Meeting minutes
<janina> scribe:
Agenda Review & Announcements
David is hosting a colleague from Russia in San Fran, under U.S.Embassy sponsorship, re exchange of info; may join APA next week
janina: TPAC 2022 in Vancouver September 12-16
Proposed Change in Teleconference Hour--Moving to 10:00 AM (Boston) effective 16 February
Matthew_Atkinson: Now expecting to start 10:00 Boston effective 16 February
Matthew_Atkinson: Has been previously discussed in telecon and on list; no major objections
Matthew_Atkinson: If any major problem, please advise asap
Task Force & Deliverables Updates
Pronunciation
PaulG: Will be moving time soon; WBS polling in progress; Most likely a swap to Noon
PaulG: Still responding to issues; working up more use cases
PaulG: Also some recruiting looks successful
Personalization
Matthew_Atkinson: We still have an I18N blocker; we're getting closer to showing our spec works as expected to close it
Matthew_Atkinson: Running internal checks as is multi-lang
Matthew_Atkinson: Also looking at renaming our suite of specs to be with a consistent naming scheme
COGA
Fazio: no news
RQTF
janina: Issue processing ongoing with several note track docs
janina: SAUR close to complete and will be first to advance
MichaelC: Note that COGA Work Statement has been agreed by the group and is ready for review by the APA and AG chairs.
<janina> MichaelC: Draft WS from COGA -- MichaelC Formally, Work Statements should be approved by WGs
FAST & Deliverables Update
Joshue108: Subgroup heard presentation from a11y for children; some focus on pedagogy and a11y in relation
Joshue108: also updated on further back and forth; some delay re deceptive patterns that could be problematic
publications
janina: Previously FAST was an APA deliverable; it moved to Silver and it is expected that it will return to APA for further publication.
<Fazio> Thank you
janina: Work on an Accessibility Maturity Model was being undertaken within AGWG and it has recently been discussed that this may move out of AGWG. Thus it may need a new home, and APA is a possibility if so. This was mentioned on the AGWG call yesterday to a small degree. Further discussion within AGWG and APA needed (to introduce it to you, if need be).
<Fazio> I chair the Maturity Model group with Sheri Byrne-Haber
Gottfried: We are working on a model too. Is the W3C model focused on sites, or organizations?
janina: Wider than web sites, so could cover more areas, as long as they're web-related.
<Fazio> we meet the hour before APA
Gottfried: We may have people who could contribute.
janina: That would be great.
+1 to janina
janina: It's intended to be useful to a wide range of organizations.
Fazio: Focusing on what is W3C accessibility; what does it mean and how do you sustain it?
Fazio: Ensuing that accessibility is consistent across different channels, and advice on sustaining it applicable for organizations of different sizes.
Fazio: It cotnains information about creating a continued process of improvement a la ISO 9001. But it's not tied into ISO's accessibility standard.
Fazio: The current draft is on GitHub
Gottfried: AFAIK the first model of this kind is from the Business Disability Forum.
<Gottfried_> https://
janina: We are thinking this may be a good fit for W3C Statement status (which is new).
<Fazio> Maturity Model https://
New Charters Review https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Horizontal+review+requested%22
MichaelC: none
MichaelC:
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: CSS Zoom -- much to look at
paul: Zoom and resolution are both important; no browser provides good data
paul: better data would be helpful for content creation; especially automating tests per wcag criteria
Matthew_Atkinson: believe we're interested
janina: also advise Silver
Matthew_Atkinson: was concerned about fingerprinting; but the testing is very interesting opportunity
janina: One benefit of moving APA call is we won't clash with CSS. We also could approach CSS (and attend) to ask for potential liaison.
A11y Review Comment Tracker https://w3c.github.io/horizontal-issue-tracker/?repo=w3c/a11y-review
new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
michael: nothing
Actions Checkin (Specs) https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/open
action-2317?
<trackbot> action-2317: Janina Sajka to Review miniapps -- due 2022-02-02 -- OPEN
janina: Concern around whether the Accessibility Considerations section is normative or not.
MichaelC: The spec says it's non-normative.
janina: No strong opinion at the moment; Roy was involved so let's wait until we can discuss with Roy.
Matthew_Atkinson: any others?
[crickets]
Matthew_Atkinson: some look just unclosed; looking at Fredrik
Fredrik: yes!
Fredrik: have UI Events pending for next week
Fredrik: will certainly check
Dangling Spec Review Cleanup: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Category:Spec_Review_Assigned
MichaelC: Still have WoT
<MichaelC> https://
janina: We discussed this in RQTF with Joshue108 et al. There is an important accessibility issue that we raised, which we may've discovered after our last deep interaction with WoT. Joshue108 is checking up on the documentation.
janina: The issue is middleware. E.g. a device may be accessible in the sense that it works with a particular voice assistant, but it turns out that you need to configure it in the first instance with a specific app, and the app may turn out to be inaccessible.
janina: You may also need to sign up for an account for that specific middleware platform, which may be in a different country etc. and there's an immense variety of middleware and variability in accessibility.
janina: We are calling this 'middleware' and I want to write it up and have us work with WoT to express it using their terms.
janina: This information needs to be expressed in sales copy, on packaging, etc., so that we can search/filter for/on it.
Other Business
[crickets]
Matthew_Atkinson: given there's time; the personalization discussion of renaming reminds me of the two hard problems in comp sci:
1. Naming things
2. Cache invalidation
3. Off by one errors
Matthew_Atkinson: it's not original to me!
Lionel_Wolberger: are you counting fencing; or fence posts?