<julierawe> hi, lisa :)

<Lisa> Are u on zoom?

<julierawe> Not yet

scribe+

scribe+ Eric_hind\

next item

scribe+ Eric_hind

Rain: Frankie has pulled pattern into the template - this demonstrates opportunities to remove redundant items. Frankie will be doing side by side comparisons of the new view if we remove redundancies, or not.

<Rain> A document pulling together what bringing all of the patterns into the new template might actually look like: https://docs.google.com/document/d/12Vhha2F9NmcIdi3byrHnQAGORey2HhMHDwjdLrhYf48/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.uz0d2rol8ozo

Rain: In the doc, there are two tabs - Design and Pattern Structure. Pattern Structure has 5 sections, within each, there are 3 subsections; per user testing ,this was helpful as an org structure
... Design tab items need human summaries/review - for now, there are AI generated placeholders
... Reviewed sections edited and added, where content could be created or existing content could be added.
... Identified sections that could be removed or consolidated and the process used to review and recommend

<kirkwood> well done, Frankie!

Rain: Feels that this process could be used to point to related patterns as well

Lisa: Notes that these are two separate processes - the template and the content and pattern editing

Rain: Showed how, in the new format, the Summary serves as the container where users will make decisions about opening the section to review if this is what they actually need.

<Jennie> Love that ability to move to the personas without leaving. Supports that WCAG guidance "multiple ways"!

<Jennie> +1 to related user stories

<Frankie> +1 to "related user stories"

Jennie: Suggestion - working in multiple ways is good. Could we add something at the end to show 'how to test' per Design, Build, Test?

Lisa: To extend that, potentially link to 'how to test' section so it's more obvious about what to do to test the section.

<kirkwood> +1 for the need from tester perspective, interesting call out

<lisa> +1

<Frankie> +1

Rain: Our user testing does show the need for the How to Test section, and an extensive testable section (more granular) does make sense - collating it together

Lisa: Do need to be clear on the difference/delta on those sections.

Frankie: Support Jennie's idea and happy to be a part of it.

Jan: Focusing on one category is making a lot of sense - allowing us to do on-the-fly adjustments as we discuss and the process/template might be re-usable (for internationalization)

<Jennie> +1 to John K's kudos to this group!

<LenB> +1

<Frankie> +1 to Rain's point--this is a good example of solid teamwork!!

+1

<Frankie> The way we have leaned into difference and discussion as a method here is difficult but has proven to be very much worth it! Appreciate you all.

Lisa: Can we move this design into an editors draft to get a feeling if we're moving in another direction - to be distributed for feedback within W3C

<lisa> +1

<Jennie> +1

+1

<julierawe> +1

<Rain> +1

<Frankie> +1

<LenB> +1

<Jan> +1

<tiffanyburtin> +1

<JeanneEC> +1

<kirkwood> +1

Lisa: We will move this on based on the poll.

next item

Lisa: Have talked about this and improved process already - we have one pattern in - they can open things up and review our specific, updated section.
... Propose to have a day for people to help out; half of google docs, putting objective into new template. Second half, moving that structure into HTML within GitHub with pull requests..

Rain: Note that in the next week, for the items we have now, we can put them into a fresh, stand alone GitHub page

Lisa: We need to decide where that's going to sit - maybe that's a third section. Might be worth having an editors call to work through this? Early next week to get a plan together then a broader meeting where everyone who wants to help, can help.

<Rain> +1 sounds like a good plan. I'm out next week, but will make sure the group has the template ahead of time

<Frankie> +1

Rain: May not be able to attend the editors meeting and planning next week.

<julierawe> Please note: This Monday is a federal holiday in the US so I won't be able to attend

<Jennie> -1

<JeanneEC> I am working next Monday

<LenB> I'm working President's day.

<Frankie> I don't celebrate President's Day

<Jennie> My minus 1 is because my office is closed on Monday

<DavidSwallow> Available next Monday.

Available next monday

<Frankie> Also available for a working session next Monday

<Jan> I am available on Monday

<tiffanyburtin> I'm available

next item

<Jennie> * have to drop - have a good 2 weeks!

<julierawe> Have to drop--thanks, everyone!

Jan: Some terms like fuzzy or canonical may not be commonly understood.

<JeanneEC> Have to drop. Thank you all!

rrs agent, publish minutes

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: tiffanyburtin, Eric_hind, DavidSwallow, JeanneEC, Rain, Frankie, julierawe, tburtin, LenB, kirkwood, Jennie_Delisi, lisa, Jan, rashmi, Jennie
Present: tiffanyburtin, Eric_hind, DavidSwallow, JeanneEC, Rain, Frankie, julierawe, tburtin, LenB, kirkwood, Jennie_Delisi, lisa, Jan, rashmi, Jennie
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: Eric_hind
Inferring Scribes: Eric_hind

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth


WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)