Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

02 Dec 2021


Jennie, Fazio, Rain, julierawe, Roy, Rachael, kirkwood, krisannekinney
albert, EA
me, Rain


<LisaSeemanKest> regerts: albert, EA

<krisannekinney> scribe /me

<Jennie> :

<LisaSeemanKest> :

<krisannekinney> scribe : me

action https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage#Timelines_and_actions

<Jennie> *It may have to be scribe (no space) colon (no space) me (not sure)

<krisannekinney> john R and Julie working on clear language

<krisannekinney> Lisa: Jennie working on Guardianship Draft with John K

<krisannekinney> Jennie: wondering where to add the information that they have so far.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: Google Doc should be fine - it can go to the share drive

<krisannekinney> Jennie: will just put it in the general drive

<krisannekinney> ... meeting notes for the images subgroup, where should they go?

<krisannekinney> Rain: will make an action item to organize the google docs in the drive.

<krisannekinney> Jennie: have a meeting with the designer on the books.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: Chris working with Clear Language

<Rachael> congratulations

<krisannekinney> Kris Anne: an updated survey from EOWG will be available soon for the Stories of Web Users.

<krisannekinney> Rain: the community group is really starting to pick up some energy. two reports they are working on, one of which may eventually be issue papers from COGA TF. First is a report on how live captioning and real time transcription can support individuals with cognitive support needs.

<Fazio> steve lee circulated research on reading captions while listening enhances cognition for people qith down syndrome

<krisannekinney> ... community group itself is also thinking of education and outreach within the COGA community - to collaborate with EO.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: important to get that article to the community group.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: we haven't updated the work statement since we were first founded, but the next stage is to send it to the co-chairs of our parent groups to see if they are happy with it.

<krisannekinney> ... agree with Jennie's comment to put Task Force and [TF].

<krisannekinney> John K: had some other eyes on that and they all specifically thought this was a teaching and learning area only.

<krisannekinney> ... medical community thought that it was just for teaching and learning rather than cognitive disability that is more general.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: cognitive learning disabilities and specific learning disabilities is meant to be separated since they mean different things. So redundancy is a good thing there.

<krisannekinney> Julie: my concern is that readers have all that knowledge you mention - expand it slightly with a footnote perhaps with some examples of each for people who don't know the difference.

<krisannekinney> ... important to be global, but put a little more explanation for someone new to this world.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: footnote - to understand our use of language see - point to the paragraph in Content Usable.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: Jennie added a note that some editorial work needs to happen too.

<krisannekinney> Jennie: added a comment under Julie's as a response to see if we can use a bulleted list there and then add the age related memory loss into that list.

<Rain> +1

<julierawe> +1

<krisannekinney> +1

<kirkwood> +1

<krisannekinney> Jennie: when would the editorial review need to be done?

<krisannekinney> Lisa: ASAP

<krisannekinney> Rain: the chairs have a meeting Wednesday and we want to pass it to them by then. even if its a draft version with the comments in place.

<krisannekinney> Jennie: style guide for all of these so is there an editorial process that follows?

<krisannekinney> ... if we needed it to conform to the style guide, i would need the style guide and i could possibly get it done next week. need to know by Monday if that is an expectation

<krisannekinney> Lisa: we didn't put Silver on our timeline, its under our work because its on Silver's timeline, not ours.

<krisannekinney> Jennie: under timeline heading, there is a bullet for Research and publication is outside of the list structure.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: I would not put internationalization on here, as we don't know how we're going to address it. Every document has to address internationalization. we may just point to a wiki page that is a living document.

<krisannekinney> ... any strong disagreements with that?

<krisannekinney> Rachael: did we make commitments that we would address it?

<krisannekinney> Lisa: we would look into it for the next publication. Its a "boiling the ocean" it doesn't end.

<Rachael> I am comfortable with that approach

<krisannekinney> Julie: thinking back to the meeting with the internationalization folks - do you think they would be concerned if we don't mention it.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: we could add community feedback and open issues, just not single out one of those issues.

