time for subgroup meeting. see https://
docs.google.com/ spreadsheets/ d/ 1fg1rjjvlGtzn8m8rN9ThKalnL9F6g8N8AEHodARWkuc/ edit#gid=0
<lisa> time for subgroup meeting. see https://
Lisa: Let's start with setting a time
… I made this poll
… There isn't an obvious time
… The 2 times that are most likely is Monday, after the typical COGA call
… This helps some because it groups the COGA calls together
… For me, I get tired for the 2nd meeting.
… Does anyone else find 2 meetings in a row difficult?
<lisa> prefer one meeting after another option 1
<lisa> prefer 2 diffrent days
<lisa> option 2
<Rain> option 1 but with a longer break in between (10 mins)
0 since some meetings may be hard to get to
Lisa: I am not seeing a huge preference one way or the other
<julierawe> Lisa, when is the new COGA taskforce meeting? Mondays at 11am ET?
David F: It can be exhausting
<lisa> yes Mondays at 11am ET?
David F: this may only matter to those participating in the subgroup
Lisa: It may be harder for the person chairing
<Becca_Monteleone> For me, it's easier to schedule if its just one block, but happy to split if that's the group preference.
Lisa: I don't lead most subgroups
Lisa: The big issue, then, is when can people make it
Lisa: The 2 best times are
… Monday, after the 1st call
… (noon, Boston time)
… Rashmi cannot make almost any of the times
… I have asked to see if there can be an alternative time for the Mental Health subgroup
… EA can't make it
… Jennie is a maybe
<EA> Sorry Monday is not great as really is a work day - episodic is probably right for me as well if Monday is the day...
Jennie: I can make some of the meetings on Monday, and if I know ahead it is easier, but will sometimes need to drop all of a sudden
Rain: This is a popular time for meetings, so there are times I cannot attend
Lisa: We can work with this, if that is ok with you.
Rain: I am only involved in some.
Lisa: OK, so for the ones that you are chairing, we have to be sure you are available for those.
… Becca - would you like to chair some in the future?
Becca: Not particularly. I think I will remain a light participant, participating in the Language subgroup
… If I have the schedule far enough in advance I can try to make that work.
<Becca_Monteleone> I did too! On Thursdays at 11, I am teaching
Lisa: 1st we were talking about Monday
… But then we were talking about Thursday
… John K - you are not available then, or sometimes?
John K: sometimes. Every 3 weeks I have a meeting on Thursdays at that time
Lisa: ok. That sums up subgroup meetings
EA: I am also episodic. If I know I need to come on a Monday, that is fine.
… I can't block it out.
… I prefer Thursday, and already have that blocked out
John K: It is the idea of a new slot that makes it difficult
EA: but this is only for the subgroups?
Lisa: Yes. But it wouldn't be every week - only for the weeks you want to attend.
Lisa: People can focus on their interests
… Monday seems more popular
… It is more difficult for Jennie, but easier for Rain. Both can sometimes make it.
… And Becca, and John K.
<kirkwood> +1 to 12 noon boston, Monday
Lisa: I think we will stick with Monday, at noon Boston, UK 5pm, 7pm in Israel. But we will take a 10 minute break between meetings.
… Does that sound good?
EA: Is that 2 meetings?
Lisa: I got the impression that it is now better to have both meetings on the same day.
… The main meeting is moving to Monday because more people could come.
… But it is often a holiday in the United States
… I think the subgroup meetings became more popular when they are on the same day.
ShawnT: 2 hours on Monday I cannot do. This may be something other people may also have.
… To do 2 hours in a row is a lot harder to find in a complete block, then 1 hour on each day, for me personally.
Lisa: Since we have confirmed the main meeting on Monday...
ShawnT: Every 2nd week I have a meeting from 1-2 on Monday...I assumed this was just for a one hour meeting
… I can do 1 hour on Monday, 1 hour on Thursday
Lisa: I also find it easier, the same as you
… We have more people that can make it on Thursday
… The time now is Thursday, 11am Boston.
DavidF: I will change my 0 to a +1
… I like a later meeting anyway
Lisa: We have decided on 11am Boston on Thursday for the subgroup meeting
… We can change it after a few months if everyone is getting confused.
Lisa: I will also check in with Rashmi, to see when she can make it
… for the Mental Health subgroup, if I don't come, she can do it late in the day in America
… If I do come, she can do it earlier.
… Maybe we need to find a different time.
… Who is intending on coming to the Mental Health subgroup meetings?
Lisa: if it is at a time that is convenient for you
David F: I hope to be more active next year
<lisa> abby is central
Abbey: It is easier for me if it is not grouped together.
