15:57:37 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #coga
15:57:41 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/11/24-coga-irc
15:57:41 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:57:42 <Zakim> Meeting: Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
15:57:47 <julierawe> chair: julierawe
15:58:03 <julierawe> date: 24 nov 2025
15:58:13 <julierawe> regrets: rain
15:58:21 <julierawe> zakim, clear agenda
15:58:21 <Zakim> agenda cleared
15:58:32 <julierawe> agenda+ Len TPAC feedback
15:59:11 <Lisa> Lisa has joined #coga
15:59:17 <julierawe> agenda+ Whether/how to include exceptions in V2 of Making Content Usable
15:59:32 <julierawe> agenda+ COGA style guide question about slash marks
15:59:33 <Lisa> present+
15:59:37 <julierawe> present+
16:01:45 <Charli> Charli has joined #coga
16:01:51 <Charli> present+
16:02:05 <LenB> LenB has joined #coga
16:02:11 <LenB> present+
16:03:09 <Jennie_Delisi> Jennie_Delisi has joined #coga
16:03:15 <Jennie_Delisi> present+
16:04:13 <kirkwood> present+
16:04:43 <julierawe> zakim, next item
16:04:43 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Len TPAC feedback -- taken up [from julierawe]
16:04:44 <Gareth> Gareth has joined #coga
16:04:54 <Gareth> present+
16:05:57 <julierawe> LenB TPAC was really interesting. It focused a lot on WCAG 3.0
16:06:02 <Jan> Jan has joined #coga
16:06:17 <julierawe> LenB We talked a lot about how to talk to legislative bodies about WCAG 3 conformance models.
16:06:29 <Jan> present+
16:06:37 <julierawe> LenB Same themes as we've talked a lot at COGA calls, but more intense.
16:06:53 <julierawe> LenB: Shadi as usual had all of the best challenging questions.
16:07:11 <julierawe> LenB: Meeting notes are available somewhere. We'll look for them and share them out.
16:07:26 <julierawe> LenB: On Wednesday, there were a lot of breakout sessions.
16:08:04 <julierawe> LenB: The HTML working group wants to introduce an HTML <amount> element.
16:08:24 <julierawe> LenB: In our plain language subgroup, we've been wondering how to handle things like Roman numerals, dates, etc.
16:08:37 <julierawe> LenB: I wanted to talk with the HTML group about this.
16:08:47 <Lisa> link?
16:09:04 <kirkwood> interesting! can you put link in?
16:09:09 <julierawe> LenB read the description for this breakout session.
16:10:02 <LenB> https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/126c9a01-9cbb-47d2-a5c9-7cc17dde0b58/
16:10:21 <kirkwood> great!
16:10:30 <julierawe> LenB: If you think about one thousand, it's 1,000 in the US and 1.000 in Europe
16:10:59 <julierawe> LenB: Could browsers handle a lot of the work of that interpretation?
16:11:35 <julierawe> LenB: Browser could tell if you're viewing from the US so you'd see it in the context that makes the most sense to you.
16:11:45 <julierawe> LenB: Mozilla has already written this up.
16:12:12 <julierawe> LenB: The link I shared for the breakout session includes a link to Mozilla's writeup.
16:13:14 <julierawe> LenB: The <data> tag has something similar to present data in different languages.
16:13:31 <julierawe> LenB: We don't want to convert currencies.
16:14:08 <julierawe> LenB: There's so much more to unpack.
16:14:20 <julierawe> LenB: Could we do this for dates?
16:14:57 <julierawe> LenB: Months come first in some cultures and day comes first in some cultures.
16:15:11 <julierawe> LenB: The HTML group really likes the idea of focusing on amounts first.
16:15:34 <julierawe> LenB: It might be good for some COGA members to get in touch with the HTML group to help move this work forward.
16:16:00 <julierawe> LenB: The next step is to make a proposal for the spec.
16:16:12 <Lisa> Q+
16:16:12 <julierawe> LenB: So this is the perfect time for COGA to think about this.
16:16:22 <julierawe> ack Lisa
16:16:53 <julierawe> Lisa: Thank you, Len. I think we need to have a conversation with them and give them some use cases. Who do we communicate with?
16:17:17 <julierawe> LenB: I would reach out to Tantek and Eemeli, who are listed on the breakout session link I shared.
16:17:26 <julierawe> Lisa: Maybe we should also reach out to Matthew and Janina.
16:17:56 <julierawe> Lisa: As APA chairs, they do coordination with other groups. We should be careful to loop them in.
16:18:49 <julierawe> Lisa: We'll bring up with them at our coordination call tomorrow.
16:19:06 <julierawe> LenB: There is a separate but related object proposal that apparently addresses similar use cases.
16:19:32 <julierawe> q?
16:19:50 <julierawe> Eemeli Aro and Tantek Celik shared the HTML call
16:20:08 <julierawe> kirkwood: Was there any representation of numbering that were different to you than anything you've seen discussed before?
