Meeting minutes
Judy: Any additional agenda items?
<no additions>
Publication plans, announcements https://www.w3.org/WAI/cc/wiki/WAI_Announcement_Drafts
Judy: Any upcoming publications in next 3 or 4 weeks?
Janina: Accessibility Remote Meetings
Janina: Info is updated, will check after this call.
Judy: Can you give a quick update on publication and expected date.
Janina: We are good on wiki. roy is working on last minute details of publication. Hoping for Tuesday.
Janina: Second one behind, in call for consensus for WAI Adept.
Janina: Last is Maturity Model (reviewed this morning)... should be out for FPWD before TPAC.
Judy: 3 or 4 items?
Janina: 3.
Tzviya: Nothing new in my area.
Judy: Anything from AGWG?
New work? Cross-WAI review requests?
Rachael: No.
Judy: New work or cross-WAI review?
Janina: I was asked a q in silver, about publication of SAUR. OK, great, it's a note. What is WCAG 3 suppose to do with it?
Janina: You can say video and audio shouldn't be so out of sync... maybe we should create normative expectations. Accessibility needs it, but everybody loses comprehension if it gets too large.
<Judy> JB: Synchronized Accessibility User Requirements (SAUR)
Janina: Captions too.
Janina: There's a gaming env where captions are on and can be turned off. Only 10% turn them off.
Judy: Implications of SOUR, for years APA has been asking other specifications to add a section or appendix that has implementation expectations.
Judy: Should SAUR have a section? Sounds like it. I welcome you bringing it up from coordination. What about brainstorming that is attached to things that you feel comfortable backing into the doc.
Janina: If old idea was that there were mainstream implications, there should be a W3C statement.
Janina: It's accessibility but also wider. We can maybe figure out what group should own normative specs. And define expectations. everybody can point to it then. Maybe that's the way to go.
Janina: Looking for reactions. Possibly a TPAC conversation.
Judy: comments? Mine is procedural. If you think you have things to recommend, in terms of implementation implications, being a candidate statement, wouldn't you rather have those statements be in...
<tzviya> https://
Judy: Let's move on and cycle back.
s /SOUR/SAUR/
Judy: How many groups outside of AGWG have reviewed AGWG charter?
Judy: Confirmation that you aren't surprised by anything in the charter.
Tzviya: Can you provide the link?
Judy: I can foresee that some raise some concerns, but late in the process.
<Rachael> https://
Judy: Most groups have dependencies on AGWG, and it's challenging to hear about after the fact.
Janina: Assigned to me.
Judy: Is digital publishing going to have concerns?
Tzviya: We will review and get back to you.
Judy: This is not an early version.
Rachael: We've been doing internal conversations, went to AC for early review. Will soon go into CfC. We plan to CfC week after next Tuesday.
Rachael: Would love to hear by next week.
Judy: Any other new work?
Judy: Tough time, quiet part of summer.
TPAC travel, plan for possible airport & customs backups
Judy: Michael, you've been sending something around, can you speak to it? Some caution and advice?
Michael: I sent to TPAC, hopefully it appears under travel. Airport backlog, Canada is pretty bad. Have 3 hours for layovers. Go through customs in Vancouver.
Michael: Those are the big ones, 4 more points.
Michael: Take a covid test before you arrive.
Michael: I can forward.
Michael: It does not contain no privileged information.
Judy: Any questions?
Tzviya: Michael you said... PCR covid test before?
Michael: Advisory. It would not be good to be quarantined to hotel room for a week upon arrival.
Tzviya: Coming from NY, direct flights, there are only 2.
Judy: Any other questions?
Judy: There are other people that are working on other logistics.
Judy: Review info on registration page or review Michael's info.
Janina: For some of us, in the US, covid tests can get to an app if you can't see color change.
Judy: Accessible tests are great.
Judy: Efforts to guide dog registration have had challenges. Any other q for TPAC?
Respec feedback?
Judy: From time to time there have been scattered conversations such as "the sections need to have higher fidelity to reality", and I'll support. I'll hear "respec doesn't allow".
Judy: Michael, most conversations have been with you when you've been trying to do the right thing with reality and tooling. I want to capture the latest version.
