IRC log of wcag3-equity on 2022-08-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

11:47:42 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wcag3-equity
11:47:42 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/08/22-wcag3-equity-irc
11:47:44 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
11:47:46 [Zakim]
please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jeanne
11:48:00 [janina]
janina has joined #wcag3-equity
11:48:04 [jeanne]
Meeting: WCAG3 Equity Subgroup
11:48:04 [jeanne]
present:
11:48:04 [jeanne]
chair: Janina, jeanne
11:48:04 [jeanne]
present+
11:48:05 [jeanne]
zakim, clear agenda
11:48:05 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make minutes
11:48:05 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/08/22-wcag3-equity-minutes.html jeanne
11:48:05 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
11:48:05 [jeanne]
q?
11:57:13 [JenS]
JenS has joined #wcag3-equity
11:57:18 [JenS]
present+
12:03:12 [laura]
laura has joined #wcag3-equity
12:03:51 [Cyborg]
Cyborg has joined #wcag3-equity
12:05:35 [jeanne]
agenda+ Review Recommendations
12:05:44 [laura]
present+ Laura_Carlson
12:05:48 [jeanne]
agenda+ Finalize points that Describing Equity in WCAG3 - not a definition
12:06:33 [janina]
present+
12:06:36 [MichaelC]
present+
12:06:38 [Cyborg]
Present+
12:06:42 [MichaelC]
scribe+
12:07:27 [MichaelC]
js: we´re only getting 7 weeks of the planned 8
12:07:38 [MichaelC]
thought we´d skip doing a report, but they still want them
12:07:46 [MichaelC]
we´ll present Friday at Silver meeting
12:08:02 [MichaelC]
zakim, take up item 2
12:08:02 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- Finalize points that Describing Equity in WCAG3 - not a definition -- taken up [from jeanne]
12:08:07 [Cyborg]
for some reason i can't find the agenda...
12:08:13 [Cyborg]
can someone please resend? thanks
12:08:16 [janina]
agenda?
12:08:44 [jeanne]
Presentation draft -> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1es3HvWu_NmNDJv4mdTnAlfQFeVhsKxw5CmreAvpAzRk/edit?usp=sharing
12:09:07 [MichaelC]
js: notes, that´s text-dense and needs shortening
12:09:26 [MichaelC]
don´t want to edit peoples´ work w/o permission
12:09:39 [MichaelC]
start with equity vs equal
12:10:04 [MichaelC]
then go into outcome, state, process
12:10:21 [MichaelC]
look at equity from each of those perspectives
12:11:05 [janina]
q?
12:11:25 [MichaelC]
kept ¨Usability for a site at a given conformance level is approximately equivalent across disability groups¨
12:11:47 [MichaelC]
state = point in time
12:11:51 [MichaelC]
result = outcome
12:11:54 [janina]
q+ re outcomes in equity vs. outcomes and methods
12:11:57 [MichaelC]
how I tried to group those
12:12:22 [MichaelC]
I took the definition proposals into one of those three buckets
12:12:29 [MichaelC]
then went into known challenges and questions
12:12:34 [Cyborg]
q+
12:12:34 [MichaelC]
q+
12:12:41 [JenS]
From in the Google doc: State: the particular condition that someone or something is in at a specific time. Outcome: the way a thing turns out; a consequence. From Oxford Languages: https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en
12:13:05 [MichaelC]
janina: can we combine the two?
12:13:40 [MichaelC]
doing so will help avoid confusion of terms
12:13:50 [janina]
ack jan
12:13:50 [Zakim]
janina, you wanted to discuss outcomes in equity vs. outcomes and methods
12:13:54 [MichaelC]
(state and outcome), as differentiated from process
12:13:57 [JenS]
q+
12:14:43 [MichaelC]
cs: I added a number of comments to the google doc
12:15:55 [MichaelC]
<scribe got lost about what´s where>
12:16:13 [MichaelC]
cs: added reference to design justice principles
12:16:24 [MichaelC]
define inequity as problem before defining equity as solution
12:16:54 [MichaelC]
for process, can it be part of conformance model?