Lisa: OK, I will speak to Rashmi
Jennie: we have to keep the images subgroup of Friday afternoons because of the schedule of the designers
Lisa: OK, thanks
… And thank you, everyone for working on this
… Abbey, about what time can you start with these types of calls?
Abbey: 8am Central, which is 9am Boston
Lisa: Thank you
<lisa> next item
Lisa: We need to find a time that is from 9am Boston, and on
Lisa: Now we will check in with the sub-groups, and actions
… Mental Health - Rashmi is not here
… We had a short meeting
… We are still trying to finish the literary reviews. Has anyone done a review for mental health?
… If you are late, Rashmi can help if necessary
Lisa: Hopefully after the holiday we can finish this, then work on the analysis
… Then we should be ready to get back to this group
Rain: For the structural review group
… Kiki is working with a researcher on our team
… who will be leading the qualitative study
… This will be in early quarter 1
… We also have an active card sort, with 17 responses
… I have shared by email
… 1 is through a card sort activity, and a way to participate through a spreadsheet
… Different ways to participate
… If you have already done it, please do not do it again
<Rain> Drag and drop interface to participate in the card sort: https://
Rain: instructions are in the email to the Task Force
… I resent it this morning
… or yesterday afternoon
<Rain> If you prefer to use a spreadsheet: look for the email to the task force from yesterday afternoon, December 14
Lisa: You mentioned this in the email: this is an excellent one for colleagues of yours to do, who are not necessarily are not so on top of
… Making Content Usable
… For someone looking for something on forms, will you know where to look? That is the type of information
… For some of us, we know where things should be, or have ideas about it
… People who are less familiar, it is really useful for us to see if they can put the patterns under the objectives that we chose
Kiki: We are doing that
… I gave it to the community group, which also has a lot of people that work in the accessibility space
… I also gave it to some other teams
… They should have some familiarity
… It is also helpful for anyone here
… Some people here still may find it useful to do
Lisa: Clear Language we are picking up after the holidays
Julie: Looking forward to getting back into the work, and moving it forward after hibernation
Lisa: Test plan and strategy
ShawnT: We asked members to propose an outline of the testing method that they think would be the best
… We have a meeting after this to go over the proposals
Lisa: I thought it was to make an outline?
<ShawnT> Testing Subgroup document: https://
Lisa: Then there is the research plan and strategy. I had a call with Aaron. I will reach out to David S
… We will have the 1st check in on Aaron's work on the 9th of January
… We have 18 responses
… Rain - how many people are using the documents?
Rain: I looked at what Roy had sent, keeping in mind that data is from June and July 2022
… On average, per day, we had around 90 page views (unique) on Content Usable
… We had about 4 unique page views on the user research, and about 5 on the gap analysis
… This is an average - roughly 3-4 on those 2 per day
… In June and July
Lisa: It sounds to me that 18 is a decent sample size. Do you agree, Kiki?
… We got 18 responses to the survey. Is this a sufficient sample size?
Kiki: How long has the webpage been live?
Rain: this content has been live for a couple of years, but the data is only from June and July this year
Lisa: Unique means unique for those days. Example: I go to those documents quite a few times over a month. Some may be revisiting
Kiki: With 18 responses...
… Let me think
… Normally you do it based on your estimated population
… If it is unique view is this per day? If I visit tomorrow, is that also a unique view?
Lisa: So we don't know our population, then. A research group may go every day.
Kiki: I think it is still worth to analyze, but take it with a grain of salt
… Usually response rates for a population can be relatively low when you send out a survey
… Having something like 10% but we don't know what the population is
<lisa> Sending it out https://
Kiki: I think it can still be looked at and taken into consideration
… Thank you Kiki
… We do have a spreadsheet if anyone wants to make a last blitz
… Last chance to send it out.
… It would be helpful if we got a few more responses.
Lisa: The results we do have are interesting
… I will respond in the main group with that
Images subgroup is requesting your feedback: https://
… Can we get on an agenda soon?
Lisa: would January 9th work?
Jennie: yes please!
Rain: A point of clarification
… We are trying to have an example of a well done page, but we will pull out
… smaller examples of very specific patterns
… Within the document itself, we would only be highlight small pieces of some patterns
… These particular images you are reviewing will not cover every pattern
… We will have other images that cover those patterns
… But we don't want to get anything wrong, even if it is not one that we are illustrating
John K: Would it be good to have those goals, or a sentence, on the document?
Rain: I do think that makes sense
Rain: I will add that to the document
Jennie: there are 2 images, listed in no particular order.