<Rachael> What if we add something like "work with internationalization to explore intersections between COGA and Internationalization"

<krisannekinney> Lisa: should we add a section for deferred issues?

<krisannekinney> Rachael: instead what if we write that we commit to working with them - but not what the end results will be.

<Fazio> Down Syndrome COGA Research I mentioned: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328956903_Recommendations_to_design_web_pages_for_people_with_Down_Syndrome

<Jennie> Review and prioritize work on deferred issues?

<Rachael> Just to point out that you do have to address all issues. How you address them is not defined.

<krisannekinney> Rain: we could use deferred issues but word smith it to be more general.

<Rachael> ... but the "how" should reflect best intentions

<kirkwood> we have a “commitment to review feedback” ?

<krisannekinney> Lisa: this is not a final version, its the version we send to the co-chairs for their approval.

<krisannekinney> ... and comments. can we approve doing that? is it ready to send?

<julierawe> +1

<LisaSeemanKest> can i send this to the chairs?

<krisannekinney> Lisa: Can i send this to the co-chairs?

<LisaSeemanKest> +1

<Rain> +1

<julierawe> +1

<krisannekinney> +1

<Jennie> +1

<Rachael> +1

<kirkwood> +1

<krisannekinney> Lisa: any objections?

<LisaSeemanKest> sny objection or request to delay

rachael AG progress review https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/AG_process

<krisannekinney> Rachael: its a longer topic and not urgent. we can push it back a week.

<krisannekinney> ... heads up on the AG meetings: tomorrow there is an all day meeting trying to wrap up WCAG 2.2. may be interested in the COGA SC.

<Rachael> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Upcoming_agendas#Upcoming

<krisannekinney> ... you may want to join the meetings if there is one you feel strongly about. Surveys are also out to comment on under the December 3rd meeting. if things are going to get dropped, this is the meeting where it may happen. good to have representation.

<Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sugAtqie_x1XqHDZo1Im7ftDNllWeRV_ty4PULeoTV0/edit#heading=h.q6kvhdps0qv4

<krisannekinney> ... next week on the 7th we will be talking about measurement but what may be more interest - WCAG 3, how do we write testable outcomes. Email comments back or pay attention to the survey this week.

<krisannekinney> Rachael: if anything looks like it will get dropped, I will suggest an email to go out to discuss it.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: two things we need to review for APA

<krisannekinney> ... accessibility of remote meetings

<Rain> COGA suggestions on remote meetings: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WIcQbQXI9qhfqONFI9kLuFDzVAoMGwPwlY1aAnAnBpQ/edit#

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WIcQbQXI9qhfqONFI9kLuFDzVAoMGwPwlY1aAnAnBpQ/edit#

<krisannekinney> Lisa: I think there should be a section on Relevance of Content Usable that we can write with APA

<krisannekinney> Julie: similar suggestion but in a different section of the document. I think it should go in the 4th section for creating accessible content for people developing the platform as opposed to the content going on the platform.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: I think there is enough for both for people making the platform and for people using the platform. Timeouts or how people are logging in for instance.

<krisannekinney> ... a host may have some options.

<krisannekinney> Julie: makes sense - can we add notes about that ways we can point to specific parts of COGA.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: we add a section of how's it relevant

<krisannekinney> Julie: they have specific sections about how things are relevant of WCAG and we should follow their lead and add information to the sections. Call out the COGA resource in each of those sections.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: yes

<krisannekinney> John K: importance of self-pacing throughout this. person with cognitive disabilities may need to pace their way through it.

<krisannekinney> Rain: I have a number of comments in the document about that John. very important to clearly communicate it back to APA.

<krisannekinney> Jennie: in response to Julie's comment : piece i have about break out room is both for the developers but also for the person hosting the meeting. Think about how we use each of those features, some are the developers responsibility (i.e the transcript)

<krisannekinney> Lisa: host may have a cognitive disability and they need to be abel to use the platform too.

