13:21:44 RRSAgent has joined #coga 13:21:44 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/09/01-coga-irc 13:21:44 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:21:47 Meeting: Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 13:21:47 Date: 01 September 2022 13:22:16 agenda+ Updates with task requests and actions , 13:22:29 clear agenda 13:22:34 agenda+ Updates with task requests and actions , 13:22:48 agenda+ Tpac agenda and preparation 13:23:13 Agenda+ Mentral health https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Subgroups 13:23:49 agenda+ Ag update 13:41:00 agenda+ ferifiable credentials .. https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/research-questions/wiki/Some_use_cases_for_verifiable_credentials 13:43:20 Fazio has joined #Coga 13:51:51 stevelee has joined #coga 13:54:11 kirkwood has joined #COGA 13:54:27 present+ 13:58:18 present+ 13:59:14 Rain has joined #coga 13:59:48 Jennie has joined #coga 13:59:55 present+ 14:00:03 present+ 14:00:34 ShawnT has joined #coga 14:00:42 present+ 14:00:54 scribe+ rain lisa 14:00:58 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Scribe_list 14:01:12 julierawe has joined #coga 14:01:15 present+ 14:01:23 next item 14:02:19 Fazio has joined #Coga 14:02:19 Lisa: because of TPAC, a lot of subgroups won't be meeting 14:02:32 scribe+ Rain Lisa 14:02:41 Present+ 14:02:43 Lisa: so we will check in to make sure we don't get bottlenecked 14:02:53 Rashmi sent regrets 14:03:05 Le has joined #coga 14:03:13 present+ 14:03:37 Rain: structure - survey is closing September 15, so please do a last push 14:04:07 ... links: outreach record -- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xXjHPCfWm00iAJqmjdwFq_RQ80vKwwxFAoiEGI3NOlM/edit 14:04:16 Form: https://bit.ly/content-usable-v2 14:05:05 Jennie: updates on test plan and strategy which is meeting later today and looking at things within content usable to see how we can best make testable statements and processes for each of the items in the document 14:05:30 David: ICT asking me to run an innovation sprint to create testing for people with cognitive disabilities 14:05:58 Rain: part of mEnabled the week of October 24, David leading it 14:07:18 Lisa: research plan and strategy, some back and force with Rashmi and Rain about the introduction. Conclusion is okay with what we have knowing that we have to keep it there and made a lot of text adjustments to make it as easy to understand 14:07:33 Jennie: images update, group had a robust conversation Friday 14:07:50 ... Rain provided annotations and concepts, and designers have tasks getting ready for September meeting 14:08:29 ... currently tightly scoping work based on specific design elements that the subgroup has identified 14:08:38 ... once we get a tighter idea around that, will review the other documents 14:08:43 EA has joined #coga 14:08:46 q+ 14:09:00 Lisa: do you want us to continue gathering examples for inspiration 14:09:08 ack next 14:09:36 pages in the whild: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TeSP612Z9Zf7Srojdbq0te615CE0g5wB6puCBVLXziw/edit# 14:10:35 Lisa: when you do see good examples, find pages can be good examples of one or two things but not everything, so indicate what you thought was good 14:10:53 Rain: yes, these are helpful, had to scope the designers more tightly for now, but will be looking to these for inspiration 14:11:53 Lisa: current high priority is APA's collaboration tool accessibility feedback 14:12:26 ... we have a link to our feedback, please take a look and put your thoughts in 14:12:46 Task review: https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/research-questions/wiki/Collaboration_Tool_Accessibility 14:12:55 Our feedback document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14Ha6bbgDMMo_zLLWa3yz88mkwL2Dz7eczWXQTB6mcPc/edit?usp=sharing 14:13:42 Lisa: the EO group has said they are continually refining this, so I'm wondering if we want to do a pass and offer key points 14:14:01 ... they've tried to be inclusive but felt like it wasn't how we do it 14:14:16 first pass to me it seems like it needs a lot of work 14:14:27 ... the language is not the right phrasing 14:14:34 q? 14:14:43 Lisa: think we should do a review, but don't think this is the highest priority 14:14:44 q+ 14:14:59 ... does the team want to look at making events accessible as well? Or just hope it will resolve by itself? 