<Lisa> clear agenda
<Lisa> scribe: Rain
<lisa> scribe: Rain
<lisa> zakim next item
Lisa: next week we will be
focusing on sprints and who is doing what moving forward
... checking in to see if anyone has any updates
... Jennie has set the collaborative documents meeting for
tomorrow, so if you want to be involved, reach out
Jennie: having difficulty
understanding where there is a zoom link that we can use
... is there one we can use?
Lisa: can use Lisa's or
COGA
... will email it to Jennie
... we have two subgroup meetings this week in parallel
... May 3 has a clear language meeting, and on Thurs. May 4 a
structure meeting
... and a second for mental health
Jennie: images subgroup has a meeting on Friday afternoon US time, added to COGA calendar
Lisa: will give more attention to
subgroups next week when we discuss the new sprints
... Inviting Shawn and Jennie to share
Shawn: sharing screen
<ShawnT> HTML: [4.3.6 Provide Search (Pattern)](https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#provide-search-pattern)
<ShawnT> Doc: [4.3.6 Provide Search (Pattern)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-FPbYKghJUYvn-9UzZGkANXdYCPPAFjf/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=114934085576672059156&rtpof=true&sd=true)
Shawn: picked out 10 patterns to
go through for testing initially and figured out how to test
them
... today only focusing on 2 of them, sharing links
... starting off with Search
... there are a lot of details in the patterns that would be
nice to define better to help with testing
... some patterns can be covered under others, and one test can
get both of them
<ShawnT> HTML: [4.3.6 Provide Search (Pattern)](https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#provide-search-pattern)
<ShawnT> Doc: [4.3.6 Provide Search (Pattern)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-FPbYKghJUYvn-9UzZGkANXdYCPPAFjf/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=114934085576672059156&rtpof=true&sd=true)
Shawn: example, "make it easy to undo form errors pattern" and "letting users go back"
<ShawnT> - 4.5.5 Make it Easy to Undo Form Errors (Pattern) and
<ShawnT> - 4.5.2 Let Users Go Back (Pattern)
ShawnT: created documents for
each document
... tried to come up with answers to the patterns, what kinds
of tests they are, and whether any of them could be
automated
scribing note -- refer to the documents for the details of what was written, only scribing what isn't in the document
ShawnT: also looking at "Letting
the users go back"
... a bit more complicated than Search because looking at
different ways a user might go back
<ShawnT> HTML: [4.5.2 Let Users Go Back (Pattern)](https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#let-users-go-back-pattern)
<ShawnT> Doc: [4.5.2 Let Users Go Back (Pattern)](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-_8j7udr4-lIJo5i2KWsrGMzY1LE0mvq/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=114934085576672059156&rtpof=true&sd=true)
ShawnT: if you can't access the
word doc, let Shawn know and will convert to Google Doc for
access
... lots of different mechanisms and ways to go back or
undo
... we weren't certain about things like what if the developer
disables the undo button in the agent but then creates their
own?
... some of the tests can be automated, but not all of
them
... one thing we noticed is that there are some details in the
patterns that need to be better defined
... next steps, Shawn stepping back from the subgroup for
now
... looking for other people to take up co-lead position
... but should we just wait to see what Clear Language comes up
with when defining their test?
... should we focus on defining the details in the patterns to
make them more testable?
... need more contributors, there is a lot of work ahead
Lisa: next week meant to define
the next row of sprints, so thank you to Shawn and Jennie for
this work. When we start making the sprints, question is what
is in the next sprint?
... need to define together based on KPIs
... if OK, sounds like we've come to a good break point
Rachael: on AG, have not kicked
off the subgroups yet, but many of the guidelines would benefit
greatly from COGA input
... don't have enough folks to cover all of the subgroups
... are there people in the community group we would want to
invite?
... which potentially ramps them in as invited experts
Rain: there are a few people in the community group that we can think of, Kiki and I will connect and introduce them to Lisa and Rachael
Lisa: asking if we want to also put an update for the community group onto the agenda for the week of May 10
Kiki_: we launched a form for people who might want to give feedback but don't want to or aren't able to join the group, hoping to pull that feedback together soon to share with the group
<Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to make sure folks know about the WCAG 3 survey at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/working_draft_23/
Rachael: there is a WCAG survey
that closes tonight for the working draft, last pass before
update
... if any major concerns, this is the time to let AG
know
... this is a reset from the point of view that have taken all
of the feedback, and have changed over to exploring some
different approaches
... don't think there is anything in there beyond exploratory
stage, nor conflict with what COGA wants to do
... there will be many updates going forward and opportunities
to change it
Lisa: back to Shawn and Jennie
and test plans
... really interesting drafts with these two patterns
... do we want to put in more time getting them stronger?
