15:07:56 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag3-protocols
15:07:56 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/05/06-wcag3-protocols-irc
15:08:03 <Rachael> zakim, start meeting
15:08:03 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:08:04 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Rachael
15:09:52 <Rachael> rrsagent, make logs world
15:46:46 <JF> JF has joined #wcag3-protocols
15:46:54 <JF> agenda?
16:00:27 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #wcag3-protocols
16:00:43 <Rachael> agenda+ breakout groups
16:01:15 <bruce_bailey> scribe:bruce_bailey
16:01:17 <bruce_bailey> present+
16:01:56 <bruce_bailey> Rachal:  As before, we plan for breakout
16:02:02 <bruce_bailey> ... but attendance is light
16:02:08 <Rachael> present+
16:02:17 <bruce_bailey> JF:  We seem to be talking at cross purposes...
16:02:30 <bruce_bailey> ...very different meanings for "protocols"
16:02:56 <bruce_bailey> ... evaluation protocols versus production protocols or production protocols
16:03:22 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  We do have different visions, so we want to come back to that
16:03:51 <bruce_bailey> JF:  both teams trying to solve different problems -- but using "protocols" to mean those two different things
16:04:21 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  we will document those difference and come back to the larger groups...
16:04:53 <bruce_bailey> ... previously we had different ideas, but did not split, so it was hard to resolve conflict of meaning
16:05:06 <bruce_bailey> JF:  prefer to figure out sooner than latter
16:05:33 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  first group could switch to "procedures" nomenclature
16:06:01 <SuzanneTaylor> SuzanneTaylor has joined #wcag3-protocols
16:06:20 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  We have broken up into two group to document what we mean by protocols.
16:06:33 <Rachael> Goal: What is a protocol (define it), Example or two, What would be documented or captured to prove a protocol, suggested alternate for "protocol"
16:07:02 <bruce_bailey> q+
16:07:28 <Rachael> Two approaches: Points for protocols and Procedures
16:07:35 <bruce_bailey> bruce asks if we have quorum
16:07:45 <Rachael> 1) Points for protocols vs 2) Procedures
16:07:58 <bruce_bailey> q+
16:07:59 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
16:08:00 <SuzanneTaylor> 1
16:08:01 <mbgower> present+
16:08:03 <Rachael> ack bruce_bailey
16:08:06 <SuzanneTaylor> present+
16:08:52 <bruce_bailey> bruce feels that points for protocols was making pretty good progress as compared to proceedures sub group
16:09:28 <bruce_bailey> JF:  Points for protocols is giving points / scoring for promise
16:09:31 <mbgower> q+
16:09:37 <Rachael> ack mbgower
16:09:46 <MichaelC> present+
16:09:52 <bruce_bailey> Racheal:  So might points for protocols only be that promisary statement?
16:10:24 <bruce_bailey> Mike Gower:  Is that it?  Don't you have to have some evaluation against meeting that promise?
16:10:42 <bruce_bailey> JF:  Well, are we going to split up, or all talk about procedures?
16:11:08 <mbgower> q+
16:11:22 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  If points-for-protocols groups feels like they have answered my questions, lets take a look.
16:11:32 <bruce_bailey> JF:  Yes we have working definition with examples.
16:11:46 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wcag3-protocols
16:12:01 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  I heard statement that you have documented comittment, can that be done?
16:12:14 <Rachael> q?
16:12:16 <jeanne> Points for Protocols -> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UgoMz3OPyoEVLbU4uCU5F5K6aEM7E1rii6oCaWqQy50/edit
16:12:20 <bruce_bailey> JF:  I cannot, but group might be able to get at a consensus
16:12:47 <bruce_bailey> ... Plain Language is an example, cite legal obligation and commitment...
16:13:27 <bruce_bailey> ... Plain Language is contextual, so what is plain language for scientist is different than students
16:13:47 <bruce_bailey> ... plain language gives 8 factors for evaluation
16:13:52 <Rachael> ack mbgower
16:14:09 <jeanne> q+ to review the Points for Protocols document
16:14:35 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  I feel like current doc is not providing all we looking for with a sub group concensus statement
16:15:09 <bruce_bailey> Mike Gower:  You said you didn't have the right questions?  What are the right questions?
16:15:18 <jeanne> q+ Sheri
16:15:40 <bruce_bailey> JF:  The idea of this sort of protocol is getting the expectation in front of the content creators.
16:15:43 <bruce_bailey> q+
16:16:04 <JF> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UgoMz3OPyoEVLbU4uCU5F5K6aEM7E1rii6oCaWqQy50/edit
16:16:09 <bruce_bailey> Racheal leaning toward split up.
16:16:10 <mbgower> JF, I heard: how can mechanisms be used to prove success? How do you see a statement being used in this?
