Meeting minutes
<lisa> next item
Lisa asking about Calendar and the way the new W3C information Is provided
Lisa is adding the calendar link with the Zoom Link.
<Becca_Monteleone> I find the agenda helpful!
John K. said this would be really useful.
<EA> +1
Lisa asked: When is it useful for the email to go out?
I like the day before
John K also said the day before
<Becca_Monteleone> +1
<JeanneEC> +1
Lisa will send out a W3C calendar a few days before and the reminder a couple of days before.
Other updates - meeting last week with coga community - suggestions for different types of reviews etc.
Lisa will try to invite people from the meeting as soon as possible. Tues next week with be time to put items in the new template.
Jeanne was wondering who she should talk to get persistent link to the community.
The coga community - link is available on W3C site
<lisa> next item
Lisa will send out on Tuesday next week 9am EST invite for meeting
<kirkwood> COGA community group: https://
AAATE conerence in Cyprus in September
Sadly not going
<JeanneEC> thank you John
AAATE european association - but about research projects and has several companies as well exhibiting
<lisa> next item
The AAATE meeting could be a time to also have a virtual meeting. Lisa will also ask next weel.
Introduction to the issue papers for discussion
Disccussion about the research papers and now have new modules - can publish every month. New modules will be the first working draft - editors draft has more notes with things that need to be added. Now writing some content and this can be re-written at any time...
Now you can see comments and improvements. Introduction added is all about what the papers allude to - notes may include grant proposals ete - background information may also be for a developer. A range of information to support decision making - more in depth understanding for different users
Lisa highlighted that there does not appear to be much for testers in issue papers.
The idea is the explain the scope of the issue papers - trying to look at challenges for users and then an explanation about the modules. This is followed by what is in each issue paper
Short summaries of what you are going to find. Then looking at the older issue papers.
Becca - asked about the section labelled challenges - need to mention limitations
John mentioned some other recommendations about - difficult if you can't mention specific brands etc.
<lisa> please review at https://
Lisa editing some of the item - conversational and voice AI assistants.
<kirkwood> voice AI assistants
Lisa asked if people were happy with the sections discussed
Becca has offered to look at the various sections and likes the layout.
<kirkwood> examples: Amazon Alexa, Apple Siri, Google assitant
Lisa felt that some editorial changes may still be needed but the general look and feel could be ready for GitHub and editors call. Asked if we agreed it was ready
<Becca_Monteleone> Yes, I think it's ready for editorial
<EA> +1
<lisa> after an edtorial review can we merge it into github?
<kirkwood> +1
Once it is in GitHub we can still make changes but hard to alter at that stage
<JeanneEC> +1
<lisa> next item
Still not resolved the change of title
Lisa apologised for the difficulties is changing the title with all the cultural nuances
John K confirmed how important the word "disabilities" is in terms of getting people to understand what we are trying to focus on for the extra support.
Becca agreed as it is not just for the legal reasons - developers need to be aware of the actual specific accommodations for specific disabilties.
MCI - mild cognitive impairment (early stage dementia) - so can be confusing if we use the term cognitive impairment. Lisa stressed this as an issue that she has come across - some terms are off putting and we need to be careful.
John K also pointed out the MCI is not recognised legally in the USA as not being a disability but only as a condition -
So we need to be aware of these dilemmas - maybe use 'coga disabilities' with a pop up explanation. This may be a bit obscure and requires a second step.
Need to add opinions and provide feedback to those options provided in the document
Jeanne mentioned ...
Lisa requested COGA members provide feedback on linked document. Short discussion on getting access with JeanneEC
Lisa Could alternate between "cognitive disabilities" and "cognitive disabilities such as..." with examples.
kirkwood feels "cognitive disabilities" alone is too restrictive
Lisa next option is to remove the term "cognitive and learning disability" completely to focus on function instead. Suggested rewrites from Frankie in the document
Becca_Monteleone I think that people with cognitive and learning disabilities are already forgotten about, so I think we need to be explicit about which groups we're actually talking about. Otherwise it risks being too generalized
kirkwood agreed but noted that it depends on context
Lisa we do not want to lose context about specific needs and preferences of people with disabilities (e.g. using assistive technology)
discussion around "cognitive impairment" as a more restrictive term. MCI also a specific diagnosis in dementia, which may cause confusion
Lisa potentially could use "cognitive accessibility" (from EN 301) with the occasional reminder that cognitive accessibility is for "people with limited cognitive, language, and learning abilities"
*"people with cognitive, language, and learning disabilities"
<kirkwood> FYI AI defintiion of cognitive accessibility: Cognitive accessibility refers to the design and development of products, services, and environments that are usable and inclusive for individuals with cognitive disabilities or challenges. Cognitive disabilities can encompass a wide range of conditions, including intellectual disabilities, learning disabilities (e.g., dyslexia), memory impairments, attention deficits (e.g., ADHD), neurodivergence (e.g.,
<kirkwood> autism), and age-related cognitive decline.
Jeanne, John, and Becca all like this option if we can edit the longer sentence to be as inclusive as possible