W3C

– DRAFT –
Maturity Model Task Force

20 November 2024

Attendees

Present
CharlesL, Darek, Dr_Keith, Fazio, IrfanA, janina, jkline, Mark_Miller, NehaJ, Sheri_B-H, Stacey, stacey2
Regrets
-
Chair
David Fazio
Scribe
Sheri_B-H, janina

Meeting minutes

<Fazio> Update on Github Issue #148 Resolution

<gb> /issues/148 -> #148

<gb> /issues/226 -> #226

<gb> /issues/230 -> #230

<gb> /issues/231 -> #231

<gb> /issues/126 -> #126

Introductions, because we had new people

<Stacey> audio not working

janina explained interaction between APA and Maturity

New Business

Jeff (no longer on IRC) wants to include a disclaimer in the document that the single source of truth is the assessment tool, so every change to the tool doesn't require a document change

janina thinks it's a reasonable thing to do

ack

janina Spreadsheet was a sanity check

janina the question will get asked

Mark_Miller his organization used the spreadsheet, it caused confusion because of lack of parity between the two. Don't know that we need to retain parity. Maybe the disclaimer would help make things clearer

<Fazio> If the publication isn't prescriptive and proof points are flexible and not necessarily in the note that makes the spreadsheet/tool problematic

Sheri_B-H: Legal concept of incorporation by reference

Sheri_B-H: Lots of work to keep both sync'd

<Fazio> +1 Sheri

Sheri_B-H: we need to avoid those issues

Dr_Keith agrees with Mark_Miller - we should state the spreadsheet is a representative example. Proof points can change, users can update

Fazio we've always intended to not be presecriptive. We can't create a spreadsheet that covers every case. We don't tell people "how"

Fazio: used ACR as an example

janina we will publish 1.0, we seem to have an agreement that there needs to be a disclaimer

janina what is the goal of continuing to work on the spreadsheet after 1.0 We want to work on data collection

Sheri_B-H once we start working on the tool, we can't continue mucking in the spreadsheet

Dr_Keith important thing is we have an example of use

<Fazio> +1 Dr Keith

<Fazio> And scoring work was next after publication not necessarily spreadsheet

jkline: doesn't matter what the format is at the end of the day, what we are trying to do is to provide a system that will provide consistency across the industry but allow users to customize

jkline: document explains stuff well, but you can't use it to measure maturity. That's the purpose of the spreadsheet and tool

<Fazio> proof points were never prescriptive

Sheri_B-H: aGWG has issued a "Store of Broken Things," containing all manner of WCAG violation

Sheri_B-H: Was being used to devel WCAG3

Sheri_B-H: So, I see that people can taylor to their needs, the proof points aren't perscriptive, but the SS is still just an example

Fazio spreadsheet is a means to an end, to provide guidance for scoring

fazio that was the next thing we were going to work on

CharlesL last week, higher ground had three different accessibility maturity models were presented

CharlesL Shuffle (someone's PhD these) california college (close to our dimensions and proofpoints). Both used excel spreadsheets, they were very similar to ours

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to ask whether we pub a SS when we go 1.0

general agreement that the spreadsheet will be published with 1.0

janina how hard do we work to keep them in parity

janina assuming we are there, then we publish an APA note, does the spreadhsheet get published also?

Dr_Keith we have how to use guides with WCAG, doesn't that address the problem?

<Fazio> +1 doc K

<Fazio> w3c tool is an example not a requirement of wcag

jkline: To say we don't release tools is wrong, there is the validator

jkline: without the spreadsheet, the maturity model narrative becomes a white paper

jkline: add language saying the assessment tool can be used as an example. Then we don't have to keep them in sync

Fazio we aren't telling the people to use the spreadsheet, we are providing it as an example of how to use the maturity model

janina: we agreed the last call draft will include the spreadsheet

janina if we don't have them in parity, we can't have the last call

fazio we agreed to continue to evolve the spreadsheet after 1.0 was published

jkline: we handle the proof point discrepency in the narrative by including the disclaimer

Sheri_B-H: jeff's proposal aligns with what I said, because any changes in the spreadsheet are automatically absorbed into the narrative

no meeting on the 27th

Jkline to propose disclaimer language by Dec 2, and we will discuss on Dec 4

fazio: wider APA group will tell us whether this approach is a problem

janina: we need to finalize what is the relationship between the documents

jkline: also will propose where the language goes

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 238 (Fri Oct 18 20:51:13 2024 UTC).

Diagnostics

All speakers: Fazio, janina, jkline, Sheri_B-H

Active on IRC: CharlesL, Darek, Dr_Keith, Fazio, IrfanA, janina, jkline, Mark_Miller, NehaJ, Sheri_B-H, Stacey, stacey2