Silver Conformance Options Subgroup

31 Mar 2022


GreggVan, janina, jeanne, joeyang, maryjom, PeterKorn, shadi, SusiPallero, ToddL, Wilco
Azlan_Cuttilan, Darryl_Lehmann
maryjom, shadi

Meeting minutes

Agenda Review & Administrative Items

Janina: main agenda item is debrief
… and talking about what next
… no announcements today

User Scenarios Debrief https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Substantial_Conformance/Example_Scenarios

Peter: think meeting went very well
… wasn't surprised that exception discussion came up
… but felt there was warmth for the work

Joseph: [introduces himself]

Jeanne: thought it went very well
… most comments seemed engaging
… that was my hope

Janina: agree

<jeanne> +1 to Shadi's response

Janina: didn't hear any opposition to the buckets concept

Todd: thought conversation went very well
… good responses to questions

Wilco: agree with all
… not surprised that exceptions came up
… wonder if we need to address upfront

Peter: tried that in user generated
… but may be worthwhile to try again

Janina: agree it will continue to come up
… as long as WCAG 2.x is being worked on
… mindset different from 3.0 model
… maybe need to work on smaller set of situations
… and lay out the buckets more nuanced

Peter: so far we had mostly focused on standards level work
… maybe the next step would be to work on application and policy guidance
… as examples to help people understand the approach

Janina: we seem to be in agreement
… maybe not do that for all situations but just a subset

Jeanne: +1

<jeanne> +1 to going back with 2 well-worked out examples

Peter: I like that idea

<ToddL> +1 as well.

Gregg: maybe pick ones that are easier to understand
… some that are more policy related
… to help relieve some of the tension
… might get a better reaction
… avoid perception we're trying to get an exception

<PeterKorn> "Considerations for policy-makers looking to adopt WCAG [3]"

Wilco: is this to come with a document for policy makers?

Gregg: yes, more towards our third bucket
… maybe lead with the policy guidance
… and at the end add things that could be done in addition

<jeanne> +1 to coming back in detail with only 1 or 2 items

Janina: could pick just 2 or 3 and try to be more nuanced
… some things stand out to me from reading the document
… critical errors will be an important concept
… second, more sophisticated way of labeling things
… maybe some form of metadata markup
… could be a win, because can build smarter interfaces

shadi: Generally an explanation of what to expect that is easy to get to that provides access to get help when requirements aren't met.

Peter: which of the 11 situations do we think are most ripe?
… maybe ones that policy makers have already addressed
… like small businesses, which most policies already address
… another one, is transition periods when introducing new policies
… also possibly something around situation 7 and future technologies

Gregg: think that is spot-on
… these are mostly policy areas
… will have less controversy
… maybe we have too many bullets on policy
… could just say, this is a policy issue

<jeanne> For small business, we should provide suggested language for procurement contracts

Gregg: could work on the details later

Janina: on XR, maybe have some first pieces that could be done already

<GreggVan> sorry I have to go present to a class at CMU regrets

Janina: speaks to the fact that we can't be just categorical

<GreggVan> +1

Janina: would like to address authoring tool vendors a little
… because they have such a massive impact

Peter: suggest even cite policy examples we know of
… there might be some technical aspects in the small business area as well
… lowest hanging fruit that is easy to do
… maybe could be more nuanced
… think there might be some examples

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say that we should start with ones that are mostly policy but there are things we can suggest technically.

Jeanne: thinking of 2 and 3 or of 4 and 5
… think these are more balanced examples
… technical things we can do
… specific things we can put in each of the buckets
… if we do only policy ones, might a have a lot to catch up on

shadi: RE: Peter, agree with overall approach but nervous of citing specific policy as examples. Could start us down rabbit holes.
… Should stay somewhat agnostic from specific policy and what is good/bad. Could cause some pushback.
… Situation 1 with bugs could have some controversy, but is a central one that has more policy than technical concerns.

<SusiPallero> +1

shadi: Marking what works/doesn't work, stating a policy to how to report bugs, avoid having critical errors, etc.

Peter: maybe being too cautious
… could start with something more complex internally
… like 11, 1, or other
… see how this pans out, and re-assess later

Janina: last task from AGWG Chairs before this task were
… sampling and reporting
… and third-party
… so could consider that as well

Peter: third party could be another option

Peter: could also think about the role of accompanying guidance
… things to look for when evaluating a CMS
… not for us to develop that guidance but to outline that

Janina: EOWG has also been doing a lot of excellent work

<Wilco> +1 I think there's a lot to be said for continuing on the third-party direction

Janina: doesn't all have to come from AGWG
… could maybe be interested in providing some of this guidance
… and work with the maturity model guidance

Todd: think working on subset of buckets is a good idea

<PeterKorn> I also need to drop a touch early. Thank you!

Todd: like the discussion we are having today

Janina: let's think about this more
… and regroup next week to take this further

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


Succeeded: s/Generally/shadi: Generally/

Succeeded: s/some/somewhat/

Succeeded: s/buts/bugs/

Maybe present: Gregg, Joseph, Peter, Todd