W3C

– DRAFT –
RQTF meeting

02 April 2025

Attendees

Present
janina, jasonjgw, John_Paton, josuae108, matatk, Roy_Ruoxi, scott_h, stacey
Regrets
-
Chair
jasonjgw
Scribe
jasonjgw, scott_h

Meeting minutes

jason: propsal to reorganise with outlined secitons

some more open issues raised, good to consider intended changes

<Joshue108> Here is the draft branch from me https://raw.githack.com/w3c/ai-accessibility/joshEdit1/index.html

janina: good ot talk through reorganisaiton

shawn: good to hear about proposed changes at high level

josh: restructure proposed before some of github issues b

some new sections

included a section on authoring accessible content

anther seciotn - AI and user perspective

seciton - evaluaiton tools and AI teting

seciotn - AI generaiotn , possibly overlays

seciton - potentila harms in AI

jason: other proposals?

janina: can work with this structure

jason: some github issues woud fit, introducitonadn ethers disucsion

kevin: does tease out higher levle issues

sign posting what documetn is trying ot achieve, tentative positive direciton

<kevin> +1

mathew: value the RQTF work,

good lit review/gap analysis, poitning to other W3C resources and summary,

if this is the goal, good approach

<stacey> in section 4.1 ATAG and UAAG links are switched, FYI

jason: concern raised about evulation methods to conrim system is able ot meet users needs in unpredictable machine lenring, want to check it works with this structure

matthew: yes, can ifle two separate issues

janina: would propose go through github issues as to where it woudl fit in that structure

step 1: merge Josh's restructure

2. Github issues: go through and make note inside the restructure secitons

3. if doens't fit, teases out what's missing

kevin: when woudl first drraft be published?

janina: need tighter coordination, more frequent check-in

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say address potential conflicts and publish draft with lots of notes

shawn: fine to publish 1PWD wiht a lot of open quesitons

need to get quesitons filled in

coudl be seciotns with editors notes, 'thinking about this',

just getting sensistivies addressed

kevin: +1, keen to get to a point where we can publish someitng osoner rather htan later

a document with lots of flags is fine for wokrign draft

signal to community we want ot open up converaiotn

and Josh's strucutreis good step forward

need to rip apart scope, doesn't really say where it needs to go and explaining this isimportant part

janina: will work on scope to tell clear story

josh: great. lots of good quesitons to ask and point to what' sthere, raise falgs

jason: thing that resonated with everyone is that its a issues paper. unusual in W3C,

generally note the issues and understood solutions or aren't, and provide conceptual scheme ot think about

and make decisiona bout quesitons int he document

is this a good prupose in achivement?

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to note "issues papers" and literature review

shawn is literature reivew needed,

andwhat does the world need form tis document

kevin: +1

janian: +1 too

still need to address issue of citations, no easy way in academic process that requires hadn editing

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to discuss lit review citations issue; also process to stay coordinated

also woudl be good to dicuss hwo to stay coordiated

jason: won't have complete bibliography for some tme due to rapdily evolving subject area

kevin: noted. will look at how to manage citations

we can use technology platforms we have to point to relevant research

<Zakim> kevin, you wanted to talk about citations and to talk about rapid field

shawn: +1, acknowledge technical issue

also looking at sharing of resources as you go

here's the summary, here's key poitns etc

jason: bibliogropahy cited as relevance int eh text and authors slective on what's relevant

public review process helps with those decisions, will provide additional references

or highlight other reosurces.

Public ocmments valuable in that process

scott: +1 ot public comment helping clarify resources

jason: being able ot importa references, that tehcnical issue is an issue and appreicaed noted help

raja: quesiton - sibib text acceptable?

jason: bibliogropahal databases can export to man formats

<Joshue108> scribe/sibib/Is bib

<kevin> +1 ... tell us what you want! :)

<Joshue108> SH: Bibtex works for me

janina; let's pick a format

Accessibility of Machine Learning and Generative AI.

jason: immersive captions follow up - any updates

janian; no

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 244 (Thu Feb 27 01:23:09 2025 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/keven: when/kevin: when

Maybe present: janian, jason, josh, kevin, mathew, matthew, raja, scott, shawn

All speakers: janian, janina, jason, josh, kevin, mathew, matthew, raja, scott, shawn

Active on IRC: janina, jasonjgw, Joshue108, JPaton, kevin, matatk, Roy_Ruoxi, scott_h, shawn, stacey