IRC log of silver-conf on 2022-02-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:52:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #silver-conf
16:52:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:52:17 [janina]
Meeting: Silver Conformance Options Subgroup
16:52:25 [janina]
Date 24 Feb 2022
16:52:28 [janina]
Chair: janina
16:52:31 [janina]
16:52:38 [janina]
rrsagent, make log public
16:52:41 [janina]
Agenda+ Agenda Review & Administrative Items
16:52:41 [janina]
agenda+ User Scenarios Review
16:52:44 [janina]
agenda+ Planning for presentation on Friday's Silver call
16:52:47 [janina]
agenda+ Other Business
16:52:49 [janina]
agenda+ Be Done
16:57:41 [janina]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:57:41 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate janina
16:58:09 [janina]
regrets: Darryl_Lehman
16:58:14 [janina]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:58:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate janina
16:58:46 [janina]
16:59:02 [Azlan]
Azlan has joined #silver-conf
17:00:23 [shadi]
shadi has joined #silver-conf
17:01:39 [PeterKorn]
PeterKorn has joined #silver-conf
17:03:05 [ToddL]
ToddL has joined #silver-conf
17:03:11 [ToddL]
17:03:26 [Azlan]
17:03:33 [PeterKorn]
17:04:00 [janina]
17:04:25 [PeterKorn]
scribe: PeterKorn
17:04:38 [maryjom]
maryjom has joined #silver-conf
17:04:48 [ToddL]
I cannot scribe today either. Apologies.
17:04:49 [maryjom]
17:04:52 [PeterKorn]
zakim, next item
17:04:52 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- Agenda Review & Administrative Items -- taken up [from janina]
17:05:45 [KimD]
KimD has joined #silver-conf
17:05:52 [KimD]
17:07:24 [janina]
17:07:30 [PeterKorn]
zakim, next item
17:07:30 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- User Scenarios Review -- taken up [from janina]
17:08:22 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: thanks for everyone who helped with review & feedback for the doc.
17:09:12 [PeterKorn]
...quick synopsis of changes made in doc
17:10:03 [PeterKorn]
...removed auto-gen TOC, replaced with manual header, so the intro & problem desc. come earlier.
17:10:39 [janina]
17:10:48 [PeterKorn]
...using "fully accessible" and "relevant to PwDs" - explaining this in Key Terminology & Concepts
17:10:57 [janina]
17:11:05 [PeterKorn]
...editing headings as we discussed last week; some few more just came in from Judy
17:11:50 [PeterKorn]
...updated example 1.3 to make acquisition more general (vs. just of MOOC).
17:12:54 [PeterKorn]
... example 2.2 is being removed - it was really a 3rd party issue, so only one example in situation 2.
17:13:51 [PeterKorn]
...cosmetic changes in example 3.2, 4.1. (and make 4.1 more clearly distinct from 5.3)
17:14:43 [PeterKorn]
...added time limitation consideration for policy around "forever beta" state.
17:15:04 [PeterKorn]
... some further edits in 9.2 around text alternatives.
17:15:13 [PeterKorn]
... rest of changes are editorial.
17:16:07 [PeterKorn]
Janina: in situation 4 remediations (maybe also in 5), we say 1st party, 2nd party, 3rd party doesn't match up with typical meaning of 1st party, etc.
17:16:26 [janina]
ack ja
17:16:30 [PeterKorn]
... maybe drop the "party" designation, and instead just be descriptive
17:16:40 [PeterKorn]
...shadi: anyone opposed to that change?
17:16:51 [PeterKorn]
<no disagreement with Janina's suggestion>
17:16:51 [ToddL]
Full support here.
17:18:20 [PeterKorn]
Janina: like shorthand version of "fully a11y". Good that we know how to add more a11y, but want a shorthand for ...
17:18:33 [Azlan]
scribe: Azlan
17:20:36 [Azlan]
PeterKorn: There's no way to avoid the issue but how is the situation best presented when if you can't do everything but recognising doing everything may take longer.
17:21:13 [Azlan]
… maybe in our concept of "fully accessible" we give an example?
17:22:15 [janina]
17:22:16 [Azlan]
… This document is about prioritising where you can't do everything immediately
17:22:22 [PeterKorn]
scribe: PeterKorn
17:23:30 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: summary of Judy concerns. Situations 1 & 3 have the concerns.
17:23:45 [janina]
17:24:00 [PeterKorn]
... "When making content fully accessible is not achievable immediately" - isn't this something potentially EVERY web developer might claim?
17:24:54 [PeterKorn]
...also "When content is accumulating too rapidly to make fully accessible" - again something most web developers would see applying to them?
17:27:11 [Azlan]
q+ to say where do you draw the line? Just employ more staff no matter how big your archive is?
