02 February 2022


mbgower, rachael, shadi
Rachael, shadi

Meeting minutes



<mbgower> Existing google doc on work https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B6mCxY0tQ-TfYoOeLVpoI23Xf9EYV5xkKG5KwTcyXaE/edit?usp=sharing

<mbgower> minutes from presentation, first item https://www.w3.org/2022/01/25-ag-minutes.html#item01

<mbgower> Shadi: felt the presentation covered what is said in the 2 standards

<mbgower> Shadi: The link to the problem statement in the document is very useful

mbgower: JF was asking about processes
… and progressive disclosure
… is it part of the process?

Rachael: makes sense, feel it's relevant

mbgower: will move into document

Rachael: seems Jennie was asking about responsive design
… and the breakpoints
… this is how I would re-state her question

mbgower: Detlev raises question
… is there an essential process?
… wondering if that is author-defined
… going to have to define what you test

<Rachael> shadi: Couldn't a page/unit have multiple essential purposes or processes. For example purchase a process and another is to look at the reviews.

<Rachael> ...within each of these, there are different parts of the page and evaluate different things.

<Rachael> mbgower: I think a page can have multiple processes/purposes or a process can have multiple pages.

mbgower: the idea of multiple processes, or none, is sound
… but think the author needs to define this
… if there is a way for the author to declare this
… but can see the concerns here too

Rachael: would be about documenting the process

<mbgower> Rachael: we would need to provide a way to document a process.

mbgower: if you're the author, you usually have a vision for the user process
… except for some types of informational pages without interaction
… but for the most part, you have a process
… how wireframes are usually generated
… even in waterfall method you'd define some process
… we don't have that notion now
… just report by page

Rachael: interesting approach, worth documenting

<Rachael> shadi: Definitely agree its an interesting approach. We've discussed it a fair amount when working on WCAG evaluation methodology. Also the idea of a university website with multiple sub themes with its own processes/purposes/goals. Even the global one like example.com even has subfunctions like its own departments or countries.

<Rachael> ... Two things we couldn't work out. From an author perspective. Its one thing people do when they design and another that they report on. Espeically if they know certain processes don't work. The other, what if someone designs alternative processes. You are not supposed to do X, but rather Y.

<Rachael> ....noone actually checks that the processes is accessible.

Rachael: are alternates always bad?
… sometimes can help improve accessibility

mbgower: maybe on mobile devices or on different screen sizes
… agree that there could be issues

<Rachael> shadi: Not categorically bad but there are situations that the user is not aware the alternate process is there, can't find it

mbgower: addressed that latter part
… you also mentioned other things
… like rolling up conformance for large sites
… but author can only be responsible for what they are working on
… application or website
… cannot be responsible for up-stream

mbgower: Detlev also talks about reporting aspects

mbgower: re-visiting Silver, see some things already in there

Rachael: yes, some of it but needs more work
… making tests more reportable
… but do they really build on each other

<Rachael> Shadi: work on ACT led through the categorizing by types of tests and found it doesn't work. Focus instead on testability. New design is to make it much more granular. I don't think they should be stacked. Looking at space of testable requirements.

mbgower: there are more and less subjective tests
… looking at more subjective tests on a process level is more useful
… also usually the more expensive tests

Rachael: wonder if we still do want some sort of categorization
… some sort of baseline
… we usually take the example of affordance
… don't have a baseline
… like how a button should look
… but that it should be consistent

mbgower: there are some things in between
… like maybe the lang tag
… if it makes sense

<Rachael> shadi: ACT talked about lang tag. Needs WCAG to be clearer about application. Agree about baselines. Also about reducing decision space. Alt text covers so many into different contexts. Could break it down to say "functional images" even if they are subjective.

mbgower: maybe need to define where the intersections are between this group and other groups
… might be good to map out the space


<Rachael> shadi: Conformance subgroup has use cases that may relate. For example, when we talk about dependencies. Could be solved by having a primary process. There is an archive material or less important twitter feed. Talk about similar use cases and how they connect to each other.

mbgower: need to find out how our group relates to others

Rachael: will ponder over that

<mbgower> Shadi: think minutes are helpful but maybe there is a way to take lighter minutes

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 185 (Thu Dec 2 18:51:55 2021 UTC).


Succeeded: s/thnings/things

Succeeded: s/ibm.com/example.com

Succeeded: s/what/how

Succeeded: s/is there a way to take lighter minutes?/think minutes are helpful but maybe there is a way to take lighter minutes