13:18:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:18:36 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/03/28-wcag2ict-irc
13:18:36 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:18:37 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:18:42 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
13:18:42 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:18:47 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
13:19:05 <maryjom> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:19:05 <Zakim> ok, maryjom
13:19:17 <maryjom> Regrets: Gregg Vanderheiden
13:21:12 <maryjom> Agenda+ Announcements
13:21:19 <maryjom> Agenda+ Status of remaining work before next publication
13:21:24 <maryjom> Agenda+ Survey results: Proposals for remaining work
13:21:30 <maryjom> Agenda+ Open issue discussions
13:21:35 <maryjom> agenda?
13:52:22 <PhilDay> PhilDay has joined #wcag2ict
13:56:13 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
13:56:33 <Chuck> present+
13:56:51 <PhilDay> present+
14:00:00 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:13 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:29 <shadi> present+
14:01:38 <FernandaBonnin> FernandaBonnin has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:01:49 <maryjom> Regrets: Gregg Vanderheiden, Olivia Hogan-Stark
14:02:08 <PhilDay> agenda?
14:02:08 <FernandaBonnin> present+
14:02:12 <bruce_bailey> present+
14:02:46 <ChrisLoiselle> present+
14:03:52 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
14:04:10 <Laura_Miller> Laura_Miller has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:04:18 <Laura_Miller> Present+
14:04:34 <maryjom> present+
14:04:49 <Devanshu> Devanshu has joined #wcag2ict
14:05:43 <Devanshu> present+
14:06:28 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
14:06:34 <Laura_Miller> Laura_Miller has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:07:01 <PhilDay> Brief discussion about new IRC client. Default theme has poor contrast, "Morning" theme is slightly better, but could be approved. Enable coloured nicknames may also help to switch off (both in settings/appearance).
14:07:27 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:07:27 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:07:46 <bruce_bailey> s/but could be approved/but could be improved
14:08:38 <PhilDay> Timezone changes this coming weekend for UK (& continental Europe) so should revert to previous gap.
14:08:49 <PhilDay> Chuck: Will we need a horizontal review.
14:09:21 <Chuck> https://www.w3.org/Guide/documentreview/#how_to_get_horizontal_review
14:09:42 <PhilDay> Horizontal review: document gets reviewed by cross functional team across W3C
14:09:53 <PhilDay> ... Goes to other working groups for sanity check.
14:10:02 <bruce_bailey> q+ to ask if chuck said *first* call draft?
14:10:38 <PhilDay> Chuck: There is a checklist that is helpful to go through to prepare prior to any horizontal review. Should help identify areas of concern that we can address ahead of time
14:10:47 <Chuck> https://w3c.github.io/apa/fast/checklist.html
14:11:41 <bruce_bailey> q-
14:12:07 <PhilDay> More information to come. We do need to do a horizontal review - takes ~30 days.
14:12:20 <bruce_bailey> q+
14:12:42 <Chuck> q+
14:12:53 <Chuck> ack bruce
14:13:00 <PhilDay> bruce_bailey: Do we submit what we have for horizontal review, and we work in parallel on the changes to continue working towards 2nd public draft.
14:13:21 <PhilDay> Chuck: Heard different answers on that - so to start with we should go through the fast checklist linked above
14:13:22 <bruce_bailey> +1 for checklist of course
14:14:07 <PhilDay> Chuck will follow up
14:14:37 <bruce_bailey> s/+1 for checklist of course/+1 for our self-review against checklist of course
14:14:57 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:14:57 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, PhilDay
14:15:01 <PhilDay> q?
14:15:09 <Chuck> ack Ch
14:15:13 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:15:13 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Status of remaining work before next publication -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:15:21 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Work-left-for-second-public-draft
14:15:39 <PhilDay> maryjom will add horizontal review work on to the work left list
14:16:02 <PhilDay> We are getting close to completion. Survey is out, due this coming Wednesday
14:16:38 <PhilDay> Please complete survey in time, and be diligent on any suggested changes (add all necessary detail and context).
