07:01:03 RRSAgent has joined #coga 07:01:03 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/07/12-coga-irc 07:01:05 RRSAgent, make logs public 07:01:08 Meeting: Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 07:01:08 Date: 12 July 2022 07:01:38 Topic FTF at ICCHP see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TO-oh_T6-ql2B-WrD1JSEyqNEZ0Kc3kvDym_3Z8nYrA/edit# 07:01:59 Topic: FTF at ICCHP see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TO-oh_T6-ql2B-WrD1JSEyqNEZ0Kc3kvDym_3Z8nYrA/edit# 07:03:08 agenda+ tech, sort out presentions 07:03:13 agenda+ Review our docs and put them together into one findable place in preparation for the Research next steps conversation 07:03:22 agenda? 07:03:40 clear agenda 07:03:45 agenda+ tech, sort out presentions 07:04:41 agenda+ tech, sort out presentions 07:04:52 agenda+ Review our docs and put them together into one findable place in preparation for the Research next steps conversation 07:05:03 Rain has joined #coga 07:06:13 present+ 07:06:16 present+ 07:07:09 informal meeting no scribe yet 07:07:44 scribe+ rain, lisa, rashmi 07:07:53 rahmi has joined #coga 07:08:08 we are only minueting big dessions for this sesion 07:08:15 zakim, next item 07:08:15 agendum 1 -- tech, sort out presentions -- taken up [from Lisa] 07:08:19 rashmi has joined #coga 07:08:39 present+ 07:18:37 decision on structure for mental health project meeting: 07:18:48 Rain will introduce everyone 07:18:52 Lisa will present the slides 07:19:09 Rashmi will have questions ready to bring to the conversation 07:19:22 Rain will monitor questions and the room, including Meet Chat 07:22:55 Key topics Rashmi will have prepared: triggers, overstimulation, privacy, manipulative or deceptive patterns 07:36:41 decision on the structure for the COGA Making Content Usable talk: 07:37:30 Rain to present from in the room, but to ask Lisa at key points (documented in speaker notes) 07:37:38 Lisa introduce the mental health work 07:37:47 Rashmi give the examples (keep to 10 minutes) 07:42:52 Lisa will talk about working on version 2 07:43:09 Rain wrap up with recruiting and then open up for questions 07:45:14 zakim, next item 07:45:14 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Lisa 07:45:24 q? 07:45:29 ack next 07:45:36 zakim, next item 07:45:36 agendum 2 -- tech, sort out presentions -- taken up [from Lisa] 07:45:56 close item 2 07:45:56 agenda? 07:46:01 zakim, next item 07:46:01 agendum 3 -- Review our docs and put them together into one findable place in preparation for the Research next steps conversation -- taken up [from Lisa] 07:47:12 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Subgroups/ResearchPlan 08:07:56 https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG2/supplemental/ 08:20:57 Updated priorities and work: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Priorities,_schedules_and_Work 08:24:46 Fazio has joined #coga 08:24:54 present+ 08:47:31 Rain has joined #coga 08:47:35 present+ 08:47:38 agenda? 08:49:06 present+ 09:00:21 Roy has joined #coga 09:04:59 scribe: rain 09:05:10 agenda+ determine what to focus on for this 1/2 hour 09:05:19 take up item 4 09:05:32 zakim, take up item 4 09:05:32 agendum 4 -- determine what to focus on for this 1/2 hour -- taken up [from Rain] 09:06:02 For the Clear Language patterns, the title is very important 09:06:09 These are what make it into the left hand navigation bar 09:06:15 Above from Lisa 09:06:36 Lisa: for example, "avoid double negative" doesn't work because it isn't consistently good advice 09:06:51 ... what we found was consistently good advise was "avoid a double negative to express a positive" 09:07:37 ... when changing the wording of the method before changing a pattern, bring back to the bigger group before working on test cases 09:07:48 ... someone in the bigger group may know why we have chosen specific wording 09:08:13 ... change in the pattern title can make it confusing and difficult 09:08:29 ... should we determine this as a principle of something that goes back to the group? 09:09:23 q? 09:09:54 Resolution: when writing pattern, method or objective names, bring the names back to the group for review and consensus before starting any detailed work 09:10:01 ... this includes any wording changes 09:11:43 Rain: suggestion to review these resolutions at a future meeting, since there are people who may want to know this who aren't present 09:11:49 Lisa: adding to a future agenda 09:12:08 agenda+ finish up review of functional needs 09:12:12 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ndRziXRfnyAgDaL8ctByQagDdM36H8QxV44lO3u8zgc/edit# 09:12:15 zakim, take up item 5 09:12:15 agendum 5 -- finish up review of functional needs -- taken up [from Rain] 09:12:25 present+ Maya 09:12:41 present+ David Fazio 09:14:02 Lisa: functional needs matrix, which could be very important and helpful to us 09:14:22 ... includes buckets with lots of categories. First thing we are reviewing for this project is whether or not we are happy with the categories 09:14:30 ... First column is the category 09:14:41 ... Second column is what they've put there, 09:14:45 ... Third is what we think 09:14:58 ... We also added a section called "new proposed buckets" 09:15:47 Lisa: looking at attention 09:15:56 David: attentional capture or capturing attention is technical turn 09:16:07 ... then there is top down attentional guidance 09:16:45 Lisa: not necessarily what helps or solutions, instead this is where there is a reduced ability 09:17:11 David: whenever you have things that don't match the schema, then it can throw someone off (stroop effect) 09:17:30 ... if scanning through environment and it doesn't match the schema, then it will prevent them from directing their attention 09:17:51 Lisa: so what about the buckets as "sustained attention, returning attention"? 09:18:50 David: concerned that how these are written in are more from the ADHD angle and less from the real need, will add research 09:19:01 Lisa: yes, the research is really helpful, please add the links 09:19:12 ... the user's choice of task is important 09:20:20 David and Lisa together (summary) -- the point is finding the user's key task and purpose 09:21:32 David: read recently about the doorway effect. When in one room and think about something, like get a glass of water, then walk into the room for the water, you are still associating the water with the room you were in 09:22:28 Maya: remembering a book about neurodivergent students that talks about returning attention, will send it to one of us so that we can add the reference 09:22:50 Restore context after focus is lost and return attention 09:22:53 merged 09:22:55 Lisa: merging returning attention and restoring context 09:22:57 and objections 09:23:13 any objections 09:23:18 Lisa: any objections to this block? 