14:15:04 q+ 14:15:17 Le: might be worth doing as a joint thing since we are already doing one 14:15:52 ack kirkwood 14:15:56 ack next 14:16:02 kirkwood: struck me that this needs a lot of work 14:16:06 q+ Jennie 14:16:19 kirkwood: not as sensitive as it needs to be 14:16:22 ack Jennie 14:16:34 +1 to John's comments. Odd that the document saved says 'accessible presentations' rather than 'meetings' Mixed messages etc. 14:16:50 Jennie: haven't reviewed the EO document, but think we need to start with the original timeline to satisfy the obligation we committed to, then we can copy it over to the other group 14:16:56 ... that way they are aware 14:17:08 ... if there is time, we can do this, too, but be cautious of what we commit to 14:17:18 q- 14:17:22 Lisa: okay, going to say that this will be a follow on after we have looked at the APA document 14:17:50 ... also lowering the priority, not because it is important but because of Jennie's point about overextending 14:17:54 +1 14:17:58 ... we can point them in the right directions 14:18:13 Lisa: any objections? 14:18:17 (no response) 14:18:34 Lisa: verifiable credentials, which will be part of TPAC 14:18:38 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TDPA3R1Y4hVn4Eq9NlRTZ_hg4cpd_8ZtpWoFiVuF_lk/edit#heading=h.w7xxqe7qzxx5 14:18:48 ... they are creating a set of user needs 14:19:04 credials user needs https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/research-questions/wiki/Some_use_cases_for_verifiable_credentials 14:19:14 Lisa: they will discuss in TPAC whether they want to take this further 14:19:26 ... might be that we decide to get involved if they decide to take it further 14:19:41 ... giving a quick read, think it's a bit like block chain, where you can verify what things are used for what 14:19:53 Privacy implications? 14:20:26 q+ 14:20:26 Q? 14:20:31 ... think there could be a lot of potential here across user needs 14:20:33 ack next 14:20:35 very important 14:21:01 q+ 14:21:01 q+ 14:21:06 David: seems very important to us to make sure it can't be abused and exploited 14:21:31 Lisa: we have a previous document on metadata support 14:21:53 ... one thing that comes to mind is that organizations don't like to give you say quick phone access, but if you are known to be disabled, then they ought to have to let you 14:22:01 ack next 14:22:26 EA: we've been experimenting with this, doing a voting session on app for users with AAC access and using blockchain 14:22:30 I have some real world examples of why companies say no to this 14:22:36 ... each of those elements requires a different security way to enter 14:22:51 ... really are limited as to how easy they can make the security 14:23:01 ... one of mine requires me to have twelve secure words 14:23:20 ... the only way to link between browser and app is to use those 12 words, and a password 14:23:33 ... so the difficulty what is required to get you into the secure pathway 14:23:41 ... so this needs to be figured out 14:24:08 EA: and once you get in, you may have to go through the process again to get to another part of the block chain 14:24:15 ... they are all separate so they cannot be broken into 14:24:26 ... need to do a ton of research first to make sure this is usable 14:24:36 q+ 14:24:39 ack next 14:24:40 Lisa: a key question and wondering if it possible to raise these at TPAC 14:25:22 kirkwood: agreeing with aspect of remembering 12 words or names to get into the secure system 14:25:33 +q 14:25:42 ... but the blockchain model should reduce that because should be safer and easier once you get in 14:25:55 ... get in through your own device 14:26:28 ack next 14:26:56 EA: blockchain by itself can look after your security 14:27:05 ... the problem comes with what you have to interact with to get into the blockchain 14:27:22 ... the bit storing my votes was the blockchain bit, but getting into the voting system was the challenge 14:27:39 Biometrics 14:28:05 Lisa: there will be work to do in the way of use cases 14:28:18 ... and overreaching questions before we suggest using this 14:28:23 ... make sure this is itself useable 14:28:41 ... these are the key questions 14:28:54 Lisa: think need to take an action to ask APA about verifiable credentials 14:28:55 +1 to biometrics 14:29:45 Lisa: asking David about the deadline next week for mental health form submission 14:29:50 David: thinks good with deadline 14:30:01 Lisa: feel free anyone finding it overwhelming to reach out to Lisa 14:30:13 Lisa: switching to guardianship drafts 14:30:33 Jennie: Michael Cooper is setting up the meeting. Asking Lisa and JohnK to confirm availability 14:31:14 Michael: proposed time is Wed. Sept. 7 at 11am ET 14:31:22 kirkwood: that time works fo rme 14:31:47 Lisa: thank you, Michael, for making this happen 14:32:18 Lisa: asked about specifications for images 14:32:31 Jennie: yes, we have what we need for image specifications 14:32:43 Lisa: asking JohnK about research for mental health 14:32:51 kirkwood: yes, haven't completed yet 14:33:06 Lisa: will start recruiting 14:33:19 Lisa: asking Julie if anything in her list should be removed? 