14:17:11 <PhilDay> Survey is at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICTfinishclosed/__;!!D5WlZnHMtQ!T-Y-zGgkE5YV-WWt5J-gvGBNmA4QSPyvMbVEo-YC4Wth80jqaS6_3DNRe4aig9rsOsQLRidNq9VC8BhUfA$
14:17:24 <PhilDay> Survey is at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICTfinishclosed/
14:18:40 <PhilDay> Issues from Taskforce - one is done, 2 are in survey, we will have to work on answers once we have the content agreed.
14:18:51 <bruce_bailey> q+ to confess to throwing in another wrench and I will offline next week
14:18:55 <PhilDay> We may cover these answers tomorrow
14:20:03 <PhilDay> Issue 145: we still need a pull request/draft content completed. Some activity, but need content to review.
14:20:25 <PhilDay> Currently assigned to bruce_bailey, Laura_Miller, loic.
14:20:28 <PhilDay> Do you need help?
14:20:35 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/145
14:20:38 <bruce_bailey> i must confess to throwing in another wrench and I will offline next week
14:20:46 <PhilDay> q?
14:20:56 <PhilDay> ack bruce_bailey
14:20:56 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to confess to throwing in another wrench and I will offline next week
14:20:56 <bruce_bailey> ack me
14:21:00 <maryjom> ack bruce_bailey
14:21:22 <PhilDay> bruce_bailey: I think regulators really need help, so we should provide any guidance that we can.
14:21:40 <bruce_bailey> I think regulators need help and will screw things up if they are not provide help from wcag2ict tf
14:21:53 <PhilDay> maryjom: This was about the sets of clauses - we wanted some general comment about these
14:22:24 <PhilDay> It was mentioned that content from Section 508 & EN may be relevant to consider here
14:23:00 <GreggVan> q+
14:23:04 <PhilDay> Should we just take what is currently proposed and share with group for input?
14:23:08 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:23:31 <bruce_bailey> I provided link in survey and/or issue thread, but example is DOJ CRT ANPRM (august) where they cite to 2.1 but WITHOUT saying anything about "sets of software".
14:23:44 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Is the suggestion on sets of software - check regulatory requirements ...
14:24:02 <bruce_bailey> s/CRT ANPRM/CRT NPRM
14:24:15 <PhilDay> maryjom: Yes, that was the proposal as some were getting confused, and EN for example does not apply any of these "sets of" SCs
14:24:37 <bruce_bailey> I am prejudiced, but I think 508 and EN 301 549 did fine.  Not so much that NPRM.
14:25:13 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Seems to me that I should always check regulations for every SC - so not sure what a general note like this would tell us.
14:25:23 <bruce_bailey> +1 to GreggV that we fish or cut bait
14:25:35 <PhilDay> ... Instead, we should say it applies to "sets of" ... but these are rare...
14:26:01 <PhilDay> Or we say that it has not been proven a problem in these cases.
14:26:17 <GreggVan> q+
14:26:38 <PhilDay> Why we put them on these specific SCs? To address specific questions and comments on these particular SCs
14:27:20 <bruce_bailey> +1 to maryjom
14:27:53 <PhilDay> This is currently under survey - so put your responses in the survey so we can move this and other issues on
14:28:05 <PhilDay> This particular issue needs draft content to be completed
14:29:44 <PhilDay> Correction; this particular issue (145) is not in the survey - we need draft content. If you have ideas please contribute to the conversation in the issue. https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/145
14:29:54 <maryjom> q?
14:29:54 <PhilDay> q?
14:29:59 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:30:10 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:30:10 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Survey results: Proposals for remaining work -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:30:22 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 2
14:30:22 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Status of remaining work before next publication -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:30:47 <PhilDay> [sharing screen showing work left for second public draft]
14:31:50 <PhilDay> All but 2 issues are under survey which is good. Please can you work on the remaining issues to help draft content.