Michael: Clarify how it works. For status, respec puts in boiler plate, some of which is mandated. Other text is something respec developers have found useful.
Michael: There has always been the ability to put in the custom paragraph.
Michael: Any custom content will be added to the boiler plate. But you can't change boiler plate w/o changing respec.
Michael: Or declining to use respec.
Judy: Roughly matches my understanding. Does that mean you could have a status section that is boiler plate, boiler plate, ad-hoc truth, boiler plate done...
Judy: If one of those boiler plates were wrong, you could use respec to regenerate some, but back out of respec...
Michael: I sometimes override, but less and less. Editors draft would have what respec is putting in. If something is wrong, it's a respec issue, we should file an issue and ask for a fix.
Michael: If it is different wording than we prefer, there may be reasons for that wording. They pull lots together and generate something that makes sense.
Judy: How much work does it take to bypass? This is because something I've seen informally that may be a community group pub that the may not be a report but is identified as such.
Judy: We don't have staff resources to bypass respec.
Michael: bypassing by scripting is not worth it, should get respec fixed.
Michael: In this example, it's a draft, respec is using that language. It is using specification when it should use document.
Judy: Even the word "report" is misleading?
Michael: Even in a draft?
Judy: yes.
Judy: Thank you for clarifying, I want to review it over the next day. Worried about enflaming things because of our tools.
Judy: Are there other instances? Is this one of 20 problems, or is respec pretty much working?
Janina: I think it's not 20. It's probably... a handful.
Janina: One of my favorites... they are always called a WIP, but we are done.
Michael: Differentiate respec problems from disagreements. A bug or accessibility issue they are responding to. Broader community has a stake and may disagree with some.
Michael: Respec solves more than it creates. I don't want to go back to not using it.
Michael: Respec is engineered to swap out modules if we really care about some things. It's some dev time, they may prefer us to do that.
Judy: I'm not advocating dropping respec, but this is a recurring problem ever since respec started. We aren't able to customize.
Judy: would anybody object to filing a bug that allows for customizations? Would anybody object to that?
Judy: Multiple instances where there have been extra messaging cycles to clarify.
Michael: Never hurts to file an issue.
Judy: While we are at it, with some other things, a handful of respec issues, are there others that we could follow up on?
Janina: We discussed in APA maybe working to clarify how we get comments. We typically say use github, or send email. I want to change to plain text.
Janina: Better to go through a large google doc with many issues.
Janina: And group doesn't track.
Judy: You reminded me of feedback from EO on how they get comments.
Michael: Suggest, if this works, if its more comfortable to mark as an editors draft, that's a one line change in respect.
Judy: It's combination of "draft report" for a group where there's been zero discussion, that will cause a misunderstanding that could derail constructive conversation.
Michael: Would editors draft solve this?
Judy: Yes.
Michael: I can make the change.
Judy: Back to Janina, I notice that one of our groups was getting comments in PDF.
Janina: No, WCAG 3, from ITI.
Judy: I would assume that the normal response to that would be to request comments be sent in an accessible format? PDF is the least functional way to receive comments.
Michael: We try and steer in directions. We never specified format.
Judy: I'm wondering if that's more literal than we should be here? The reason for having a mailing list was if someone couldn't use the form so that they could send in plain text.
Judy: Not so that they could send something in a format that may not be accessible by many.
Michael: It happened to come out the other way.
Judy: I recommend you ask people to rewrite and resend. Do you have a form?
Michael: I was answering as WCAG. As APA I find that when you send comments, each group has their own way. It's difficult to adapt. I have taken the permissive approach.
Michael: It is a challenge, I support asking for them to do it our way, but I don't think we should exclude PDF comments.
Judy: I think the folk sending comments should have resources to address. I recommend in your comments guidance you be more explicit on what is more and less usable, even if you aren't absolute.
Michael: I agree. I can't commit to a timeline.
Janina: It's my action item. We can review and bring it back to this group.
Judy: You don't need to bring it back to me unless you want the feedback.
Janina: We could share what works with other groups.
Janina: It's reasonable to expect accessible content from some sources responding.
Michael: We could look at our comment guidance, but it's several layers back on the burner.
Judy: But could save you time.
Michael: I'll bring to chairs, but no guarantee when it can be addressed.