09:23:22 No one had objections 09:23:40 Lisa: moving onto language and communication. We discussed at the last meeting to separate language and non language communication 09:23:51 ... we felt that they covered language, but non language communication gets lost 09:25:14 Lisa: back to previous -- should we also add direct attention 09:25:32 David: yes, direct is a different moment. Capture is something you cannot control. Directing attention is something you can control 09:25:39 ... so they are different things 09:25:47 ... so including both is good 09:25:57 Lisa: back to language 09:26:09 ... suggestions to separate. Had a discussion on other ways to device it 09:26:27 ... remember that they may want to do research based on our suggestions. This isn't the final wording 09:30:01 David: what makes non-language communication, because sign language and AAC are language 09:30:49 Lisa: things like metaphors, body language, implied communication 09:31:07 Rain: adding implied communication, which comes from contextual information 09:31:15 Lisa: also need information about culture 09:32:11 Rain: another way to break up communication is "expressive" and "receptive" 09:32:55 Maya: language and non-language are under communication, is there a way to be clear on how this is delinated? 09:33:13 ... non language is relating to communication which is non-verbal or sublinguistic 09:34:08 Lisa: level of granularity is a lot different from the definition 09:34:47 Lisa: suggesting followign subtopics, expressive communication, receptive communication, language, literacy, and sublinguistic 09:35:56 Rain: just bringing up a comment about literacy that I've heard, which is that individuals with reading disabilities consider themselves literate. Something to have in mind 09:36:15 Lisa: going back to literacy because of all the the things that might be missed 09:37:49 Lisa: confirming that we don't like their list and want to replace it with our new list. Do we have consensus to use the new list? 09:40:13 Breaking for lunch! 10:20:30 rashmi_ has joined #coga 10:59:56 Lisa has joined #coga 11:00:01 Fazio has joined #Coga 11:00:02 Rain has joined #coga 11:00:08 agenda? 11:00:18 Present+ 11:00:23 agenda+ Structure review 11:00:28 present+ 11:00:35 zakim, take up item 6 11:00:35 agendum 6 -- Structure review -- taken up [from Rain] 11:00:38 present+ 11:03:04 Fazio_ has joined #Coga 11:03:36 scribe+ Lisa 11:04:49 Jennie has joined #coga 11:04:58 present+ 11:05:16 RRSAgent, make logs public 11:05:36 Good morning - afternoon to all of you! I think I am trying to connect to the correct Google Meet. Can anyone tell if I am in the correct waiting room? 11:05:42 rrsagent, publish minutes 11:05:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/12-coga-minutes.html Lisa 11:05:50 present+ 11:06:15 present+ Klaus, EA 11:06:31 Deck to help us collaborate on structure: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PTCdFcg6NRK4exNX9LIquCGFHIwthQod4lgXpQx4vKw/edit?usp=sharing 11:06:42 Good morning Rain. I think I am in the waiting room 11:06:47 ...virtually 11:12:34 introductions - maya (from israel), Kluss (Icchp, and student support), EA Daffran (southampten) Becca (US) 11:13:08 and Jenny (Us - minisota - canada) 11:14:14 Rain review of stucture of content useable 11:14:58 1. very long. 11:15:06 2. lots of content 11:15:19 3. uses w3 sytles (not aure what we can do) 11:17:02 michal introduced - will be ginving a talk on scafolding 11:17:50 Rain: overview of slide https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PTCdFcg6NRK4exNX9LIquCGFHIwthQod4lgXpQx4vKw/edit#slide=id.g13c21b361e4_0_0 11:18:42 User Stories: Objectives Detail https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PTCdFcg6NRK4exNX9LIquCGFHIwthQod4lgXpQx4vKw/edit#slide=id.g13c21b361e4_0_40 11:19:01 repitition with the design (objective titile) 11:20:12 Lisa: There is also Appendix A 11:20:24 ...Mapping User Needs 11:20:30 ...And scenarios 11:20:41 ...We know this is a very long document 11:20:58 ...The consideration was that people would need a reference point 11:21:10 ...It has all the information that we have to give them in this one document 11:21:35 ...Then we were going to make a more interactive way to use the information, with some hidden until they reveal it 11:21:46 ...Now it is in the WCAG supplement website, just of the design guide 11:21:56 ...This can be a bit problematic because there is much more here 11:22:03 ...The idea is to have different entry points 11:22:30 ...Maybe what we need is an entry page that sends people to different places depending on their preferences 11:22:37 scribe+ jennie 11:22:41 :0 11:22:45 :) 11:23:20 rain: looking at survey feedback 11:23:57 31 responces - please push the survey 11:24:48 mainly used, content creaters, designers creaters engineers, and some use from end users 11:24:55 q+ 11:25:01 less reserchers 11:26:45 klaus: Lets announce the survey tomorrow at the conference ! 