Lisa: I think that is the subgroup meetings
… We are having a check in with RTQF on the 25th
… They are the research group within APA
… Jason White, Kevin, a couple of others
… We need ot have it then because it is their regular meeting time
… They have members needing the sign language interpreters they already have booked for that time
… That is a Wednesday, at 4pm Israel time
… I think that is an hour before the meeting we are in right now
… It may be worth for some people, like Rain and John K, actually everyone
… What we have found is that a lot of the work missed cognitive related information
… If they are gathering user needs on text to speech, or something like that, for accessibility requirements
… They are often missing out cognitive related issues
… What we want to do is look over their methodology and see if we can improve on it, so it would crop up
… as they are working
… Example: if they are doing a literary review, then cognitive related information gets included
… I'm wondering if the term "web accessibility" or WCAG has excluded COGA in a lot of ways
… And therefore we need to try again with disability specific, or category specific information
… So that when doing research, there is stuff we have not found!
… They are doing so much work
… If this is of interest, please attend
… Rachael has asked if this can become a note on doing good research
<lisa> jennie: the terminology realy makes a diffrence
<lisa> jennie: i can help with this
<lisa> are they accessing the lists that already crawl
<lisa> maybe we can help with sharing the lists of reserch that has been curated
Lisa: David and I are on AStep which is another group sharing this kind of research
… maybe we could use their wiki or something like that
DavidF: I shared Content Usable with them - it will be part of the White Paper they will submit
Lisa: Thank you David
<lisa> take up item 4
Rachael: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (AG) is not meeting for a few weeks
… The charter review went through and we are in an extended charter period right now
… We have 2.2 in the final wrap up stages
… There is a meeting tomorrow, then we will reissue the candidate recommendation for WCAG 2.2
… Then that kicks off another 90 days
… We will pick up in January on WCAG 3 work
… with some proposed documentation to capture everything we have done in the fall
… After we have that approved it will be time to pick back up with the COGA related guidance
Lisa: I completely missed that the rechartering was happening
… Did someone from COGA review it?
Rachael: I am not aware of a problem. I believe there were COGA groups that were there
… there was discussion around ensuring the task forces were supported
… Please do share any concerns
<Rain> I reviewed it
<lisa> take up item 2
Lisa: ok, good
<lisa> take up item 3
Lisa: Please sign up to scribe
… I will put, randomly, tomorrow, the subgroup meetings
… If there are times you cannot make it, and you are chairing one of the subgroups
… Send it to me before Sunday, I can take that into consideration
*Becca needs access to some documents. Rain - can you give her access?
<Rachael> Regarding the charter Section 2.2 covers and calls out the COGA deliverables including gap analysis, research, and Making Content Usable https://
Lisa: You can also get back to me if you cannot make a time that gets scheduled, but it is helpful if you can provide the information ahead of time.
… Check your schedules for Thursdays.
… I will do January, February, and March
<Becca_Monteleone> Thank you!
<Rain> Access to the shared drive granted to Becca and Kiki
<ShawnT> Testing Subgroup document: https://
<EA> Clear language group will be hopefully giving more guidance in the New Year as not heard from them since TPAC
Shawn is leading the meeting - Link for the testing subgroup document - ideas and outlines have been added to the document so Shawn wanted to discuss content.
Jennie asked if the document could be displayed so others can see it.
Lisa made a series of topics such as 4.8.1 as an example of might be included. Intro and then testing the process - what is required to ensure you are conforming - one test is to confirm and the other is the unit tests... are these things included in your testing? 1. Checking the process 2. Design check list, 3. Unit tests - Yes/No procedure
Lisa then went through a section about a team having the right representation and when people are making requirements - are they included? Also has the research included coga? Then need to consider what in the design checklist is relevant to your setting.
Unit testing is in a different section - can be automated and then user testing is a big one with an example - again too, 4.8.1 so in this case make sure there are disabled users included. Make sure it is possible to get feedback and then is it managed and sympathetically processed.
Lisa then went on through the document discussing how the unit test might pass and fail.
Lisa felt that testing the process is the most important but felt that probably people will consider the unit testing as being most used.
Shawn if there were any questions...
Julie - zoomed out rather than pin pointing one example. Julie asked if there was not going to be user testing for every pattern but more for achieving the objectives. The problem being that organisations may not have the bandwidth to always do user testing for every single pattern. May need to look at the big objectives and provide guidance on it all as an overview for general testing for coga - making it applicable anywhere not just linked to Content [CUT]
<ShawnT> awk lisa
Julie also asked how often do you need to do testing - so not always playing catchup and also consder the scoring. Does Unit testing get weighted more heavily than say design testing... need to consider these issues.
