21 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/11/18-silver-conf-irc
15:10:34 <janina> Meeting: Silver Conformance Options Subgroup
15:10:41 <janina> Date: 18 Nov 2021
15:10:46 <janina> Chair: janina
15:10:50 <janina> agenda?
15:11:16 <janina> Agenda+ Agenda Review & Administrative Items
15:11:16 <janina> agenda+ Analyzing conformance Considerations https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Conformance_Short_Summary_Strawdog
15:11:19 <janina> agenda+ Glossary Initial Draft Definitions https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Conformance_Glossary_Candidates
15:11:22 <janina> agenda+ Sampling & Reporting -- Initial Use Cases https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YgiOg3CZz-LAVxRT0CWUTWHzyVa3UrjqdU4NvoyUZ_8/
15:11:25 <janina> agenda+ Other Business
15:11:27 <janina> agenda+ Be Done
15:13:16 <janina> present+
16:40:54 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #silver-conf
16:55:37 <shadi> shadi has joined #silver-conf
16:57:06 <ToddLibby> ToddLibby has joined #silver-conf
16:57:27 <janina> rrsagent, make log public
16:57:33 <janina> agenda?
16:57:44 <janina> zakim, who's here?
16:57:44 <Zakim> Present: janina
16:57:46 <Zakim> On IRC I see ToddLibby, shadi, Rachael, RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, MichaelC, trackbot
16:58:25 <shadi> present+
16:58:38 <ToddLibby> present+
16:58:40 <shadi> scribe: shadi
16:58:45 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #silver-conf
16:59:50 <janina> regrets: Aslan, Jeanne
17:00:59 <janina> zakim, who's here?
17:00:59 <Zakim> Present: janina, shadi, ToddLibby
17:01:01 <Zakim> On IRC I see GreggVan, ToddLibby, shadi, Rachael, RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, MichaelC, trackbot
17:02:59 <PeterKorn> PeterKorn has joined #silver-conf
17:03:02 <PeterKorn> present+
17:03:20 <JF> JF has joined #silver-conf
17:03:28 <shadi> zakim, take up next
17:03:28 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Agenda Review & Administrative Items -- taken up [from janina]
17:03:30 <JF> Present+
17:04:21 <shadi> [Janina walks attendees through the agenda]
17:04:58 <GreggVan> q+
17:06:18 <shadi> JS: Shadi also has a partial write-up on the wiki which we can review in the coming weeks
17:06:40 <shadi> ...no meeting next week, several will be comatozed by Turkey
17:06:54 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Substantial_Conformance/Example_Scenarios
17:08:32 <shadi> SAZ: first pass, all examples are there for discussion
17:08:43 <shadi> ...not sure how to get first reviewed
17:08:57 <shadi> JS: will come back to this on 2nd Dec meeting
17:09:15 <shadi> GV: coming back to the sampling
17:09:25 <shadi> ...also need to talk about mass sampling
17:09:43 <shadi> ...testing massive number of pages
17:09:57 <shadi> ...maybe a different discussion item for the future
17:10:20 <shadi> JS: agree, we will probably need to tackle this
17:10:33 <shadi> ...but might not be able to get to it this year
17:10:35 <shadi> ack gr
17:10:40 <shadi> zakim, take up next
17:10:40 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Analyzing conformance Considerations https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Conformance_Short_Summary_Strawdog -- taken up [from janina]
17:11:13 <shadi> GV: was not intended as a proposal
17:11:30 <shadi> ...just an attempt to find a common thread
17:11:43 <shadi> ...what is it that we're trying to do?
17:11:56 <shadi> ...understand the different needs and desires
17:12:13 <JF> Q+
17:12:29 <shadi> ...the second part is to summarize the understanding
17:12:46 <shadi> ...initially doing it for myself
17:13:08 <shadi> ...first parts is the higher-level goals
17:13:44 <shadi> ...in WCAG 2.x tried to have Level AAA
17:13:45 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #silver-conf
17:13:52 <shadi> ...but that mostly just got cut away
17:13:53 <Wilco> present+
17:14:00 <shadi> ...and people didn't do it
17:14:23 <janina> q?
