Meeting minutes
New Business
janina: AMM came up in the WCAG meeting yesterday and it was noted for what it does around process and how an org matures
janina: there could be a kind of digital maturity for content creation
Mark_Miller: it could be an additive dimension
Sheri_B-H: Feels content creation is already covered in AMM. Social media comes in Communications. A lot of other content comes under ICT lifecycle. So it could be expanded.
Task Review rewrite related to Github Issues #328 and #334 #345
David read out the current abstract
Jeff reviewed Kevin's ticket and talked about reducing sales-y ness
Jeff read out current proposed abstract.
Discussion around missing sentence on customizability and extensibility
Sheri_B-H: second paragraph needs to be broken up
janina: second paragraph might be too much towards implementation details , maybe it should go into the intro?
<SusiPallero> +1
Mark_Miller: last paragraph - should we drop what to do to get there?
general agreement
proposed including "outcomes" in the abstract
JeffAdams-UN: Janina mentioned the second paragraph should go into the intro.
janina: it's too much for the abstract
JeffAdams-UN: keep the abstract tight
SusiPallero: is outcome the expected results, or the actions needed to get there
Fazio: this document is not normative, so we are less prescriptive. Outcome is the expected results in this case
Fazio: read the beginning of the current intro
(sorry forgot to take her off the queue previously)
Sheri_B-H: some of the sales-yness was intentional. We needed to answer the question What's In It For Me ("me" being the person reading the abstract) The reader may have already done a lot of work to make a product accessible, and needs to be convinced that they need to do more to keep it accessible
Sheri_B-H: but we can always convey the same info differently
JeffAdams-UN: About needs to come back
janina: we could make them sibling sections, as opposed to subsections
janina: understanding maturity, understanding THIS maturity model
JeffAdams-UN: some of the about stuff got moved into the "how to use", we would need to bring that back
Mark_Miller: maybe we need to step back and define what each of these sections needs to be
Mark_Miller: and then make the information fit the definition
JeffAdams-UN: what do we have to have to do to meet W3C standards (to stay consistent with other abstracts and intros)
Sheri_B-H: is there a published document that we like for layout and style we should emulate?
janina: will look for one she likes