Meeting minutes
Testing Update for APG support tables
<Matt_King> Two sets of data done for jaws for 4 of first 5 plans.
<Matt_King> SAssessment of NVDA shows that we don't need to update the NVDA data.
<Matt_King> Dillon will provde the 2nd second data set for toggle with jaws 2023.
<Matt_King> James will follow up with Dillon.
<Matt_King> Matt: are there any conflicts we need to resolve?
<Matt_King> James: No conflicts.
<Matt_King> We were able to resolve the prior conflicts without additional input.
<Matt_King> Matt: should we publish now?
Next Steps: 1. Howard land the PR for reports page that will eliminate extra rows on reports page
2. Land APG PR that Alex is working on for the changes to APG Support table that were requested
3. Get Dylans update to toggle data
4. Then publish all 5 reports to the reports page
5. The Matt makes PR to APG to add support tables to Link, Label, and Alert
Then we will be ready to share the APG preview with Apple and Vispero that will include the support tables for all 5 plans
Next three plans: Preview Slider, Dialog, Menu Navigation Button
MK: How is the testing on these going?
JS: We've completed the testing with JAWS 2023, but no other SR yet.
JS: We need to get a second tester to go through the test plans with JAWS 2023
MK: For VO, the Preview slider is already passing 100% of our tests, so does not need to be retested
MK: Next to do is to get the second set of JAW data, and then decide if we want to update the test plan data for these three with VO
MK: This seems like it would be great to have Louis perform these test if he is available. Bocoup is that possible?
Howard: It would be best to wait until the new PM comes on board, before engaging Louis
JS: We have plenty to do over the next week, so we can decide in next weeks meeting
Plan for sizing and prioritizing testing backlog
MK: When we tell the world about the new AT Support tables, and have 65 support pages, the first question people will ask is "When will we get some more?"
MK: We need to set expectations with the broader community, but also would be good to apply pressure to the AT Vendors. We will need to check in with the AT vendors regarding this plan before we make it public
MK: Right now we have a blank slate about how to approach this. I have discussed this with James a little
JS: To schedule additional test plans, we suspect we will want to look at the 16 and determine what state those are in. Some are ready to go into test queue, some need updates, some may need to add some assertions related to mode switching.
JS: The two question I have is, do we want to keep the 16 plans we have previously prioritized, or revisit the whole list and create new priorities?
MK: I think we should reopen the discussion of the entire list of test plans and get some input from the community as to what to prioritize
JS: The most important next step is to come up with the list of the plans, and their status. Then we can decide what plans are next in part based on how much work they need to be ready to test
JS: We also need a list of examples that aren't currently targeted by an existing test plan
MK: It appears to me that there will be significant value in chasing some more low hanging fruit. However, we can't avoid the more complicated ones, because they will likely have a higher value to the community
MK: We should involve the SR developers in these discussions. I think we should target 1 or 2 more complicated ones
JS: I agree
MK: Should we use a google sheet to share the test plans and their status with the community?
JS: Yes that works for us
MK: It seems to me that we need to make some progress on this fairly soon, to have these answers ready when people start review the first examples in the APG
JS: We will look into and see what we come up with
Communications of APG support table availability
MK: I think this is a big deal. I'm trying to figure out some communication post for inside Meta about this projects progress. I've started writing a section on WCAG, and realized these support tables are a game changer for WCAG
MK: I feel like once we get some comprehensive data, WCAG can use our APG support tables as the official standard. That seems to me like it is something worth talking about in a public way
MF: I think that there is a opportunity to work with the authors of WCAG 3.0
MF: We should work with the working group to make WCAG clearer to understand
MK: I think we should write a W3C blog post to communicate to tell the world what these updates mean, include testimonals, get some statements from various stakeholders. Then have this post supported by a more technical post on the Bocoup blog, that explains they have been doing on a technical level. James should we post on the PACs website?
JS: Yes we can discuss that internally
MK: I think 5 is enough support tables to show the world what this all means, especially since Radio button is included
MK: Do others agree this is a good way to tell the world?
JS: Yes
MF: Yes I think its a good idea
MK: Mike and Howard we can discuss this with Boaz
MK: I will take the lead on this and figure out who will do the writing. I can be the author for the W3C post,
MK: We can discuss how to get other people involved over the coming weeks. I imagine Vispero would love to give some testimonials especially about the work they have performed as a result of these test plans
JG: I can perform the additional testing for Slider and Menu button