11:27:03 Dave: and ask facebook to fill it out 11:27:39 Lisa: they have joined 11:27:49 ack next 11:28:23 Jennie: are we socializing it in diffrent circles. Lets pmote it 11:28:49 rain: the link is on my linked in page 11:29:08 Maya, will send it to her group 11:29:53 rain: I reached out to our designt eem and they are over represented 11:30:38 age groups focus of people work are younger (a third is working with 65+) 11:32:43 Many people are new to coga user groups. more in genral accessibility. very small number were not used to accessibilty 11:33:52 a fair number red most or all of it. 13 percent 11:34:01 23 percent 11:34:20 q+ 11:34:46 almost 30% havent read any! 11:35:26 maybe stucture based on the jorney of users 11:36:19 dont have heavy use of people using it regualu 11:36:53 david: people use it for a usage, or situation they need to solve and it works well for that 11:37:30 EA: you are using it regualy, (say once per module) ibut they may say occosionaly 11:37:52 dave: can we add cookies 11:38:28 Lisa: From the previous slide 11:38:46 ...Lots of people haven't read all of it, but you have 30% that have read most of it 11:38:49 Becca_Monteleone has joined #coga 11:38:54 ...It is actually designed for you not to need it 11:38:59 ...to read it all 11:39:07 ...If you don't set policy, you don't need that section 11:39:16 ...For those that have read most of it, they found what they needed 11:39:30 +1 Lisa 11:39:32 ...There is some redunancy because different teams have different working styles 11:39:44 ...You can go into a section, and forget the sections you don't need 11:39:49 ...That is optimal 11:39:58 ...People should be able to read most of it and get what they need 11:40:17 q? 11:40:18 ack next 11:40:41 julierawe has joined #coga 11:40:45 present+ 11:41:08 present+ 11:41:45 ongoing users: most find what they are looking for. 30% often do not find what they need 11:42:27 Survey responses and edit form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1s2mqTweqrNmB4gSSfC3I-rx31Gl8OJPAUW1v9_gVsSc/edit#responses 11:42:50 How long are we leaving the survey open? And is there any chance that other W3C groups would share it to help us get more responses? 11:43:28 Michal_Lahav has joined #COGA 11:43:45 hello world! 11:44:16 hello 11:44:29 would you kindly resend the links? 11:44:42 survey results/survey shareout link 11:44:49 Welcome! If you use the word present followed by + it will mark you as present in this channel. 11:44:53 present+ 11:45:00 usages included: neg : looking for unabigues guidence 11:45:16 headings best practice for aria? 11:45:20 present+ 11:45:31 evidence or get a message 11:45:43 maya: it is effective for it 11:46:05 rain: it being a note help 11:46:24 has waight for a team, less in law court maybe 11:47:12 lisa: it might be useful in law 11:47:35 rain: lots of use of stories, refresher prinicples, help for advocusy 11:47:39 q+ 11:48:08 needs more practicle application 11:48:37 massive and overwelminf. u can use control f, but need to know what you are looking for! 11:48:43 (important one) 11:49:05 q+ 11:49:27 we are advacating to do better 11:49:42 Rain, would you kindly resend the survey results link? 11:49:43 Lisa: This week in the research group 11:49:54 ...we reviewed a study about the search, when it isn't working as you expect 11:50:00 ...They didn't give many examples 11:50:07 ...We thought it meant more operators not working 11:50:16 ...You can't narrow your search or get selections 11:50:22 ...Here we are getting direct feedback 11:50:32 ...One of the patterns in the next version will be "friendly search" 11:50:39 ...So it works well, so people can find the right results 11:50:45 ...We have to do what we are advocating 11:50:51 ...We should be implementing this in our document 11:51:41 jennie add about quickref has suggested search terms - helps shrink the content 11:51:52 q+ 11:51:55 maya: filters 11:52:01 ack Jennie 11:52:28 WCAG Quick Reference Tool I was talking about: https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/quickref/ 11:52:39 maya : there are skimers, (some hate control f) 11:53:16 Survey results: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1s2mqTweqrNmB4gSSfC3I-rx31Gl8OJPAUW1v9_gVsSc/edit#responses 11:53:26 Lisa: For the Quick Ref style, you need to remember you are out of the same space 11:53:35 ...Lots of the interactive pieces are not available within the ntoe 11:53:51 ...As you were going through the feedback, I noticed that some people were looking for information on ARIA 11:53:51 Thank you! 11:53:58 ...They won't find it, because it is not there 11:54:07 ...They are going in a direction that is for other end users 11:54:23 ...There is much less cross over than you would imagine 11:54:36 ...There is a percentage of people that replied that they didin't find what they were looking for 11:54:40 Rain: Access requested 11:54:54 ...It may be that they are looking for something that we don't want to be doing, which is a small number 11:55:12 Rain: maybe a note that says here is what you won't find 11:55:20 Lisa: All the things we are not including? 11:55:27 Rain: Not everything, but just at a high level 11:55:45 Lisa: I am not convinced that some wording couldn't be counter-productive 11:55:53 ...But when you consider comorbidities 11:56:02 ...That would be up to the consensus of the group 11:56:06 ...But for those that are lost 11:57:14 rain: trouble what the terms meen, the distintions are not instictive 11:57:24 q+ 11:57:47 EA and Dave had the same probelm what is a pattern 11:58:01 Lisa: We changed these terms a few times 11:58:11 ...There were objections to them if they looked too similar to WCAG 11:58:19 ...We weren't allowed to use guideline, or checkpoint 11:58:28 ...This feedback is fantastic 11:58:34 Roy has joined #coga 11:58:36 ...Maybe we have to use intuitive words 11:58:46 ...Using things like design checkpoint, to distinguish it from WCAG 11:59:23 ...We iterated lots of terms 11:59:32 ...and had consensus meetings with the other groups 11:59:52 ...At the end of the day, you are right, it needs to be intuitively understandable 12:00:03 we should close the conversation until they are clear 12:00:43 control f does not work on mobile (I am not sure it is true) 12:00:59 dave: should we define our terms! 12:01:10 maybe tool tip 12:01:24 can it be accessible 12:01:31 (jennie) 12:01:51 rain: visual map 12:02:09 q+ 12:02:23 dave: an easy reader 12:02:48 ea: easy access to the glossary - 12:03:09 on control f, until number 5 12:03:32 Q+ to say about my svg interface 12:04:28 used many ways - including change at work 12:04:37 learning 12:05:11 used design devlopment and implementation 12:05:25 need to promote in the planning process 12:06:04 peaople who use it rarely (44 pecent) coudnt find what they were looking for 12:06:35 only 1 said they wouldnt use it (found it to complex to browes) 12:07:10 new users: ;want to learn about coga and improve their skills 12:07:33 one person said it also helps useability 12:07:42 not a visual document 12:07:45 That's a good note from that person when we consider tagging for findability on browsers 12:08:27 rain: can we use this survey as a tool to push back at w3 12:09:03 lots of interst in user reserch (2 thirdsx) 12:09:12 very north american 12:10:00 need to send it out more 12:10:32 24 percent in tech 12:10:41 q? 12:11:03 q+ tech 12:11:16 few over 65 12:11:34 reserecher offered to help with the numbers. 