Meeting minutes
COGA (Cognitive Accessibility) Task Force
<Lisa> no quarem
<Lisa> quarum
Lisa: talking about schedule for next 2 weeks
<Lisa> Meeting for next two weeks
<Lisa> Thursday, Apr 2 - no call
<Lisa> Monday, Apr 6 - considering an informal 30 minute meeting.
<Lisa> Tuesday, Apr 7 - no call
Lisa: Easter and Passover are impacting schedule
Lisa: Any questions/thoughts?
Lisa: For those unable to make calls - you can review asynchronously.
… If no quorum we will collect feedback from those who are present, then have an extra call.
<Lisa> next item
<Lisa> close item 1
<Lisa> close item 2
<Lisa> next item
(Looking at the tab: Schedule, actions, and minutes)
Lisa: top section: actions and to do items - drafts ready for review - error handling
… This links in the document to "Drafts for github"
… You don't have to go anywhere else in the document to see what is being discussed.
… This links to the spreadsheet with usernames, but you don't have to (link name row 1 in spread sheet)
… This will take you to the exact row in the spreadsheet.
… In the spreadsheet - the notes should generally be the same as the issue description in the github description proposal draft.
… The spreadsheet also contains links to related issues in Github
… You can vote within the Google document if that works easier for you than the spreadsheet
… You can add comments in either the Google document or the spreadsheet
… Next call: this is what we will review.
… Any questions?
John K: what is the purpose of the spreadsheet?
Spreadsheet title: "Review Tracking WCAG 3 - W3C Editor's Draft..."
Lisa: Review tracking spreadsheet
… Some people prefer the Google document, others prefer the spreadsheet.
… both are options to use
… We can have another call if necessary
… There are some issues which appear to be missing.
… We also have some related feedback.
… These are in the tabs "Missing from WCAG 3" and "Other WCAG 3 Feedback"
… Then if you miss the Monday call, you can start at the top of the tab "Schedule, Actions and Minutes" and find what is happening
<Lisa> scedule for wcag review
(this is the link to that location)
(Jan and Jennie like this)
<Lisa> next item
Lisa: we have an old action item: finding a new name for Making Content Usable
… lots of discussion
… Cognitive Accessibility Guidance - what was discussed
… Issue: original document name is long, some felt their disability of interest was not included and didn't match local naming of disability
… Issues continued: some people were not reading the abstract and information which expanded on what was included (but not in the title)
… Issue: some people already know the title Making Content Usable
… Other considerations: didn't want specific vocabulary like impairment
… Other considerations: terminology impacted jurisdiction differences (legal)
… We cannot use the phrase Cognitive Accessibility Guidance because it is considered too close to other W3C titles
… John K and Julie reviewed several similar options
… Best practices will be less likely to be followed in some areas.
… Some places will include best practices in legal requirements but not others
… "Heuristics" is included in one suggestion - some do not know what that means
<kirkwood_> Cognitive Accessibility Protocols
(Lisa's suggestion): Cognitive Accessibility (followed by longer subtitle)
John K: Are we allowed to use protocols? I think it is a good way to name it
Lisa: I like that
<Lisa> who want Cognitive Accessibility Protocols
<Lisa> +1
<LenB> +1
<Jennifer> +1
<Jan> 0
<kirkwood_> +1
(Jennie): an option fo rme
<Jan> I am not how that will translate
0
Jan: I don't know enough about how people speaking other languages will understand that word
… Not my area of expertise but might need some feedback.
<Lisa> Jennie: might need to check set definitions
John H: agree, with protocols and procedures in government this could be something to check
Jennie: also in IT shops, there could be specific definitions for protocols
Lisa: Sounds like we would want to pursue if it works with translations and defintions
John K: great acronym, too!
Lisa: We can take this one to the next step
Lisa: Do we want to review other suggestions?
Jennie: could the group pursue 2 or 3 at the same time?
