<jeanne> Scribe List https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Scribe_List#Scribe_List

<jeanne> Scribe List https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Scribe_List#Scribe_List

<Chuck> Audio issues, working on it.

This week in AG - WCAG3 architecture and shared vocabulary presentation

<jeanne> * Review WCAG 3 architecture

<jeanne> * Review shared vocabulary

Jeanne: announcements of AG meeting on Tuesday talking about WCAG 2.2 and 3 preparation for TPAC, architecture and vocabulary

Test Terminology presentation

Jeanne: test terminology group first

Shadi: can we go second?

Equity presentation

Jeanne: yes equity first

<Lauriat> qv?

<jeanne> Equity presentation https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1es3HvWu_NmNDJv4mdTnAlfQFeVhsKxw5CmreAvpAzRk/edit#slide=id.g1464a4e99e5_0_66

Jeanne: equity presentation first

<jeanne> Equity presentation https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1es3HvWu_NmNDJv4mdTnAlfQFeVhsKxw5CmreAvpAzRk/

Jeanne: starting out research we already have, slide desk linked and silver research related to equity
... early work 2018 and defintions of equity from around the web, including different groups, reseach projects aroound equtiy
... please look at framework and research
... started with definition broke down over few slides
... what is equity, inequity is the problem
... detailed thoughts in equity framework.

<scribe> .. [continues to describe slides]

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: describing equity versus equality, into 3 categories
... talking about equity-centered processes from slide
... [continue describe equity from slides]
... equity as a state [from slides]
... talking about ‘equity as a result’ slide
... talking about known challenges
... known challenges, technical, expertise and differnt needs [from slides]
... complexity and scoring [from slides]
... listing outstanding questions [from slides]
... list of outstanding questions socioeconomic, international civil rights
... recomendations [from slides]
... working on clear definitons hopefully for TPAC

<Lauriat> qv?

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: resouces links on slide

Charles: asking about goal

MC: drafting about equity, will be in process more than content and will try to right hooks for that

<jeanne> +1 Michael

Wilco: thought on compare? challenges people are having… striving for equity seem to need to know persons problem is larger than another, concerned about avoiding loudest voice

Rain: don’t think this is proposing judging largeness, more about different and adopting to individual
... not a value judgement, more to be resolved in diffent ways

Wilco: we still need to know some measure of levels, how would we make such a decsion

MC: we are at first subgroup measuring equity or for being part of scope and realize 1— equity not achievable but string to do and how to do it remains to be seen

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say we want to avoid comparison

Jeanne: still seeing prioritization by user need diferent groups are looking at differnt aspects, by context not by user need

Jennifer: have history of looking at things in outdated maner
... oppression olympics is a danger, need to make space for those not in here or have difficulty to participate as in past, to ensure equitable for all.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say dimensions of equity

<janina> And a few of us wouldn't be helped by any kind of box in that illustration

Jennifer: too early to talk about things like measuring

MC: other thing thinking about is several dimensions of equity
... how severe is this severity wilol be compex

<Wilco> +1

<jeanne> Yes, there are two discussions and probably should be addressed separately

Shadi: think this is a great discussion. separate discussion, one about conformance model and other process, has subgroup talked about it

Jeanne: we have not 8 week spread

Janina: very good questions, but not one of outcomes of report summary

<jenniferS> * the speaker queue closed after I queued.

Janina: illustrate of boxes did talk about conformance group nothing we are going to do for some things won’t make equitable such as a concert

Test Terminology presentation

Wilco: giving test types and terminology subgroup

Wico: [going through slides]

<jaunita_george> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1KhuTdTemRjjJIFViftKYPXc1nKhcJ4LqrQum0qOJLBI/edit#slide=id.g13851ed4d67_0_4

<jaunita_george> Here is the presentation! :)

Wico: goals [slide]

proposed terms [slide]

<janina> jaunita, I would never way never, but I as a musician trained to be a concert pianist, I will say "no way."

scribe: giving examples of terminology [slide]
... giving examples of adaptive tests [slide]

<Wilco> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/evaluating-procedures-proposal/examples/outcome-implementation-procedures/example1.html

<jenniferS> * I'm glad to see Jaunita picked up what I was thinking. The conversation is more complex than we can have in this venue and amount of time.

Wico: continuing to go through slides link to prcedural samples

procedural samples [slide]

other test types [slides]

Wilco: [continues in spldes] about other possible test types

<jeanne> +1 for adaptive tests for external factors -- especially sites for specialized audiences

Wilco: [from slide] talking about what makes a good test

<jeanne> +1 to liking the table Comparing the Test Types - user Need, test method, and evidence

<Lauriat> qv?

Wilco: Comparing Test Types [slide]

<jeanne> Retesting the content has problems of recreating the same circumstances for dynamic pages

Wilco: talking about adaptive versus prescriptive test and procedural test
... maybe Rain can talk through

<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to say I missed the question for the larger group, what will you be bringing to the larger group for discussion?

Rain: 4 question alides will do high level now
... looking at naming, and adaptive versus procedural
... both adaptive and procedural and defining [from slides]
... thats first discussion point

<Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to say I think there may be a third type of adaptive, those relying on internal variations

Rachael: based on internal, visible controls as an example

<Lauriat> qv?

Rain: if internal like visible controls, what makes it adaptive is to already know if controls are visible in different ways

Shawn: similar question to Rachel
... in scoping group, testing multiple ways, talls into adapt how evaluating based on context

<Chuck> let Shadi respond ahead of me

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to ask whether "Adaptive" tests would include the kind of test cases where you adjust how you evaluate based on context (ex: multiple ways, info &

Rain: adaptve is a way of testing needs to adapt for condtions

Shadi: external to author, might relate to concept of accessibility supported

<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to make an observation about prescriptive tests

Chuck: not sure i get perscriptive tests
... getting perscriptive tests or is it different?

Jaunita: thought usability testing versus procedural

Rain: to slide 15 and What are we calling ‘tests’

<Lauriat> The discussion point slides outline things really nicely, thank you for including these!

Rain: either computational or qualitative
... will it be equitably met

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: jeanne, Lauriat, jenniferS, Rain, jaunita_george, janina, kirkwood, maryjom, Makoto, ToddL, Rachael, Laura_Carlson, sarahhorton, Wilco, Jem, Poornima
Present: jeanne, Lauriat, jenniferS, Rain, jaunita_george, janina, kirkwood, maryjom, Makoto, ToddL, Rachael, Laura_Carlson, sarahhorton, Wilco, Jem, Poornima
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: kirkwood
Inferring Scribes: kirkwood

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)