14:55:00 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
14:55:04 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/11/09-wcag2ict-irc
14:55:04 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:55:05 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
14:55:10 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
14:55:10 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:55:18 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
14:55:26 <maryjom> meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
14:55:33 <maryjom> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
14:55:33 <Zakim> ok, maryjom
14:55:45 <maryjom> Agenda+ Announcements
14:55:52 <maryjom> Agenda+ Project status and standup
14:56:00 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results: Updated proposal for 2.5.7 Dragging Movements
14:56:08 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results: Proposal(s) for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum)
14:56:17 <maryjom> Agenda+ Handling of 4.1.1 Parsing for changes made to WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 in WCAG2ICT
14:56:26 <maryjom> Agenda+ FPWD public comments
14:56:33 <maryjom> regrets: Gregg Vanderheiden
14:57:19 <maryjom> regrets: Gregg Vanderheiden, Bruce Bailey
14:58:58 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
14:59:45 <Olivia> Olivia has joined #wcag2ict
15:00:28 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #wcag2ict
15:00:43 <Olivia> present+
15:00:52 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
15:01:00 <shadi> present+
15:01:44 <Olivia> scribe+ Olivia
15:01:46 <Mike_Pluke> present+
15:01:48 <LauraBMiller> LauraBMiller has joined #WCAG2ICT
15:01:49 <Olivia> zakim, next item
15:01:49 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:01:54 <LauraBMiller> present+
15:02:03 <maryjom> present+
15:02:05 <PhilDay> present+
15:02:18 <Chuck> present+
15:02:23 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #wcag2ict
15:02:27 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
15:02:34 <loicmn> present+
15:02:35 <mitch11> mitch11 has joined #wcag2ict
15:02:39 <ShawnT> present+
15:02:43 <mitch11> present+
15:03:31 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
15:03:34 <Olivia> maryjom: Get started on surveys early. More will be sent out today.
15:03:38 <Sam> present+
15:04:21 <Olivia> maryjom: AG WG did restart up charter. Get AC rep to rejoin so you can contribute.
15:04:46 <Devanshu> Devanshu has joined #wcag2ict
15:04:52 <Devanshu> present+
15:05:08 <Olivia> maryjom: Found way forward for parsing. Will be discussing proposed approach later today. Would like your input.
15:05:25 <maryjom> q?
15:05:40 <Olivia> zakim, next item
15:05:40 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Project status and standup -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:05:53 <maryjom> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/13/views/2
15:08:35 <Olivia> maryjom: We have a lot ready for review. Olivia has last SC for proposal. We still have a number of public comments in Todo.
15:08:59 <Olivia> mitch11: Will be clearing time to address comments.
15:10:11 <Olivia> maryjom: Still some not assigned public comment. A couple on reflow. We need some help addressing comments.
15:10:55 <maryjom> agenda?
15:11:13 <Olivia> zakim, next item
15:11:13 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Survey results: Updated proposal for 2.5.7 Dragging Movements -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:11:13 <dmontalvo> present+ Daniel
15:11:49 <maryjom> Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-dragging-proposal-2/results
15:12:28 <Olivia> maryjom: Everybody says "Prefer proposal 2 is incorporated into the editor's draft, as-is."
15:12:48 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Add 2.5.7 Dragging Movements SC guidance proposal 2 from the survey into the editor’s draft, as-is.
15:12:50 <Sam> +1
15:12:51 <loicmn> +1
15:12:51 <mitch11> +1
15:12:52 <Olivia> +1
15:12:55 <maryjom> +1
15:13:07 <PhilDay> +1
15:13:17 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:13:19 <Devanshu> +1
15:13:34 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Add 2.5.7 Dragging Movements SC guidance proposal 2 from the survey into the editor’s draft, as-is.
15:13:37 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:14:16 <Olivia> maryjom: We have some things in the original survey we didn't get to last week
15:14:23 <maryjom> From last week's survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/wcag2ict-dragging-movements/results
15:15:05 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Do not add a bullet for 2.5.7 Dragging Movements to the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.
15:15:10 <loicmn> +1
15:15:11 <Devanshu> +1
15:15:12 <Olivia> +1
15:15:13 <PhilDay> +1
15:15:13 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:15:28 <maryjom> +1
15:15:31 <mitch11> +1
15:15:39 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:15:49 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Do not add a bullet for 2.5.7 Dragging Movements to the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.
15:15:56 <Sam> +1
15:16:01 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:16:06 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:16:19 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Add “dragging movements” term to the Glossary Items that Apply to All Technologies section.
15:16:23 <Olivia> +1
15:16:24 <loicmn> +1
15:16:26 <mitch11> +1
15:16:28 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:16:31 <maryjom> +1
15:16:37 <PhilDay> +1
15:16:46 <Sam> +1
15:17:03 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Add “dragging movements” term to the Glossary Items that Apply to All Technologies section.
15:17:08 <maryjom> agenda?
15:17:23 <Olivia> zakim, next item
15:17:23 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Survey results: Proposal(s) for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:18:02 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-focus-not-obscured/results#xq2
15:18:12 <Olivia> maryjom: Another one where we have reached consensus
15:18:36 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Incorporate proposal for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum), as-is.