17:14:26 <shadi> ...another goal is to get accepted by other regulatory and standards groups
17:15:02 <maryjom> maryjom has joined #silver-conf
17:15:40 <shadi> ...third goals is what content can influence and what it can't
17:16:06 <maryjom> present+
17:16:15 <shadi> ..for example, can't be responsible for the accessibility of emails written by users of a webmail site
17:16:45 <shadi> ...fourth goal is that page that is part of a process needs to be considered together
17:17:06 <shadi> ...like a checkout page in a shopping site to complete the transaction
17:17:31 <shadi> ...fifth is to recognize there is no absolute accessibility
17:17:53 <shadi> ...then lastly, to make it as simple as possible
17:18:09 <shadi> ...already complaints about the currently complexity of WCAG
17:19:06 <PeterKorn> q+
17:19:11 <shadi> ...sometimes even debates within the Working Group about what something means
17:19:20 <janina> ack jf
17:19:33 <shadi> JF: agreement with much of this
17:20:15 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Conformance_Short_Summary_Strawdog
17:20:52 <shadi> JF: propose goal for bronze level to encourage people to implement things like COGA guidance
17:21:17 <shadi> GV: sounds like a how, rather than a goal
17:21:27 <shadi> ...maybe part of the first goal?
17:21:40 <shadi> JF: looking for something more specific
17:21:50 <shadi> JS: concerned we can get into the weeds
17:22:00 <shadi> ...for example, which level and such
17:22:14 <shadi> ...discussion in process, let's not define it that specifically
17:22:35 <shadi> GV: why is the first goal not sufficient
17:22:58 <janina> ack pet
17:22:59 <shadi> JF: want people to actually do these things
17:23:40 <shadi> PK: goal 4 seems overly page-centric
17:23:43 <Wilco> +1
17:23:58 <shadi> ...later on you speak of parts of a process, which is less page-centric
17:24:26 <shadi> PK: another goal was to better reflect the lived experience of people with disabilities
17:24:56 <shadi> ...to reduce definition of requirements that do not really impact accessibility
17:25:33 <shadi> JS: technical violation that doesn't really have a real impact, like empty iframe?
17:25:51 <janina> q?
17:25:53 <shadi> PK: yes but trying to stay higher-level than that level of detail
17:25:56 <janina> zakim, who's here?
17:25:58 <Zakim> Present: janina, shadi, ToddLibby, PeterKorn, JF, Wilco, maryjom
17:25:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see maryjom, Wilco, JF, PeterKorn, GreggVan, ToddLibby, shadi, Rachael, RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, MichaelC, trackbot
17:26:08 <janina> q?
17:26:20 <shadi> PK: might be other goals from Silver research work
17:26:30 <shadi> ...would be good to look back at these
17:26:45 <Wilco> https://www.w3.org/community/silver/draft-final-report-of-silver/
17:27:42 <shadi> GV: now numbered goals, and added new goal #5 to address your latest comment
17:28:19 <shadi> PK: not very settled on the language
17:29:04 <Wilco> q+
17:29:18 <PeterKorn> Suggested alternate text for #5: "That something that fails technically, but which does not have any real world impact on the lives of people with disabilities, can still conform"
17:29:18 <shadi> GV: would be good to re-review these
17:30:08 <janina> q?
17:30:17 <janina> ack wil
17:30:35 <shadi> WF: how do we define "objective"?
17:30:57 <shadi> GV: something is objective when it has a high inter-rater reliability
17:30:58 <JF> if we are wordsmithing, then I'd like to see #1 modified to: "Will get web designers to do more than what has been able to be put into WCAG 2.x"
17:31:14 <shadi> ...people who know what they are doing agree to a large degree
17:31:19 <JF> i.e. do more than just "look" - DO
17:32:40 <shadi> WF: agree with high inter-rater reliability as a goal
17:32:56 <shadi> q?
