13:47:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rqtf
13:47:25 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/01/31-rqtf-irc
13:47:25 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:47:26 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), jasonjgw
13:47:40 <jasonjgw> meeting: RQTF Meeting
13:47:45 <jasonjgw> chair: jasonjgw
13:47:49 <jasonjgw> present+
13:47:51 <jasonjgw> scribe+
13:47:52 <jasonjgw> agenda+ Collaboration Tools Accessibility User Requirements.
13:47:52 <jasonjgw> agenda+ Miscellaneous updates and topics.
14:00:04 <JPaton> JPaton has joined #rqtf
14:00:35 <janina> janina has joined #rqtf
14:01:47 <DavidSwallow> DavidSwallow has joined #rqtf
14:02:00 <JPaton> present+ John_Paton
14:02:04 <DavidSwallow> present+
14:03:30 <scott_h> scott_h has joined #rqtf
14:06:00 <janina> present+
14:06:00 <jasonjgw> Janina, we're giving you time.
14:07:16 <scott_h> present+
14:07:42 <scott_h> scribe+ scott_h
14:07:50 <jasonjgw> zakim, next item
14:07:50 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Collaboration Tools Accessibility User Requirements. -- taken up [from jasonjgw]
14:08:41 <scott_h> jason: changes to document made to resolve open issues
14:08:59 <scott_h> changes merged directly
14:10:14 <scott_h> janina: happy with changes
14:11:52 <scott_h> reviisons re being worked on by Janina
14:13:02 <scott_h> janina: discussed with COGA about points considered out of scope,
14:13:20 <scott_h> woudl be good to discuss with COGA on  our decision and clarify with COGA
14:15:12 <scott_h> jasoN: how long for reviiosns?
14:15:17 <scott_h> janina: aiming for next meeting
14:16:56 <scott_h> jason: good to circle back to references/citations in recent literature
14:17:08 <scott_h> to head towards working draft
14:17:50 <scott_h> janina: would be good to put out working draft earlier so we have an updated draft ot work from goin forward,
14:18:01 <scott_h> also need glossary
14:18:16 <scott_h> jasons: we do definte in document, do we need glossary?
14:18:33 <scott_h> janina: yes, cna use exisitng definitons for glossary
14:19:02 <scott_h> jason: lhow about makng all changes in response to comments, then send out working draft - not just a heartbeat draft, a call for review with reasonable review time
14:19:28 <scott_h> then in parallel add citations, discuss COGA comments
14:20:24 <scott_h> janina: would prefer wait for referencs, citations before a major 'lat call'
14:20:56 <scott_h> jason: let's get working draft in place and then work out what else we can do in parallel once htat's in place
14:24:50 <scott_h> subtopoic+ issue 18, 19, 20 and 21
14:25:09 <scott_h> in requirement 14c at end of notificaiotn and messages
14:25:24 <DavidSwallow> User Need X: As a user with an executive function impairment who struggles with too much content, I need support to focus on the key content.
14:25:52 <scott_h> already discussed by Jason and Scott on GitHub
14:25:57 <DavidSwallow> REQ Xa: I need ability to mark for myself which items need you to follow up on. Notifications sometimes get marked "read" but do not have a way for you to remember to come back to them. You may need to review them multiple times to be sure you understand, and to complete the task. Further allow Users a view of just the items they need to follow up on, both from notifications, and any additional they identify.
14:25:58 <scott_h> and possibility of AI covering it
14:27:05 <DavidSwallow> REQ Xb: Provide a mode of operation for a separate viewing mechanism. Example: different window. This can better support readability, and maintain focus in the main document.
14:27:36 <DavidSwallow> REQ Xc: Ensure that users can choose how the notifications are delivered, such as through personalization and extensions.