... or do we want to use them as a draft example and focus on
other things for the testing plan?
... what are the options for the next sprint for the test plan?
Grouping things that can be tested together? Refining the ones
here? Trying drafts of others?
Jennie: complicated, but one of
the things that they came to is that making an outline or a
table of contents
... seemed ahead of where we were
... elements that needed more definition first
... may need to break down concepts that have a word like
"easy" and further refining what easy means and what it looks
like
... to make it more concrete and defineable
... which would support the work for revisions to making
content useable
<ShawnT> +1
lisa: is there an outline draft where you could put words that need to be clarified?
Jennie: yes, we did pull them out
and listed out questions we had for the ones that we
reviewed
... they aren't all word or definition specific, but they are
in the template
Shawn: sharing template
lisa: we could also have a
baseline that we recommend, and allow people to make their own
baseline. You declare who you are excluding
... that could be practical as an alternative way of getting
around definitions, and how you define "easy" could be part of
that
ShawnT: template starts with questions which asks about what tests are needed, can they be automated, and which patterns are related
ShawnT: started with enable apis
and extensions
... there were a lot of questions about this one
... complexity about differences between web of things,
internet of things, differences between widgets, apis and
extensions, etc.
Jennie: calling attentions to
what we need to pay attention to before we can piece apart the
elements to make sure that the testable statements can be
tested
... so there is pre-work to support the work
... definitions is one, but then also going back and making
sure that we can consistently apply a term throughout the
pattern to support making it testable
Lisa: suggesting that the next
sprint (8 weeks) for this project is closing in on the template
and testing it against the ones that have already been
done
... and also testing it against the language subgroup's
work
... next sprint, zoom in on the questions, what kind of terms
need to be defined, and what answers do we have, then propose
solutions (like the baseline concept)
... even if don't define the baseline yet
Jennie: should we talk a little about the style of participation that Shawn and John were feeling was important so that those who might want to participate are aware?
ShawnT: thinking weekly meetings
to go through would be very beneficial to see where everyone is
at
... every two weeks not enough
... also, what the Clear Language subgroup is doing, may need
to see where that is going because they may end up doing the
same thing
<Jennie> +1
lisa: asking Shawn and Jennie if comfortable leaving defining the next sprint until next week? Both said yes
<lisa> next item
Becca_Monteleone: working on
updating two issue papers that have stagnated
... last week, talked about conversational interfaces and voice
systems
... biggest part was about defining what we mean by that
... wants to share that definition and get feedback before
moving onto talking through the next paper
Scribing note -- not scribing what can be found in the issue paper notes found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B1vCqlU1IF5UmqxhJAy8Khdi-kRQNPalVX8f3lCMr7w/edit#heading=h.9j8rnhzb9sv8
Becca_Monteleone: proposal is to narrow down to conversational voice systems, where the user supplies voice input and gets a response, or the other way around
Rain: asking if it is okay to
bring the ai vs. pre-programmed interfaces together into one
space since they could be so significantly different?
... or should we think about two separate papers
Becca_Monteleone: good open question
Lisa: suggesting to leave this as open questions at the bottom of the document
Becca_Monteleone: moving over to
the Wayfinding issue paper
... paper is quite old, found updates in the last 5 years
... for the most part not a lot of change to the challenges
section
... but did add a lot to the proposed solutioins
<Becca_Monteleone> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TDtuC_iMyS_X6nXwyEEAu4Abp2tXHb86/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=102321809599068419955&rtpof=true&sd=true
Becca_Monteleone: also have open
questions here, which will add to the bottom of the
document
... this document was written before mental health research was
part of the umbrella, so wondering if there are some mental
health challenges that also need to be added
lisa: smallest unit possible could imply inches, centimeters, when probably mean number of steps
Becca_Monteleone: next step: add the open question to the bottom of each document, then share with the list
lisa: asking Becca to also
include a bit on the process used to find these
... so that we can identify if we think more needsto be
added?
<lisa> rain will see if she can get access.
Becca_Monteleone: also looking for help for access
lisa: reminding everyone to sign up to scribe
<lisa> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Scribe_list
Zakim: make minutes
RRSAgent: make minutes
<lisa> (hurray!)
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: Jan_, Lisa, JustineP, Jennie, Rain, julierawe, kb, Becca_Monteleone, kirkwood, ShawnT, JohnRochford, jeanne, Santina Present: Jan_, Lisa, JustineP, Jennie, Rain, julierawe, kb, Becca_Monteleone, kirkwood, ShawnT, JohnRochford, jeanne, Santina Regrets: katie and EA Found Scribe: Rain Inferring ScribeNick: Rain Found Scribe: Rain Inferring ScribeNick: Rain WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth 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.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]