W3C

– DRAFT –
COGA Task Force meeting

06 oct 2025

Attendees

Present
Becca_Monteleone, Charli, Eric_hind, julierawe, kirkwood, LenB, Rain
Regrets
-
Chair
julierawe
Scribe
EA

Meeting minutes

<julierawe> New logo: https://www.w3.org/press-releases/2025/new-logo/

<julierawe> Use clear visible labels: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uAVRkNIgd3XlUIGQ6Gq-ZOcnwsFvIM9UJ1dNyHq8NSQ/edit?pli=1&tab=t.bzlxq1ykahxq

I can scribe

EA present+

<julierawe> Thank you, EA!

Discussion about citing references and how this will take place. Plan is in place

WCAG 3 update

Update on WCAG 3 - All sections discussed - refined and where user needs were not specified, methods and tests - these were added.

Plain Language was discussed with 20 requirements added out of 200 - will be shared with Coga and AG - conformance models questioned

The problem seems to be the need for requirements and assertions before conformance can happen. - Will be topic of tomorrows AG meeting plus new draft and will be shared with coga

Taking what people were discussing sub-groups - tallied 150 foundational requirements and only a small number of the requirements - so what should be foundational - consider the do no harm requirements - small group 10 requirements or fewer

But need to compare these to absolute blockers that might be a bigger group - foundational versus supplemental to be discussed

Eric asked if this process would be seen as an official mile stone

Julie said unofficial

In Sept exploratory to developmental published but what has been left off is now being tackled - so using consistent and design elements still need to be discussed as part of the working draft . e.g. expexted behaviour as an item that has been left out so far.... now this week's document will fill the gaps of those things left out - so most have

been developed

Few things will still be at the exploratory stage - a lot of work has been done to achieve this state of affairs

As we get feedback on the draft the next version will be in a better state by December. - So no check box to go out the public

Julie said that WCAG 3 probably will not be published to the public until another year or more. Conformance is where the discussions need to happen

Thoughts on new W3C logo?

Updated draft will be shared soon - Julie went through all the comments that had been sent in and checked what had not been added in late Agust and early Sept and got those item into the draft

<julierawe> https://www.w3.org/press-releases/2025/new-logo/

The link above is going to the new W3C logo - It appears that the image is now accepted as the final version unless there are complaints

<EA> +1 to John and Julie's comments

It is not necessarily readable by everyone - looks rather too abstract

No one sees the W and even the 3 is difficult to work out.

<julierawe> https://www.w3.org/press-releases/2025/new-logo/

Rain asked if there was any reasoning behind the choice of logo. - We need help to understand how it was chosen

The link above provides some more information and is a press release about the logo

it is meant to represent the DNA as the heart of the web - "It has a curl that resembles a heart. This imagery communicates that W3C is the 'DNA at the heart of the web'."

Many attendees were not keen on the logo and it is already being used as a icon on the website tabs - they did not appear to seek the groups advice

Need to document as a cognitive task force whether there are any real blockers to the symbol rather than just feelings of dislike as this could be important.

<julierawe> EA shared concerns that it's not like any scripts used around the world. Was the internationalization working group consulted on this logo?

<julierawe> EA Does it look similar to a script that someone reads in their everyday language? Cambodian, Thai, Lao, etc

<kirkwood> strikes me as a medical logo

Charlie is concerned about the anatomical part of the DNA - may cause embarrassment.

John K mentioned whether there was any usability test and visual perceptual difficulties were considered.

Key questions to consider about the 3rd V2 pattern: Use clear visible labels

Migrating patterns from Making Content Usable v1 to v2 - this is taking time and there still needs to be some alignment on wording

<julierawe> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uAVRkNIgd3XlUIGQ6Gq-ZOcnwsFvIM9UJ1dNyHq8NSQ/edit?pli=1&tab=t.bzlxq1ykahxq#heading=h.pcu5m13uuzk

Link to Use Clear Visible Labels - look at comments - screen shared.

Pattern is mainly about the interactive controls on a page e.g. icon controls - what is there for inorder to achieve something.

How it helps - linked to related personas - links go to the original version of Making Content Usable. - now have 8 personas and plan to add a persona who may have a mental health issue. May have schizophrenia -

Julia posed a question - do we need to have every user story feeding into a separate persona or can we share personas - but also can have stories elsewhere.

Don't need to wait till we have a full set of personas

Julie asked how long is too long for an expanded user story - should be keep short and skimmable -

Rain felt they could be longer as most stories are explandable.

Clear visible labels pattern includes heading structure - does this belong in this section

Rain said this is not a label thing and this example should be in a different pattern.

Headers are used incorrectly and this affects the text to speech output - need to realise it is not actually a header but a label.

This causes confusion and the same can happen with incorrect use of CSS

Went on to discuss alternatives and will provide other examples

Julie asked if everyone could read through the draft and send back comments before more work was done

<julierawe> kirkwood asked when the next COGA and Coffee meeting will be.

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 246 (Wed Oct 1 15:02:24 2025 UTC).

Diagnostics

Active on IRC: Becca_Monteleone, Charli, EA, Eric_hind, julierawe, kirkwood, LenB, Rain