IRC log of ag on 2022-07-12

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:42:22 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ag
14:42:22 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:42:25 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:42:26 [Zakim]
Meeting: AGWG Teleconference
14:42:29 [alastairc]
present: alastairc
14:42:33 [alastairc]
chair: alastairc
14:43:24 [alastairc]
regrets: Shawn:, JakeA, Gundula, Rain
14:44:24 [alastairc]
14:44:30 [alastairc]
agenda+ WCAG 3 Protocols Survey
14:44:42 [alastairc]
agenda+ WCAG 3 Subgroup participation and handbook
14:44:52 [alastairc]
agenda+ Moving the charter forward
14:45:49 [Chuck]
Chuck has joined #ag
14:45:59 [Chuck]
14:55:42 [laura]
laura has joined #ag
14:58:17 [laura]
Scribe: Laura
14:58:22 [JF]
JF has joined #ag
14:58:37 [laura]
present+ Laura_Carlson
14:58:46 [JF]
14:59:02 [Rachael]
14:59:28 [Chuck]
15:00:47 [Francis_Storr]
Francis_Storr has joined #ag
15:00:52 [Francis_Storr]
15:01:03 [GreggVan]
GreggVan has joined #ag
15:01:15 [Azlan]
Azlan has joined #ag
15:01:26 [Azlan]
15:01:34 [alastairc]
scribe: laura
15:02:04 [ShawnT]
ShawnT has joined #ag
15:02:14 [ShawnT]
15:02:16 [AWK]
AWK has joined #ag
15:02:17 [Jaunita_George_]
Jaunita_George_ has joined #ag
15:02:21 [laura]
ac: Any new members?
15:02:23 [AWK]
15:02:30 [sarahhorton]
sarahhorton has joined #ag
15:02:35 [Makoto]
Makoto has joined #ag
15:02:35 [janina]
janina has joined #ag
15:02:39 [sarahhorton]
15:02:39 [janina]
15:02:40 [laura]
15:02:48 [Wilco]
Wilco has joined #ag
15:02:52 [Makoto]
15:02:56 [Wilco]
15:02:57 [laura]
ac: Any new topics for afuture meeting?
15:03:10 [laura]
15:03:13 [maryjom]
maryjom has joined #ag
15:03:25 [alastairc]
zakim, take up next item
15:03:25 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- WCAG 3 Protocols Survey -- taken up [from alastairc]
15:03:36 [ToddL]
ToddL has joined #ag
15:03:39 [alastairc]
15:03:41 [laura]
ac: WCAG 3 Protocols Survey
15:04:39 [laura]
... 3 parts.1. Editor's Note. 2. proproasls 3. informative questions
15:04:48 [alastairc]
TOPIC: Editor's Note for protocols
15:05:06 [laura]
... have a draft one.
15:05:16 [laura]
... and various comments.
15:05:28 [GreggVan]
15:05:39 [Chuck]
ack Gregg
15:05:48 [ToddL]
15:06:06 [laura]
gregg: should we talke about one or 2?
15:06:10 [Wilco]
+1 to Gregg's point
15:06:21 [GreggVan]
15:06:28 [laura]
ac: should apply to both. but would derer to chuck or others.
15:06:40 [JF]
Q+ to note that outside of the name choice, the 2 proposals differ widely
15:06:54 [laura]
chuck: not seeing a dependency.
15:06:55 [Chuck]
ack JF
15:06:55 [Zakim]
JF, you wanted to note that outside of the name choice, the 2 proposals differ widely
15:06:55 [alastairc]
ack jf
15:07:37 [laura]
jf: 2 are very different. could be both. may not be a either or.
15:07:55 [GreggVan]
15:08:09 [alastairc]
ack GreggVan
15:08:11 [Chuck]
ack Gregg
15:08:28 [laura]
gregg: would help in understanding.
15:08:30 [Chuck]
15:08:48 [bruce_bailey]
bruce_bailey has joined #ag
15:08:50 [alastairc]
ack Chuck
15:09:02 [alastairc]
TOPIC: Preferred starting point
15:09:10 [laura]
chuck: harmless. less do 2.
15:09:34 [laura]
ac: question is what do we include in next editors draft.
15:10:06 [laura]
... could have both in.
15:10:36 [laura]
... looks like some combination of both.
15:11:04 [alastairc]
15:11:18 [laura]
... Is it possible to add a combination of both. or should they be separate?