<Lisa> Jennie thinks a back up might be Cognative accessibility with subtitle making content usable for peopel with learning and cognative disabilities and mental health disabiliabilities ect)
Jennie: Lisa's suggestion before ensures greater search follow up for those with previous experience with the document
<Jennifer> +1 I do like "cognitive accessibility" as a more streamlined option
Lisa: Does anyone prefer Cognitive Accessibility without protocols?
Jennifer: I do. Protocols feels technical.
John K: Are there other ones? What is the whole ecosystem?
… I am wondering if "Cognitive Accessibility" without anything else might be misunderstood.
<Lisa> jenny digital cognative accessibility
John K: I am unsure if the word digital is important.
Lisa: We are not doing anything outside of digital, though someone looking at it may be looking at environment and digital
John K: We are publishing under the world wide web
Lisa: But some who receive the document may not know who published it when they receive it
John K: Did we discuss this in the Wayfinding and other areas?
Lisa: For Making Content Usable - this is for that document
John K: This is under the umbrella of web
<LenB> I'm leaning towards this: "Cognitive Accessibility: Making Content Usable for All Users"
Lisa: People may not hear "making content usable" if we remove that"
Lisa: We will not include "all users" because people interpret this to include other disability groups
John K: aging is not considered a disability in many places
Lisa: some individuals also do not consider themselves as having a disability even if they qualify as having one
… subheading could include aging
… or age-related
John K: it includes memory and processing speed. E.g. 7 page form
Lisa: and learning new things
… this is why we wanted a long subtitle - so we can add different groups
John H: what about COGA guidance?
Lisa: We cannot use guidance
… we could use COGA
<Lisa> COGA (COGnative Accessibility and making caontent useable for .........
Lisa: this could include the subheading to help those new to the topic
<Jennie_Delisi> -1 still, sorry, on this one
Lisa: Cognitive Accessibility Protocols, Cognitive Accessibility
… each with the subtitle
… We still want to look into translation and definitions for protocols
<Lisa> Digital cognative accessibility
Lisa: any more suggestions?
<LenB> Making Content Usable: <insert new thing>
Len: Leveraging making content usable?
… Then add one of the titles suggested above?
John K: Usable - not something that holds in legal circles
… often associated with usability studies, so wondering if this would impact how people review the information
… Usable vs accessible is part of the differences.
Len: that is an interesting question
… Usable is used in real estate, medication
… for example a usable amount of marijauna
… under the law has its own meaning, and I am wondering if this is a good question for a lawyer
Lisa: Making Content Usable - Cognitive Accessibility
<Lisa> Making Content Usable: Coganive accessibility protacals for digtal accessibility or .......................................................
Lisa: This could then include the whole list
… then Making Content Usable is the short name
<johnkirkwood> USable seems nice. Accessiblity protocols. Seems to have more legal weight to me.
Lisa: I will ask for a list of what they are comfortable with
… Each one comes with a subheading with the details
<Lisa> Making Content Usable: Coganive accessibility protacals for digtal accessibility ; cognative accessibilty ; digital cognative accessibilty , cognative accessibilty protocals
<Jan> My apologies - I have to drop for another call
<Lisa> and cognative accessibilty
<johnkirkwood> cany chance we sould have all the options in irc?
<johnkirkwood> sorry
<Lisa> Making Content Usable: Coganive accessibility protacals for digtal accessibility ; cognative accessibilty ; digital cognative accessibilty , cognative accessibilty protocals
Cognitive accessibility; digital cognitive accessibility, cognitive accessibility protocols (if this works);
<johnkirkwood> Cognitive Accessibility Protocols
Lisa: This would go to the AG chairs, internationalization
<LenB> 0 for the names in the list
<LenB> Making Content Usable: COGA Protocols,
<LenB> Making Content Usable: Digital Cognitive Accessibility,
<LenB> these feel better
I also like: Making Content Usable: Digital Cognitive Accessibility
<Eric_hind> Cognitive accessibility Strategies +1
<Jennifer> I really like Making Content Usable: Digital Cognitive Accessibility
Lisa: Strategies - this has been shared as being difficult in some legal areas
<johnkirkwood> Prefer just “Cognitve Accessiblity”