14:31:55 <FernandaBonnin> q+
14:32:11 <PhilDay> There is also an issue on addressing the use of "requires" in some SCs.
14:32:32 <maryjom> ack FernandaBonnin
14:32:57 <PhilDay> FernandaBonnin: for reflow issues - there is another sub group within AGWG working on this, so we might want to wait.
14:33:38 <PhilDay> maryjom: We can't just wait for them - maybe discuss with Mike Pluke to see if we can agree a position to get public draft out in time
14:33:54 <bruce_bailey> I don't think wcag2-issues TF will resolve Reflow guidance soon.
14:33:57 <PhilDay> Document needs to go out for review as we have made significant changes
14:34:13 <bruce_bailey> q+
14:34:47 <PhilDay> bruce_bailey: Reflow discussion in WCAG2 issues & AG is going slowly.
14:35:20 <PhilDay> Reflow is a tough issue - we have an approach - give your input in the survey
14:35:26 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 3
14:35:26 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Survey results: Proposals for remaining work -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:35:38 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICTfinishclosed/results
14:36:01 <PhilDay> TOPIC: q1, issue 196
14:36:23 <maryjom> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICTfinishclosed/results#xq1
14:36:23 <PhilDay> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/196
14:37:00 <PhilDay> 3 responses: 2 say do not make changes, 1 disagrees saying changes are needed
14:37:09 <ChrisLoiselle> I had answered the survey but it doesn't show my answers, could you refresh the results?
14:37:14 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/discussions/310
14:38:04 <Laura_Miller> Laura_Miller has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:38:05 <maryjom> Bruce's latest comment: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/discussions/310#discussioncomment-8933556
14:38:10 <PhilDay> Bruce commented on the need for input for regulators
14:38:23 <PhilDay> s/input/guidance
14:38:35 <bruce_bailey> q+
14:38:56 <PhilDay> ack bruce_bailey
14:38:57 <maryjom> ack bruce_bailey
14:40:07 <PhilDay> bruce_bailey: The link is a proposed rule that DOJ put out in August (just proposed so can change). Not sure how many entities submitted comments. There were lots of comments, but not many about applying to closed systems. It just says we should apply WCAG, without referring to WCAG2ICT or any other considerations.
14:40:16 <PhilDay> (Applies to native mobile apps)
14:41:18 <PhilDay> maryjom: Also heard that some states are trying to do this (Colorado, California).
14:42:12 <PhilDay> Problem is that there is no US standard that does application of WCAG 2.1/2.2 to non
14:42:20 <PhilDay> ... non-web
14:42:38 <PhilDay> Input is needed, but may be out of scope for this TF
14:43:09 <bruce_bailey> Agreed, 508 still being on 2.0 (not 2.1 or 2.2) is also problematic.  508 will NOT be updating anytime soon.  It is NOT on the Unified Agenda.
14:43:47 <PhilDay> Conforming alternate version - complex number of options
14:43:48 <Laura_Miller> Q+
14:44:11 <PhilDay> ack Laura_Miller
14:44:12 <maryjom> ack Laura_Miller
14:45:14 <ChrisLoiselle> Laura: Asked Bruce about 508 and being applied vs. wcag 2.1
14:45:33 <maryjom> maryjom has joined #wcag2ict
14:45:34 <Laura_Miller> Laura_Miller has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:45:39 <ChrisLoiselle> Bruce: legal min is 2.0 AA . Mentions memo 2223 memo
14:46:09 <ChrisLoiselle> Laura was asking on Kiosk standards and interpretation and requirements around digital accessibility
14:47:01 <ChrisLoiselle> Laura applying to native apps without legal requirements to do so. From WCAG standpoint, industry seems to be ahead of us. Across methodologies / mediums
14:47:10 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:47:10 <PhilDay> PhilDay has joined #wcag2ict
14:47:13 <PhilDay> present
14:47:16 <PhilDay> present+
14:47:27 <ChrisLoiselle> MaryJo: Customers want beyond requirements and non web requirements
14:47:35 <PhilDay> [brief interruption while losing IRC]
14:47:37 <PhilDay> Laura_Miller: Q for Bruce on 508 and more broadly. 2223 most recent memo. Just clarifying what is meant by digital accessibility. See people apply these to digital apps without any other guidance in place.