17:27:52 [PeterKorn]
scribe: PeterKorn
17:28:08 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: maybe not focusing on rates, but on volumes. E.g. "Large volumes of content"
17:28:08 [maryjom]
+1 to volume
17:28:18 [janina]
ack a
17:28:18 [Zakim]
Azlan, you wanted to say where do you draw the line? Just employ more staff no matter how big your archive is?
17:28:44 [PeterKorn]
Azlan: As Peter said, just because you haven't bothered to hire enough staff to do the work... where do you draw the line?
17:28:48 [PeterKorn]
17:28:51 [PeterKorn]
17:29:05 [janina]
ack pe
17:32:19 [PeterKorn]
scribe: PeterKorn
17:32:53 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: happy to add examples to the content. Judy's primary concern (for now) is peoples skimming headers, coming to conclusions just from those.
17:33:08 [PeterKorn]
... add examples now, or continue to refine titles?
17:33:11 [PeterKorn]
+1 for titles
17:33:21 [PeterKorn]
Janina: biggest hit is top level labels
17:34:00 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: add "large volumes of" in front of "content" in situations 1 & 3.
17:34:18 [Azlan]
17:34:18 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: does that work?
17:34:20 [PeterKorn]
17:34:23 [ToddL]
17:34:31 [KimD]
17:35:35 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: other situation from Judy was with situation 2. "When content is seldom used, if ever"
17:36:40 [PeterKorn]
...initial discussions were about parts of a page/views that was less relevant/less essential
17:37:04 [PeterKorn]
...only thing left in situation 2 is archived content
17:37:08 [PeterKorn]
17:37:20 [janina]
ack pe
17:42:46 [maryjom]
One example might be archives of government content - eg old census info, old birth certificates, deeds, legal documents and so on that may have been scanned but not OCR or described.
17:43:21 [PeterKorn]
maryjom: reiterates her typed comment.
17:43:48 [PeterKorn]
...old data like family history going back generations. Seldom used, but you would want to use on demand.
17:44:09 [PeterKorn]
...court documents, deeds. Lots of older/historical data. Not all digitized. And they are digitizing it over time.
17:44:24 [janina]
17:44:31 [PeterKorn]
... there is some other method/mechanism to get access.
17:44:32 [PeterKorn]
17:46:19 [PeterKorn]
Janina: likes not having "archived" in the situation title.
17:46:58 [PeterKorn] ancestry example, as it covers the situation better than legal deeds (not just gov't)
17:47:20 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: is any of the data current, or is it all old? Is there a temporal component to this?
17:49:56 [PeterKorn]
Shadi: 3 approaches
17:50:36 [PeterKorn]
... 1: Shadi tries to come up with something for situation 2 title; 2: remove the situation from the document and return to it later;
17:50:47 [PeterKorn]
... 3: continue discussing it, maybe beyond end of hour
17:51:18 [PeterKorn]
Peter: "rarely if ever" or "almost never"?
17:53:04 [PeterKorn]
shadi: before returning microphone to Janina - any thoughts from Tod/Azlan/Wilco?
17:53:30 [PeterKorn]
Azlan: listening to discussion (not minuted) of prioritization, the example makes a lot of sense to him.
17:53:56 [PeterKorn]
...makes more sense than archives of new content. Can hear Gregg "if we are making content available to some people, why not all?"
17:54:25 [PeterKorn]
...prioritzation is a situation I can completely understand. Even as new content comes in - may supersede something that may not have been made a11y.
17:54:54 [PeterKorn]
KimD: really like what Peter said earlier - "you don't know what you need until you need it"
17:55:28 [PeterKorn]
... we don't make PDFs of every single thing that is available in print. But if a student needs it, we make the print material available in a11y digital format.
17:55:41 [PeterKorn]
... you don't know in advance what you will need in the alternate format.
17:55:45 [ToddL]
I've got to run to another meeting. Thank you everyone.
17:56:29 [PeterKorn]
Janina: we have 1/2 of Friday call (2nd on agenda).
17:56:49 [PeterKorn]
...expect that Shawn will turn mic over to Janina, who will pass to Shadi.
17:57:27 [PeterKorn]
...while we were tasked with 3rd party, we actually found 11 situations that needed to be addressed. We felt an overall map was important.
17:57:53 [PeterKorn]
...then we might do a deeper dive w/Silver on 1 or 2 of them, and invite Silver to do a close read on their own after.
17:58:12 [PeterKorn]
...also ask folks to consider "neutral language" in this text.
17:58:29 [PeterKorn]
...remaining question: what to walk out of meeting with?
18:01:41 [janina]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:01:41 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate janina
18:05:37 [KimD]
KimD has left #silver-conf