14:48:39 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
14:48:43 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/10/22-ag-irc
14:48:43 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:48:44 <Zakim> Meeting: AGWG Teleconference
14:49:40 <alastairc> agenda+ Announcements
14:49:50 <alastairc> agenda+ Requirements Publication https://github.com/w3c/wcag3/pull/117
14:50:07 <alastairc> agenda+ WCAG 2.x issues https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2-issues/2024Oct/0002.html
14:50:30 <alastairc> Agenda+ Breakouts for technical-statement refinements & notes
14:54:27 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #ag
14:54:34 <Chuck> present+
14:56:02 <alastairc> chair:alastairc
14:56:04 <alastairc> present+
14:56:10 <alastairc> agenda?
14:58:39 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #ag
14:59:09 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
14:59:31 <Francis_Storr> Francis_Storr has joined #ag
14:59:31 <dj> dj has joined #ag
14:59:36 <DJ> present+
15:00:34 <Kimberly> Kimberly has joined #ag
15:00:37 <Laura_Carlson> Laura_Carlson has joined #ag
15:00:47 <Laura_Carlson> Laura_Carlson has left #ag
15:00:52 <Laura_Carlson> Laura_Carlson has joined #ag
15:00:58 <Francis_Storr> present+
15:01:01 <Kimberly> present+
15:01:19 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
15:01:26 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #ag
15:01:35 <Azlan> present+
15:01:46 <ashleyfirth> ashleyfirth has joined #ag
15:02:07 <Laura_Carlson> Laura_Carlson has joined #ag
15:02:12 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #ag
15:02:37 <Rachael> present+
15:02:37 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #ag
15:02:39 <filippo-zorzi> present+
15:02:45 <Laura_Carlson> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
15:02:57 <Jennie_Delisi> Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag
15:03:03 <Jennie_Delisi> present+
15:03:16 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #ag
15:03:19 <ashleyfirth> present+
15:03:19 <jeanne2> jeanne2 has joined #ag
15:03:44 <ShawnT> present+
15:03:50 <alastairc> zakim, pick a scribe
15:03:50 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Jennie_Delisi
15:03:50 <Jennie_Delisi> * I can scribe if needed
15:03:53 <giacomo-petri> present+
15:03:54 <GN015> GN015 has joined #ag
15:03:54 <bruce_bailey> present+
15:04:07 <Jennie_Delisi> scribe: Jennie
15:04:16 <Kimberly> Kimberly has joined #ag
15:04:25 <aditya> aditya has joined #ag
15:04:28 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #ag
15:04:29 <alastairc> zakim, take up next item
15:04:29 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from alastairc]
15:04:32 <jtoles> jtoles has joined #ag
15:04:35 <julierawe> present+
15:04:36 <jtoles> present+
15:04:48 <nina> nina has joined #ag
15:04:48 <Makoto> Makoto has joined #ag
15:04:52 <sarahhorton> sarahhorton has joined #ag
15:04:55 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: Chairs discussed item from TPAC: starting a mentoring or buddy system
15:04:58 <Makoto> present+
15:04:59 <sarahhorton> present+
15:05:04 <Jennie_Delisi> ...someone with more experience.
15:05:05 <Tananda> Tananda has joined #ag
15:05:14 <Jennie_Delisi> ...There is a video for new people starting.
15:05:17 <nina> present+
15:05:32 <MJ> MJ has joined #ag
15:05:39 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Is there anyone interested in helping set up a spreadsheet and matching people?
15:06:01 <Justine> Justine has joined #ag
15:06:04 <MJ> present+
15:06:09 <Jennie_Delisi> ...If you are interested in becoming a mentor or buddy, please email the chairs.
15:06:24 <Tananda> present +
15:06:41 <steveF> steveF has joined #ag
15:06:43 <Gez> Gez has joined #AG
15:06:53 <steveF> present+
15:06:55 <Chuck> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AGWGSubgroupParticipation_Oct_24/
15:07:07 <Gez> present+
15:07:10 <Jennie_Delisi> Chuck: Announcement 2 - need volunteers for these subgroups
15:07:24 <Jennie_Delisi> ...This survey is open until end of day today, Boston time.
15:07:33 <AlinaV> AlinaV has joined #ag
15:07:35 <Jennie_Delisi> ...When they start: it will be working sessions in this call.
15:07:42 <AlinaV> present+
15:07:50 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Then there will be times outside of this call.
15:07:59 <DJ> q+
15:08:02 <Graham> Graham has joined #ag
15:08:13 <Graham> present+
15:08:15 <alastairc> q?
15:08:19 <alastairc> ack DJ
15:08:23 <Jennie_Delisi> DJ: The subgroup form time?
15:08:55 <Jennie_Delisi> Chuck: Consider it daylight savings time
15:09:10 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: Boston time is the way our times are set.
15:09:29 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Anyone new who would like to introduce themselves?
15:09:41 <alastairc> zakim, take up next item
15:09:41 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Requirements Publication https://github.com/w3c/wcag3/pull/117 -- taken up [from alastairc]
15:10:07 <ChrisLoiselle> present+
15:10:23 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: Background: Requirements for WCAG 3 turns into a document to assess how successful WCAG 3 is
15:10:26 <Jennie_Delisi> ...We iterated.
15:10:50 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Earlier in the year: issues available on Github related to this document
15:11:07 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Small group reviewed, and made changes to the document. We are in the final stages getting ready for publication.
15:11:10 <Frankie7> Frankie7 has joined #ag
15:11:16 <Frankie7> present+
15:11:21 <Jennie_Delisi> ...People have been reviewing, asking questions.
15:11:49 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Changes include editorial information towards the beginning...
15:12:04 <Jennie_Delisi> ...In the requirements section are the pieces which will be used to assess success
15:12:27 <Jennie_Delisi> ...We tried to make them more testable - that WCAG 3 satisfies these requirements.
15:12:39 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Comments have been resolved, merged in.
15:13:03 <kirkwood> present+
15:13:06 <Jennie_Delisi> ...A few things were left from a thread on the readability section.
15:13:27 <Jennie_Delisi> ...(reads the edits made)
15:13:50 <Jennie_Delisi> ...There is a last minute suggestion
15:13:52 <alastairc> "WCAG 3 is written using the plain language guidance from WCAG 3. The goal is for the widest possible audience to understand WCAG 3
15:14:25 <Jennie_Delisi> ...1 other change made recently is to add the self-validation section, which overlaps
15:14:35 <Jennie_Delisi> ...(reads from the document)
15:14:51 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Should we keep the readability requirement as a separate thing?
15:15:17 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Or should we remove it because it is taken care of by the self-validation section?
15:15:20 <dan_bjorge> dan_bjorge has joined #ag
15:15:21 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Questions or comments?
15:15:32 <Jennie_Delisi> Gregg: This is a requirement and listed separately?
15:15:33 <julierawe> q+
15:15:59 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: To me, the self-validation section is the umbrella one, which encompasses the other.
15:16:00 <alastairc> ack julierawe
15:16:10 <Jennie_Delisi> Julie: One of the design principles, #5, is plain language.
15:16:32 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Connecting plain language requirements to what makes it into WCAG 3 about plain language.
15:16:42 <Jennie_Delisi> ...What if the plain language things are not ready yet?
15:16:59 <alastairc> q+ to speak to the use of plain language before final publication
15:17:06 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Is it essential to tie the section about readability to things specifically in WCAG 3 vs general plain language principles?
15:17:07 <alastairc> ack alastairc
15:17:07 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to speak to the use of plain language before final publication
15:17:07 <GreggVan> q+
15:17:14 <Makoto> q+
15:17:24 <GreggVan> present+
15:17:34 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: I don't think we have to formally  meet the requirements until we get close to the final publication.
15:17:46 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Also the requirements document will primarily be applied to the normative text.
15:17:55 <Graham> q+
15:18:04 <Chuck> +1
15:18:05 <alastairc> ack GreggVan
15:18:09 <Rachael> +1
15:18:19 <Jennie_Delisi> Gregg: Readability is more than plain language. It has to do with structure, order, organization.
15:18:32 <GN015> +1 to Gregg
15:18:41 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I think I would add some of that and leave it in for now.
15:18:53 <alastairc> ack Makoto
15:19:05 <Jennie_Delisi> Makoto: I think we should keep the readability section.
15:19:13 <kirkwood> +1 to keeping plain language
15:19:23 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It would help ensure it is more readable and understandable.
15:19:30 <alastairc> ack Graham
15:19:32 <Jennie_Delisi> ...This will help emphasize this.
15:19:53 <Jennie_Delisi> Graham: Does it still need to be in the design principles section?
15:20:02 <Rachael> q+ to answer
15:20:05 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: I don't think there is a problem to have it in both places.
15:20:13 <alastairc> ack Rachael
15:20:13 <Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to answer
15:20:24 <Jennie_Delisi> Rachael: I think the reason it was set up this way is the design principles are aspirational
15:20:32 <Jennie_Delisi> ...But the requirements are what we use to check.
15:20:44 <Graham> q+
15:20:45 <jeanne2> q+
15:20:53 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Testable ones are the ones we hold ourselves to, and is the reason they are divided up this way
15:21:18 <Jennie_Delisi> Graham: Is this an overview because we need to define what plain language looks like?
15:21:44 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: This is "out in the world" - this is an update to it
15:21:53 <Jennie_Delisi> ...But we are iterating as we go through the process.
15:22:12 <Jennie_Delisi> Jeanne: Measurability and testability is the difference between the design principles and the requirements
15:22:23 <Jennie_Delisi> ...More difficult to measure aspects went into the design principles.
15:22:24 <kirkwood> current regs in US: “The Plain Writing Act of 2010 requires federal agencies to use plain language when communicating with the public.”
15:22:25 <kirkwood> “
15:22:44 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Readability is critical, and came out in all input about WCAG 3
15:22:46 <alastairc> q/
15:22:47 <alastairc> q?
15:22:50 <Jennie_Delisi> ...That's why it is in the requirements section.
15:22:51 <alastairc> ack Graham
15:22:53 <alastairc> ack jeanne2
15:22:55 <alastairc> ack jeanne
15:22:59 <alastairc> "WCAG 3 is written using the plain language guidance from WCAG 3. The goal is for the widest possible audience to understand WCAG 3."
15:23:06 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: The proposal is to update that language.
15:23:25 <Jennie_Delisi> ...(reads from the document)
15:23:34 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Any objections?
15:23:53 <Rachael> +1
15:23:57 <Jennie_Delisi> ...OK I can make that update, then it goes to CFC
15:24:00 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
15:24:04 <Jennie_Delisi> Kirkwood: Does that language make sense?
15:24:28 <alastairc> Diff document: https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fwcag-3.0-requirements%2F&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fdeploy-preview-117--wcag3.netlify.app%2Frequirements%2F
15:24:30 <Jennie_Delisi> Chris: Design principles - "based on requirements of WCAG 2.x and build upon those requirements"
15:24:37 <scott> scott has joined #ag
15:24:41 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Then in the requirements we say "should"
15:24:43 <scott> present+
15:24:56 <Graham> q+
15:25:00 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Seems like we are mentioning a couple of different terms that are conflated when someone is reading it through
15:25:05 <alastairc> ack ChrisLoiselle
15:25:25 <Laura_Carlson> present+ Laura_Carlson
15:25:33 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: Regarding scope: if there are any new things people want to suggest - these can be added into Github
15:25:37 <alastairc> ack Graham
15:25:38 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Today we are reviewing these changes.
15:25:47 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
15:26:04 <Jennie_Delisi> Graham: Can we add a caveat about adding to WCAG 3?
15:26:31 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: In terms of all of them - the requirements are written in present tense
15:26:39 <Jennie_Delisi> ...and that was a deliberate choice
15:26:51 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I think that is a quirk about how this document works.
15:27:02 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Otherwise we would have to make minor edits.
15:27:13 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Rachael mentions we can add an editor's note to address this.
15:27:14 <Graham> +1 to editors note then, far better idea!
15:27:34 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: I did not see any issues with the proposed language.
15:27:40 <ljoakley> ljoakley has joined #ag
15:27:43 <Jennie_Delisi> ...The other topic on this: adding something about mental health.
15:27:46 <ljoakley> present+
15:28:06 <Jennie_Delisi> ...There is a section in the broad disability support section (reads from the document)
15:28:08 <tiffanyburtin> tiffanyburtin has joined #ag
15:28:29 <ljoakley> q+
15:28:34 <Jennie_Delisi> ...The proposal is to add
15:28:34 <alastairc> "This approach includes particular attention to people whose needs may better be met with a broad testing strategy, such as people with low vision, limited vision, cognitive and learning disabilities, or mental health disabilities."
15:28:55 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Are we happy to add mental health disabilities to this list?
15:29:02 <tiffanyburtin> present+
15:29:05 <Jennie_Delisi> ...This is being worked on in the Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Task Force
15:29:10 <GN015> q+
15:29:14 <alastairc> ack ljoakley
15:29:18 <ChrisLoiselle> q+ I had one other question.
15:29:22 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
15:29:26 <Jennie_Delisi> Laurie: There is nothing in here about people with restricted mobility.
15:29:33 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Why wouldn't we add that in?
15:29:44 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: Because it was perceived to be well-covered in WCAG 2.
15:29:59 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Those included were felt to be more difficult to cover in a WCAG 2 structure.
15:29:59 <Rachael> q+ to ask about voice control?
15:30:06 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Otherwise we have to list all disabilities.
15:30:09 <alastairc> ack GN
15:30:31 <Jennie_Delisi> GN: Are there consequences for adding mental health because it is a complex topic?
15:30:43 <Jennie_Delisi> ...How could we cover it from an accessibility perspective?
15:30:48 <alastairc> ack ChrisLoiselle
15:30:53 <Rachael> q+ to speak to mental health
15:31:19 <jeanne2> q+ to say that we discussed mental health when writing the original document and chose not to because of the lack of research at that time
15:31:24 <Jennie_Delisi> Chris: Design principles: in the heading, #4 - is that the same topic that Gregg was asking about? It seems circular to me.
15:31:33 <ljoakley> +1 to Chris
15:31:39 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Should I raise an issue about this or is it covered by this conversation?
15:31:48 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: WCAG 2 is supposed to conform to WCAG 3.
15:31:55 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Yes, the guidelines document should conform
15:32:02 <alastairc> q?
15:32:05 <alastairc> ack Rachael
15:32:05 <Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to ask about voice control? and to speak to mental health
15:32:06 <Jennie_Delisi> Chris: OK. Thank you
15:32:25 <Jennie_Delisi> Rachael: re mobility - we may want to call out voice control. But I am not sure it fits there.
15:32:41 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Regarding mental health: it is hard, and it is something COGA is working on - what can be included.
15:32:46 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It is an important area.
15:32:58 <Jennie_Delisi> ...There is enough research to make improvements.
15:33:05 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It is a conversation we will be having.
15:33:20 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It will only include what we can work in based on research, but this is true of all disabilities.
15:33:21 <alastairc> ack jeanne
15:33:21 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say that we discussed mental health when writing the original document and chose not to because of the lack of research at that time
15:33:34 <alastairc> q+ on the reason for the section
15:33:56 <Jennie_Delisi> Jeanne: History - we wanted to include mental health. When we looked at it in 2018 - we didn't want to tie ourselves to something without sufficient research.
15:34:03 <alastairc> ack alastairc
15:34:03 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to comment on the reason for the section
15:34:15 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: The reason for the section - it used to be called multiple ways to measure
15:34:25 <Jennie_Delisi> ...We are trying to go beyond true false statements.
15:34:37 <Graham> q+
15:34:45 <GreggVan> q+
15:34:51 <Jennie_Delisi> ...The different structure and provisions we are including, like assertions - these are the reasons to include something in this section
15:34:57 <kirkwood> mental health disabilities should be the language used, no?
15:35:16 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Along with COGA - it does seem like an area that would benefit from assertions
15:35:16 <alastairc> ack Graham
15:35:34 <Jennie_Delisi> Graham: We don't we move the whole section into the design principles section?
15:35:34 <Rachael> q+
15:35:45 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Then it could grow or shrink without it being a requirement?
15:35:51 <alastairc> q+ on keeping it as a requirement
15:35:55 <alastairc> ack GreggVan
15:36:17 <Jennie_Delisi> Gregg: 1: Broad disability support is a wonderful section. I think it focuses too much on measuring.
15:36:34 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It mentions other ways of measuring, but in the end you need to pass or not pass.
15:36:46 <kirkwood> +1 to Gregg
15:36:49 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Even if a sliding scale you need to say where on the scale it passes.
15:37:07 <Jennie_Delisi> ...We are not mentioning all the things we are doing, or not doing.
15:37:22 <Jennie_Delisi> ...We are making a broader range of guidance.
15:37:27 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Measuring is measuring.
15:38:10 <Jennie_Delisi> ...2: We have limited and low vision as people not included. I am not sure why we have particular attention to low vision
15:38:21 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I would suggest removing them.
15:38:22 <alastairc> ack Rachael
15:38:37 <Jennie_Delisi> Rachael: I strongly think we need the broad disability support section. (Chair hat off)
15:38:48 <Jennie_Delisi> ...The 1st sentence - this is a strong start.
15:38:57 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I agree with Gregg's comments related to measurement.
15:39:14 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I like cognitive being called out because getting additional support will be a good test.
15:39:25 <alastairc> ack alastairc
15:39:25 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to comment on keeping it as a requirement
15:39:27 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I think we can simplify it and meet the needs to keep it in this section.
15:39:41 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: (chair hat off) we should keep something like this in.
15:39:51 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It needs to be a requirement, not just a design goal.
15:40:16 <Jennie_Delisi> ...The main thing - we are trying to create something with more flexibility - that is the point.
15:40:28 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Regarding mental health: maybe it is premature to include it here at the moment.
15:40:47 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I don't know that there are different mechanisms needed for mental health that isn't in COGA in general.
15:40:55 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I can poll on this.
15:41:12 <Jennie_Delisi> ...If people think we need to reframe the whole section...
15:41:29 <bruce_bailey> q+
15:41:56 <Jennie_Delisi> Bruce: regarding dropping low vision (missed what he said)
15:42:04 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #ag
15:42:15 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: I think people in the low vision task force were frustrated that some requests they had re WCAG 2 did not go in
15:42:30 <Jennie_Delisi> ...That a slightly different approach would enable them to include more provisions
15:42:33 <alastairc> ack bruce_bailey
15:42:53 <Jennie_Delisi> Bruce: I agree with Gregg that WCAG 2 does a decent job for low vision, in comparison with the needs of COGA
15:42:58 <GreggVan> q+
15:43:06 <jeanne2> q+ about LVTF not even trying to be included in 2.2
15:43:07 <alastairc> ack GreggVan
15:43:09 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: I think we would get an objection if we removed that, from people who are not on the call.
15:43:16 <jeanne2> q+
15:43:53 <Jennie_Delisi> Gregg: There are people who think low vision / limited vision is something that is an area requiring special attention?
15:44:20 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: Not special attention, but had certain requirements which could not fit into the true / false
15:44:30 <Jennie_Delisi> ...There were frustrations around things they could not get into WCAG 2
15:44:47 <Jennie_Delisi> Gregg: There is so much focus on vision, this could draw concerns from other areas
15:44:56 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I would remove "limited vision"
15:44:57 <julierawe> +1 to Gregg on removing one of the mentions of vision
15:44:59 <ChrisLoiselle> perhaps intersectional needs and disabilities and remove the "classes and categories " of disabilities
15:45:09 <Jennie_Delisi> ...There were things for all areas which could not be fit in
15:45:30 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: I will take that as an editorial comment.
15:45:31 <alastairc> ack jeanne
15:45:38 <ChrisLoiselle> q+
15:45:45 <Jennie_Delisi> Jeanne: When we first wrote this - there were task forces being formed for different disability groups
15:45:47 <kirkwood> +1 to Gregg, acuity versus the visual field.  low/limited. i would keep limited rather than low
15:46:00 <Jennie_Delisi> ...who felt their needs were not getting added into WCAG 2.1
15:46:24 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Low vision had a number of proposals which did not get added into 2.1 because they did not meet the true / false requirements
15:46:54 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I was informed by one of the chairs of the low vision task force that they disbanded because they did not feel it was worth their time to continue trying, and would wait for WCAG 3
15:47:06 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I think it is important to keep it there.
15:47:10 <Laura_Carlson> +1 to Alastair I remember the low vision situation the same. But Wayne and JonA are not here to speak to it.
15:47:17 <alastairc> q?
15:47:20 <Jennie_Delisi> ...If we want to change the order so cognitive goes first in the list, I am fine with that.
15:47:23 <Rachael> q+
15:47:33 <Laura_Carlson> +1 to Jeanne
15:47:36 <Jennie_Delisi> Chris: In IRC I added a possible suggestion
15:47:48 <kirkwood> agree putting with Jeanne
15:48:02 <steveF> +1 to Jeanne
15:48:05 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I can echo Jeanne's point to a degree, and I feel we are trying to include rather than exclude
15:48:15 <alastairc> ack ChrisLoiselle
15:48:17 <alastairc> ack Rachael
15:48:18 <Jennie_Delisi> Rachael: I put a suggested alternative in (chair point on)
15:48:21 <kirkwood> +1 to Jeanne
15:48:33 <Chuck> Rachael suggested alternative: WCAG 3 guidance will have a structure, tests, and/or approach that allows for requirements that are not available in WCAG 2.x, such as additional needs of people with cognitive and learning disabilities, intersectional disabilities, and limited vision.
15:48:35 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Possibly (reads from her comment)
15:48:59 <Jennie_Delisi> ...This gives us more flexibility, doesn't focus just on the measurement, and uses these as exemplars
15:49:01 <alastairc> WCAG 3 guidance will have a structure, tests, and/or approach that allows for requirements that are not available in WCAG 2.x, such as the additional needs of  people with cognitive and learning disabilities, intersectional disabilities, and limited vision.
15:49:04 <julierawe> +1 to Rachael suggestion
15:49:13 <jeanne2> +1
15:49:19 <Chuck> +1
15:49:20 <GreggVan> q+
15:49:24 <Graham> simpler suggestion is just adding "such as (but not limited to) ..." in the current setence?
15:49:40 <GreggVan> q-
15:49:58 <GreggVan> +1 to Rachael
15:50:05 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: Should we update the broad disability support to the proposal above?
15:50:12 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Any suggestions, objections, or comments?
15:50:14 <GreggVan> +1
15:50:24 <tiffanyburtin> Will we be covering intersectionality?
15:50:28 <Jennie_Delisi> Rachael: I added the suggested revision
15:50:28 <Chuck> +1
15:50:33 <Graham> +1
15:50:54 <Jennie_Delisi> ...(not limited to)
15:50:55 <ChrisLoiselle> +1
15:50:55 <GreggVan> +1 to Rachale #2
15:50:58 <bruce_bailey> +1
15:51:00 <MJ> +1
15:51:01 <Makoto> +1
15:51:06 <alastairc> Draftr RESOLUTION: Accept the suggestion to replace the current "Broad disability support"
15:51:06 <ShawnT> +1
15:51:09 <kirkwood> +1
15:51:17 <Laura_Carlson> +1
15:51:20 <DJ> +1
15:51:20 <scott> +1
15:51:22 <Francis_Storr> +1
15:51:22 <Justine> +1
15:51:23 <GN015> I can't see the suggested text.
15:51:24 <GreggVan> +1
15:51:31 <alastairc> WCAG 3  guidance will have a structure, tests, and/or approach that allows for requirements that are not available in
15:51:31 <alastairc> WCAG 2.x, such as (but not limited to) additional needs of  people with cognitive and learning disabilities, intersectional disabilities, and limited vision.
15:51:34 <tiffanyburtin> +1
15:51:39 <julierawe> +1
15:51:40 <dan_bjorge> +1
15:51:51 <jtoles> +1
15:51:58 <Jennie_Delisi> RESOLUTION: Accept the suggestion to replace the current "Broad disability support"
15:52:10 <Frankie> Frankie has joined #ag
15:52:30 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: moving to the WCAG 2 issues
15:52:33 <alastairc> zakim, take up next item
15:52:33 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- WCAG 2.x issues https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2-issues/2024Oct/0002.html -- taken up [from alastairc]
15:52:58 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: We are building to a republication
15:53:08 <Jennie_Delisi> ...These are large but minor - lots of editorial things
15:53:26 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Lots of style-guide type things.
15:53:52 <Jennie_Delisi> ...I am highlighting things which are minor but part of the normative text.
15:53:59 <Jennie_Delisi> ...They will be added to the CFC
15:54:26 <Jennie_Delisi> ...The other one, not normative: there was a proposal with discussion about automatic
15:54:35 <Jennie_Delisi> ...there was some back and forth
15:54:46 <Jennie_Delisi> ...If you looked at it 2 weeks ago there have been minor updates.
15:54:56 <Jennie_Delisi> ...If you are concerned about this, please review in the next few days.
15:55:04 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It has received several thumbs ups
15:55:19 <R_Brown8> R_Brown8 has joined #ag
15:55:24 <Jennie_Delisi> ...We will have a CFC soon.
15:55:36 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Any questions or comments?
15:55:38 <Kimberly> Kimberly has joined #ag
15:55:41 <nina> nina has joined #ag
15:55:49 <alastairc> zakim, take up next item
15:55:49 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Breakouts for technical-statement refinements & notes -- taken up [from alastairc]
15:56:03 <Jennie_Delisi> Alastairc: This is a continuation of our work from last week.
15:56:13 <Chuck> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JgjDonZEvJMc3_k_R6r3siNexeBjigQsqVxvQRhLEN8/edit?gid=0#gid=0
15:56:18 <R_Brown8> present+
15:56:19 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Outcomes are now called technical statements.
15:56:26 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Are there refinements we can make?
15:56:38 <Jennie_Delisi> ...It is fine not to know what it means or the intent behind it.
15:56:44 <Jennie_Delisi> ...We are usability testing it.
15:57:00 <Jennie_Delisi> ...Notes are given to the subgroups as feedback.
15:57:08 <Jennie_Delisi> ...There might be things that are easy to update.
15:57:33 <Jennie_Delisi> q+
15:58:05 <ChrisLoiselle> do we have those two links related to the exercise?
15:58:20 <alastairc> ack Jennie_Delisi
15:59:21 <MJ> my group was 151-180
15:59:44 <julierawe> Have to drop, thank you all!
16:06:16 <ljoakley1> ljoakley1 has joined #ag
16:15:44 <LenB> LenB has joined #ag
16:15:49 <LenB> present+
16:33:31 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
16:40:53 <scott> scott has joined #ag
16:42:39 <Chuck> group 61-90 is "complete".
16:47:05 <alastairc> 2 left for us
16:54:33 <dj> dj has joined #ag
16:56:07 <jtoles> jtoles has joined #ag
16:56:32 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #ag
16:56:46 <bruce_bailey> q+
16:57:01 <alastairc> ack bruce_bailey
16:57:26 <alastairc> Need to check 160, 174 etc.
16:58:03 <GN015> present+
16:58:09 <ljoakley> ljoakley has joined #ag
16:58:38 <alastairc> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:58:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/10/22-ag-minutes.html alastairc
18:01:14 <Adam_Page> Adam_Page has joined #ag
18:48:20 <Laura_Carlson> Laura_Carlson has joined #ag
18:48:32 <Laura_Carlson> Laura_Carlson has joined #ag