12:11:40 q+ 12:12:23 ack Lisa 12:12:23 Lisa, you wanted to say about my svg interface 12:12:25 ack tech 12:12:40 Lisa: I made something in the past that converts headings into a spider map 12:12:45 ...I have the code somewhere 12:12:52 ...It pulled out the first paragraph too 12:12:58 ...Also, I think tech is the right audience 12:13:09 ...That is who we said is our first audience 12:13:17 Rain: We included government, and healthcare 12:13:22 ...Those are our audiences as well 12:13:33 EA: Those of us in one area may also be in another 12:13:46 Rain: Being a student in special education, we may want to reach more teachers 12:14:06 ...to make their materials more accessible 12:14:13 EA: they may have a department that does that 12:14:37 Klaus: Translation, annotation, using a different language 12:14:43 ...Saying "what role do you play?" 12:15:01 ...Giving everything over to students - they need to understand the service provision 12:15:10 ...I would be happy to bring this to the European service providers 12:15:19 ...They work on a day to day basis with their groups 12:15:29 ...I went through the document 12:15:42 ...I would recommend to describe different roles of providing usability and accessibility 12:15:49 ...You cannot do everything 12:15:54 ...They have to support personalization 12:16:05 ...We don't know which symbols to use 12:16:13 ...I think this would be very beneficial and be a door opener 12:16:42 Rain: Over time the accessibility of the document gets at risk 12:16:55 q? 12:17:28 Lisa: My feeling is that asking a researcher - that is fantastic, thank you 12:17:35 Klaus: service providers should be another category that we reach 12:17:40 ...What I would do first, let's focus on getting those hundred responses 12:17:46 ...Other businesses 12:17:52 ...Then when we are ready, we can ask them to 12:17:57 ...analyze it 12:18:08 ...Don't take that offer too quickly - it will be more useful when we have more results 12:18:15 Rain: We will keep this up for a few more weeks 12:18:39 Klaus: the ecosystem. The designers are only part of the process. Would be good to add how each of the roles in the process impact accessibility 12:18:47 Keep in mind that there are different titles in every country 12:18:56 ea: roles have diffrent needs in diffrent countries 12:19:07 E.g. special ed = personal assistants, paraeductors, education coordinators 12:19:46 q? 12:20:21 julie: how long is it open? is there a value to asking other groups? 12:20:34 lisa: wai intrest group 12:20:57 rain: a few more weeks, it is summer 12:21:03 Until at least mid September? 12:21:05 rain: steptember 12:21:20 q+ 12:21:23 q+ 12:21:27 ack next 12:21:57 Short link for sharing the actual survey: https://bit.ly/content-usable-v2 12:21:58 mid septemeber: 12:22:03 q+ 12:22:16 julie: lets have a better external deadline 12:23:18 Same for some American school districtrics 12:23:27 ack Jennie 12:24:17 Lisa: We wanted to put out another survey on what people want from research documents 12:24:26 ...so we learn how urgent it is to update them 12:24:40 ...Will we have 2 surveys out at the same time? 12:24:52 Rain: I think that is ok because there is some overlap in audiences, but there are differences 12:25:08 Lisa: If we can keep some kind of log on what channels are being approached, then we can repeat it relatively quickly 12:25:11 Rain: right 12:25:36 q- 12:25:38 *Jennie is stepping away for a moment 12:25:45 ddave : do we expect people to read it to answer 12:25:59 rain: there are questions for people who didnt read it 12:26:00 Survey link (public): https://bit.ly/content-usable-v2 12:26:24 Link to survey results: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1s2mqTweqrNmB4gSSfC3I-rx31Gl8OJPAUW1v9_gVsSc/edit#responses 12:28:50 rain: i sent it to the coga group, and slack and drubal, women in tech 12:29:03 and google and linkedin facebook and twiter 12:29:20 *Jennie is back 12:29:22 q+ 12:29:36 dave: i can send it out to itu 12:30:06 rashmi has joined #coga 12:30:14 ack Jennie 12:30:18 and shari 12:30:27 Shari Byrne Haber 12:31:44 maya: slack groups on designers 12:32:01 present+ 12:32:15 lisa: who disaster relieafe and whatsup for israel AT devlopers 12:32:30 maya. negishuyt on facebooks 12:32:38 ea can we have blog post wording 12:33:12 Blurb to improve: 12:33:13 Help improve digital accessibility! Share your thoughts on the W3C's "Making Content Usable for People with Cognitive and Learning Disabilities" so that we can make it as useful as possible: 12:33:20 https://bit.ly/content-usable-v2 12:33:33 dave: other networks 12:34:08 rain: will make a spreadsheet, so we can all share it 12:34:25 rain: blerb 12:34:53 q+ 12:35:00 ack l 12:35:12 stevelee has joined #coga 12:35:15 q+ 12:35:24 julie: make the next version as useful as possible 12:35:34 "make it as useful as possible" change to "make the next version as useful as possible" 12:35:37 ack next 12:35:57 add face deadlines... 12:36:06 ack next 12:36:30 jennie: i will put it in our news letter, that explains the doc 12:37:11 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DoohB2-tREjXx7PF6sCi3jLt6OrjE1ciAb0Dcb7FgyU/edit 12:37:38 WAI is pleased to announce publication of the Working Group Note: Making Content Usable for People with Cognitive and Learning Disabilities https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/ This document helps you make web content, including applications, more accessible to more people. It provides guidance on: * people with cognitive and learning disabilities * aims and objectives for usable content * design patterns (ways) to make content usable * includi[CUT] 12:37:38 Lisa: That is a link to previous announcements and requests for participation we have made 12:37:53 ...I think that is what people are looking for to augment their own blurbs 12:38:02 blurb from other times 12:38:33 q+ 12:38:41 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DoohB2-tREjXx7PF6sCi3jLt6OrjE1ciAb0Dcb7FgyU/edit#heading=h.6huvhno1y8uv 12:38:48 ack next 12:39:09 rashmi: I made a post on linked in! 12:39:22 https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rashmi-r-katakwar-bb110b154_cognitiveaccessibility-cognitivediversity-activity-6951125296980848640-E63t?