16:20:19 <julierawe> LenB: No, we were really focused on amounts
16:20:46 <tiffanyburtin> tiffanyburtin has joined #coga
16:20:55 <tiffanyburtin> present+
16:20:56 <julierawe> Charli: I was jumping immediately to a use case. This is exciting. My use case involves medical testing and looking up what the different units meant.
16:21:17 <julierawe> Charli: Nanograms versus milligrams versus micrograms
16:21:35 <julierawe> q=
16:21:37 <julierawe> q+
16:21:56 <julierawe> Charli: I'm not a mathematician but I generally understand numbers
16:22:09 <julierawe> ack julierawe
16:22:30 <julierawe> julierawe: Any other conversations related to COGA?
16:22:42 <julierawe> LenB: Nothing outside of AGWG.
16:23:23 <julierawe> LenB: Big topics such as future of W3C, future of AI, etc.
16:24:16 <Lisa> Q+
16:24:31 <julierawe> ack Lisa
16:24:43 <julierawe> Lisa: There's a lot of follow-up we can do with these initiatives.
16:25:08 <kirkwood> with that, do you think there should hvae been better COGA representation there?
16:25:13 <julierawe> Lisa asked Len to put together a list of initiatives we should follow up with based on TPAC conversations.
16:25:23 <kirkwood> (no criticism) ! ;)
16:25:40 <kirkwood> q+
16:26:20 <julierawe> LenB: You're triggering memories of Makoto-san submitting a request abou Ruby. We spent an hour digging into concerns about line height issues.
16:27:14 <julierawe> LenB: Ruby is a model inside HTML and certain languages that use characters such as Japanese. Above the characters can appear a phonetic or colloquial secondary text.
16:27:39 <julierawe> LenB: In some scenarios, that can actually be more confusing because you have two sets of text representing the same thing.
16:27:50 <julierawe> LenB: Everybody agreed it's important to keep talking about this.
16:28:00 <julierawe> q+
16:28:23 <Lisa> including when it doesnt support accessibility
16:28:30 <julierawe> kirkwood: This is fantastic. I am remembering times I have been at TPAC before.
16:28:43 <julierawe> kirkwood: Did you feel that COGA was underrepresented?
16:28:59 <Eric_hind> Eric_hind has joined #coga
16:29:12 <Eric_hind> present+
16:29:13 <Rachael> q+ to say you could coordinate applications for the diversity funding
16:29:34 <Jennie_Delisi> +1 to John, and wish we had ongoing representation, not just during TPAC. But agree we need to keep scoped to what we can do
16:29:46 <julierawe> LenB: The first few days were very focused on AGWG. I felt COGA as being underpresented on the Wednesday that was full of breakout sessions.
16:30:17 <julierawe> LenB: From a representation perspective, I didn
16:30:49 <julierawe> LenB: I didn't find a single room where people weren't trying to close some sort of gap, including neurodivergence even if COGA members weren't there
16:32:21 <julierawe> q?
16:32:28 <julierawe> ack kirkwood
16:32:33 <julierawe> ack julierawe
16:32:38 <julierawe> ack Rachael
16:32:38 <Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to say you could coordinate applications for the diversity funding
16:32:48 <julierawe> scribe+ LenB
16:33:22 <Lisa> https://knowbility.org/programs/john-slatin-accessu-2026
16:33:40 <julierawe> Reminder that AG will be attend AccessU instead of CSUN this year
16:33:56 <julierawe> q?
16:34:28 <LenB> q+
16:34:30 <Lisa> q+
16:34:42 <Rachael> TPAC inclusion fund https://www.w3.org/get-involved/tpac-inclusion-fund/
16:35:20 <julierawe> ack LenB
16:35:36 <julierawe> LenB: Where can we find the minutes from TPAC?
16:35:53 <Rachael> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Upcoming_agendas
16:36:02 <julierawe> ack Lisa
16:36:38 <julierawe> zakim, next item
16:36:38 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Whether/how to include exceptions in V2 of Making Content Usable -- taken up [from julierawe]
16:37:07 <julierawe> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uAVRkNIgd3XlUIGQ6Gq-ZOcnwsFvIM9UJ1dNyHq8NSQ/edit?pli=1&tab=t.ht1sood1wqs8
16:37:16 <LenB> scribe+
16:37:34 <Lisa> rachal should/can  coga meet at access u
16:38:16 <Lisa> Q+
16:38:36 <LenB> the question is - is it too disruptive to have an exception on a V2 pattern
16:40:13 <LenB> ... Pros - cluster relevant inforomation together. Con - moakes overall guidance more cluttered / harder to read
16:40:24 <kirkwood> of couse the example that would be an exception. it still would not be usable. i like the one page idea!
16:41:47 <kirkwood> it would highlight how legislation can be considered.
16:41:51 <kirkwood> fq+
16:41:53 <LenB> Lisa: we also don't want to look like WCAG and we're trying to take a different approach to making content usble. With WCAG being referenced by legislating bodies ties it to being very precise to make it work for laws. Every scenario has to be considered and written for.
