Meeting minutes
<jeanne> Scribe List
Requirements Issues Editorial PR 619
<jeanne> https://
jeanne: Getting to end of requirements, wrap up today hopefully
… editorial issues all in 1 PR
… need to look at some, others are typos
… look at rewording issues
<shadi> https://
jeanne: [working through GitHub issues]
<jeanne> https://
jeanne: rewording under measurable guidance [reads old, new, changes]
… introduction to measurable guidance
… trying to include more user needs
<jeanne> Certain accessibility guidance is quite clear and measurable. Others, far less so. Some needs of people with disabilities, especially cognitive and low vision disabilities, are not well served by guidance that can only be measured by a true/false statement. If we allow Multiple means of measurement, in addition to true/false statements, then we may include new accessibility guidance that
<jeanne> benefits groups that may have been underserved in the past.
jeanne: any suggestions?
… used to talk about SCs as pass/fail, changed to true/false, still want pass/fail but not only true/false statements
shadi: Likes direction, suggestion to remove first 2 sentences, change especially to such as, change underserved to less served
… rationale from last time?
<shadi> Some needs of people with disabilities, such as cognitive and low vision disabilities, are not well served by guidance that can only be measured by a true/false statement. If we allow multiple means of measurement, in addition to true/false statements, then we may include new accessibility guidance that benefits groups that may have been underserved in the past.
<Zakim> maryjom, you wanted to say...Perhaps the last phrase could be "that addresses additional user needs previously not covered in WCAG".
maryjom: Need to say underserved? Not that, but want to cover additional user needs
<shadi> +1 to MaryJo
<janina> +1 to Mary Jo
<shadi> Some needs of people with disabilities, such as cognitive and low vision disabilities, are not well served by guidance that can only be measured by a true/false statement. If we allow multiple means of measurement, in addition to true/false statements, then we may include new accessibility guidance that benefits more people.
jeanne: Send editorial comments to email, review, note objections
… significant rewrites on this one, appreciate suggestions
Rachael: Sending email about new email list to talk through WCAG 3 issues, all issues, including editorial, pass resolutions from subgroup to list, approve through email where possible
Requirements issue 427\
<jeanne> https://
jeanne: Org sent spreadsheet of comments, want to add instruction videos and how-tos
… concerns, want to use where available, not sure we can commit to it everywhere
… thoughts?
Chuck: No chair, wonderful, goes where we don't have expertise, not ready to commit to it at this time
shadi: Agree, also intrigued, hard work and can't be added easily
… powerful way for people to learn, consider in design knowing might be in future
<janina> +1 to Shadi.
<Chuck> +1
shadi: think of it when designing UI
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to answer shadi
jeanne: Design for how-to includes links to existing EO or other vetted video/illustration
… worry about committing, include in response, want to include videos where possible but can't commit for all guidelines
maryjom: Not sure focus is they want us to provide videos/illustrated how-tos, make what we provide understandable to non-technical people
… people trying to consume, finding it difficult
… Silver focus include making it more understandable
… applies to anything we provide
… goal to be consumable by non-experts
jeanne: Commented include language from requirements, added the instructional videos/how-tos
Makoto: Tough to create videos, having graphic example helpful for non-English speakers, tough for Japanese committee to understand and translate
… having only text barrier for wider range of audience to understand
<maryjom> +1 to Makoto China has also had difficulty understanding some criteria.
janina: Clearly state in text that's easier to make understandable, easier to meet internationalization requirement
… some might have videos, alternative media would need to be included
shadi: Currently not in scope, pursue in future, be clear in response
… different from providing links to other videos, with current design opportunity not to divide into org structure
… WAI producing video can integrate into same UI
<jeanne> The core guidelines are understandable by a non-technical audience. Text and presentation are usable and understandable through the use of plain language, structure, design and link to instruction videos and how-to where available. Creation of new videos amd illustrations are outside the scope of this project at this time.
shadi: note to be aware, might be possibility, don't add to scope
… many benefits, can't add to scope now
<jeanne> https://
jeanne: In design principles section, maybe? Will look at it
Chuck: Imagining understanding doc and video, great idea, worth exploring
… very supportive, might be side project, sounds awesome
<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to say having an understanding doc and understanding video would be AWESOME! Maybe explore for some.
<SuzanneTaylor> +1 to chuck's comments
<Chuck> +1
<Chuck> +1 for Jeanne's language
<jeanne> The core guidelines are understandable by a non-technical audience. Text and presentation are usable and understandable through the use of plain language, structure, design and link to instruction videos and how-to where available. Creation of new videos and illustrations are outside the scope of this project at this time.
<jeanne> The core guidelines are understandable by a non-technical audience. Text and presentation are usable and understandable through the use of plain language, structure, and design. They link to instruction videos and how-to where available. Creation of new videos and illustrations are outside the scope of this project at this time.
<shadi> +1
<Chuck> +1
<Makoto> +1 Wish more graphic examples (including illustrations) though
jeanne: Acceptable? Send wordsmith suggestions to Jeanne
<jeanne> The core guidelines are understandable by a non-technical audience. Text and presentation are usable and understandable through the use of plain language, structure, and design. They link to instruction videos, illustrations and how-to where available. Creation of new videos and illustrations are outside the scope of this project at this time.