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web 12:40:26 rain writing blerb 12:41:33 q+ 12:41:47 berb at https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PTCdFcg6NRK4exNX9LIquCGFHIwthQod4lgXpQx4vKw/edit#slide=id.g13c21b361e4_3_0 12:42:04 rashmi: are we colecting ids? 12:42:10 q+ 12:42:17 it is anaomus unless they agree at the end 12:43:17 Lisa: as part of the mental health review we have been doing 12:43:28 ...There are concerns for people that they have the option to be anonymous 12:43:39 we can say you can choose to answer anaomusly? 12:44:05 +1 12:45:03 julie: maybe clarify that you dont need to have read it 12:45:58 rain: updated the blub. you can edit it 12:46:40 agenda+ update plans 12:47:06 conversational interface https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B1vCqlU1IF5UmqxhJAy8Khdi-kRQNPalVX8f3lCMr7w/edit#heading=h.9j8rnhzb9sv8 https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-user-research/ https://w3c.github.io/coga/issue-papers/ https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-gap-analysis/ 12:57:00 see https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Subgroups/ResearchPlan#Links 13:00:26 next ietm 13:00:36 zakim, next item 13:00:36 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Lisa 13:00:46 q? 13:00:51 ack next 13:00:53 ack next 13:00:58 zakim, next item 13:00:58 agendum 3 -- Review our docs and put them together into one findable place in preparation for the Research next steps conversation -- taken up [from Lisa] 13:01:38 Questions we need to answer the following questions Who is using our research documents? How are they using it? What research documents do we want to make “publish ready” ? What research documents do we want to work on or update? How research documents do we want to publish? And in what form (wiki, w3c note etc)? What research documents do we want to publish to merge? Should we make structural changes? Are there other urgent issues papers for v2? [CUT] 13:11:10 Adding to notes so that we can remember to look at this document: mental Health paper for research Bernard, R., Sabariego, C. and Cieza, A., 2016. Barriers and facilitation measures related to people with mental disorders when using the web: a systematic review. Journal of medical Internet research, 18(6). 13:11:48 And also: Bernard, Renaldo (2020): Web accessibility and mental disorders: difficulties experienced by people with depression and anxiety on the Web. Dissertation, LMU München: Faculty of Medicine (both shared by EA) 13:13:49 scribe: Rain 13:13:57 scribe+ Rain 13:14:05 scribe+ Rain Lisa 13:14:32 Lisa: sharing the Research subgroup. This is the moment to plan what to do with all of our research. It is overwhelming and people don't know what we have 13:14:36 ... it is also now out of date 13:15:02 ... What do we need to do to get these documents ready? What needs updating? How do we want to publish them? Informally as a wiki page with less process? Or more formal and citable as a note? 13:15:26 Lisa: reminder for what we did when we started 13:15:35 ... people said it was impossible. Too much, too many different types 13:15:51 ... so we made a user research module and looked at 8 diverse diganoses 13:16:02 ... normally we deal with functional needs, not diagnosis 13:16:09 ... but we used the diagnosis to create a framework 13:16:32 Lisa: our working document was published in 2015, so it may be really out of date 13:17:46 Lisa: Issue papers took a topic across cognitive disabilities. E.g., logging in, privacy, finding help 13:18:50 Lisa: everything comes together in the gap analysis 13:19:02 ... User needs, when updated, are updated in Content Usable 13:19:30 ... Question about whether or not we can let the user needs in Gap Analysis age since it is in Content Usable? 13:20:04 ... For issue papers, we have a couple papers (horizontal topics, e.g., user preferences, personalization, authentication, multimodal, etc.) 13:20:30 q+ to ask location of link to this slide deck 13:20:43 ... Things we've started drafting but not in format: wayfinding paper, conversational interfaces, and (from Community Group) live transcription 13:21:24 Lisa: this is what we have that we can be working on. Research projects is quoted often. If it is in use, we should probably update it 13:22:06 ack Jennie 13:22:06 Jennie, you wanted to ask location of link to this slide deck 13:22:07 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1YeqvkeE6xbh8yAAUvliA6v4MqbLsj28dFxzRcMyGTz0/edit#slide=id.gf7b42fe111_0_981 13:22:26 Q? 13:24:16 Michal: mentioned when you had the needs, had the user groups and diagnosis, and then the functional needs. Where the functional needs also sorted by user needs 13:24:37 Michal: correction: sorted by diagnosis? How granular did it get 13:26:12 Lisa: structure where for each disability, we described the challenges, and what was working, and what people were doing if they were making content for the group 13:26:22 Michal: groups? how many people? 13:26:33 Lisa: mainly a literary review. Bulk of it. There was some user research 13:26:44 ... there is a link to methodology 13:26:58 ... this was the last time we focused on disabilities. After that, we focused on functional needs 13:27:36 ... when you look at the issue papers, you'll see that we may say "people with memory impairments" without saying why they have a memory impairment 13:29:22 Lisa: took all the information from research and issue papers, did a big analysis and took out things that worked, don't work, and then took out the user needs, and then created deliverables for people to actually use 13:29:30 ... such as Making Content Usable 13:30:04 ... often doesn't fit neatly into a WCAG type of checkpoint, such as people needing reassurance that their privacy is being taken care of 13:30:20 ... also have used this to create pieces that have gone into personalization and APA 13:30:48 q? 13:31:17 Lisa: but then we carried on continuing to do user research, and have a nice document of issue papers 13:31:33 ... other papers were near completion and didn't go into the editors draft, but did go into content usable 13:31:42 ... for example, wayfinding and orientation 13:32:05 ... have two google docs drafts with indoor and outdoor, and we have little bits in design patterns in content usable, but there is more 13:32:21 ... now we need to determine what needs to happen next with these documents and how 13:33:50 Lisa: asking about what the room thinks, and difference between doing and publishing the research and what additional topics 13:34:10 How important is it that this research is updated? 