14:33:58 Julie: working on the examples for TPAC, and John R should be returning to the project soon 14:34:13 Lisa: hoping for at least one example 14:34:34 Julie: EO is on hold, making TPAC the top priority and know Kevin at EO is busy with other things as well 14:34:55 Le: if someone else available to take the literary reviews on my list, that would be helpful 14:34:58 Kiki has joined #coga 14:35:02 ... can try to do one of them 14:35:23 Lisa: pick one and put your name next to it so that others know where to get it 14:35:57 Lisa: my updates, did look at collaborative meetings 14:36:08 ... research questions took a look at that, and there is a lot to do there, 14:36:23 ... worried about balancing and spending all our time working on research questions 14:36:24 q+ 14:37:04 ... will go back to the group on what they are actively working on, since there is so much there that can actually impact us 14:37:07 Q+ 14:37:24 q+ to suggest generic research questions 14:37:25 ... haven't tested survey with a screen reader yet, but want to do that by TPAC so that we can start sending it out at TPAC 14:37:42 ack next 14:37:43 MichaelC, you wanted to suggest generic research questions 14:38:02 MichaelC: research questions, are you wanting to review priorities of the task force, or suggest questions? 14:38:26 Lisa: no, Janina mentioned that we can keep on top of what they are doing by looking at their wiki page, and saw there are tons of things there that can take up all our time 14:38:46 MichaelC: I think what Janina really meant is that if we have research questions, we can bring them to the RQTF 14:38:55 .. please don't get lost in the wiki itself, 14:39:04 ... COGA questions should be high level 14:39:18 ... we can circle back to details down the road 14:39:26 ... will require some interaction to make something a research priority 14:39:33 ... possible to come up with questions that will engage their interest 14:40:07 Lisa: that's different from what I understood. Understood that they've created documents that we've been upset by or we have made suggestions to late, so need to stay on top of their work 14:40:18 ... it might be a good idea to ask them for help with our research, as well 14:40:28 ack next 14:40:42 Lisa will circle back with Janina 14:41:11 Fazio: national science foundation reached out to me recently to be part of a grant program to fund research, so we might be able to use that as a way to help us answer some of these questions 14:41:27 Lisa: did something like that effectively for the european commission 14:41:44 ... we can learn from that model 14:41:53 David: will look for it and sent it to the group 14:42:10 Lisa: just a reminder that we won't be responding as W3C COGA, but rather as individuals 14:42:35 David: we can review the solicitation together and find out the best route to get us help because this will be a lot of work 14:43:11 Lisa: adding an action item to David's list to follow up on this 14:44:24 ShawnT: mid-september is when we will start the project to link to Making Content Usable. Already been tranlsated into French, but need to verify it is understandable to the French community 14:44:28 next item 14:45:17 Lisa: Adapt group (formerly personalization) wanted a get to know each other meeting 14:45:28 ... may find an hour in the morning on Tuesday or Thursday 14:46:07 Lisa: maybe someone should be making a presentation for functional needs and what we did? 14:47:57 q+ 14:48:38 Lisa: asking about what other meetings or work we may want to do, writing it into the schedule (not scribing every word) 14:49:02 ... when it comes to content usable, we are not all on top of it as much as each other 14:49:22 ... also might want to brainstorm ideas? 14:49:30 ... are there other things in Content Usable we should be doing? 