<kirkwood> +1 to user testing points by Julie. especially when we are talking about 10.8% of US population with cogneitive disabilities according to CDC)
Lisa wanted to highlight that in Content Usable we had user testing for every objective not for every pattern as this is not always possible. Content Usable has a whole section on this type of testing. May be able to make it more granular. Lisa mentioned co-morbidity as well and looking at the coga testing. Also testing guidance for more general items such as the number of people with disabilities to help with the user testing.
Need to consider testing in local situations with people willing to help but payment for time needs to be considered.
Julie wants to get more specifics into the guidance for testing as a ideal - more concrete idea as to how the process is carried out
Lisa highlighted that when we offered the guidance there were some queries about the amount we had done regarding testing because people use different methodologies so need to make sure we are working with the experts in the field
Shawn add that there are many companies that do testing working with specific disabilties. So may need to consider going to them for support.
<lisa> +1 to jenny. this is what we need to capter
Jennie: knows one group who includes people with coga impairments then need to consider the process as they go through the tests in terms of validity due to the range of difficulties
Julie: felt that Google has user with a range of disabilities and there are other organisations work with those who have disabilties
Julie felt it was important to show how to do user testing well as liable to have push-back - so need to make it possible to demonstrate good practice for working with those who have cognitive impairments
Lisa add that it would be possible to do this very well as we have links with teams working in the field.
Shawn said that he worked with Jennie on the content and introduced the three different types of testing - usability and prcedural and who is the audience for the document.
Shawn went on saying there is a need to think about which groups this document might be used by.
Shawn: need to consider how many people needed for usability, how to find them, and what actual type of testing would be carried out - task based etc.
Jennie added the need to compare atomic and usability testing - need to clarify the process of both testing types.
Shawn went on about resources needed - time, budget, access to people etc. testing process, links to resources etc pass/fail. May need documentation for testing such as a walkthrough.
<Zakim> lisa, you wanted to say we use the term process diffrnetly
Lisa: Process as a term is being used differently - need to make sure this is explained... one could be company processes and will they be inclusive compared to a UX team - user needs research - are you looking at cognitive mental health to spearhead a really inclusive approach.
Lisa went to elaborate on the research that can be carried out such as selecting user profiles and need to make sure people understand the working processes if this is possible but it is another document.
Lisa asked if we were looking at a roadmap or a maturity model that has inclusion at its heart. Maybe possible with a large company but not so easy for the smaller ones.
Jennie: Terminology testing subgroup not looking for the maturity model type of change and so it may be important to separate the different documents as those with different roles in an organisation will be looking at very different documents for guidance. So need to divide up the type of content needed for each of the groups who might be looking at it.
Lisa also mentioned that as this was important may be there is a need to go back to the main group to consider this in a slightly different way compared to other documents.
Lisa agreed with Shawn that there is a need to help people cope with this process however large or small the organisation is - everyone needs to be able to cope with the tests in a way that suits their needs
Shawn agreed with Lisa and Jennie added that she had to ask herself the question as to how and who would be using the document.
Need to make it really clear who might be the users of the testing document.
Shawn felt that having presented the document there may not be time to make decisions.
Lisa felt there is a need to see where there are gaps and what can also be missed out
Julie felt this was a good next step - pulling in what is needed and what can be omitted as a next step.
<Jennie> EA: There is a lot in the document. Somehow, there needs to be some separating out of the various sections.
<Jennie> ...In light of the different users - that is a huge problem.
<Jennie> ...Working with computer scientists is different than working with accessibility experts that are testing for accessibility.
<Jennie> ...They are experts in testing other people's websites.
<Jennie> ...You have those that are experts in developing websites.
<Jennie> ...They need the same unit tests, but are coming at it from a different angle.
<Jennie> ...They both need more on COGA.
<Jennie> ...I think that is the dilemma we have with Making Content Usable.
<Jennie> ...They are different organizations.
<Jennie> ...I was keen on how we pursued the developing, and was glad we did that.
<Jennie> ...But there are people who don't know coding, but they know something is not right.
<Jennie> ...They have to look it up before they do the test.
<Jennie> ...The ability for some to understand the computer science makes some things not usable for all that need it.
<Jennie> Julie: do we need to create different guidance?
<Jennie> EA: We will have different people with different skills.
<Jennie> Lisa: I had processes as an overall thing (as an organization)
<Jennie> ...I have a second section, which is user testing.
<Jennie> EA: this works for the different users.
<julierawe> I have to leave for a 12pm meeting, thank you!