Meeting minutes
<Rain> meeting name: Harm from motion subgroup meeting 7
Rain: Note that Presentation to AGWG is tomorrow (Tuesday); this will be the basis of our pull request
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say problems with PR
assign scribe
Get updates from Sheri and Andy re: their outcomes work
Jeanne: Notes that there may be config issues on the pull that may shift when the pull happens.
Sheri: (Created with Andrew) Visual motion and pseudo motion presented (via scratchpad). Specific point-outs on non-harmful motion (5 seconds), unexpected movement with examples. Categories of impact were suggested.
Sheri: Questions around 5 seconds in WCAG 2.2.2 raised. There are some source papers listed in the scratchpad for future review
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to disagree with levels
Jeanne: Point around assigning levels raised as any impact for some users can be too much. Sheri and Jeanne agree this is a future discussion point.
<Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to comment on exact values from continuums, re WCAG 2 values and to also say categories could be for type of trigger, rather than type of effect.
Alastair: As an FYI, often static values (like 5 seconds) used as thresholds are not based on research (from WCAG information); more often as a consensus during other discussions.
<alastairc> NB: There would have been research saying "these things are bad", but there is unlikely to be a number that comes out of those research papers.
Eric_hind: Is there a reason there are hard numbers?
sheribyrne: My understanding is that Pause Stop Hide was oriented toward carousels
… 5 sectonds was time to absorb the information
Rain: ALso the number of seconds is for testing reasons
Sheri: People know it, so I am reluctant to change it without evidence.
Review all of the outcomes, what is in them, and decide how we will get the right language into them for review next week
<alastairc> Again - there is research, it's just that research for things on a continuum is very unlikely to establish a useful number to test against.
<Rain> Slide for outcome 1 - https://
+1 to take out medical references
* yes
Rain: Assigning slides for outcomes; Outcome 1: Visual motion and pseudo motion are under User Control (note that Neurological is removed per Jedi)
Rain: Functional Needs slides reviewed (rain to update)
Rain: What's Included /Implementation slides reviewed (sheri to update)
+1 to Jedi's change. It's more clear
<Rain> ack?
Rain: How are we defining non-harmful motion? (stretch goal)
<jedi> +1 to allowable motion
Rain: Non-harmful motion question, per Sheri maybe this is allowed?
<Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to ask about scoping
Sheri: Add to questions do we need categories, Rain agrees
Alastair: Notes that defining non-harmful motion will eventually be something we need to do.
Rain: Adding examples into slides (per Sheri and Andrew scratchpad work)
Rain: Adding questions recommended for next subgroup or step; definition harmful/allowable motion, is 5 seconds the right number (more or less?) what research or considerations should be included...
Rain: Adding questions about categorizing motion as harmful, cumulatively harmful, functional use impedance
Rain: Outcome 2: Users are safe from the effects of continuous motion (actual or perceived); per discussion with Alastair, maybe this is too close to Outcome 1
Rain: Outcome 2, Alastair is updating.
<alastairc> Jeanne - is there a method of having stronger vs more-flexible versions of an outcome in one thing, or should we keep the separate for now?
Rain: We think that all the user stories apply to this one (like Outcome 1). Visual memory does apply here.
Rain: Adding ideas for how this is implemented or included (flashing is avoided by default, spatial orientation is consistent, include scrolling). Alastair will add others asynchronously.
Rain: Adding slide examples like screen curtain, animation doesn't move, high contrast zigzag, etc.
<Rain> Poll, okay with removing the word extreme from Users are safe from extreme physical reactions due to flashing and strobing (such as seizures or sudden dizziness)
<Rain> +1
<jedi> +1
+1
+1
<alastairc> +1, alhtough wondering how 'physical' some of the reactions feel?
<sheribyrne> +1
<sheribyrne> from personal experience, it does feel pretty physical
Rain: List of outcomes slides assigned to individuals for editing; Sheri has Visual motion and pseudo motion, Alastair has Safe from the Effects of continuous motion, Jeanne to take Users are Safe from Physical Reactions.
Rain: List of outcomes assigned (continued): Controls and elements have a consistent orientation to Tiffany with a backup of Rain. Jedi has Audio Shifting. Eric to take move in order to use content, user is able to save their task progress.
Rain: Will create slides, copy and paste content from scratchpad, assigned individuals to clean up for tomorrows presentation today, to be ready for tomorrow AGWG meeting. We can cross check with functional needs too.
<Rain> Poll, Rain proposed next steps, is everyone good with them?
+1
<alastairc> +1
<jedi> +1
+1
Determine how we will prepare the pull request
Rain: Prep for pull request, plan it out via scratchpad.
Rain: After presentation tomorrow, will pull feedback back into a form we can asynchronously review and be ready for next weeks final meeting. Then Jeanne can provide instructions to do the actual pull.
Determine what we want to present on September 5 (final share out)
<Rain> RRSAgent: make minutes