15:18:40 <loicmn> +1
15:18:41 <Olivia> +1
15:18:41 <Devanshu> +1
15:18:42 <PhilDay> +1
15:18:42 <mitch11> +1
15:18:45 <maryjom> +1
15:18:59 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:19:01 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:19:06 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Incorporate proposal for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum), as-is.
15:19:18 <Sam> +1
15:19:34 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-draft2-closed-functionality/results#xq3
15:20:12 <maryjom> wrong link above...corrected link: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-focus-not-obscured/results#xq3
15:20:37 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Do not add a bullet for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) to the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.
15:20:43 <Olivia> +1
15:20:43 <Sam> +1
15:20:45 <PhilDay> +1
15:20:46 <loicmn> +1
15:20:47 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:20:54 <maryjom> +1
15:21:02 <mitch11> +1
15:21:06 <ShawnT> +1
15:21:06 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:21:30 <Olivia> maryjom: we are on track to have a survey for AGWG pretty soon!
15:21:41 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Do not add a bullet for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) to the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.
15:22:06 <maryjom> agenda?
15:22:15 <Olivia> zakim, take up item 5
15:22:15 <Zakim> agendum 5 -- Handling of 4.1.1 Parsing for changes made to WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 in WCAG2ICT -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:24:09 <Olivia> maryjom: Looking at all different possibilities out there.
15:24:21 <Olivia> maryjom: Question is how to handle it in the document.
15:25:29 <Olivia> maryjom: Leadership discussion gives us a couple of options. Would have to publish 2.1 version. Or we could modify this note to be more generically covering WCAG in whatever form.
15:26:30 <Olivia> maryjom: Pro to separate documents - each version clearly defined. Con would have to publish 3 notes. A lot of work.
15:27:12 <Olivia> maryjom: Option 2 - would have to change title and update guidance to 4.1.1.
15:27:16 <Chuck> q+
15:27:23 <Chuck> ack Ch
15:27:23 <shadi> q+
15:27:24 <maryjom> ack Chuck
15:27:49 <Sam> q+ like the 2.x, one and done document
15:28:18 <Sam> +1 to Chuck
15:28:18 <maryjom> ack shadi
15:28:19 <Olivia> Chuck: Based on experience, trying to maintain multiple notes is challenging.
15:28:48 <maryjom> q?
15:28:48 <Olivia> Shadi: Please don't publish multiple documents.
15:29:02 <Olivia> Sam: I agree with Chuck
15:29:31 <Olivia> maryjom: Wanted to present all options. We are in agreeement.
15:29:58 <PhilDay> q+
15:30:05 <Olivia> maryjom: helps me put forward the proposal. I can put the change out for review.
15:30:15 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
15:30:35 <Olivia> PhilDay: We should specify 2.X so when 3 comes out we don't have issues
15:30:36 <dmontalvo> q+
15:30:49 <PhilDay> ack dmontalvo
15:30:50 <Chuck> ack dm
15:31:12 <Olivia> dmontavlo: What's the difference between WCAG 2 and 2X?
15:31:18 <mitch11> q+
15:31:34 <Chuck> ack mitch
15:32:05 <Olivia> mitch11: If I saw 2 it might look like 2.0 to me. But I don't mind what we do either way.
15:32:15 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Publish one document to cover all three WCAG 2 versions and rename document to be for WCAG 2
15:32:21 <PhilDay> +1
15:32:23 <Olivia> +1
15:32:23 <loicmn> +1
15:32:25 <shadi> +1
15:32:25 <Devanshu> +1
15:32:26 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:32:26 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:32:29 <Sam> +1
15:32:29 <mitch11> +1
15:32:30 <Chuck> + Oh HECK YES
15:32:37 <maryjom> +1
15:32:38 <mitch11> I almost typed... +2
15:32:56 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Publish one document to cover all three WCAG 2 versions and rename document to be for WCAG 2
15:33:25 <maryjom> q?
15:33:26 <Olivia> zakim, take up next
15:33:26 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Survey results: Proposal(s) for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:33:49 <maryjom> Original survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-fpwd-responses/results
15:34:02 <maryjom> New survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-draft2-closed-functionality/results
15:35:14 <Olivia> maryjom: Four main issues in first survey. Heading, examples, examples should be same as definition, more clear SC not to be used on hardware
15:35:23 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 1: New title for the section
15:35:32 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-draft2-closed-functionality/results#xq3
15:36:26 <maryjom> Options surveyed: Closed Functionality Situations Closed Functionality Contexts Comments on Closed Functionality Software with Closed Functionality Closed Functionality Examples
15:36:58 <maryjom> Options surveyed: 1) Closed Functionality Situations 2) Closed Functionality Contexts 3) Comments on Closed Functionality 4) Software with Closed Functionality 5) Closed Functionality Examples
15:37:53 <maryjom> 6) Closed Functionality Considerations 7) Closed Functionality and WCAG 2.2. 8) Closed Functionality Guidance
15:39:59 <loicmn> Link to EAA: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32019L0882
15:40:43 <loicmn> Example of hardware+software products: "consumer general purpose computer hardware systems and operating systems for those hardware systems"
15:40:52 <loicmn> q+
15:40:54 <Olivia> Shadi: I thought the OS level is considered part of the product
15:41:04 <maryjom> ack loicmn
15:41:34 <Mike_Pluke> Q+
15:41:51 <maryjom> ack Mike_Pluke
15:42:14 <Olivia> loicmn: Unclear with word product combining hardware and software
15:42:35 <Olivia> mike_pluke: May not be an issue anyhow
15:43:03 <Olivia> maryjom: 4 isn't preferred, just wanted to understand terminology
15:43:23 <Olivia> maryjom: Other preferred option was Phil's comment
15:43:50 <PhilDay> q+
15:44:29 <Olivia> maryjom: Only issue is we are not using defn- in key terms.