12:17:00 [MichaelC]
js: put under recommendations
12:17:07 [MichaelC]
the first 2 not sure if we have time
12:17:11 [MichaelC]
ack c
12:17:24 [MichaelC]
cs: these aren´t new points
12:18:20 [MichaelC]
and we need to demonstrate the harms of inequity when people ask why we want to do it
12:18:29 [MichaelC]
js: it´s time consuming to develop use cases
12:18:40 [MichaelC]
if someone can work on it, great
12:18:43 [MichaelC]
cs: meant as a framing
12:19:21 [jeanne]
scribe+ jeanne
12:19:22 [janina]
scribe+ janina
12:19:50 [janina]
MichaelC: Don't disagree that saying more about inequity is useful, but for now see it as implicit--can fit into later work
12:19:59 [jeanne]
MC: I don't object to adding a bullet point on needing to understand inequity, but I don't think we have time in this sprint
12:20:24 [janina]
michalre combining outcome and state; possibly
12:20:45 [janina]
MichaelC: wcag3 outcome statement would be different; but guideline by guideline, yes, very similar
12:20:50 [jeanne]
MC: Possibly Outcome and State and be combined. Outcome as a noun is relatively equivalent to state
12:21:22 [janina]
MichaelC: re verbosity, important to cover content digestibly, maybe shorter bullet points with links into GD
12:21:35 [jeanne]
... the content is what we want to cover. Suggest we boil it down to bullet points and link to the document
12:21:47 [MichaelC]
ack me
12:21:51 [janina]
MichaelC: written should be enough for presentation; but we can make references
12:22:13 [MichaelC]
jen: don´t think outcome and state mix
12:22:27 [MichaelC]
should look at orgs using equity-centered processes
12:22:45 [janina]
Jen, aren't you arguing against something no one proposed?
12:23:01 [MichaelC]
state is a condition, outcome is a consequence
12:23:36 [MichaelC]
we do need to align the lingo
12:24:01 [MichaelC]
ok for me to do a readability pass on the slides?
12:24:16 [MichaelC]
js: google has some automatic features
12:24:24 [MichaelC]
jen: they don´t do enough
12:24:32 [MichaelC]
<details>
12:24:34 [janina]
Can we please not digress?
12:24:55 [MichaelC]
jen: I can´t read this at the moment
12:25:09 [MichaelC]
want to make it easy for the group to read, provide ahead of time
12:25:23 [MichaelC]
js: I will check display after the content matures
12:25:28 [MichaelC]
you can take a pass at that point
12:25:47 [MichaelC]
so, I changed slide title to Equity-centered processes
12:25:53 [Cyborg]
q+
12:26:10 [MichaelC]
objections to editing text, if original linked?
12:26:21 [MichaelC]
lc: that will help
12:26:35 [jeanne]
ack je
12:26:49 [jeanne]
ack cy
12:26:50 [MichaelC]
jen: so the slide content is from the google docs?
12:26:56 [MichaelC]
q+ to say suggesting
12:27:42 [MichaelC]
js: yes
12:28:04 [MichaelC]
cs: it´s not clear that we´re discussing 2 things
12:28:09 [MichaelC]
how equity is developed in AG
12:28:18 [MichaelC]
and how it is achieved via guidelines
12:28:32 [MichaelC]
as well as relation on conformance model
12:29:18 [MichaelC]
because we have to look at potential inequities in conformance model from many directions
12:29:33 [JenS]
q+
12:29:54 [MichaelC]
ack me
12:29:54 [Zakim]
MichaelC, you wanted to say suggesting
12:30:00 [jeanne]
ack mi
12:30:56 [MichaelC]
mc: suggest using suggesting mode in google docs to highlight your comments
12:31:05 [jeanne]
ack jen
12:31:08 [MichaelC]
we can review and accept for a new round each weeks
12:31:25 [MichaelC]
jen: are slides readable to you?
12:31:54 [MichaelC]
janina: generally gsuite is difficult, it´s got keyboard but gotchas
12:32:01 [MichaelC]
jen: how will you review?
12:32:13 [MichaelC]
janina: I will review with Jeanne
12:32:59 [MichaelC]
jen: I´m really struggling to understand the slides
12:33:07 [Cyborg]
+1 to Jennifer being able to do the work to make this understandable
12:33:53 [MichaelC]
want to make sure people seeing the intro receive a streamlined, impactful message
12:33:59 [MichaelC]
q+
12:34:29 [MichaelC]
js: I did re-arrange to give structure
12:34:50 [MichaelC]
janina: we did think we had a presentation tomorrow, so it was a hasty gathering
12:35:12 [MichaelC]
js: we´ll move some content back to the background doc, which will help with review
12:36:40 [MichaelC]
ack me
12:36:56 [MichaelC]
mc: remember that content development has stages from rough to final
12:37:08 [MichaelC]
we have walkthrough of the rough version
12:37:20 [janina]
+1 to using "result"
12:37:23 [MichaelC]
and the nearly final version will be ready for additional review
12:37:23 [JenS]
Please note, my concerns are less about the development of content and more about being able to understand what content is presented — due much to the current presentation of the proposed content.
12:38:17 [Cyborg]
q+
12:38:22 [MichaelC]
js: what about combine result and state?