<krisannekinney> Rain: next steps

<krisannekinney> .... asked by APA if we want our feedback NAUR and the Remote Meetings - we need to create github issues for our feedback. I need to have a sense of when i can take our feedback and make it github issues.

<krisannekinney> ... will need time to create all those github issues.

<krisannekinney> Lisa: comments that I heard, we can write one issue for each document and summarize them. strongly do not want them published without Content Usable being mentioned throughout. that is a good start.

<krisannekinney> ... we will work with them to do it.

<Fazio> no one wants dozens of git issues

<krisannekinney> Rain: I got a different sense from Janina but one issue for each is easier to manage.

<krisannekinney> Julie: offer to Rain to try to summarize some of the big things that need to be done and a smaller summary of the lesser issues.

<Rain> +1 thank you Julie

<LisaSeemanKest> ist that an ok aprouch

<kirkwood> +1

<LisaSeemanKest> +1

<Fazio> +1

<Rain> +1

<julierawe> +1

<Jennie> +1

<LisaSeemanKest> any objecttions?

<krisannekinney> +1

<Rain> Subgroup meetings: come back to our same main COGA room at 10 minutes after the hour (11:10am ET)

subgroup breakout

<Rain> scribe: Rain

Clear language, how many outcomes are we building?

Helpful deck that Julie put together to guide us: https://st1.zoom.us/web_client/rnqzmq/html/externalLinkPage.html?ref=https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Yz3KECKX8AnEYiFvJxXuyJrKpC7fv3zPNcvJ3F2_Twg/edit#slide=id.p

Jennie: method is what we are doing, not the goal

Template for Access to Help: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ufckA6WgfAvd88nLLWM9VIFfdNDJcq15pTCqiTQVIzE/edit#

Rain showed how this might map to Access to Help (Provide Human Help)

Julie: some of the guidelines have only one outcome, and some have multiple

so these may not be single outcomes

Jennie: example Julie showed excellent
... the methods do not really translate to our patterns but rather to more dense content
... word "method" used to describe what are the steps you take
... trying to map the language

Julie: one other example, for structured content it has three outcomes and each one has only one method

Rain: Figured it out with "provide human help" -- Access to help is the OUTCOME, and Provide human help is a method to achieve that outcome

Jennie: exactly, need to think about how we define human help

Julie: Silver is giving signals that it is okay to have more than one outcome
... Guidelines are supported by multiple outcomes to determine what need has been met
... If we have one really big outcome with many methods, how do we test and score for that?
... Really important to try to come up with that initial plan

Jennie: propose another approach, what actually hear happening is that there is a higher level even than Guideline. If concept of Help is one level higher (like the POUR principles, Help is an essential component of providing content and interactions)
... beneath that help, there are different types of help, and those are guidelines
... wondering if the phrase "help" is even too broad

kirkwood: very good point, and this is a sticky issue because the laws around help end up in courtroom a lot

Julie: thinking about Jennie's comment, early draft of WCAG 3, have 5 different guidelines, and Access to help as a phrase would fit nicely here

Jennie: help becomes difficult to define, not translatable to a topic as easily understood by everyone coming to it

<Jennie> *Julie's slides is an awesome catalyst for this discussion.

Working document for us to create a structure: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CJ5QgJ1VA_k1xliois5pl5LGJ1GMYidUynt-6xpCKb4/edit

Went into creating the structure

not notetaking because working in document...

RRSAgent: make minutes

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.200 (CVS log)
$Date: 2021/12/02 17:22:08 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: Jennie, Fazio, Rain, julierawe, Roy, Rachael, kirkwood, krisannekinney
Present: Jennie, Fazio, Rain, julierawe, Roy, Rachael, kirkwood, krisannekinney
Regrets: albert, EA
Found Scribe: me
Found Scribe: Rain
Inferring ScribeNick: Rain
Scribes: me, Rain

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 02 Dec 2021
People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]