14:28:14 <scott_h> jason: i thik the first one does relate to issue tracking
14:29:12 <scott_h> perhaps proviing some kind of labelling feature in UI for comments in issue tracking, potentially private to the user
14:30:17 <scott_h> janina: more software design
14:30:25 <scott_h> jason: any thoughts o response?
14:30:48 <scott_h> janina: first one is covered,
14:31:22 <scott_h> it's i there
14:32:47 <scott_h> Scott: agreed
14:33:43 <scott_h> jason: for labelling, some discussion good for this one
14:34:02 <scott_h> jason: yes, person with disability may not want labelling visible to everyone
14:36:13 <scott_h> janina: woudl be good to hear more from COA perspective on this
14:38:04 <scott_h> janina: let's defer that one
14:38:28 <scott_h> subtopic+ issue 22
14:38:39 <DavidSwallow> Add section about needing a wayfinding/orientation space within a collaboration tool This helps users: •	Know where within the tool they are to complete certain tasks. •	The names and locations available within the tool used for a specific group. Example: if there are multiple document libraries within a collaboration space, this makes finding the one related to a project difficult to find. •	Review a summary of current work histo[CUT]
14:40:47 <scott_h> jason: quite general
14:41:11 <scott_h> janina: 'you are here' feature?
14:42:29 <scott_h> scott: WCAG 2.2 has consistent and finable help, woudl that cover this?
14:45:05 <scott_h> jason: if there's someting rleated to issue tracking/project maangement
14:45:45 <scott_h> but don't tihnk there are collaborative features not already covered, seems more general to wide variety of applicaitons and possibly out of scope unless ther'es something related to issue tracking
14:46:21 <scott_h> scott: agree, not specific to collaboraiton tools
14:46:45 <scott_h> jason: yes, focusing on collaboraiton aspect of tool, not every aspect of tool
14:48:13 <scott_h> jason: agreed, issues best addressed in gidance elsewhere
14:48:23 <scott_h> janian: flagged reelvance to WCAG
14:49:06 <scott_h> subtopic+ issue 23
14:49:13 <DavidSwallow> Add section about improving participation of all members. Examples include: •	Identify when group members are not participating in conversations and decisions. o	They may not be able to use one or more of the methods. o	They may not know the conversations and decision making opportunities are taking place. o	Silence is not necessarily an indicator of agreement.
14:50:17 <scott_h> jason: social usage advice rather than software design advice
14:50:23 <scott_h> outside of scope
14:50:27 <scott_h> janina: agreed
14:50:54 <scott_h> can say someting general about needs in colaborative envrionment from a non-technical perspective
14:51:06 <scott_h> jason: great proposal
14:51:42 <scott_h> could be framed that a successful collaboraiton needs technolog used appropriately
14:52:10 <scott_h> introductoy section, deliniating scope of document
14:52:10 <scott_h> while remiding good designed software system is not enough
14:52:32 <scott_h> janina: accepting comment and adding intro on appropriate facilitation by collaboraiton teams
14:52:50 <scott_h> janina to write, jason to review
14:55:29 <scott_h> scott: just a concern that sometimes people are jumping in and out of collaboraiton toosl,
14:55:48 <scott_h> not always pepole bieng left otu, may be many reasons
14:56:03 <scott_h> raja: sometimes paper adn pen may be more functional,
14:56:18 <scott_h> lookng at user communication is more mportant
14:56:49 <scott_h> janina: basically accepting, will explain a little differently
14:56:58 <scott_h> jason: and people need to be reminded that technoogy is still important
14:57:26 <scott_h> david: three comments left for next time
14:57:52 <jasonjgw> zakim, end meeting
14:57:52 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been jasonjgw, John_Paton, DavidSwallow, janina, scott_h
14:57:55 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:57:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/01/31-rqtf-minutes.html Zakim
14:58:03 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, jasonjgw; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
14:58:03 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rqtf
15:00:48 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #rqtf
15:03:13 <janina> janina has left #rqtf
15:35:46 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #rqtf
15:38:14 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #rqtf