12:38:29 [JenS]
q+
12:38:41 [MichaelC]
mc: if we don´t have consensus to combine, best to leave uncombined at this early stage
12:38:43 [MichaelC]
ack cy
12:39:11 [MichaelC]
cs: equity-based process holds a journey towards an outcome; along that journey there are states
12:39:17 [JenS]
Where something is "proposed" might we label it as such? i.e., "Equity as a state" becomes "Proposed: Equity as a state" — this way we come to understand what we're talking about.
12:39:23 [JenS]
+1 to Cyborg
12:39:30 [MichaelC]
js: think people would understand that
12:39:46 [MichaelC]
cs: that would address process of developing guidelines
12:39:52 [JenS]
=1 to Cyborg that along the journey towards equity there are states
12:40:19 [janina]
q+ for Cyborg's two definitions of equity process
12:40:24 [MichaelC]
if our goal is equity for end users, there is a different process
12:40:44 [MichaelC]
within equity-based process we consider the meta-process
12:41:38 [MichaelC]
so want to separate a) how do we achieve equity for end users in WCAG 3 b) how do we engage in equity-based process in the development of WCAG 3
12:41:45 [laura]
+q
12:42:05 [MichaelC]
js: that sounds like great content for the final report, which we´re not ready for yet
12:42:54 [jeanne]
ack jen
12:43:42 [MichaelC]
jen: Please note, my concerns are less about the development of content and more about being able to understand what content is presented — due much to the current presentation of the proposed content.
12:43:50 [MichaelC]
Where something is "proposed" might we label it as such? i.e., "Equity as a state" becomes "Proposed: Equity as a state" — this way we come to understand what we're talking about.
12:45:26 [MichaelC]
ack ja
12:45:26 [Zakim]
janina, you wanted to discuss Cyborg's two definitions of equity process
12:45:27 [jeanne]
ack jan
12:46:53 [MichaelC]
janina: capturing that we want to support equity in the impact of a W3C specification, and that that specification itself embody process designed to continue to improve equity as a result of applying equity to its process
12:47:28 [Cyborg]
q+
12:47:41 [MichaelC]
we need to capture how we do that, but not ¨boil the ocean¨
12:47:46 [MichaelC]
maturity model relates to this
12:48:14 [janina]
q?
12:48:25 [MichaelC]
js: editing slide 3 for that point
12:48:49 [jeanne]
ack lau
12:49:04 [MichaelC]
lc: thanks for the work and input on this difficult work
12:49:16 [MichaelC]
re recommendations, there are a couple in the wiki
12:49:44 [MichaelC]
Achieve AGWG consensus on a clear definition of equity scoped for WCAG 3.
12:49:44 [MichaelC]
Achieve AGWG consensus on the actions and process needed for WCAG 3 to attain equitable results for all disability groups including those who may have been previously marginalized.
12:49:52 [MichaelC]
could see a slide for that
12:50:02 [laura]
https://github.com/w3c/silver/wiki/Equity-Framework
12:50:06 [MichaelC]
MichaelC has changed the topic to: WCAG 3 Equity sub-group
12:50:19 [jeanne]
ack cy
12:50:43 [MichaelC]
cs: I think equity vs inequity fits in slide 2
12:51:17 [MichaelC]
+1 to janina´s characterization of what I said
12:51:29 [MichaelC]
but some of the details not clar
12:51:33 [MichaelC]
s/clar/clear/
12:51:55 [MichaelC]
one of my biggest concerns is of inequity being baked into conformance
12:52:40 [MichaelC]
the need for equity in the conformance model is something we need to highlight
12:52:46 [MichaelC]
js: should conformance have its own slide then?
12:53:01 [MichaelC]
q+
12:53:38 [jeanne]
ack m
12:53:42 [jeanne]
scribe+
12:54:04 [jeanne]
MC: The slection of recommendations should be Conformance oriented
12:54:32 [jeanne]
... the filters we have about achievability will have impact on conformance
12:54:58 [jeanne]
... accessibility support of WCAG2 has an equity impact by requiring people to have a level of tech
12:55:10 [jeanne]
... we aren't propose solutions, but we need to document the entire space
12:55:29 [MichaelC]
s/should be/should be in part/
12:55:56 [JenS]
q+
12:56:58 [MichaelC]
jen: another point we need to document is process
12:57:07 [Cyborg]
+1 to what Jen just said
12:57:31 [MichaelC]
ack j
12:57:37 [MichaelC]
rrsagent, make minutes
12:57:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/08/22-wcag3-equity-minutes.html MichaelC
13:58:09 [janina]
janina has left #wcag3-equity