<shawn> scribe: Laura

Charter

Kris Anne: Did not get many responses so we'd like to discuss what we want the group to be

scribe: don't want to commit to doing work if we can't get the people

<shawn> EOWG charter survey : https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/charter2023/results

scribe: we need editors, writers, within the group so we can continue
... we need feedback that people have the time to commit to the work
... do we have the people ... this is the most people we've had in this meeting in a long time... do we want to continue to be a working group? should we be a community group?
... not as official but less formal group doing the same type of work

Sharron: suggest another word than formal - it would be less authoritative less weighty by the people who use it

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask followup

Shawn: Sharron ? community group that publishes in a wiki or some other place but they also publishes as w3c report
... another options is that a community also develops content that's like any other group that gets hosted as a WAI resource
... there's nothing to stop a community group from publishing a WAI resource

Sharron: people don't really know the difference

<shawn> qq+ to clarify

Sharron: review, comment, etc to publish on theWAI website
... we had to get input from other groups, that's a process ... the process has not been clear in the past
... if all that is unnecessary they we can publish WAI resources it would be fine

<slewth> +q

Sharron: I didn't know if we'd get as much participation

Shawn: process - while we are a working group we have to follow the process

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to react to shawn to clarify

Shawn: if we're not a working group, we don't have to follow process

Sharron: if we don't go through the process will it be as authoritative?

Shadi: to Sharron's ? who's we after the working group is dissolved?
... what is the process to get it online?
... I agree people will not know the difference
... how will it happen?

Shawn: the W3c doc does have process if a working group closes... staff can update webite

Shadi: will w3c staff review the content to publish?
... specifics?

Shawn: everything gets reviewed now - that wouldn't change.

<kevin> ack +

Kris Anne: as a community group we can still have meetings, etc

Shadi: should the people here move to community group? Who's we?

<kakinney> scribe: Laura_

Kris Anne: community groups will have more flexibility and non W3c members can join

Sarah: second what Sharron said ... working group has more authority
... others says, community group without a transition possibility loss of expertise

Brian: the idea ... working group extends to end of december ... detail what a transition would look like, we could ask for extension

Sarah: Are the 2 models exclusive does it have to be either or?

Shawn: it does not ... there are precident for that

<sharron> +1 to Sarah's suggestion for no either/or

Kris Anne: community group does all of the writing and bring product to the working group

scribe: working group approves to be published

<slewth> -q

Len: +1 to Sarah about working group. I'm ready to do work now
... lack of participation of the charter ?

Kris Anne: only 7 of 60 responded to the survey 2 of the 7 were me and Brian

scribe: the majority didn't agree or continue to support
... I've been chair less than 2 years... lot to learn... did not want to set up our group to fail
... I want to make sure it's a very small number of people participating in the working group
... 2 year charter ... and a year from now potentially no one participating
... we need to take a moment ... make sure everything is relavent and up to date.

Daniel: add to Shawn and Kris Anne - future plans, liasioning - other groups need outreach and advice from EO

Kris Anne: EO members could potentially go to other groups with EO mindset

Shawn: requested with 2017 charter - expertise of this group be embedded with other groups instead of being EO

Sharron: wondered along with Shadi - how would it work? what's the alternative?
... 7 people responding ... seems typical. What's different? What the plan?
... other groups have asked EO to participate in the past.

What's different now? less staff support?

Kris Anne: thanks for the perspective - it's Brian and my first time re-chartering. I thought we'd be looking for a majority.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to note staff resources for charter and to say as Daniel says, integrate with other Working Groups

Shawn: clarify - 5 active participants commented. Meetings over the last months have had about 5 participants...

previous charter ... in order to be effective ... the group should have 10-12 then dropped to 6. The lack of active participation has been lwer than in the past.

scribe: the chair resources needed and staff resources needed. .4 FTE currently
... is staff and chair availability is an issue

Sarah: I think on the survey response if the group is 60 then the response is low but active participation is lower. 20% participation is actually good.
... work I did with Daniel was really focused and proud of that work. Can we facilitate more focused work. Maybe not stop anything but look at the use of smaller task force work.
... allowing our long list of members to sign up for more focused work.
... survey responses are minimal

Shawn: follow-up on Sarah... yes I agree. For us surveys are different. We not the same as public surveys. That's how we approve work.
... leadership established that if you are invited expert you have to participate if you're a member we're ok with you just being on the list.
... roadmap ... what's missing... we put out a survey 6 months ago... what would help you contribute more ... having a roadmap ... what's next

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to followup on Sarah: survey, roadmap

Shawn: I have tried to encourage people to develop a plan but haven't had bandwidth. Even those who have been active there's not a plan

<BrianE> acl shadi

Shadi: I hear you. It's clear. There's no funding, contribution and project

TPAC - visioning given the staff changes ... session - rethinking Do we need to make this decision right now?