16:43:01 <LenB> ... we had previously taken our exceptions out becuase we were writing guidance for progammers and assuming they are trying their best.
16:44:48 <LenB> ... We've written some of our things as "if it helps ... do this, if it doesn't ehlp don't it". We're focused on guidance that makes sites better. But we understood that people writing a Masters Thesis with a template won't be able to follow all of our guidance.
16:45:10 <LenB> ... The question is do we want to change our approach and start including exceptions.
16:45:15 <LenB> ... The question is do we want to change our approach and start including exceptions?
16:45:42 <LenB> ... It might be useful for WCAG 3, but it is not a requirement, yet.
16:47:15 <LenB> ... OPTION 1 - we keep doing it the same way.
16:47:15 <LenB> OPTION 2 - we write an exception page
16:47:15 <LenB> OPTION 3 - we start writing it to olook more like WCAG
16:47:26 <Rachael> q+
16:48:06 <kirkwood> if so the exception name should be very very clear. afraid you could “drive a truck through them” if not done properly
16:48:15 <julierawe> q?
16:48:32 <julierawe> ack lisa
16:48:46 <Jennie_Delisi> Rachael - this is a note, correct? Do we have a definition of note?
16:48:51 <kirkwood> q+
16:48:56 <julierawe> ack Rachael
16:49:35 <Lisa> Q?
16:49:38 <julierawe> ack kirkwood
16:49:38 <Lisa> Q+
16:49:48 <LenB> Rachael - not an anser, but a perspective. A lot of this will be translated to 3.0 in some form. So, someone will need to consider the scenarios. But, there is benefit in having the same content on two formats.
16:50:32 <julierawe> +1 to kirkwood comments
16:51:03 <julierawe> ack Lisa
16:51:11 <Jennie_Delisi> q+
16:51:14 <LenB> kirkwood - This question could help us figure out how to write things better. If we had a page of scenarios it would help us group things and see where things are effective or where we can focus.
16:52:00 <Lisa> OPTION 1 - we keep doing it the same way.
16:52:00 <Lisa>  OPTION 2 - we write an exception page
16:52:00 <Lisa>  OPTION 3 - we start writing it to olook more like WCAG
16:52:21 <LenB> Lisa - keeping things simple to read could help people apply our content to their scenarios. Option 2 might be the best because it would help us with 3.0.
16:52:30 <Jennie_Delisi> q-
16:52:40 <Rachael> q+ to try to answer
16:52:50 <LenB> Jenni - this is a note, correct? Do we have a definition of note?
16:53:10 <julierawe> present+ EA
16:54:09 <Jennie_Delisi> q+
16:54:14 <julierawe> ack Rachael
16:54:14 <Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to try to answer
16:54:41 <julierawe> ack Jennie_Delisi
16:54:42 <LenB> Rachael  - a recommendation is a formal document that goes forward through a rigorous process to become a spec or even be used in a law. a note is a more informal document that goes through an internal process and is considered informative. A note is a specific format and can be changed more easily.
16:55:19 <julierawe> OPTION 1 - we keep doing it the same way.
16:55:19 <julierawe> 11:52 <Lisa>  OPTION 2 - we write an exception page
16:55:19 <julierawe> 11:52 <Lisa>  OPTION 3 - we start writing it to olook more like WCAG
16:55:24 <LenB> Jennie_Delisi - does that mean an audience coming to a note would understand how to read the document. Would they appraoch a note with the same expectation as the spec?
16:55:46 <Lisa> 1 or 2
16:55:51 <LenB> Rachael - yes.
16:56:24 <julierawe> 2
16:56:26 <Eric_hind> Option 2
16:56:27 <LenB> 2
16:56:31 <Jennie_Delisi> 2 or 3
16:56:31 <Rachael> 2
16:56:31 <Gareth> 2
16:56:45 <kirkwood> 2
16:56:47 <Jan> 2
16:56:58 <Charli> 1 or 2
16:57:33 <Lisa> any objection to 2
16:57:41 <Lisa> or need more time
16:58:09 <Rachael> q+
16:58:33 <julierawe> ack Rachael
16:58:52 <Lisa> or a wiki page
16:58:58 <LenB> kirkwood This scares me - it seems like something that will be referenced a lot. It has to be really well-written.
16:59:00 <Lisa> at least to start with
16:59:24 <Rachael> q+
16:59:37 <julierawe> ack Rachael
16:59:41 <kirkwood> i think i’d have to see the list, seems scary to put it out
17:00:05 <LenB> Rachael - if you created a list of exception would it be its own published document or would you make it part of WCAG 3?
17:00:28 <LenB> julierawe - mmm, feels like a timing thing. We'll have to think about it.
17:00:56 <julierawe> rrsagent, make minutes
17:00:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/11/24-coga-minutes.html julierawe
17:01:12 <LenB> LenB has left #coga
17:01:27 <Charli> Charli has left #coga