14:49:40 ... we know we want it to be more testable, for example, but maybe there are other ideas 14:49:55 ... a really good brainstorm session may be very useful, and Tuesday morning would be key 14:50:16 ... then we can have working time on the testing process 14:50:18 q- 14:50:21 ... does that sound like a good morning 14:50:24 ack next 14:50:24 +1 14:50:25 q+ 14:51:15 Rain: I can have some preliminary ideas ready to share for revising structure by that time 14:51:19 ack next 14:51:30 Lisa: that would be great, but also want to make sure there is time for very open conversation 14:52:15 Lisa: then if we have time, overview of mental health review and what patterns we are finding, mid-analysis conversation 14:52:48 ack next 14:53:25 Lisa: some of the schedule times noted may need to be adjusted 14:53:37 ... will update when we know specifics 14:54:18 Lisa: do we want to try for joint meeting with EO, or leave as is? 14:54:39 Julie: KrisAnne did not think working session would be the way to go, instead to put very specific suggestions on the document for them 14:55:05 Lisa: it would be worth reaching out to EO during this time for people who are there, have a drink with them, and establish a relationship 14:55:19 ... we want to widen the scope of how important this work is together 14:55:43 ack next 14:58:19 RRSAgent, publish minutes 14:58:19 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/01-coga-minutes.html Lisa 14:58:25 Lisa: five minutes break 14:58:35 ... return at 3 minutes past the hour 14:58:36 *Canadians are awesome (wink!) 15:04:58 topic: lang and testing subgroups 15:05:23 agenda+ Clear Language and Test Types subgroup meeting 15:05:37 zakim, take up item 6 15:05:37 agendum 6 -- Clear Language and Test Types subgroup meeting -- taken up [from Rain] 15:08:49 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Tve0g7pRufB5iShWwstwrfGdDtbn8YdsHEyN7Coj1vU/edit#slide=id.p 15:09:06 Rain: things are changing rapidly 15:09:20 ... so don't try to stay with that, instead follow what we've already been doing 15:09:41 ... and we will correct once the terminology and definitions have been agreed on 15:09:52 Julie: looked at ways to break off binary testing 15:10:15 ... for TPAC, asking "can clear language do binary testing?" 15:10:26 ... trying to show that yes, there is a way to do yes or no testing 15:10:48 Julie: tried to create some examples that may be universal 15:11:03 ... if you need different versions for different languages, that would be a different test type 15:11:24 ... looking for one that doesn't depend on adapting to inputs from the user 15:11:43 Julie: landed on roman numerals as a small discrete test 15:11:55 ... which shows that there are parts of clear language that can be done 15:13:45 Julie: including symbols and letters is language specific, because guidance is different in different languages 15:13:53 q+ 15:13:59 q+ 15:14:29 ... when we have parts of clear language that have different rules for different languages, how many languages do we need to do? 15:15:05 ... aiming for small and manageable because hoping to have a conversation at TPAC to show that we can do this 15:15:16 ... big part that is not in here are the more complex things like common words 15:15:40 ... and whether we can set rigorous procedural testing requiring the website to say what common words they are sticking to 15:16:23 ack next 15:16:55 Lisa: procedural thing, cannot edit or make comments in the presentation 15:17:03 Julie: apologize, trying to fix that 15:17:50 Lisa: cannot add to presentation, which is fine, but asking procedurally that we set it up so that everyone can edit 15:18:08 ... noting that Hebrew is as excellent example, and isn't so simple as what we have in the document so far 15:21:17 Lisa: when we were thinking about language specific, what we were talking about is having a wiki 15:21:19 q+ 15:22:46 ack next 15:23:05 Jennie: excellent overview, two questions 15:23:42 ... some text to speech tools are less feature rich, so are we only referencing feature rich ones or all of them? 15:24:03 Julie: excellent question, pulling from making content usable, so if there is additional detail then we should add it 15:24:22 Jennie: example if take a tool like immersive reader, that is where we are going to find real differences 15:24:31 +1 to Jennie 15:24:41 ... user agents making to the machine readable components, for example 15:24:52 q+ 15:24:54 ... have to be a little more discrete 15:25:03 +1 to jennie 15:25:14 Jennie: question 2, in reference to slide 10, if referencing paragraph text alone or also apply to date entry fields 15:25:33 Would screen readers be considered text to speech technology? 