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

<scribe> scribe: Chuck

AGWG announcement

jeanne: Link to this weeks agenda.

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1yLYeNcybGxRu43KdrVUcOCL6iXsy6-gxl9-lbyr90dI/edit#slide=id.p

<jeanne> scribe+ Continuing the conformance discussion

<scribe> scribe: Chuck

Writing outcomes as user needs

Jeanne: We discussed how we wanted to approach this topic. We decided to do some prototyping of what this could look like based on existing guidelines that have already been written for WCAG 3.
... I did some prep and found some docs that could guide us today. Starting with user need process. This was written back in 2019. This was the early process for writing new content.

<jeanne> Content Creation Process https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gfYAiV2Z-FA_kEHYlLV32J8ClNEGPxRgSIohu3gUHEA/edit#heading=h.s6cmfinlgb3q

Jeanne: This links to "define user needs". Puts user needs at center.
... We do have some updates we will use today. It also references WCAG understanding.
... Even though says it was in 2019, it was updated in 2021 by Errors subgroup when enhancing the writing process.
... <reads the process>
... I thought we would start today....
... Alternative text. I'd like to start by going through an inventory of user flows.
... This is the work Makoto did yes.

Gregg: Whenever I do something like this I do a sniff test. This approach, there are an infinite number of user needs. It would take 15 years... we'd be through half.
... It's kind of like personas there. You can't design to 10 personas, you'd leave out a lot.
... Do we have a comprehensive list of user needs?

jeanne: You are new to this group, we've had 6 groups go through successfully. It's been tried and true.

Gregg: I did a user needs thing, we developed to a standard. Pages long. Much more general. It doesn't even begin to get to detail. Several people have gone through?
... Are we done?

MichaelC: We are engaging in an exercise to see how this works. I agree with a math, there are a lot of user needs. We should flag as a known issue and go through the exercise.

Jeanne: You are new to the group, and you are making suggestions to change what we have agreed to. I recommend you take a bit of time and learn.

Gregg: I asked about how this possible. Would appreciate the question being answered.

Jeanne: 6 groups went through this exercise successfully. It has been demonstrated. We are bui...

MichaelC: I think the question from you is is this the direction we want to go? It's a thought exercise to help us. Components may come into some other proposal. We need to leave this as a given at the moment.

Suzanne: I think I can answer Gregg's question. It's not perfect. It serves as a brainstorming exercise. We fill in the content until it becomes repetitive, and then we stop.

<MichaelC_> qq+

Gregg: I'm concerned that this is something we've been working on for years. People have been talking about it for a decade, when I look at something I know that there are tough questions that need to be answered before we proceed, and we are avoiding those tough questions.
... Instead of us tackling them again. These activities are interesting and informative, but they aren't asking the big questions that need to be answered. And conformance is one of them.
... This seems to not be a conformance discussion. We haven't addressed the big questions. I think we need to sit back, figure out big picture stuff, and come back at this again.
... Where we have a unified context. That's my concern. Working on developing one more guideline.

Michael: This conversation is digressing from the agenda, we need to have this conversation in another place. Some things are being deliberitely reviewed later in the process.
... We need to go through these exercises. I'll stop here. We need to go through the exercise.

<Zakim> MichaelC_, you wanted to react to SuzanneTaylor

Gregg: I would like us to know the objective of the exercise.

Rachael: To look at whether or not rewriting outcomes from user needs side instead of outcome side is better. It does not address conformance because that is in the main group, and not this TF's mission at this time.
... If you wish discuss how chairs are handling, we are welcome to discuss with you outside the conversation.

Gregg: I apologize the topic, because that's the link I clicked on.
... About the user need approach. When we looked at approaching from outcome vs users. We found that anytime we used the word "users"...
... 2 problems popped up. Which users? There was about 165 different types and combinations of disabilities. It was very challenging. The other thing is what the product can do, because the person authoring the page may not understanding the full depth and breadth.
... We don't do that.

Rachael: We can try, it's worth bringing the group along even we are doing an exercise to help the group learn.
... We will adjourn this meeting we will start again next week.

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, janina, Makoto, sarahhorton, SuzanneTaylor, Chuck, Rachael, Azlan
Present: jeanne, Lauriat, janina, Makoto, sarahhorton, SuzanneTaylor, Chuck, Rachael, Azlan
Found Scribe: Chuck
Inferring ScribeNick: Chuck
Found Scribe: Chuck
Inferring ScribeNick: Chuck

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.)