14:13:20 RRSAgent has joined #coga 14:13:25 logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/11/17-coga-irc 14:13:25 RRSAgent, make logs Public 14:13:26 Meeting: Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference 14:33:58 Lisa has joined #coga 14:34:11 agenda? 14:34:34 agenda order is 2,3,1,4,5 14:34:58 scribe: EA 15:47:14 q? 15:47:49 RRSAgent, publish minutes 15:47:50 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/11/17-coga-minutes.html Lisa 15:50:18 regrets+ Rain 15:51:06 EA has joined #coga 15:51:52 Q? 15:57:40 Present+ 15:57:55 scribe: EA 15:59:51 Eric_hind has joined #coga 15:59:54 present+ 16:02:07 julierawe has joined #coga 16:02:07 present+ 16:02:45 Abi has joined #coga 16:02:50 next item 16:03:02 present+ 16:03:27 ⦁ pull request 16:03:27 ⦁ send email to ag and apa 16:03:27 ⦁ Research modules wd 1 still need some formatting, recspec, citations authors and contributors 16:03:27 ⦁ are the contributers ok. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2025Nov/0023.html 16:03:41 Charli has joined #coga 16:03:47 present+ 16:04:38 Lisa has made a pull request before it goes to AG etc. - Background research papers - Research modules - first working draft - not final - plenty of time to make changes. 16:05:19 First step - went through different links Eric and Julie t approve - approval needed from AG and APA 16:05:52 Jennie has joined #coga 16:06:00 present+ 16:06:04 Then it will be sent to their groups - may send out surveys etc. so will be sent to the chairs of the groups 16:06:42 So now working in contributions, minor formatting changes etc. so not huge amount of work. 16:06:56 check Acknowledgements 16:07:52 Lisa would like to merge within the main repository of GitHub before adding all the achknowlsedgements and references which can be in their own branches 16:08:10 Q? 16:08:14 q+ 16:08:56 Eric did not see the pull request but happy to approve 16:09:01 https://github.com/w3c/coga/pulls 16:11:43 Lisa may ask for help from Roy to get the citations working properly. 16:13:15 Rachel mentioned adding approval at the beginning of the meetings in the coming week - then follow-up with the chairs gaining approval from the groups 16:13:40 q+ 16:13:52 ack next 16:14:08 ack next 16:14:35 q+ 16:15:14 Julie mentioned asking about Tamsin and Simon about the intros - this happened at TPAC. Call with Matt tomorrow for a follow up 16:15:32 Sorry Sean and Tamsin 16:16:41 Still waiting for feedback from Sean and Tamsin - so need to follow up with them 16:16:42 Jan has joined #coga 16:16:48 present+ 16:17:17 FYI, Shawn is the correct spelling 16:17:24 apologies 16:17:30 No worries! 16:18:46 The task force cannot publish so documents have to go to parent groups for approval - depends on their feedback when all corrections have been made. 16:18:57 ack next 16:21:28 Rachael suggested asking for a review rather than approval - we may get concerns - things we can fix at some point and those show stoppers that need to be fixed prior to first draft. Shawn concerns raised about safety concerns and recent research related to AI and those with Learning disabilities 16:21:49 +1 to Lisa on making clear the two kinds of feedback we're looking for -- showstoppers versus things we can address later 16:21:57 Lisa had some concerns about citations but these could be discussed in the Thursday call. 16:22:14 ack next 16:22:43 next item 16:24:43 next item 16:25:38 q+ 16:25:49 Lisa asked if anyone had any updates from TPAC 16:25:57 ack next 16:27:00 Eric asked about payments and Lisa said that online line experts did not have to pay. 16:27:44 It appeared people did not have to register in advanced - could request a waver but most people seemed to attend anyway 16:28:03 Lisa suggested there needs to be some notification about possible wavers 16:28:39 Lisa mentioned that there were discussions about a different model for conformance 16:30:50 Lisa talked about issue papers that interested people and also there were discussions about people being will to take part in APA but can be complex as everything is in Github as separate issues - not as helpful for those you used to use Janina's wiki page. It can be complex as it is not always easy to see where the papers can be found. 16:31:09 Lisa asked if Eric was still our liaison with APA - 16:32:35 Eric offers to review items regularly and Lisa said that items can be shared with the list to ensure coga related issues are not missed. 