14:47:40 <ChrisLoiselle> Phil, you ok to scribe again?
14:48:05 <FernandaBonnin> FernandaBonnin has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:48:08 <ChrisLoiselle> My did not drop so I can share notes if need be
14:48:11 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
14:48:12 <shadi> shadi has joined #wcag2ict
14:48:45 <bruce_bailey> In U.S. there is recent instruction from Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to federal agencies to use most recent version of WCAG.
14:49:19 <PhilDay> What is considered by an accessible alternative version - Mary Jo has listed some examples in the issue (310)
14:49:27 <bruce_bailey> M-22-33 and M-24-08 -- I will paste in the (long) links to IRC.
14:49:47 <PhilDay> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/discussions/310
14:49:53 <GreggVan> q+
14:49:57 <PhilDay> s/issue/discussion
14:50:53 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:51:44 <PhilDay> GreggVan: A better example is the interface to your wifi at home if you have a web based interface; the alternative is a linux command line interface. So command line is not an appropriate conforming alternate version
14:52:07 <Chuck> q+
14:53:16 <bruce_bailey> https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/ofcio/delivering-a-digital-first-public-experience/
14:53:21 <bruce_bailey> From "Follow accessibility standards" bullet...
14:53:36 <maryjom> ack Chuck
14:53:36 <PhilDay> There has to be a link from the inaccessible version to the accessible version one - so you can find the alternate. We have not really thought of a text-only page - not really an equivalent.
14:54:10 <bruce_bailey> > ...agencies should apply the most current Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) to websites and web applications, where possible.
14:54:35 <Laura_Miller> Laura_Miller has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:54:51 <PhilDay> Chuck: Example that is less technical. Efficient alternate conforming device. Home device like Alexa -there are apps for Android and iOS in case you cannot hear or execute speech. So this could be considered as an example of an alternate conforming, and does not require lots of technical knowledge.
14:54:56 <GreggVan> q+
14:56:34 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
14:56:35 <maryjom> ack GreggVan
14:56:37 <PhilDay> shadi: There is also tap for input (for those who cannot speak). The point is that not every type of access is accessible to everyone, but in combination they can provide access to the same service. (e.g. speech interface for those who find it useful, but combined with other methods it can help gain access). May not meet the full definition of a
14:56:37 <PhilDay> conforming alternate. More a partial mix of multiple methods
14:57:21 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Also consider AI. Conversational interfaces that you can talk, type or maybe sign to in order to get information to/from which could be a very helpful alternative
14:57:30 <maryjom> q+
14:57:43 <PhilDay> We should ensure we also include this in any writing
14:57:46 <maryjom> ack ChrisLoiselle
14:58:07 <PhilDay> ChrisLoiselle: From conforming alternate version, maybe need input from AGWG to list examples there rather than just in WCAG2ICT.
14:58:13 <Chuck> +.5 to Chris
14:58:14 <shadi> +1
14:58:15 <maryjom> ack maryjom
14:58:49 <PhilDay> maryjom: One of my earlier comments was that current definition was dated and needed updates.
14:59:53 <PhilDay> Another example: world clouds, and then link takes you to a list view as an alternative. Not clear from definition if this example also conformed
15:00:40 <bruce_bailey> RRSagent, draft minutes
15:00:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/28-wcag2ict-minutes.html bruce_bailey
15:01:28 <PhilDay> Please give input in the open survey. Those that have time please join tomorrow.
15:01:52 <PhilDay> Tomorrow: will work on issues that do not currently have content drafted for them. 1 hour earlier than today.
15:02:14 <PhilDay> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:02:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/03/28-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay