Meeting minutes
<lisa_> scribe list https://
<lisa_> New item:- following affects on metal health and inclusion And - following saftey best practices
<lisa_> next item
<lisa_> take up item 2
Lisa: We will come back to item 1
Lisa: Do we have a meeting next week?
<jeanne> p+
* I am not working on Monday due to the holiday
Lisa: We have scheduled some mental health proposals for the next meeting.
<lisa_> take up item 3
Lisa: We will have a quorum so we will have next week's meeting.
… We will also do some things through the list.
David S: Over the last few months I have been communicating COGA's feedback
… On the Collaborative Tools document
… To the group who originated it: the Research Questions task force
… They have welcomed the feedback, but pushed back on some of it.
… Especially where they consider the feedback to be out of scope.
… Some they felt was more about software in general.
… They don't tend to explain for particular users so feel it is difficult to do it for cognitive but not others
… They have agreed to have a meeting for members of COGA and RTQF
… This will allow an opportunity to discuss those issues.
… I will put the issues together, and circulate that to COGA.
… Anyone who originated the issue or wants to discuss could attend the joint meeting.
Lisa: We have to understand if our comments are out of scope, or they are misunderstood
… John K is not on the call. I know some issues are from him.
… Jennie also put together a lot of the comments.
… It is hard sometimes to determine who originated each comment.
… We thought it included Github, Google Docs, etc.
<lisa_> take up item 4
Lisa: Can you send an email with a few alternative weeks?
<lisa_> https://
Lisa: (still on the previous topic)
… I have done a spreadsheet for a call on literary review - maybe copy that format
David S: I agree. I will send around a summary of the issues.
<lisa_> take up item 1
<lisa_> https://
Lisa: Let's finish all the schedule/reminders
… This is for finding a good time - working meeting to go through the papers we have agreed to review.
… A lot of people want to do at least one together.
… This is about updating our research documents, reviewing the literature to see what has changed.
… We need people to do the literary reviews. If you are unsure how to do it, then it might help to do them together.
… Then you can ask questions as you are doing it
… Please put yes if there are times where you can attend.
… I will try to send the responses tomorrow.
… Do people need more time?
… (moving to AG summary)
<julierawe> https://
Julie: Welcome to the new member!
… This link is a discussion thread in Github
… This is about outcomes - what should they look like in WCAG 3.
… There is not a "must" to do this
… This is an interesting discussion
… Example: users with limited memory will be able to complete a certain tasks
… Or, should it be written in first person? "I need..."
… Another example: where, what, why
… When you do something, what you do
… Some are getting thumbs up and thumbs down
… What if the same outcome also works for someone with both a visual impairment and people with cognitive disability
… At what point does it become cumbersome to list them all?
… This will be discussed more tomorrow in the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group discussion, item 3
… That's my update
<lisa_> take up item 4
Lisa: This is a link to the paper
… The email was sent shortly before the meeting. Hopefully that is ok.
… We had an issue paper on safety.
… We were not too specific because we didn't want to give people ideas.
… We wanted to alert people to be careful, and do more research.
… We did not want to detail the criminal activities.
… With the mental health review, we expanded it.
… This now includes how this impacts mental health.
… There was also the inclusion of social media apps.
… This can be used both in a supportive way, and can be used in a detrimental way to mental health
… We discuss privacy in a bit more detail.
… A bit on social media.
… And a warning that these studies are correlations at best.
… We do know there is curated content due to the algorythm
… If you are more likely to click on things that make you anxious, then your feed is more likely to show you things that may make you anxious
… Emotional regulation and impaired decision making - sometimes gatekeeping is good, sometimes it is not
… Certain addictions, like gambling, can be made more difficult
… The normal things people may have done to restrict certain issues may not be possible.
… "Gaming addiction" is not something some agree on as a diagnosis is included, and noted.
… Sometimes use of particular apps, like those for parking, may not be used by this group.
… Then, this group's data may not be included when decisions are being made (based on data from those apps).
… Section 3: Proposed Solutions
… Includes giving the user control of their data; and how easy is it
… Example: cookies
… There are different styles of asking the questions about cookies
… We may want a pattern for this.
… Another one is on Supported decision making
… We may want this to be a separate paper.
… This is about when a person has a guardian, and sometimes just a helper
… To maximize a person's independence.
… This can be to enable autonomy
… Example: if a person's memory is declining and they are afraid of using a credit card.
… If unusual patterns can go to a care giver, or they get an email requiring them to wait for 15 minutes before completing.
… How this is done to optimize a person's ability, but also maintain its safety for them.
… There are some items in the legal area we may want to remove, or put in an appendix.
… In the algorithm section
… There could be the right to delete content
… Example: a post was made during a time when treatment was needed
… Supported decision making: how long has a person been on social media
… Section 3x: A process of safety
… In the design team and process: put well-being at the forefront.
… The changes are going to be coming even faster
… Ensuring people are aware of the risks, the problems are identified
… Integrating care givers and helpers
… And includes the hacker information that was previously included
… Ongoing analytics - it may be that the data collection is excluding them
… The review of this is important.
… Any questions?
