Meeting minutes
Breakout groups (45 minutes)
setting up for breakout rooms
JF asks for clarification
Janita idea is for each group to bring something to larger group
<bruce_bailey> Jaunita: need to bring something to larger AG WG group, maybe definitions of protocols
<bruce_bailey> JF: i am still not clear on task
<bruce_bailey> JF: are we breaking into two task
<bruce_bailey> Jennifer: clarifies that it is minimal, finding some cadence
<bruce_bailey> Jennifer: hopefully bring something back to larger group
<bruce_bailey> Jake: Is there such difference between each group, that we are breakup
<bruce_bailey> Jake: ... why are we splitting up?
<Rachael> Bruce: Suggested working in the same group but just focus on each proposal for 30 minutes
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to -1 brain-switching
<bruce_bailey> MichaelC: We spent many meeting trying to get to group concensus,
<bruce_bailey> ... meeting jointly has not been productive. So to move forward, leadership teams wants to try separate groups
<bruce_bailey> Jaunitia: do we need to vote
<bruce_bailey> JF: We are struggling to make documents
<Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to respond to documentation
<bruce_bailey> JF: If we split group in two, maybe the lesson is that we should not being trying to work simultaneously
<bruce_bailey> Rachael: there is not expectation in smaller groups is to scribe, just make progress as notes
<bruce_bailey> Jennifer: We have members of the other group, we do not need to scribe breakout groups, just document some progress and thoughts
<Jaunita_George> +1 to JenniferS
<Rachael> +1
<JenniferS> +1
<bruce_bailey> ... we have had some trouble progressing, so let us try that.
<bruce_bailey> Rachael: we have two breakout rooms ready to go
<bruce_bailey> Jaunita: on group is "points for protocols" with a poor definition, but the group will be working on that
<Rachael> The documentation for the Evaluating procedures is linked here https://
<bruce_bailey> ... other group is refining protocols as ways to evaluate how testing is done
<JenniferS> * Lonely… I'm so lonely, in Points for Protocols…
<bruce_bailey> Jaunita, we will return to irc at end.
breakout rooms close
Jaunita: welcome back, have reporting back
… points for protocol first
Jennifer: JF provided some examples / proposals first
… users will earn point in order to provide way to meet wcag3
<JF> - just points
Jennifer: users (of protocols) can add additional evidence
… dutch has a good example
JF: not "bonus" points -- they are POINTS
JF: idea is that protocols contribute towards total score
… currently if you don't meet testable statements, loose points
<jeanne> Points for Protocols <- https://
JF: main ideas is make up some points by have strong self-imposed guidance -- organization protocol/per vetted Protocols (vetted by AGWG)/organization protocol
<Jaunita_George> Protocols provide evaluatable procedures to meet guidance in WCAG 3 where the outcomes are not measured. We can measure qualitative tests without using protocols and those are defined as methods in WCAG 3. Where protocols are useful are in measuring and evaluating processes and outcomes that are difficult or unable to be measured with methods. Protocols measure inputs such as documentation of steps, actions taken, date c[CUT]
Jaunita: protocols as proceedures reporting
<Jaunita_George> Protocols provide evaluatable procedures to meet guidance in WCAG 3 where the outcomes are not measured. We can measure qualitative tests without using protocols and those are defined as methods in WCAG 3. Where protocols are useful are in measuring and evaluating processes and outcomes that are difficult or unable to be measured with methods.
Jaunita pastes from top of working document
<Jaunita_George> Protocols measure inputs such as documentation of steps, actions taken, date completed, conformance claims, etc. but not necessarily outcomes. Where the outcome is less directly measured, the protocol must define a way to evaluate the quality of its implementation, which is expected to correlate to conformance with an accessibility outcome.
[Jaunita reads]
<JenniferS> The Points for Protocols document contains content now: https://
<Jaunita_George> https://
JF: i understand proposal, but do not understand how might be integrated. Do we have example.
<jeanne> rrsgent, make minutes
Jaunita: see model links at end of doc from DOL