16:32:46 q+ 16:32:51 ack next 16:33:42 FAST https://www.w3.org/WAI/about/groups/task-forces/fast/#contribute-without-joining-the-task-force 16:34:18 Rachael suggest that they will be considering using the FAST model used for issues 16:34:34 Lisa to follow up with Matt from APA 16:35:26 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ndRziXRfnyAgDaL8ctByQagDdM36H8QxV44lO3u8zgc/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.1sw3jym07njn 16:36:15 Lisa asked if anyone wants to check whether they saw the task force comments - 16:36:25 ack next 16:36:26 q+ 16:36:29 ack next 16:36:57 next item 16:37:22 Julie asked if Len could perhaps join a call to talk about TPAC 16:38:35 q+ 16:38:37 Need a different name to "Cognitive accessibility guidance" as too similar to other documents. 16:38:40 ack next 16:39:59 Julie said that the AG does not want our informative documents to be confused with normative guidance... John Kirkwood involved in one of the meetings - in one of the google doc actions. 16:40:03 kirkwood has joined #COGA 16:40:26 Q+ 16:40:46 present+ 16:40:51 Some of the ideas instead of guidance - strategies, recommnedations design patterns, 16:40:54 q+ 16:40:57 q+ to ask about motivation for name change 16:41:00 recommendations. 16:41:29 ack next 16:41:29 John Kirkwood liked 'best practices' as these is a phrase used in many documents. 16:42:11 Lisa feels recommendations that is more problematic as seen as being highly normative 16:42:12 +Zakim to issues with the term recommendation 16:43:01 Lisa other suggestions down grade it in that the phrases or words are not sufficiently strong - best practices may just be a preferred practice rather than a necessity. 16:43:03 agree might be too soft 16:43:19 design patterns again just not something you have to do 16:43:22 Cognitive Accessibility Supports? 16:43:45 ack next 16:44:40 in gov’t relm I have often seen something like “Best Practices & Guidance on Language Access” 16:44:42 requirements and standards may be too strong and design patterns is jargon. Need to be as strong as posssible 16:44:54 tiffanyburtin has joined #coga 16:45:05 ack next 16:45:06 Rachael, you wanted to ask about motivation for name change 16:45:09 Present+ 16:45:38 “Best Practices and Guidance”? if we bundle it? 16:46:15 What about "suggestion(s)"? 16:47:03 Rachael suggested that her comments are based on experience of past work on Content Usable - suggested you do lose recognition when there is a name change. Can't use labels that are similar to those already used by groups and WCAG cannot really be accepted 16:47:24 makes sense 16:48:07 I can certainly see the value of not labeling and focusing on the purpose - I think that would help people trying to promote these ideas inside of companies. 16:48:09 +1 16:48:13 ack next 16:48:15 Rachael also warned about not undermining what has been achieved - need to give a title of what the document actually does rather than giving it a label such as guidance. 16:48:15 +1 to Charli suggestion 16:48:16 * Was there a subtitle? Apologies that I cannot remember 16:48:31 q+ 16:48:51 Charli suggested supporting Cognitive Accessibility - 16:48:54 Cognitive Accessibility: The Blueprint 16:49:07 q+ 16:50:29 Lisa pointed out that the new structure has less on incorporating the user and more for designers and developers etc. 16:51:11 ack next 16:51:13 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GwIadQU2rmDwqPDeYX6PF7UjnD4D47vqRjvPysXNe-A/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.dlcxb6p8f4s2 16:51:13 How do you translate the phrase "The Blueprint" 16:52:35 The new shorter title came about because of the long list of difficulties at will now appear in the subtitle. 16:53:18 So need a short hand phrase that emphasises cognitive accessibility 16:53:19 q+ 16:53:32 ack next 16:54:06 q+ 16:54:25 ack next 16:55:48 Lisa felt it would help to have Rain at the meeting - then continue to share the ideas and Julie has documented them 16:55:53 q+ 16:55:57 ack next 16:57:08 Jennie felt that it helps to imagine the use cases and who are the users of the document and how the title will help them undertand what it is they are going to be reading when the read the title - what would it mean to those who have not experience of this type of document. 16:57:34 q+ 16:57:42 Who has reviews this document previously and who wants to read it and who might never have heard of it previously 16:58:42 ack next 16:59:27 Rain has been carrying out research about users and what might encourage potential users of the document. 17:00:04 * search engine might crawl the subtitle, but can do things other ways too 17:00:05 It might help to have Making Content Usable somewhere in the subtitle 17:00:06 +1 on putting "making content usable" in the Subtitle 17:00:17 +1 to Name recognition 17:00:18 +1 17:00:40 RRSAgent, publish minutes 17:00:41 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/11/17-coga-minutes.html Lisa 17:00:51 Thank you apologies for the error! 17:01:24 Bye 17:01:30 Charli has left #COGA 17:01:35 thanks EA!