Brian: I think the disccusion - this group has done a lot of work. There's not been any new resources but a lot of work exists to maintain what's been done
... we can work in git to update resources. It does require process to do that update work
... we're not making this decision right now

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to note tutorials - stole Brian and to note staff editors and to note timing

Brian: we've been talking in chairs meeting but had to bring it to this group

Shawn: urgent ... update tutorials... 4 years or more have been a priority and it has not been done.
... historically, EOWG has had staff editors
... not common in w3c
... no staff editors for EO
... EO is late if we are going to re-charter
... we need to decide

Michelle: what hinders me is the process of contributing
... little things like how do I update the wiki ... is it in the right place, et
... what and how I'm supposed to do. I loose momentum.

<sharron> +1 to Michelle

<slewth> +1 to Michelle

Michelle: others have caught on to the ways of working ... I have to re-learn because of the stop and start nature of the work

Kris Anne: I know what you're saying... I'm the same

scribe: maybe we can have a meeting to go over train members on how to contribute

<slewth> +q

scribe: I'm not avocating either way

Sharron: great idea to train people on how to contribute
... problem solving meeting is a great idea

Sarah: add to what Michele said... the public nature of responding is also intimidating

<kevin> +1 to terrifying transparency of knowledge!

<slewth> q_

Kris Anne: feel free to continue this discussion email the chairs with more input

email individually is also an option

Len: heard urgency... what is next?

Brian: we do need to decide on re-chartering
... next step is provide draft charter - 1 month review - round of request to revise... end of december is end of current charter
... also what's in the charter - update and maintain current resources - are there other work that people want to commit to? new work is more inviting
... updating can be done without a working group

Kris Anne: in this time between WCAG 2.2 and Silver there'll be a large lull

scribe: we could re charter as a working group in 2 years but it could be harder to get approved

Sharron: it feels urgent

Kevin: the extension process can be initiated

we can provide a new duration

it would gives time.

Kris Anne: wanted to give people time to process and for EO members to reach out to the chairs

scribe: Shawn mentioned things are changing
... we don't have the support we had in the past
... we need to regroup
... look for people who are good at writing, etc
... don't necessarily need to attend meetings
... there are opportunities ... we need to figure out a process
... I'd have to ask if I can be a chair as a community group

<Zakim> kevin, you wanted to outline extension process

Sharron: I like the hybrid idea
... small working group but activate the community group to help do the work
... people are willing to do the work

<slewth> +1 to Sharron

Sharron: I don't think we should stop being a working group then try to start up again in 2 years
... community group could take the place of the staff support that we've lost

Brian: we could ressurect the community group

Kris Anne: other thoughts?

Brian: we'll take it back to chairs then come back to the group

surveys

Kris Anne: Evaluation tools submission form

scribe: Kevin took out Accessibility Checks to shorten the form

Kevin: has not altered subbmission form but may alter the filters
... tryig to get the submission form out to get submissions

Kris Anne: survey will be out soon. Two weeks to comment

scribe: trying to get it finished
... attention is very appreciated.
... question?
... survey process - take a look - are there any glaring issues before we go forward.
... if an enhancement is needed then it'll be addressed in an update
... vendors who create tools to evaluate for accessibility
... when the survey is ready we'll send an email with the link to the survey
... maybe next Friday we can quickly go through the survey process
... also the survey is linked in work for this week when it's ready
... second survey - How People with Disabilities Use the web
... tools and techniques diverse abilities barriers - look at the content ... what needs to be added before publishing
... approval to publish - 2 weeks to review the survey
... appreciate everyone ... I hope we can continue to do this work.
... the work we do is valued. I hear that from people all the time.
... work for this week will get updated as soon as the surveys are ready

Sharron: I know what you're going through ... you're both doing great!

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: Shawn, Jedi, Sharron, Laura, Mark, Brian, Len, Kris_Anne, Shadi, kakinney, Sarah, Fred, LucyH, Daniel, Michele, kevin
Present: Shawn, Jedi, Sharron, Laura, Mark, Brian, Len, Kris_Anne, Shadi, kakinney, Sarah, Fred, LucyH, Daniel, Michele, kevin
Found Scribe: Laura
Inferring ScribeNick: Laura
Found Scribe: Laura_
Inferring ScribeNick: Laura_
Scribes: Laura, Laura_
ScribeNicks: Laura, Laura_

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.)