<maryjom> +1
<Chuck> +1 no objections
<Makoto> +1
<jeanne> porposed RESOLUTION: Accept wording "The core guidelines are understandable by a non-technical audience. Text and presentation are usable and understandable through the use of plain language, structure, and design. They link to instruction videos, illustrations and how-to where available. Creation of new videos and illustrations are outside the scope of this project at this time."
RESOLUTION: Accept wording "The core guidelines are understandable by a non-technical audience. Text and presentation are usable and understandable through the use of plain language, structure, and design. They link to instruction videos, illustrations and how-to where available. Creation of new videos and illustrations are outside the scope of this project at this time."
<shadi> https://
shadi: What is process for recording as wishlist/future work? Previous attempt to map out potential videos for each SC
… stopped for reasons, potential for future
… hearing interest, off table now but what do we do to record for future?
jeanne: Page of future ideas
… on wiki homepage, ideas section
… add under potential guidelines
<jeanne> https://
janina: Talking about CBT, Computer Based Training, building accessible ones, associate with how-tos?
jeanne: Added, hopefully we will get to it, link to good work outside orgs do
… orgs affiliated that do training videos, link to their work (might be reasons)
janina: Companies could submit, might be value
Requirements issue 451
<jeanne> https://
jeanne: ITI comments on FPWD, emailed, answered questions in status document
<jeanne> Are there additional Design Principles and Requirements that should be included in the WCAG 3 project?
<jeanne> Yes - inclusion of a compliance level or mechanism that only depends upon automated/automatable tests rather than needing human judgement and review. Sites need to be able to approach some level of conformance without manual effort, or with minimal manual effort on a limited number of key outcomes. This would, of course, not be a desired end-point for any content, but this is sufficiently
<jeanne> important for many large and highly dynamic sites that it merits mention in the requirements document.
jeanne: Conformance options discussing, huge issue, should address with chairs, do we want to comment? Good phrasing of issue, merits discussion
… chairs pop in if want to postpone/address differently
Chuck: Have to have the conversation
<Chuck> ach Ch
jeanne: Conformance options discuss adding level below bronze, automatable tests
… wouldn't meet regulatory requirement but would be under that, provide way for large/dynamic to maintain check on pages/site knowing more testing required
… anything automateable and not fixed should not pass
… manual test would have more leeway if not critical error
… make it more acceptable, so much can't be tested by automated test, understands large orgs need it
janina: Part of problem, creating page user sees happens in many places, content injected at "edge" different from similar content at same source, localized, regionalized
<jeanne> +1 to janina - I often see content that is injected by location
janina: content delivery networks injecting content, wouldn't catch without automated test
… flag things, becomes important
Chuck: Thinking of meta, not solving it now, deciding what our answer would be for comment
… will make these considerations, set expectation that will be conversation when tackle conformance
<janina> +1 to Chuck.
shadi: Agree need to discuss, nervous about this
… breaking down requirements, adding more testability to smaller chunk requirements, what's testable, what's not
… suggestion to add compliance/conformance here, not looking at user perspective
… below what policies take up, how do we know what policy makers will do?
<jeanne> +1 to nervousness of reducing meeting user needs
shadi: nothing stops companies from setting up policies
… tough discussion, not fully in line, that's fine
jeanne: Was an interesting idea, remembered, not a proposal
maryjom: Claiming automated test, single page will have 100+ errors, trying to keep up to make sure 100% fixing everything thing, that may not have effect on user
<shadi> +1 to MaryJo
maryjom: will still be bugs with automated tests, will still have to decide what to do, remaining issues
Makoto: Understand intent of comment, not easy to do, accept auto-tested conformance means accept inaccessible digital content
… cause problems with insufficient or inappropriate alternative text or keyboard inaccessible or bad caption videos, challenging
… exploring how to make it happen, going to be tough
<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to ask the question if we are evaluating an answer of "yes but not for this specific example?"
Chuck: Still at meta-level, exploring, yes, we will consider, or yes, not this one or, no, not at all. Focused on answer
… don't want to try to solve here, focus on what answer should be
… might need to explore to figure out answer
… don't go too far down that path
<janina> Suggested: "We expect we will need to explore and account for automation in WCAG 3 conformance."
<jeanne> Comment: We have received similar requests for an automated test level. There are some complex issues associated with this, including the problems of reducing the accessibility at that level. We are going to address this issue when we have a more detailed conversation on Conformance.
<Chuck> including the challenges of reducing
<jeanne> Comment: We have received similar requests for an automated test level. There are some complex issues associated with this, including the problems of reducing the accessibility at that level. We intend to make WCAG3 testing more granular to support automated testing. We are going to address this issue when we have a more detailed conversation on Conformance.
<shadi> +1 to Jeanne
jeanne: Finish up next week!
<Chuck> We have received similar requests for an automated test level. There are some complex issues associated with this, including the challenges of reducing the accessibility at that level. We intend to make WCAG3 testing more granular to support automated testing. We are going to address this issue when we have a more detailed conversation on Conformance.