<lisa_> next item
<lisa_> close item 1
<lisa_> close item 2
<lisa_> close item 3
<lisa_> close item 10
Lisa: Do we need a pattern?
<lisa_> take up next item
Lisa: Here's what we have in Making Content Usable
… The user need is pretty good for 4.5.11
… We could add a bit about mental health
… "Help the user stay safe (Pattern)"
… (reads from the document)
<lisa_> New item:- following affects on metal health and inclusion And - following saftey best practices
Lisa: I think there are 2 new ones
<lisa_> ongoing alasis
Lisa: 1. Follow or ongoing analysis of mental health inclusion
… 2. Following safety best practices
… This may be part of it
… And adding advice into the "How it helps" where you have more detail
… Or recommending people look at the issue paper
… Proposal is to add these
… Maybe changing "risks" to "potential risks"
<lisa_> add potential risks not just known risks
Lisa: Not just known risks
<lisa_> +1
Rashmi: I think this is good
Lisa: Do you like the proposal - adding to 4.5.11?
Rashmi: Yes.
Lisa: I think we can add other information to the how it helps section.
… Does anyone want more time to think about it?
David S: I am happy with what I heard so far.
Lisa: Any objections?
<JMcSorley> +1
<jeanne> +1
+1
<tburtin> +1
<DavidSwallow> +1
<abbey> +1
<rashmi> +1
<lisa_> take up next item
Lisa: There are breakout sessions in March
… March 12
… There will be other opportunities in September
… These are on Zoom
… They are across the W3C
… I wrote an email about it
… A proposal is lets start a new task force, or community, to review algorithms and best practices
… Is it something we would like to bring?
… If so, we need to work on the presentation in the next 3 weeks?
… + 1 if you can help get the presentation together
* changing the poll
<lisa_> +1 ia yes doit
<lisa_> +1 and i want help - is you can give some time
<lisa_> _1 - bad idea
<lisa_> 0 - neutral
<abbey> 0
0
<julierawe> 0 (a lot of work to get ready in short amount of time)
<tburtin> 0 Due to other commitments at work
<jeanne> 0
<DavidSwallow> 0 (would be good to have the presence, but a lot to do)
Lisa: We will leave it, and maybe we will aim for September as a break out session
… Another question to Jennie - should informed consent and guided decision making - should we do those as separate issue papers?
… Or reference them here?
Jennie: I recommend reaching out to John Rochford and John Kirkwood given some of the changes happening in terms of "Guardianship" in some groups
Lisa: I think Rain and Kiki would be other good contacts
… And Jamie
… And guided decision making
… And, the question is, is anyone prepared to do it.
<lisa_> next item
Lisa: Next steps for this issue paper is to get more feedback.
… I am assuming people want to read it, and put in comments.
… Is that correct?
<JMcSorley> I would like to read through it.
<jeanne> I would like to read, as well.
Lisa: I will put the question to the list.
… Ok, I won't put it to the list, but will give people 2 weeks to review
… It may be longer
<lisa_> next item
Lisa: Rashmi - please add the new pattern we suggested
Rashmi: Yes, I will
Lisa: There were comments that people were feeling overwhelmed.
… Here is the timeline we have
… Until April - we are focusing on getting changes into the new draft
… We only need to do the literary reviews for the next phase - the issue papers
… I think we are looking pretty good for that.
… May through August we do the literary reviews for the user research
… It is staggered
… We don't have to do all the literary reviews at the same time
… Any questions? Does this help?
Julie: For phase 1 (up to April)
… For the internal draft
… For each section of Making Content Usable
… We will take what is in version 1, and adjust as much as is needed for the new structure
… Section by section?
Lisa: Phase 1 we are going to make an editor's draft - internal draft
… With a mock up of the new structure in it
… We may run a bit late
… The main thing is the new structure
… We have to get it out of PowerPoint presentation and into a draft to see how it works, what has disappeared, etc.
… Another thing: Erik's been going through issues.
… Those will be in a group in the new draft.
… Changes suggested by the mental health group - hopefully all of them will be in the draft.
… Then, what's our suggestion for how we want to put testing in?
… Have some kind of editor's note, so we can imagine it
… And having images
… We may not have all of it done
… And at the same time, doing the literary reviews necessary for the next phase.
… The next phase is issue papers editors draft
… Becca or Abbey is reviewing papers.
… David is working on one.
… Tiffany and EA are working on one
… Getting whatever issue papers we wanted to do ready for an editor's draft.
… Before May we need to be sure we have the literary reviews done.
Julie: For getting an editor's draft - internal, with the new structure.
… Will we divide up that work?
… Rain says "Here is the new structure" then Julie and John add in the plain language section?
… Or does it happen a different way?
Lisa: The new structure will be 1-2 people, probably Rain leads, and then adds me.
… It won't be "now put in all the plain language"
… We might do it for one, but it will mainly be taking what we have and reorganize it based on Rain's proposal
Julie: Then there will be feedback.
Lisa: Yes. And we will send it to EO. This way we do it and send to a small number of people
… Before we put too much work into it.
<lisa_> next item
* Apologies - scribe has to drop in 1 minute
<julierawe> Gotta drop, thanks