17:32:57 <JF> Q+ to note that US federal government sites TODAY have to apply Plain language
17:34:11 <janina> ack jf
17:34:11 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to note that US federal government sites TODAY have to apply Plain language
17:34:47 <shadi> JF: understand the difficulty and the many attempts of trying this
17:35:11 <shadi> ...governments have to do this today
17:35:19 <shadi> GV: which law is that?
17:35:30 <shadi> JF: plainlanguage.gov
17:35:32 <Wilco> Q+
17:35:35 <shadi> GV: will check it out
17:35:47 <shadi> JS: not sure we need this deep dive now
17:36:01 <janina> q?
17:36:13 <janina> ack wil
17:36:59 <JF> A HUGE +1 to Wilco
17:37:06 <JF> this is *exactly* my concern
17:37:08 <janina> q?
17:37:22 <shadi> WF: one thing that may raise concerns, is that things that are testable will make into regulations and other things will be on a level not required by law
17:37:36 <shadi> ...not sure if this moves us forward from the current situation
17:38:11 <janina> q?
17:38:25 <shadi> GV: concerned about reducing testability may rule out adoption by policy makers
17:38:46 <shadi> ...do people think we can get passed this?
17:39:04 <JF> @Gregg, I *DO* believe we can get there
17:39:14 <PeterKorn> q?
17:39:17 <PeterKorn> q+
17:39:29 <Wilco> q+
17:39:40 <janina> ack pet
17:39:49 <shadi> JS: working some kind of an understanding to get more requirements
17:40:05 <shadi> PK: lack of clear testability is a huge problem
17:40:16 <shadi> ...like the idea of medals or such
17:40:41 <shadi> ...think that the level for requirements will depend on the nature of the product
17:41:03 <shadi> ...what is within reason or outside reasonable control
17:41:28 <shadi> ...for example, healthcare might be different from entertainment
17:41:48 <shadi> ...does not change the definition of what technically conforms
17:42:03 <shadi> ...but maybe which levels of conformance are acceptable for each
17:42:17 <janina> ack wil
17:42:18 <shadi> ...not convinced that 3 is the magical number
17:42:48 <shadi> WF: don't think we can put normative requirements that can't be tested reliably
17:43:01 <JF> Q+ to disagree cite: ISO 9001
17:43:06 <shadi> ...the question is why can't we figure out how to make these more testable
17:43:21 <shadi> q+ to respond to JF
17:44:57 <shadi> GV: added definition for objective and testable
17:45:07 <janina> ack jf
17:45:07 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to disagree cite: ISO 9001
17:45:30 <shadi> JF: disagree with Wilco, you can't test or measure ISO 9001
17:45:32 <shadi> q-
17:45:50 <shadi> GV: you can absolutely test and measure ISO 9001
17:46:02 <shadi> ...and you can get certification and such
17:46:41 <shadi> WF: not based on sloppy unit tests
17:47:03 <Wilco> s/WF/JF
17:47:06 <shadi> q+
17:47:43 <shadi> JF: different way of looking at conforming
17:48:09 <shadi> GV: is ISO 9001 required by law?
17:48:29 <shadi> JF: no but adopted by companies
17:48:44 <PeterKorn> scribe: PeterKorn
17:49:10 <PeterKorn> SA: discussion of process-based standards, that would be a separate standard.
17:49:45 <janina> q?
17:49:49 <janina> ack sh
17:49:49 <PeterKorn> ...maturity model could be that separate standard.  Feel comparison between a bulding code & ISO 9001 is Apples & oranges
17:50:00 <shadi> scribe: shadi
17:50:41 <janina> q?
