15:32:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #maturity
15:32:17 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/02/28-maturity-irc
15:32:20 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:32:51 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Fazio_
15:32:53 <Fazio_> meeting: Maturity Model
15:32:53 <Fazio_> chair: Fazio
15:43:12 <Fazio_> Agenda+ New Business
15:43:35 <Fazio_> Agenda+ Github Issues 43, 78, 85, 102, 103, 104 (Usability doc feedback)
15:43:56 <Fazio_> Agenda+ Maturity Model Scoring Subgroup Update
15:44:19 <Fazio_> Agenda+ Github Issue #101 What do we mean with 'aspects'? Used in two ways i.c.w. 'dimensions'
15:44:19 <gb> /issues/101 -> #101
15:55:40 <Fazio> Fazio has joined #maturity
15:55:48 <Fazio> present+
16:00:30 <Mark_Miller> Mark_Miller has joined #Maturity
16:00:58 <Stacey> Stacey has joined #Maturity
16:01:05 <Stacey> present+
16:01:27 <sbyrnehaber> sbyrnehaber has joined #maturity
16:01:39 <Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel_Wolberger has joined #maturity
16:01:43 <Lionel_Wolberger> present+
16:01:44 <Mark_Miller> present+
16:01:51 <janina> janina has joined #maturity
16:01:57 <janina> present+
16:02:46 <CharlesL> CharlesL has joined #maturity
16:02:58 <CharlesL> present+
16:03:34 <kline> kline has joined #maturity
16:03:39 <kline> present+
16:04:00 <sbyrnehaber> scribe+
16:04:03 <sbyrnehaber> present+
16:05:52 <nehaj_> nehaj_ has joined #maturity
16:05:58 <nehaj_> present+
16:06:04 <sbyrnehaber> zakim, next item
16:06:04 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- New Business -- taken up [from Fazio_]
16:08:10 <sbyrnehaber> all: discussion about gathering at CSUN
16:08:44 <sbyrnehaber> Fazio: Neha, David, Volker, Sheri, Charles, Mark would be there
16:08:50 <sbyrnehaber> zakim, next item
16:08:50 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Github Issues 43, 78, 85, 102, 103, 104 (Usability doc feedback) -- taken up [from Fazio_]
16:09:13 <Stacey> Doc for agenda item 2: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wrhomdc2gJWIkDPOveiH3_ig1bddTMonEhIDZIzohrc/edit?usp=sharing
16:10:20 <sbyrnehaber> sbyrnehaber: Seems more like an Implementation Guide than a Usability doc
16:11:41 <sbyrnehaber> Stacey: everyone should do a quick read-through if you haven't looked at it outside of the core meeting
16:19:00 <sbyrnehaber> Stacey: the document customizes each dimension with what types of proof points are valid for for each level
16:19:13 <sbyrnehaber> Stacey: reviewed communications as an example
16:20:01 <Lionel_Wolberger> q+
16:21:13 <sbyrnehaber> q-
16:22:00 <sbyrnehaber> Lionel_Wolberger: Scope is not overt, the list is intimidating
16:22:31 <sbyrnehaber> lionel: informal communications could include chats at the coffee pot
16:22:55 <sbyrnehaber> Lionel_Wolberger: is there a place where the scope needs to be defined?
16:23:02 <sbyrnehaber> q+
16:25:32 <Stacey> scribe+
16:26:23 <Stacey> stacey: should we add a section in the "how to rate and evaluate" to include directions on the fact that orga/individuals can define their scope in the spreadsheet...assessment scope...they can mark things as not applicable, etc.
16:26:41 <Stacey> ... See spreadsheet for defining scope (as an example)
16:26:50 <sbyrnehaber> sbyrnehaber: assessment scope is the first field in the spreadsheet, also, n/a can be used to limit scope
16:27:15 <Lionel_Wolberger> Jeff: The Excel does have fields for the declaration of scope. The "Final totals" tab says, scope.
16:27:24 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... each tab has, as row 2, "Assessment Scope"
16:27:49 <sbyrnehaber> david: provided accessibility example using his communications with an individual who is d/Deaf
16:28:09 <sbyrnehaber> example of informal communication
16:29:22 <Lionel_Wolberger> sbyrnehaber: Taking the lawyer's perspective, any communication that would be exposed in discovery, could be in scope
16:29:22 <Stacey> Sheri: anything that can be demanded in litigation could be included in informal communications
16:29:32 <Lionel_Wolberger> scribe+
16:30:58 <Lionel_Wolberger> Stacey: Sounds like we are defining what 'informal communication' means, and not talking about the evaluation phase
16:32:41 <janina> q+
16:34:04 <CharlesL> ack Lionel_Wolberger
16:34:09 <CharlesL> ack sbyrnehaber
16:34:13 <CharlesL> ack janina
16:34:48 <janina> http://raw.githack.com/w3c/ctaur/js2402a/index.html
16:35:48 <kline> present+
16:35:56 <Stacey> Does this doc help with the social expecations of a11y collaboration? Tech needs to cover, but not every team will have all situations on the team. Take the considerations that pertain and leave the rest.
16:36:44 <Stacey> ack jeff
16:36:44 <kline> queue+
16:36:50 <janina> ack ja
16:37:01 <janina> ack kl
16:38:07 <Stacey> Jeff: encompassing as possible, but people need to use their own judgement. But we don't want to leave a huge loophole for avoidance of resolving IT accessibility. Informal and formal IT is fine. Let's leave for now.
16:43:13 <CharlesL> q+
16:44:55 <CharlesL> q-
16:45:47 <CharlesL> +1 Foundation...
16:46:20 <CharlesL> We need to capitalize Accessible Communications
16:53:31 <Stacey> zakim, end meeting
16:53:31 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Fazio, Stacey, Lionel_Wolberger, Mark_Miller, janina, CharlesL, kline, sbyrnehaber, nehaj_
16:53:33 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:53:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/28-maturity-minutes.html Zakim
16:53:41 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Stacey; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
16:53:41 <Zakim> Zakim has left #maturity
16:54:00 <CharlesL> CharlesL has left #maturity