15:44:51 <Olivia> maryjom: not sure how much work it will be to accomplish
15:45:10 <Sam> q+
15:45:32 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
15:45:47 <maryjom> ack Sam
15:45:49 <Olivia> PhilDay: If the proposal I made is going to be complicated, I am happy to withdraw
15:46:10 <Olivia> Sam: I like Bruce's point
15:46:59 <shadi> q+
15:47:26 <Sam> q-
15:47:32 <Olivia> Shadi: Mike, would such a change have impact on EN#?
15:47:32 <maryjom> Poll: Which do you prefer? 1) Closed Functionality Situations 2) Closed Functionality Contexts 3) Comments on Closed Functionality 4) Software with Closed Functionality 5) Closed Functionality Examples 6) Closed Functionality Considerations 7) Closed Functionality and WCAG 2.2. 8) Closed Functionality Guidance or 9) Something else
15:47:53 <shadi> ack me
15:47:58 <Olivia> Mike_Pluke: Not 100% sure. I don't think we are going to reproduce that heading.
15:48:43 <PhilDay> 3, then 8, then 5 in order of preference
15:48:47 <Sam> 4
15:48:56 <Olivia> Shadi: Thinking of eBook readers that could be combinations of that. There are overlaps of hardware and software.
15:49:09 <mitch11> 3, otherwise 4, otherwise any. (I think I understand Shadi's concerns but they should be addressed in the text, regardless of the heading.)
15:49:33 <loicmn> 3, then 4
15:49:42 <shadi> +1 to Mitch
15:49:53 <LauraBMiller> +1 mitch
15:49:54 <Olivia> 3, 4, 6
15:49:56 <Mike_Pluke> 3, 8
15:50:13 <Chuck> 5 for three, 1 for four
15:51:39 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Rename section to Comments on Closed Functionality
15:51:47 <mitch11> +1
15:51:51 <Mike_Pluke> +1
15:51:51 <loicmn> +1
15:51:52 <LauraBMiller> +1
15:51:59 <PhilDay> +1
15:52:12 <shadi> +1
15:52:13 <Olivia> zakim, next item
15:52:13 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- FPWD public comments -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:52:34 <Olivia> zakim, take up item 4
15:52:34 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Survey results: Proposal(s) for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:53:07 <Olivia> zakim, take up item 6
15:53:07 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- FPWD public comments -- taken up [from maryjom]
15:53:19 <maryjom> TOPIC: Question 2: The closed functionality examples in the callout
15:53:31 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-draft2-closed-functionality/results#xq1
15:54:39 <Olivia> maryjom: Greg was thinking smartphone item would be confusing. He suggested adding in language.
15:55:56 <Olivia> maryjom: Agreement on using ATM
15:55:56 <Sam> q+
15:56:12 <maryjom> ack sam
15:57:05 <maryjom> Loic's alternate proposal for telephony bullet: "telephony devices such as IP phones, feature phones, smartphones, and phone-enabled tablets. Although smartphones have build in AT or AT-like features they are mostly (but not completely) closed to other AT"
15:57:08 <Olivia> maryjom: Agreement on Loïc's comment
15:58:15 <Olivia> Sam: I think old definition was straight forward enough on telephone devices
15:59:44 <mitch11> q+
15:59:53 <Olivia> loicmn: I felt it was good to have this comment added, but I'm also happy with simple version.
15:59:54 <LauraBMiller> Have to jump, thanks!
16:00:42 <Chuck> gotta go
16:00:47 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Update the closed functionality examples, editing to change ABM to ATM.
16:00:53 <loicmn> +1
16:00:55 <Olivia> +1
16:00:56 <Sam> +1
16:00:56 <shadi> +1
16:00:59 <mitch11> -1
16:01:08 <Mike_Pluke> +1
16:01:49 <Olivia> maryjom: Not going to resolution
16:02:06 <dmontalvo> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:02:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html dmontalvo
16:03:41 <Olivia> zakim, bye
16:03:41 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been Olivia, shadi, Mike_Pluke, LauraBMiller, maryjom, PhilDay, Chuck, loicmn, ShawnT, mitch, Sam, Devanshu, Daniel
16:03:41 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict