W3C

– DRAFT –
WCAG 3 Implied Meaning subgroup

22 oct 2024

Attendees

Present
Frankie, Jan, JohnRochford, julierawe, kirkwood, Laura_Carlson, Rain
Regrets
Mike B
Chair
julierawe
Scribe
julierawe

Meeting minutes

Publishing schedule

Rachael wants to publish Implied Meaning in next draft of WCAG 3

It’s OK to publish even if we still have a lot to fill in

Rachael wants the “front text”—the outcome—and it doesn’t need to be perfect

Want to publish in 2 weeks

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P7fOyEPVlqf1aXuJY0SO9LeC-E7EZllg/edit#heading=h.d43df5fxyg8f

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P7fOyEPVlqf1aXuJY0SO9LeC-E7EZllg/edit#heading=h.d43df5fxyg8f

JohnRochford Why are we saying "direct"?

julierawe I'm ok with removing "direct"

Rain Suggest adjust "emoji" to "text-based emoji"

Rain When you use an emoji for evoking a meaning that is different from what the actual emoji is

Rain Example of "sweat grin" when you mean sarcasm

Rain I suggest "emoji characters" instead of "text-based emojis"

JohnR Can we add "alternatives"?

Rain I like that

<kirkwood> add “including”

<Laura_Carlson> Users can can access literal text or alternatives that explain what non-literal text means. This includes things like jokes, sarcasm, metaphors, similes, idioms, and emojis.

<Rain> +1

"Users can access the literal meaning of text. If the text has implied meaning, users can also get explanations or access an alternate version. Examples of non-literal text include jokes, sarcasm, metaphors, similes, idioms, and emoji characters."

User-centered outcome: Users can access the literal meaning of text. If the text has implied meaning, users can get explanations or access an alternate version. Examples of non-literal text include sarcasm, metaphors, similes, idioms, and emoji characters.

<Jan> +1

<Laura_Carlson> +1

<Rain> +1

<julierawe> +1

<kirkwood> +1

<Frankie> +1

<kirkwood> making people aware of the use of nonliteral language and to give explanations.

<kirkwood> I’m very wary of calling out “Autistics”

<Laura_Carlson> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Style

<kirkwood> “The preferred language to describe someone with autism varies depending on the individual, but both "autistic person" and "person with autism" are acceptable. Some say that "autistic person" is the preferred term because it's identity-first language, which recognizes autism as an inherent part of a person's identity. Others say that "person with autism" is the preferred term because it's person-first language, which puts the person before their

<kirkwood> diagnosis. “

<Rain> supply?

<Rain> +1 to the connotation. It feels patronizing

ACTION: items: Frankie will work on drafting definitions, Makoto (who joined at the end of the meeting) will start drafting tests, and Julie will update the method section to align with the decision tree and also fill in more examples in the first method

Summary of action items

  1. items: Frankie will work on drafting definitions, Makoto (who joined at the end of the meeting) will start drafting tests, and Julie will update the method section to align with the decision tree and also fill in more examples in the first method
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 238 (Fri Oct 18 20:51:13 2024 UTC).

Diagnostics

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: julierawe

Active on IRC: Frankie, Jan, JohnRochford, julierawe, kirkwood, Laura_Carlson, Rain