15:11:39 [Chuck]
Protocols and Assertions Proposal:
15:11:47 [laura]
ac: (reads comments)
15:11:52 [Chuck]
Evaluating Procedures Proposal:
15:11:56 [Rachael]
Protocols presentation:
15:12:02 [Chuck]
Comparison Table:
15:12:07 [Wilco]
15:12:08 [MichaelC]
15:12:12 [Chuck]
Link to the presentation:
15:12:12 [Jaunita_George_]
15:12:18 [alastairc]
ack Wilco
15:12:46 [JF]
Q+ to respond to Wilco
15:12:52 [GreggVan]
15:12:55 [laura]
wilco: we haven't seen enough to have an informed desision. Would perfer sending it bac to the sub group.
15:13:05 [Wilco]
15:13:12 [Chuck]
q+ to respond to Wilco's suggestion of the sub group crafting single proposal for AGWG review
15:13:16 [Jennie_]
Jennie_ has joined #ag
15:13:24 [alastairc]
ack MichaelC
15:13:26 [Wilco]
15:13:27 [laura]
... need text to the working draft.
15:13:37 [Jennie_]
15:13:44 [Regina]
Regina has joined #ag
15:13:46 [Rachael]
q++ to state the purpose of this particular conversation is to get group input before creating the draft
15:13:49 [laura]
MC: should be possible to combine them
15:13:54 [Rachael]
15:13:54 [alastairc]
15:14:07 [alastairc]
ack Jaunita_George_
15:15:25 [laura]
jg: both have good qualities. Good to incenivise procedures and poicies.
15:15:39 [alastairc]
ack jf
15:15:39 [Zakim]
JF, you wanted to respond to Wilco
15:16:43 [MichaelC]
q+ to disagree with JF characterization of evaluating procedures
15:16:45 [alastairc]
ack GreggVan
15:17:06 [laura]
jf: sub group has discussed in depth. One is post production one is pre-production.
15:17:36 [Chuck]
ack Chuck
15:17:36 [Zakim]
Chuck, you wanted to respond to Wilco's suggestion of the sub group crafting single proposal for AGWG review
15:17:47 [Chuck]
q+ to respond to Wilco, and moving to end of queue
15:18:11 [laura]
gregg: both have great potential. should have a 3rd column explaing the differences.
15:18:35 [laura]
... standards can only refer to ther standards.
15:18:53 [laura]
... dangerous if it is not defined.
15:19:01 [JF]
+1 to Gregg re: Standards
15:19:01 [Jaunita_George_]
15:19:21 [alastairc]
ack MichaelC
15:19:21 [Zakim]
MichaelC, you wanted to disagree with JF characterization of evaluating procedures
15:19:24 [laura]
... are they serving differnet purposes? Or the same purpose?
15:19:43 [JF]
Q+ to ask if looking at differences rather than similarities might be useful
15:19:45 [laura]
mc: room for subjectivity.
15:19:58 [Jen_G]
Jen_G has joined #ag
15:20:05 [Jen_G]
15:20:21 [alastairc]
ack Chuck
15:20:21 [Zakim]
Chuck, you wanted to respond to Wilco, and moving to end of queue
15:20:23 [laura]
... details can move around but are gernarlly the same.
15:20:52 [laura]
chuck: philosophical differences between the 2.
15:21:02 [alastairc]
ack Jaunita_George_
15:21:07 [laura]
... would be a challenging ask.
15:21:39 [laura]
jg: would be difficult to be dificult to get consensus on.
15:22:19 [laura]
... measurements are diffferent.
15:22:58 [Jaunita_George_]
15:23:09 [alastairc]
ack JF
15:23:09 [Zakim]
JF, you wanted to ask if looking at differences rather than similarities might be useful
15:23:34 [laura]
JF: one does not have measurements.
15:24:02 [GreggVan]
15:24:07 [laura]
... subjective. can't measure "delesious."
15:24:07 [MichaelC]
q+ to clarify similarity
15:24:20 [alastairc]
ack Jaunita_George_
15:24:21 [laura]
... one is about measurement the other is not.
15:25:07 [laura]
jg: feeling that a statement in conformence will not be enough.
15:25:35 [alastairc]
ack GreggVan
15:25:41 [laura]
... can drive a truck though conformance statements and VPATs
15:25:57 [MichaelC]
q+ to say next steps, examples
15:26:01 [JF]
15:26:17 [laura]
gregg: are there examples? Need a minimum of 3 examples.
15:26:49 [laura]
s/3 examples/4 examples/
15:27:26 [MichaelC]
ack me
15:27:26 [Zakim]
MichaelC, you wanted to clarify similarity and to say next steps, examples
15:27:29 [alastairc]
ack MichaelC
15:27:43 [Jaunita_George_]
+1 MichaelC
15:27:45 [laura]
mc: I have examples. That is a next step.
15:28:01 [laura]
... I can take an action and work on it.
15:28:16 [Rachael]
15:28:25 [laura]
... I don't see the proposals as different.
15:28:52 [alastairc]
ack JF
15:28:55 [laura]
... will be harder for public to review 2 propsals.
15:29:21 [Chuck]
q+ to observe that the conversation highlights the philosophical differences, and propose a way forward
15:29:40 [laura]
jf: in epub they have a manefest.
15:30:09 [alastairc]
proposed RESOLUTION: The sub-group will draft initial draft text for the editor's draft for each proposal, and work on examples.
15:31:07 [Wilco]
@alastairc, can we clarify timeline on that?
15:31:22 [laura]
... (gives exampes of protocals)
15:31:45 [alastairc]
15:31:48 [alastairc]
ack Rachael
15:31:55 [Jaunita_George_]
15:32:45 [laura]
rm: put them in separately.
15:33:15 [Jaunita_George_]
15:33:19 [laura]
... in different areas of the draft.
15:33:25 [Chuck]
15:33:45 [GreggVan]
15:33:52 [alastairc]
ack Chuck
15:33:52 [Zakim]
Chuck, you wanted to observe that the conversation highlights the philosophical differences, and propose a way forward
15:34:05 [laura]
ac: anyone work on draft veribage?
15:34:13 [laura]
jf: sign me up.
15:34:25 [JF]
15:34:38 [alastairc]
ack jua
15:34:41 [alastairc]
ack Jaunita_George_
15:34:42 [laura]
chuck: sent back to the group with examples.
15:34:42 [Chuck]
ack jau
15:35:04 [laura]
jg: each team could meet separately.
15:35:20 [Wilco]
15:35:24 [alastairc]
ack GreggVan
15:35:25 [laura]
ac: makes sense.
15:35:31 [JF]
ack me
15:35:41 [michael]
michael has joined #ag
15:35:51 [laura]
gregg: need at least 4 examples.
15:36:15 [michael]
Present+ mbgower
15:37:02 [laura]
... for mc, if 2 can be brought together then have 4 example.
15:37:05 [alastairc]
ack Wilco
15:37:47 [laura]
wilco: will we need to delay new subgroups?
15:38:01 [alastairc]
15:38:06 [laura]
mc: won't stop me.
15:39:29 [laura]
mc: can have examples in a couple weeks.
15:39:51 [laura]
jf: can take another run at it.
15:40:10 [laura]
ac: need text for the draft.
15:41:08 [laura]
jf: conformace is a intragal to the proposal.
15:41:34 [laura]
... educational compontent is key.
15:42:06 [alastairc]
proposed RESOLUTION: The sub-group will draft initial draft for the editor's draft for each proposal (separately).
15:42:08 [laura]
ac: would need to present it group in 3 weeks.
15:42:18 [alastairc]
proposed RESOLUTION: The sub-group will draft initial text for the editor's draft for each proposal (separately).
15:42:29 [Chuck]
15:42:47 [GreggVan]
15:42:53 [alastairc]
ack GreggVan
15:43:06 [JF]
* I can have stuff ready for 2 weeks
15:43:07 [Jaunita_George_]
15:43:11 [Rachael]
+1 to resolution
15:43:34 [Wilco]
0 on resolution
15:43:45 [laura]
gregg: need examples before coming back to this group.
15:44:10 [jeanne]
0 - not a high priority before TPAC
15:44:11 [Chuck]
q+ to suggest we postpone review of other survey questions
15:44:38 [alastairc]
RESOLUTION: The sub-group will draft initial text for the editor's draft for each proposal (separately).
15:44:49 [alastairc]
ack Chuck
15:44:49 [Zakim]
Chuck, you wanted to suggest we postpone review of other survey questions
15:45:06 [Jaunita_George_]
15:45:17 [laura]
chuck: lets' skip other survey questions.
15:45:46 [alastairc]
zakim, take up next item
15:45:46 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- WCAG 3 Subgroup participation and handbook -- taken up [from alastairc]
15:46:02 [alastairc]
15:46:55 [laura]
ac: most people availabile for sub groups.
15:47:02 [alastairc]
TOPIC: Subgroup Interest
15:47:14 [laura]
... good spread.
15:47:30 [laura]
... scoping was of least interest.
15:47:42 [GreggVan]
15:47:56 [alastairc]
ack GreggVan
15:48:06 [laura]
gregg: what is scoping?
15:48:29 [laura]
ac: wcag 2 scoing was the page.
15:48:38 [Rachael]
15:48:49 [AWK]
Will the survey be reopened?
15:48:49 [alastairc]
ack Rachael
15:48:50 [GreggVan]
15:49:29 [laura]
rm: this group will explore using SEO intents to define user processes/journeys.
15:49:56 [alastairc]
ack GreggVan
15:50:25 [laura]
gregg: scope og wcag was not a page. Coiuld be a whole web app.
15:50:39 [Chuck]
I have reopened the survey, presently through 7/19
15:51:17 [laura]
... not sure what SEO means. Need socping defined.
15:51:18 [Lauriat]
Lauriat has joined #ag
15:51:25 [bruce_bailey]
bruce_bailey has joined #ag
15:51:29 [Lauriat]
15:52:10 [Rachael]
We 4 initially proposed scopes to explore at
15:52:19 [laura]
ac: scopign would allow you to conformbased on the user journey/path.
15:52:55 [laura]
greg: sounds like point of evaluation.
15:54:15 [Wilco]
15:54:15 [laura]
ac: think of it as scoping for the conformace statement.
15:54:40 [alastairc]
ack Wilco
15:55:00 [laura]
wilco: leave survey until the end of the day.
15:55:02 [Azlan]
I can join scoping
15:55:02 [AWK]
thanks, Chuck
15:55:21 [GreggVan]
I am willing to contribute to scoping but cannot do 4 hrs a week on it -- and don't want to do it in lieu of equity
15:55:39 [laura]
wilco: will depend o meeting times too.
15:55:54 [Wilco]
15:55:58 [alastairc]
ack Wilco
15:56:14 [kirkwood__]
kirkwood__ has joined #AG
15:56:22 [Wilco]
15:56:30 [laura]
wilco: can go through subgroup hand book.
15:56:34 [Wilco]
15:56:56 [laura]
... new direction we want to try out.
15:57:35 [laura]
... subgroups are scoped to 8 weeks.
15:58:29 [laura]
... more flexible. need 4 approx hours a week.
15:59:16 [laura]
... groups set up by the chairs.
15:59:36 [laura]
... need pull request to update the drat at week 8.
15:59:55 [laura]
... not everything will be merged. That's fine.
16:00:32 [laura]
... comitment 4 hous/wk. If that doesn't work rach out to the chairs.
16:00:37 [alastairc]
scribe: sarahhorton
16:00:45 [laura]
... can present to the sivler TF.
16:01:11 [sarahhorton]
Wilco: Week 8 feedback incorporated, presented again to AGWG for final
16:01:17 [laura]
... rrsagent, make minutes
16:01:47 [sarahhorton]
... exceptions, if group needs more time, can't put in 4 hours, connect with chairs
16:02:16 [sarahhorton]
... reach out,
16:02:40 [sarahhorton]
... facilitator responsibilities, described in doc, e.g., notifying chairs, documenting in wiki
16:03:09 [sarahhorton]
... facilitators may do less writing
16:03:20 [sarahhorton]
... approach, trial, focus on getting content before TPAC
16:03:21 [Jennie_]
16:03:26 [alastairc]
ack Jennie_
16:03:53 [sarahhorton]
Jennie_: Great doc — add something to speak to Taskforce subgroups, to understand how interfaces
16:04:00 [Rachael]
16:04:10 [alastairc]
ack Rachael
16:04:45 [Jennie_]
16:04:48 [sarahhorton]
Rachael: Does not influence how subgroups and task forces are current doing, this is separate\
16:04:49 [alastairc]
ack Jennie_
16:05:02 [laura]
s/afuture /a future /
16:05:18 [sarahhorton]
Jennie_: Thanks, recommend, since language is the same, could distinction be added to document?
16:05:30 [sarahhorton]
Wilco: Yes, will work that out
16:05:31 [Rachael]
+1 to either different names or adding clarification
16:05:49 [sarahhorton]
GreggVan: Call them AG subgroups?
16:05:50 [laura]
s/proproasls /proposals /
16:06:00 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: WCAG 3 content subgroups?