13:34:13 Question 1: how important is it that this research is updated? 13:34:25 q? 13:34:39 Lea: extremely important to update the research 13:35:02 ... as I was working on a web app, I came to this to use, and am like many developers and designers 13:35:11 ... they will want to make sure they are following guidelines 13:35:16 q? 13:35:43 Lisa: this is a good point that you make. This is different from making content usable. 13:35:54 q+ 13:35:54 ... Which is our document for developers, and our conclusions 13:35:57 q? 13:36:03 q+ 13:36:57 Lisa: also doing the mental health literary review 13:37:04 ... and that will go into making content usable 13:37:53 Lea: who is the intended audience? 13:38:03 Lisa: that's an interesting question as well. We did it for us. 13:38:21 ack next 13:38:27 Jennie: piggy back on Lea 13:38:36 ... actually think that Lea is bringing up a different use case 13:38:59 ... content usable goes based on the guidelines, but if someone is doing a grant app, citing the original research will be useful for getting funding, etc. 13:39:30 ack next 13:40:15 rain: for invation this is very important 13:40:28 this is the gaps 13:40:51 tech has changed so much since 2015 13:41:10 and we need the reserch update 13:41:47 +1 to Rain, maybe talking about it as "raw data" that is needed by some, whereas Content Usable is the "how to" 13:42:37 Michal: echoing, yes, really important to update. Also helpful to have foundational studies on each diagnosis up to date, as well. That way, most update to date information on foundational needs and pain points, etc. Don't know how much is available in the way of resources, but at least a literary review up to 2022 13:42:37 litary review update 13:42:48 ... Cherry on top would be actual user research and testing 13:43:19 Lisa: normally also if we publish, different researchers will then do research on our research and put it to the test 13:43:33 ... which is really helpful if we don't get to do much in the way of user research 13:43:54 Lisa: I'm thinking we should do from 5-0 where 5 is extermely important 13:43:58 5- 0 5 is extreamly important 13:44:50 do do a litary review on the user reserch module 13:44:58 LeaW has joined #coga 13:45:00 MIchal_Lahav has joined #COGA 13:45:07 5 13:45:10 5 13:45:14 5 13:45:21 5 13:45:41 How important is it to get it as a published note? 13:45:57 publish the reserch module as a note ? 13:46:00 q+ 13:46:14 ack next 13:46:22 if we are doing a comprehensive literature review, we might as well publish it. 13:46:57 rain: we need to put it though the publication process 13:47:08 it carries more wait 13:47:37 but even a wd is better then a wiki 13:47:48 +1 to Rain's comment 13:48:03 Lisa: what do other's feel? We have a nice wiki, but does it meet the needs? 13:48:12 Wiki does not meet the needs 13:48:35 agree 13:50:28 Side suggestion (so I don't forget): make sure we follow the REHABDATA-Connection research summaries. Lots of surveys are gathered monthly. 13:50:51 That is from NARIC.com 13:51:00 q+ 13:51:13 it might be a great PhD project 13:51:18 Klaus: this is work that you normally expect from PHD students 13:51:27 ... they publish a first paper about this as part of the PHD 13:51:30 q+ 13:51:57 or Google Research intern project 13:52:03 ack next 13:52:13 ... maybe have this be done by a research review 13:52:34 Rashmi: can we wait until we see the responses to the survey we have out now? 13:52:42 Lisa: trying to gather our opinions 13:53:02 Lisa: a word of caution on the surveys 13:53:16 ... if the research funding came because of our work, then that might bias them 13:53:18 q+ 13:54:00 ack next 13:54:01 ack Jennie 13:54:09 q- 13:54:27 Jennie: receive a monthly summary of research from NARIC.com, 13:54:28 I am attending a Fellowship program for Leadership Education in Neurodiversity via UIC (Univ IL Chicago) in the fall. I will be attending with PHD students and happy to ask people there. 13:54:31 ... what about partnering with them? 13:54:32 +1 13:54:51 ... their summaries are excellent. Maybe consider multiple groups to partner with 13:54:53 Lisa: super idea 13:55:45 David: national science foundation just launched a convergence excellerator program that we might want to tap into 13:56:00 q? 13:56:02 Lea: working a project with national science foundation with UIC 13:56:21 ... doing testing and research called parks and sidewalks study 13:56:33 ... to make parks and sidewalks more accessible, funded through the national science 13:56:44 ... I'm helping doing funding, and will be attending as a part time trainee in a fellowship 13:56:59 "leadership education and neurodiversity" 13:57:05 *There is a LEND program at the University of Minnesota as well. 13:57:21 ... this is something that UIC might be interested with, happy to bring this to people in the fall 13:57:29 ... they are research experts there 13:57:55 Lisa: what I'm hearing is that it is really needed, but we should be able to recruit people to do this rather than overstretch the people that we have 13:57:58 +1 13:58:16 Lisa: switching to issue papers 13:58:23 Are the issue papers less important? 13:58:38 Do we need to update the issue papers? 