Meeting minutes
Inaccessibility of CAPTCHA.
Introductions all around for Lionel Wolberger
LW: used to be active in verifiable identity work
LW: concerned about privacy issues in the online world
jasonjgw: Lionel's experience and background will be helpful for our CAPTCHA work
jasonjgw: A recent commentator suggested connecting to more recent CAPTCHA technologies
jasonjgw: Was also an issue around the document structure; we may need to organize the document differently
janina: Proposing a major focus shift
janina: General APA discussion was positive
janina: Suggest that we have enough technologies that can determine human authenticity
janina: Starting with reCAPTCHA 3 this is essentially fully automated
janina: Should identify older technologies as legacy
janina: New technologies like Cloudfare can be promoted as newer less-burdensome authentication techniques
janina: Individual websites should not take this role but leave it to the user agent
janina: Rewrite the CAPTCHA document so that the burden in placed on the user agent
janina: If we can shift the burden, this would help push the agenda to end CAPTCHA
scott_h: Generally like this approach
scott_h: A practical method example would be useful
janina: I am now using the user agent approach, although I still come across websites with legacy technology
scott_h: Does the user have to install this?
janina: The idea is that this becomes seamless and the user agent typically takes care of this without further human intervention
scott_h: What about email and multi-factor authentications?
Raja: Question on biometrics validations; it becomes a barrier
janina: Yes...we need to add this. For example where a phone system relies on a human voice
janina: Different user options will be important
Lionel_Wolberger: We have the industry on our side, because they want less hassle for the consumer; but they also don't want bots
Lionel_Wolberger: difference between verifying your identity and authenticating your humanity
Lionel_Wolberger: Pointing to new techniques is important
Lionel_Wolberger: The server sends a variety of handshakes, this has been done for years
Lionel_Wolberger: Not suggesting that we encourage thinngs that lower privacy, like location information
Lionel_Wolberger: Co-publishing will be a useful and important step
Lionel_Wolberger: Would like to have a trust-list protocol
Lionel_Wolberger: CAPTCHA doesn't really figure out if you are a human, but rather tries to determine that you are not a bot
jasonjgw: Importance of keeping personal information protected is what we want to stress
<Lionel_Wolberger> +1 to anonymous proofs of "i am not a bot"
jasonjgw: New technologies like Cloudfare seem to make this possible
<Lionel_Wolberger> +1 to using other W3C technologies like Verifiable Credentials, Distributed Identifiers, Webauthn
jasonjgw: May need to think about how making a number of various options both helps and complicates things
janina: Suggest that we think about this discussion before proceeding
Lionel_Wolberger: Plan to come next week; let's continue then
janina: Sounds like we have a good direction
jasonjgw: Will put this on the top of the agenda next time
Accessibility of remote Meetings.
scott_h: Gotten my head around GitHub and making progress
scott_h: Josh is helping me on getting up to speed
scott_h: Took all the COGA comments and separated into individual issues on GitHub
scott_h: The suggested edits seem reasonable
scott_h: Not sure if we need specific COGA section in the document
scott_h: Comes to about 10 issues in GistHub so far
scott_h: Look at a few now if we can
<Joshue108> guidance recommended for Braille support in remote meeting software.
<Joshue108> #257 https://
scott_h: Issue around braille display inclusion
janina: Many times the industry lumps together speech and braille output
janina: But you might want the braille display to show who is speaking while the attendee is listening to the person's voice on the meeting
janina: Also for deaf users using a braille display
Joshue108: Would like to spell out this sort of use case in our document
jasonjgw: This type of use case may be supported currently for if users can focus on the correct element
jasonjgw: Not suggesting that we pinpoint where the support needs to come from
janina: Not sure if I agree; don't want to throw this only on the assistive technology
janina: The ability to have this in the API would give us the ability to send in in the direction it is needed
jasonjgw: Keep this discussion going in githup
<Joshue108> considerations relating to text size changes depending on the resolution being used by the presenter sharing their screen, ability to resize screen share #255
<Joshue108> https://
scott_h: Issue around screen resolution
scott_h: When you switch between presenters with different resolutions
scott_h: Especially wen people are sharing their screen
scott_h: Good point; not sure if there is a way to standardize this
scott_h: May suggest that this is an issue that developers should work on
scott_h: Next issue, 253
<Joshue108> More detail on considerations of cognitive complexity as tools and larger platforms that integrate remote meetings are considered #253
<Joshue108> https://
scott_h: toggle to get simplified view and then toggle back
janina: Yes; but who decides the parameters of the simplified version?
janina: If we can get configurable simplicity, that might be goog
Joshue108: Josh has labeled COGA issues for the NAUR
Joshue108: all the COGA issues on NAUR should be in GitHub now
<Joshue108> Scott has addedthe COGA issues for Remote Meetings stuff
Look at where SAUR is next week