17:50:43 <shadi> GV: very big difference between voluntary and regulatory standards
17:51:18 <shadi> ...as soon as requirements are going to be regulated, a whole set of different requirements come in
17:51:32 <JF> https://blog.libryo.com/iso-9001-2015-legal-requirements
17:51:40 <shadi> s/requirements come in/rules come in
17:51:56 <janina> q?
17:51:56 <Wilco> q+
17:52:08 <janina> ack wil
17:52:50 <shadi> WF: would love several more people debating this
17:53:00 <shadi> ...seems only few of us discussing it
17:53:37 <ToddLibby> q+
17:53:53 <shadi> DL: my first time here, hello everybody
17:54:03 <shadi> ...from Toronto area
17:54:23 <shadi> ...education and digital publishing
17:54:43 <shadi> ...previously involved with IDPF and now W3C on digital publishing
17:55:17 <shadi> MJM: first time I've seen this proposal
17:55:36 <shadi> ...not sure it addresses web content and web apps
17:55:51 <shadi> ...always have bugs, and WCAG has been all or nothing
17:55:55 <PeterKorn> +1 I think there are important things not yet in this doc., and they are things we have been working on previously in this group.
17:56:12 <shadi> ...not conducive to progressing accessibility
17:56:35 <shadi> ...also some things are not easily testable
17:56:46 <shadi> ...becomes daunting on large-scale websites
17:56:56 <shadi> q?
17:57:08 <PeterKorn> q+
17:57:33 <shadi> ...would be helpful for developers to show progress over time
17:57:41 <shadi> ...would help get more buy-in
17:57:47 <shadi> ack todd
17:58:06 <shadi> TL: conversation is great, don't have much to add to it today
17:58:14 <JF> @Gregg: The Plain Writing Act of 2010 requires federal agencies to write “clear government communication that the public can understand and use.” https://www.dni.gov/index.php/plain-language-act
17:58:23 <shadi> ack peter
17:58:25 <shadi> zakim, take up next
17:58:25 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Glossary Initial Draft Definitions https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Conformance_Glossary_Candidates -- taken up [from janina]
17:58:34 <PeterKorn> A potential missing goal is around helping / inventing continual improvement.
17:58:48 <shadi> JS: let's try to advance the terms "conformance" and "compliance"
17:59:09 <shadi> ...helps us to distinguish these two concepts
17:59:26 <shadi> ...what we expect from a technical spec vs regulation
17:59:39 <janina> https://www.w3.org/2021/09/draft-wai-glossary
17:59:41 <shadi> ...hopefully not controversial concept
17:59:50 <shadi> ...but need to work on the definitions
18:00:40 <shadi> ...tried to integrate existing definitions
18:00:49 <shadi> ...will discuss in 2 weeks
18:00:51 <PeterKorn> q+
18:01:29 <shadi> GV: we ought to get some definitive decisions on the goals
18:01:55 <ToddLibby> I've got to get to another meeting. Thanks, everyone.
18:02:10 <shadi> ...if we can't get agreement then will go in circles
18:02:43 <shadi> ...need clarity if regulation requires testability or not
18:03:06 <shadi> PK: invite folks to look at the other doc shared at the beginning of the call
18:03:18 <shadi> PK: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Substantial_Conformance/Example_Scenarios
18:03:52 <GreggVan> present+
18:03:52 <JF> We have evidence today of a regulation with Unmeasurable requirements: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-111publ274
18:08:00 <shadi> rrsagent, make minutes
18:08:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/18-silver-conf-minutes.html shadi
18:08:08 <shadi> zakim, end meeting
18:08:08 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been janina, shadi, ToddLibby, PeterKorn, JF, Wilco, maryjom, GreggVan
18:08:10 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:08:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/18-silver-conf-minutes.html Zakim
18:08:13 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, shadi; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
18:08:17 <Zakim> Zakim has left #silver-conf
18:08:29 <shadi> rrsagent, bye
18:08:29 <RRSAgent> I see no action items