16:06:09 [sarahhorton]
Wilco: Will figure out, good point
16:06:24 [alastairc]
zakim, take up next item
16:06:24 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- Moving the charter forward -- taken up [from alastairc]
16:06:25 [laura]
16:06:50 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: Previous discussions, have sent to AC for prelim review, no feedback yet
16:07:05 [sarahhorton]
... next step to make sure AG is happy
16:07:13 [laura]
s/derer /defer /
16:07:15 [sarahhorton]
... reviewing survey results
16:07:34 [GreggVan]
16:07:39 [sarahhorton]
... 404 issue, updated
16:07:49 [alastairc]
16:07:51 [sarahhorton]
MichaelC: Should be working now
16:07:52 [laura]
s/a either /an either /
16:07:57 [GreggVan]
16:08:18 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: [reviews responses]
16:09:07 [sarahhorton]
jeanne: Unclear what was transitional, put in example to clarify, minor edits
16:09:28 [sarahhorton]
... include EO for WCAG 3
16:09:38 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: Good point
16:09:55 [sarahhorton]
... [reviews responses]
16:10:33 [sarahhorton]
GreggVan: Might get people to agree if called candidate
16:10:51 [sarahhorton]
... middle bullet, deliverables
16:11:48 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: Expanded in conformance section, add "candidate", any objections?
16:11:48 [alastairc]
Suggested scope update: "Conformance model" to "Candidate conformance model"
16:12:41 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: [reviews responses]
16:13:25 [sarahhorton]
... in 1.2, "by end of next charter", should be "this charter"?
16:13:29 [alastairc]
"Any requirement or challenge without a demonstrated solution that has AG WG consensus by the end of the next charter will be excluded from WCAG 3."
16:13:38 [sarahhorton]
MichaelC: Yes, should be "this charter"
16:14:05 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: [reviews responses]
16:15:09 [sarahhorton]
... most people happy, few small changes, standout of negative paragraph
16:15:30 [sarahhorton]
... will take away
16:15:42 [Rachael]
16:15:43 [sarahhorton]
... anything else?
16:16:29 [Chuck]
16:16:31 [laura]
+1 to awks rewrite
16:16:36 [sarahhorton]
MichaelC: It's a rewrite of the negative text
16:16:45 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: Looks like good update
16:16:50 [Chuck]
16:16:57 [alastairc]
ack Rachael
16:17:25 [sarahhorton]
Rachael: Silver Friday meeting, starting to capture use cases, lessons learned from categorization exercise
16:17:47 [sarahhorton]
... trying to finish up — 20 more, help appreciated
16:18:16 [alastairc]
16:19:07 [sarahhorton]
jeanne: Have been working on migration cases for different SCs, talk about usual things, questions, concerns
16:19:23 [sarahhorton]
... several raised, realized should capture them
16:20:02 [Azlan]
I have to drop
16:20:07 [sarahhorton]
... list in doc concerns, have list, when testing new ways to structure, test, categorize, can go to list, test against usual cases
16:21:01 [sarahhorton]
... anyone who worked on any and had concerns, please add to list, will be helpful, put in SC number, name, link to migration doc, short issue description
16:21:28 [jeanne]
List of SC ->
16:21:53 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: Look at migration exercises, quite a few done, a few gaps, docs available where gaps
16:22:06 [jeanne]
Folder ->
16:22:40 [sarahhorton]
... a few to go, please have a go
16:22:57 [sarahhorton]
MichaelC: Charter survey, but in edits, check they are correct
16:23:06 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: CfC next
16:23:14 [Francis_Storr]
16:23:22 [alastairc]
ack Francis_Storr
16:23:51 [MichaelC]
q+ to ask about decision policy
16:24:03 [sarahhorton]
Francis_Storr: Proposed redesign, is that going to roll out?
16:24:28 [sarahhorton]
MichaelC: Minor edits with Jeanne and Rachael, rolled out
16:24:51 [sarahhorton]
... redesign, almost there but something's broken, have to figure out
16:25:06 [sarahhorton]
... keep bugging
16:25:33 [sarahhorton]
... CfC on charter, are changes to decision policy part of CfC or separate?
16:25:33 [MichaelC]
ack me
16:25:33 [Zakim]
MichaelC, you wanted to ask about decision policy
16:25:51 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: Can do separately, haven't reviewed because of 404, give people change to review
16:25:56 [sarahhorton]
... with diff
16:26:10 [sarahhorton]
MichaelC: Some people wanted to see that before voting on charter
16:26:27 [sarahhorton]
alastairc: Yes decision policy then CfC
16:26:55 [Rachael]
16:26:56 [maryjom]
16:26:57 [laura]
laura has left #ag
16:27:00 [Jaunita_George_]
16:27:01 [jeanne]
16:27:38 [sarahhorton]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:27:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate sarahhorton
16:27:50 [michael]
Present mbgower
16:33:18 [alastairc]
18:49:24 [shawn]
shawn has joined #ag