16:16:37 <Rachael> ack jeanne
16:16:37 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to review the Points for Protocols document
16:16:42 <bruce_bailey> Jeanne I was looking at point-for-protocols group, and I don't feel like what JF has been saying is really in this group.
16:16:48 <mbgower> s/How do you/How do we
16:16:49 <Rachael> ack Sheri
16:17:25 <bruce_bailey> Sheri:  I heard JF talk about proof points and I would like points for protocols to have some alignment with that
16:17:54 <bruce_bailey> Sheri:  Is moving working in progress, hope to have github version very soon
16:18:05 <Rachael> ack bruce_bailey
16:18:13 <Rachael> present+ Sheri
16:18:51 <mbgower> q+
16:18:58 <bruce_bailey> Sheri talked about Maturity Model and capturing that and reflected in working doc
16:19:13 <Rachael> Maturity model link (access coming soon) 1Y5EO6zkOMrbyePw5-Crq8ojmhn9OCTRQ6TlgB0cE6YE/edit?pli=1#
16:19:20 <Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y5EO6zkOMrbyePw5-Crq8ojmhn9OCTRQ6TlgB0cE6YE/edit?pli=1#
16:19:22 <bruce_bailey> MG:  Please add the question you think you should be asked to your doc.
16:19:41 <bruce_bailey> MG:  Dont necessarily even need to answer.
16:19:52 <bruce_bailey> Group Splits Up
16:20:07 <bruce_bailey> exit to breakout rooms
16:53:48 <bruce_bailey> Joining back up.
16:53:50 <bruce_bailey> q+
16:54:19 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  we will just report back in
16:54:25 <Rachael> ack mbgower
16:54:38 <Rachael> ack bruce_bailey
16:55:13 <SuzanneTaylor> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W_5H0MCoKzGaD9XCxgzdqZ-1TiVCXHVipE_vNnG2DOQ/edit#
16:55:16 <Rachael> Bruce: We made some progress.
16:55:25 <bruce_bailey> Bruce:  We makde some progress with four item list towards bottom
16:55:41 <SuzanneTaylor> this is probably a better link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W_5H0MCoKzGaD9XCxgzdqZ-1TiVCXHVipE_vNnG2DOQ/edit?usp=sharing
16:55:44 <Rachael> ...4 item list at the bottom of the document.
16:55:45 <bruce_bailey> ... new notes at the bottom
16:56:29 <bruce_bailey> sub group feels more aligne with points for protocol than we did at top of call
16:56:45 <bruce_bailey> Rachael reporting back from points:
16:56:48 <Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UgoMz3OPyoEVLbU4uCU5F5K6aEM7E1rii6oCaWqQy50/edit#heading=h.j4ltx2ts9h2x
16:56:57 <bruce_bailey> documented a couple examples, worked on definition
16:57:42 <bruce_bailey> Rachael reads from google doc
16:58:02 <jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UgoMz3OPyoEVLbU4uCU5F5K6aEM7E1rii6oCaWqQy50/
16:58:12 <bruce_bailey> JF:  we provided some example, question as to where does protocol come from ?
16:58:19 <Rachael> q?
16:58:39 <bruce_bailey> ... we think WG should validate protocols as being sufficient or not
16:59:09 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  I agree that points-to-protocol seems close to complete enough
16:59:23 <bruce_bailey> ... not sure we need to meet next week
16:59:48 <bruce_bailey> MC:  agree that we need a little more time and are making good progresss
17:00:09 <bruce_bailey> Rachael:  I will propose something to list for next meeting
17:00:34 <Rachael> zakim, generate minutes
17:00:34 <Zakim> I don't understand 'generate minutes', Rachael
17:00:41 <Rachael> zakim, make minutes
17:00:41 <Zakim> I don't understand 'make minutes', Rachael
17:00:46 <Rachael> rrsagent, make minutes
17:00:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/05/06-wcag3-protocols-minutes.html Rachael
17:00:57 <Rachael> rrsagent, make logs world
17:01:20 <Rachael> zakim, end meeting
17:01:20 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been bruce_bailey, Rachael, mbgower, SuzanneTaylor, MichaelC, Sheri
17:01:22 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:01:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/05/06-wcag3-protocols-minutes.html Zakim
17:01:25 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Rachael; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:01:29 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag3-protocols
17:18:49 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
17:49:40 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
18:21:22 <SuzanneTaylor> SuzanneTaylor has joined #wcag3-protocols
18:42:19 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
18:59:17 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
19:31:05 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
19:50:11 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
21:03:43 <SuzanneTaylor> SuzanneTaylor has joined #wcag3-protocols
22:12:25 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
22:24:17 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
22:46:30 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
23:17:21 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols
23:33:17 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag3-protocols