Silver Task Force & Community Group

25 February 2022


Azlan, Chuck_, Daniel, janina, JenniferS, KimD, kirkwood, Lauriat, Makoto, MichaelC, PeterKorn, Rachael, sarahhorton, shadi, SuzanneTaylor

Meeting minutes

<Chuck_> some participants are still in protocols, will be over shortly.

<Lauriat> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Scribe_List

Example Conformance Scenarios

<Lauriat> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Substantial_Conformance/Example_Scenarios

janina: Would like to share the reorganisation of situations with this group. Have 11 situations with use case examples. Each situation has 3 buckets of how standards can help address the situation, how guidance can help, how regulatory environment might address the situation
… goal is to be neutral and avoid trigger words so there are a couple marked not yet ready for review.

Shadi: Caveat - this is a work in progress. We each have different understandings of terms. This document brings these in scenarios to communicate better what we are talking about.
… 11 situations (not exhaustive) with examples from various sectors to show breadth of applicability. What does technology, supporting guidance and what is the role of policies for each.

<Lauriat> Direct link to situation 1

(Shadi provides overview of the content of the document)

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 2

Situation 2 is about archived content and prioritising

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 3

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 4

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 5

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 6

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 7

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 8

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 9

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 10

<Lauriat> Direct link to Situation 11

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to note the gradient of technical to policy areas that these situations represent, partially/largely to check my understanding

Last few situations seem heavily in the scope of policy. Technical guidance would remain the same. Policy would determine the bar to be met. Is that correct?

Shadi: Yes. In most situations would need to be a combination what belongs in the standard and what belongs in the policy guidance.

<janina> https://www.forbes.com/sites/rhettbuttle/2021/10/13/vaccine-requirements-5-things-small-business-owners-should-consider/

janina: Re situation 11 - 78% of businesses in the US have fewer than 10 employees so we need to provide appropriate guidance to where the responsibility should be.
… might need time to remediate or what if the service provider doesn't provide the mechanism in the tooling

Makoto: Is it possible to use specific names of products and services where possible rather than product/service provider to help picture the situation when discussing the document?

Shadi: Yes if framed carefully - will take back to the subgroup

PeterKorn: Re Makoto's suggestion suggest avoiding specific names but provide the service type so we are not calling out a specific business.
… Really like notion of "gradient"

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to ask about policy guidance vs./and supporting policy

<sarahhorton> +1 to Shawn

Lauriat: having our work provide guidance to policy makers - think its less of us providing guidance to the policy makers but how we support them to make the decisions of when something might be required. Wanted to check that understanding.

janina: Strongly agrees.

sarahhorton: Also agree. Would be interesting to have a section on how technical standards can support policy.
… if talking about type and volume of content if policy defines limits can tenical provide data about type and volume.

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to build on Sarah's point with an example

Lauriat: Example scale of quality for captions and how to assess quality and the minimum bar and have this support the policy makers

<sarahhorton> +1

janina: would need to be some time consideration in an example with captioning of live events

sarahhorton: Is the thinking WCAG would define the acceptable time limits?

janina: No that would fall into policy
… can't call it "live" forever. At some point it becomes "pre-recorded"

sarahhorton: to take this work forward it might be helpful to be more clear where we are talking about supporting policies without defining "Acceptable time"

Lauriat: +1 to sarahhorton - not just the timeframe for when its ok
… What are the next step?

Shadi: Will take back suggestions to the sub group. Would appreciate further comments on the document for the document to be improved

janina: Agrees then we at some point need to take this to the Tuesday call

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