13:58:50 above two notes from Lisa 13:59:09 Fazio has joined #Coga 13:59:13 Lisa: some we aren't done with and know we need to do more with, as we are coming across new information like privacy, and people getting anxious because they log in as an example 13:59:26 Link shared by Lea Whitney: https://idhd.ahs.uic.edu/ 13:59:26 ... a few things we could potentially do 13:59:35 ... one is general issues now that technologies have changed 13:59:42 ... another is add the wayfinding interface 14:00:06 ... and the ones we haven't written or thought about, really important topics we are missing 14:00:06 Q? 14:00:22 q+ 14:00:36 ack Jennie 14:00:39 ack next 14:01:11 Jennie: can we consider our need for research as a jumping off point for other groups to do the research and fund or support it, like the educational institutions 14:01:28 ... they may not have identified the use cases, aso we can use this as a way to partner and have value on both sides 14:01:33 ... and our time being well used 14:02:48 Lea: another topic I think about a lot is AI and how AI can potentially be useful or helpful when building technology 14:03:23 Lisa: actually in a-step, based on what information got from Google and Microsoft, trying to collect APIs that people could use in research 14:03:35 ... there were some analyses that have been done, and will probably come across more 14:03:43 q+ 14:04:09 ack next 14:05:54 q+ 14:06:57 Rain: when prioritizing, feel that the foundational user research is higher priority because we have to have that right. Really like the ideas that are coming up to scale and leverage other groups to expand this work, but our reasoning behind what we emphasize has to be solid 14:07:08 Lisa: good segue into gap analysis 14:07:17 ... we do have these ideas in as a summary in the roadmap 14:07:32 q? 14:07:33 ... and conversation about user needs, so this is where these things come together 14:07:52 ack Jennie 14:07:57 ack next 14:08:35 Jennie: hearing two things, 1 is that there may be need for researchers to be able to reach out to coga taskforce, to have a conduit to reach out to us after reviewing the information already available 14:09:04 ... 2. this gap analysis being published as at least a working draft would be important in terms of the promenance for people reviewing, have more weight for research being approved 14:09:46 Lisa: hearing all important, but that there is a staggering of the work 14:09:51 ... user research module is stage one 14:10:29 Jennie: think it goes research, lit review, gap analysis, and then if there are things we don't see getting picked up, then that is issue papers 14:10:32 +1 from Rain :) 14:11:08 Lisa: have the summary in the gap analysis, so while they wait for updates, they can be wiki pages 14:11:13 ... then the summary is published 14:11:27 Michal added on chat: 1) UXR lit review 2) Gap 3) issue papers agreed! 14:11:35 Lisa: next steps, make an outline draft of a plan 14:11:47 ... when send out our questions ask if they feel this is a reasonable set of priorities 14:11:56 q+ 14:12:22 ack next 14:12:42 Jennie: can you add to the questions, "what else might you need from the COGA Task Force" with an open field 14:12:47 yes, I added this to the deck to! 14:12:53 ... there may be ways that we don't understand that they are missing support 14:22:29 Klaus added the importance of making sure that the quality of the research is very high because people trust it 14:22:47 michal has joined #COGA 14:22:49 Lisa: another advantage of publishing as a note and not a wiki is that it is published with a date 14:23:09 q+ 14:23:21 Klaus: it also needs a methodology behind it. Which databases, what keywords, how did we come to a decision of what was relevant and not relevant 14:23:30 q+ to ask Klaus about dividing work, research institutions 14:23:38 ... based on this research method, then we can claim it is complete or sufficiently complete 14:24:22 ack next 14:24:23 Jennie: in the past, seen research institutions partner together to tackle larger questions 14:24:24 Jennie, you wanted to ask Klaus about dividing work, research institutions 14:24:38 ... is there a pathway for this kind of partnership? 14:24:58 ... could be an additional issue to highlight here, a bunch of researchers here, in particular in the session on cognitive accessibility 14:25:14 ... for phd and master students because they then have a sound reference, and we don't have to redo work 14:26:12 * I would recommend the research institutions, not the PhD student's themselves 14:26:43 Klaus will talk with Susanna (sp?) starting a followup project on August 1 using easy read 14:27:03 ... have students, master or phd level, starting with exactly this work 14:27:12 ... could be a good partner in a shared cooperation 14:27:22 q? 14:27:35 q+ michal 14:27:37 Roy has joined #coga 14:28:19 Lisa: need more synergy with universities 14:28:45 Michal: either publish or wiki is good, but would also be good to have a progressive document, such as the wiki, where case studies can continue to be added 14:28:55 ... and a forum for adding content as we have new insights 14:30:02 Lisa: are there issue papers we don't have, and then Klaus mentioned it and we did a review on working with users in Content Usable. Claudia's research. 14:30:09 ... some of it ended up being quoted in Content Usable 14:30:20 ... is Working with Users an issue paper 14:30:27 ... don't we have to do that for the next version? 14:30:48 ack next 14:32:29 q+ Lea 14:32:48 Rain: volunteering to connect Sally who is doing up to date research on including individuals with cognitive disabilities in the research 14:33:40 Lea: have done remote usability testing recently with a company called Autonomy Works with individuals who have autism 14:33:55 ... can also potentially take work such as that, with videos and case studies 14:34:10 ... when test with individuals with different disabilities, the testing and script is completely different 14:34:21 ack next 14:34:25 ... but the feedback is amazing 14:34:49 * Look forward to a future conference presentation on this from Lea Whitney! 14:35:03 Lisa: hearing what we need to do is in this update, is to figure out how out of date are we 14:35:04 Thank you Jennie 14:35:42 Lisa: so have to be very careful on the next version of content usable that we are not publishing out of date research 14:35:53 This was the company we tested with: https://www.autonomy.works/ 14:36:06 q+ 14:36:58 Michal: would like to add her work, the scaffolding method, which remains unpublished, working on a publication 14:37:11 ... is presenting this here at the conference 14:37:19 ... a methodology that can be used 14:37:51 Lisa: giving a session on networking for researchers and support for cost action 14:38:01 ... one of the things is to be able to put things up in a common space where people can comment 14:38:12 ... that then gives COGA the ability to access it 14:40:13 Lisa's session tomorrow on cost network: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1f0ddD9UtiwMx1pr4SM392CJOPQ1nN65C9SeCtQ2eBT4/edit#slide=id.g13a4aeabfa1_0_32 14:40:25 And the github link: https://github.com/a-STEP-action/A-Step/wiki 14:40:26 q? 14:40:57 ack next 14:41:10 Jennie: topic see missing from a lot of research is IT Governance 14:41:14 ... with three sub headings 14:41:21 ... 