15:25:33 ... there is a tieback into the way information can be taken into a data entry field and then moved back into the systems 15:25:56 ... times where for quick visual discrimination, having the number makes it easier 15:26:10 ... considering those use cases, may be more helpful to scope down even smaller to paragraph text 15:26:18 ... to help scope the conversation for TPAC 15:26:32 julierawe: great point, so specifying in a paragraph 15:26:47 ... that way not trying to scope it into non-paragraph, so that at this time it helps everyone stay together in the conversation 15:26:55 ... gives a more specific use case for now 15:27:02 ... doesn't mean we cannot broaden it out for later 15:30:07 q+ 15:30:15 +1 to splitting 15:30:33 Jennie: will be much easier to split them out because the form controls will make it too difficult and complicated 15:30:39 agreement to Jennie’s point 15:31:11 q? 15:31:37 When it comes to forms, I always point to the UK: https://design-system.service.gov.uk/patterns/dates/ 15:33:40 screen reader uses meta data 15:34:16 I'm aware of the differences, I was wondering if there was a term we can use that covers both? 15:37:45 Rain: addressed that screen readers and TTS are different 15:38:07 ... mentioned that we are changing the names of conditional and unconditional to either computational or qualitative 15:38:46 ... mentioned that identifying if a site has the accents needed or not is computational, but then have to adapt to how that is evaluated and may have different conformance in different languages 15:39:03 ... if a site is using roman numerals or not for numbers is computational, as well 15:39:55 q+ 15:40:01 ack next 15:41:31 Laughter as a group over the complexity 15:41:40 Lisa: good news is these are good examples to bring to TPAC 15:43:26 Lisa: suggesting we each take a type of test and create examples 15:44:22 +q 15:44:56 Original definitions: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1KhuTdTemRjjJIFViftKYPXc1nKhcJ4LqrQum0qOJLBI/edit#slide=id.gfe3effe5fb_0_6 15:45:27 ack next 15:46:06 EA: adaptive, would that mean ddmmyyyy if I moved to America my computer would see that my location has changed and adjust? 15:46:27 ... web developer has enabled it to become personalized? 15:49:35 q? 15:49:39 ack EA 15:50:09 julierawe: one more week before TPAC 15:50:20 ... like Lisa's idea, folks add to the deck and pick apart examples 15:51:06 So sorry I am in Namibia tomorrow till 24th Sept 15:51:15 julierawe: align on drafts next week 15:51:26 Apologies - I won't have capacity to take on a task for the next week 15:52:25 Julie: we have a conventional example (diacritics) 15:53:21 julierawe: roman numeral is computational 15:53:30 ... slide 10 is computational using adaptive method 15:53:55 Lisa: simple verb simple tense as a procedural test? 15:53:56 stevelee has joined #coga 15:54:24 julierawe: when word procedural comes up, keep in mind that some people may think it won't have any enforceability 15:54:29 ... getting organization to affirm 15:54:36 ... I want to push back on checkability 15:54:39 q+ 15:54:50 ... should get people to declare what they are doing and test against what they are declaring 15:54:55 +1 and it is auditable 15:54:55 +1 to Julie 15:55:09 ack ShawnT 15:55:24 ShawnT: isn't procedural testing where wanted to bring content usable into the content usable 15:55:56 julierawe: what we are trying to show is that there are parts of content usable that can be old school repeatable high interrater reliability tests 15:56:09 ... doesn't all have to be procedural 15:56:17 q+ 15:58:42 Julie: happy to draft common words where we get the site to tell us what they are testing against, and then we can check against it 15:59:00 q+ 15:59:19 have you met standards/guidelines and/or are you following procedures? is how to meet legal requirments. so it may or may not be confusing. 16:00:06 ack next 16:01:11 john: hard to rap your head around these diffrent tersm, iether proceduers or standards. they cant be both 16:01:16 q+ 16:01:25 ack next 16:02:57 ea: been reserch if there is the resrch on testing against a process or proceduer on how these words are used. pleale use more , but if you take 1000 words on a subject , the set ofwords is not more then a thousand complex twords 16:03:32 Q+ 16:03:50 (to say tm, controled language 16:03:54 EA: we can do it 16:04:07 julie: both rigurouse and flexible. 16:04:33 procedual may not be the right word. accessible to testeres what the words are 16:04:49 q? 16:05:05 ack next 16:06:05 disagrees with how u see procedual. if you see something being actionalble, there is the policy and the policeduer. if they didnt follow a proceduer it can be messuered, and action can be taken 16:06:11 (jennie 16:06:13 agreed with Jennie, not following procedures is binary. 16:06:58 So sorry I will be away next week. 16:07:06 Julie: we are meeting on monday, 9 am. 16:07:16 Apologies - can't meet or take a task for next week 16:08:58 sorry must drop 16:09:17 Nice work Julie! 16:09:20 Have a good week 16:09:22 RRSAgent, publish minutes 16:09:22 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/01-coga-minutes.html Lisa 17:47:51 kirkwood has joined #COGA 17:59:48 bkardell_ has joined #coga 19:08:19 kirkwood has joined #COGA 19:18:42 ShawnT has joined #coga 20:56:12 kirkwood has joined #COGA