Any Community Group activity scanning still going on in APA WG?
Judy: For a long time we had used WAI coordination to check on new community groups that APA had been spotted and in need of accessibility engagement.
Judy: A q for Janina. Did APA stop review?
Janina: We did.
Judy: I want to persist. There's a need to stay on top of things. A year or more APA stopped scanning the space. We could be missing a lot. Could APA think about that and report back at next meeting for replacement or continue review?
<Judy> JB: Ask again in one month.
Janina: 2 weeks short. Month better. We can come up with what we think may matter, but follow on has not always been successful.
Judy: May can still be helpful.
Lionel: Came up in APA. What we did then was made a list on community page. 382 that we tracked.
Lionel: How we got the hook into the process isn't clear, or engage isn't clear, but very exciting.
Judy: Great, hadn't seen this in a while. The worry is not only what is going on in groups that think they are addressing, but also what is happening in community groups where they don't know or realize that they need to address.
Michael: It is one reason why I allowed things in APA to reduce, Twitter was a good place to review.
Judy: How are you picking up?
Michael: Twitter is a crowd source, but it has come to our attention.
Tzviya: If you follow a handful of individuals, you get the scoop.
Tzviya: We catch a lot, but we may miss a lot.
Judy: 4 sources we can cover 80%, but some groups may not understand the relevance. Subscribing to the council may be the best way.
Lioenel: Credentials are low hanging fruit. Now digital identifier. You covered my case.
Michael: This is a change. The index is sorted by activity level. We struggled before. That may make it easier for spot checks.
Judy: Additional, who else is subscribed to community group council?
Tzviya: I get notifications.
Judy: You may be subscribed.
Lionel: To get into the lifecycle, finding a way to hook in will take some creative thinking. We could request community groups to fill out something annually.
Lionel: Pointing out that we may need to do some creative thinking.
Judy: You would need to be careful to not make a commitment on behalf... rather "this community group would like to take up..."
Judy: This is incubated, and that has caused some confusion, but there is some things that have evolved over time.
Judy: Janina, what I think I'm hearing is that some circumstances has changed.
<MichaelC> https://
Judy: Maybe subscribing to community group council and other things could... maybe some renewed energy. I'll bring back up in a month.
Janina: Like that it is sorted by activity.
Tzviya: Why-see-gee.
WG & TF morale & participation levels, entering August, B.A5, pre-TPAC, etc
Judy: At some point in mid july I try to check in and see how participation and morale is going. My impression is that it's not as bad as before, or there's less being vocal.
Judy: 2.5 years in a pandemic, and in a very quiet period for W3C work. We haven't gathered in person.
Judy: Lots of great work still happening. Sometimes it is worth talking through. One or 2 groups have planned for this. If there are questions or suggestions, or observations, please share.
Janina: APA participation is up, I'm encouraged. Great incites.
Judy: We can talk about CSS later.
Judy: How are other groups doing?
<Rachael> Chuck: AG is still working through tensions but it is a quiet period
Judy: Any other observations?
Getting enough outreach, dissemination, and feedback opportunities (in person, hybrid, virtual)?
Judy: We thought that things would be more open, more convening. There is still some apprehension in gathering.
Judy: Looking to hear if people are finding opportunities to talk about the work, and creating virtual or hybrid opportunities to engage and recruit diverse participants.
Judy: Is it fine, should we talk in future call? Do you think it is taking care of itself? Are we adapting?
Chuck: Need to think on it.
Judy: Bring it back in a later meeting?
Lionel: Fear of meeting personally, but getting use to meeting virtually.
Judy: Any questions about legal entity status?
More public info on legal entity transition, any questions?
Chuck: Curious how it's going.
Judy: Lots of work left to do.
Judy: Many settled conversations, but lots of issues remain.
<Lionel_Wolberger> * Lionel does have to drop, next meeting starts on the hour. Good to see you all.
Janina: Series of technical changes will occur or have occurred. IRC was impacted.
Janina: An ounce of prevention is good. No notice on TLS.
Tzviya: That one was not planned.
Judy: No advance notice.
<Judy> jb: I've gotten several notices of system maintenance notifications, Michael can you check why Janina's not receiving hers?