1 employees with cognitive disabilities 14:41:29 2 citizens with cognitive disabilities 14:41:48 ... 3 disaster planning for that group by the stakeholders 14:42:14 ... if there was research showing the value of stakeholder involvement at these different places, with solid research to point to, would give citizens research to take when someone doesn't include them 14:42:27 Lisa: it's a bit like a small appendix on policy? 14:42:59 Jennie: yes and no, just like talking about the protocols for how to involve someone, how you involve people with disabilities in IT governance, we need to make sure that we break that open 14:43:30 ... otherwise the codesign piece that has been brought up, which is a major kickoff piece, where something is going to impact the standard process. Being able to impact the conversation 14:43:54 Lisa: worked years ago on a maturity model for smart cities, and there seems to be overlap 14:44:12 Jennie: what I'm finding is that if it is not published with their words, specific to their space, they will not generalize it over to their group 14:44:28 ... if the research is specific to IT governance, then it will get the focus and attention 14:44:38 ... under the general umbrella, it won't get the attention 14:44:51 ... we want to make it get that prominence 14:45:07 Lisa: so, how important is this? 14:45:11 ... all very important 14:45:40 Lea: government space builds technologies or ensures content is findable, usable and accessible, so with that, the information is also promoting independence 14:45:48 ... connecting the dots for all parties 14:46:21 ... clarify that we are also promoting supporting greater independence 14:46:32 q? 14:48:36 Lisa: in an interrelated space, the WHO is about to publish a draft of a standard for IT for health care, and that will need review from the cognitive perspective 14:49:04 Lisa: should we be drafting a sample policy (overlaps with testing subgroup) for health care? 14:49:20 ... or critical services such as health care 14:49:42 Jennie: not my recommendation because of the effort it would take 14:49:53 ... but we could draft points of order to include, things to consider, or questions to answer 14:50:00 ... and formulate it the way those documents are currently working 14:50:12 ... that way, they can grab some of the language and port that into their documents 14:50:23 ... it will need a champion to get the language in 14:51:03 Lisa: as far as resources, do we have the right ones? 14:51:17 ... it is something that needs to be done, but probably comes under a different title. An issue paper? 14:52:46 Lisa: coming out with potential issue papers that might be important, and next steps 14:53:03 ... helping us frame our information into a way that government can absorb it 14:53:09 ... we've tried to do that for designers 14:53:35 ... same thing as Making Content Usable, but doing it for government instead of designers/creators 14:53:48 ... that suggests another survey 14:53:56 ... because it's not the same survey for researchers 14:54:33 ... and what about the legal perspective? 14:55:20 Lisa: next steps 14:55:29 ...Lisa will put everything into a document 14:55:34 I will have to drop off ,thanks everyone,see you later! 14:55:41 ... will then ask the people on this call to review, update, improve 14:56:20 Lea: looking at it from the perspective of the end users, a lot of end users and designers would like to see more videos or images of the actual users themselves 14:56:38 ... knowing that we have some quotes or ways to talk with more individuals and have that in the material 14:56:54 ... to show that all of this work is involving these individuals 14:57:09 ... then tech and government will then see that these end users are benefitting 14:57:31 * Lea is kind of also suggesting a COGA PR campaign! Love it! 14:57:46 Lisa: what I'm hearing is an issue paper on the research on our research 14:57:50 q+ 14:59:06 ack next 15:00:56 And, we can add this easily into the web version 15:01:29 1. here's what you think about, 2. Here's how you design it, 3. Here's how you test it, 4. Here's how a person uses it 15:01:47 Rain spoke to talk about more naturally weaving the quotes directly into the structure 15:02:06 Jennie: does it actually speak to how we have to consider using the web version of making content useable 15:02:07 ShawnT has joined #coga 15:05:09 David: has access to research opportunities through the state of california, can look into that 15:05:18 ... also wondering if we are starting to move into what EO is working on? 15:05:32 If we have a survey that points to the need, it may support EO to adopt working on that 15:06:19 Lisa: good point that we need to be careful to scope 15:07:00 Lisa: what is our level 4/5 have to do? 15:07:06 2 15:07:17 (I think it's beyond our scope) 15:07:24 4 15:07:28 I think the government issue paper idea could be some presentations 15:07:33 (gov 4) 15:08:23 q+ 15:08:31 ack Jennie 15:08:49 Rain: struggling to put a number to it because feel the foundational work is more critical 15:09:19 Jennie: if the group supports Jennie with some time to review materials and set up talking points, we can be strategic about how we present representing COGA in target areas 15:09:26 then it doesn't take the same amount of work 15:09:37 ... for example, there are government tech conferences 15:09:43 ... and then we can make sure it is tailored to the group 15:09:52 ... so multiple ways to tackle this 15:10:09 +1 to this idea 15:10:16 + 1 too 15:10:30 Lisa: over time, asking one more question 15:10:41 question: is there a group already researching this? 15:10:46 Issue paper on how to work with users? 15:12:10 Rain: take an action item to talk with Sally to help out with the include users issue paper 15:12:40 This was fantastic! 15:12:47 Thank you to everyone that joined! 15:12:57 Thank you! 15:13:00 Thank you! 15:13:20 RSSagent, make minutes 15:13:27 zakim, make minutes 15:13:29 I don't understand 'make minutes', Rain 15:13:35 RRSagent, make minutes 15:13:35 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/12-coga-minutes.html Rain 15:56:14 kirkwood__ has joined #COGA