14:47:52 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
14:47:57 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/05/19-ag-irc
14:47:57 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:47:58 <Zakim> Meeting: AGWG Teleconference
14:47:58 <alastairc> chair: alastairc
14:48:01 <alastairc> present: alastairc
14:48:04 <alastairc> agenda?
14:48:22 <alastairc> agenda: Policy document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BuZOGxddoZbPRmPB-CoNVfqSCiD0Cm3oaGeDQ3yJRI4/edit?tab=t.7v4fbak4pwa7#heading=h.lszmh82qg0ga
14:48:30 <alastairc> agenda+ Policy document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BuZOGxddoZbPRmPB-CoNVfqSCiD0Cm3oaGeDQ3yJRI4/edit?tab=t.7v4fbak4pwa7#heading=h.lszmh82qg0ga
14:48:53 <alastairc> agenda+ Retro https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DxCVBtsbxgOS0mLpoJ4Ur1nU0_MadKzE6q9PGg_MBzE/edit?tab=t.bzymfqyhn1za#heading=h.je7f0zo52our
14:55:53 <Charles> Charles has joined #ag
14:59:14 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #ag
14:59:17 <Eloisa> Eloisa has joined #ag
14:59:26 <Ben_Tillyer> Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag
15:00:05 <Ben_Tillyer> present+
15:00:11 <bbailey> present+
15:00:18 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #ag
15:00:18 <Eloisa> present+
15:00:24 <wendyreid> present+
15:00:36 <HaTheo> HaTheo has joined #ag
15:01:11 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
15:01:11 <Jennie_Delisi> Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag
15:01:19 <Jennie_Delisi> present+
15:01:21 <Azlan> present+
15:01:22 <Charles> present+
15:01:27 <ahick> ahick has joined #ag
15:01:33 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #ag
15:01:40 <filippo-zorzi> present+
15:01:41 <Heather> Heather has joined #ag
15:01:46 <Heather> present+
15:02:00 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #ag
15:02:01 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
15:02:03 <kevin> present+
15:02:04 <Heather> scribe+
15:02:06 <ShawnT> present+
15:02:12 <kevin> zakim, who is on the call?
15:02:12 <Zakim> Present: alastairc, Ben_Tillyer, bbailey, Eloisa, wendyreid, Jennie_Delisi, Azlan, Charles, filippo-zorzi, Heather, kevin, ShawnT
15:02:19 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
15:02:20 <ahick> present+
15:02:20 <AWK> present+
15:02:23 <giacomo-petri> present+
15:02:25 <LenB> LenB has joined #ag
15:02:28 <JeroenH> present+
15:02:30 <LenB> present+
15:02:36 <alastairc> TOPIC: Intros and Announcements
15:02:36 <kirkwood> present+
15:02:39 <erinevans> erinevans has joined #ag
15:02:41 <Helen> Helen has joined #ag
15:02:45 <erinevans> present+
15:02:54 <Monica> Monica has joined #AG
15:02:55 <Helen> Present+
15:03:04 <HaTheo> present+
15:03:09 <Monica> present+
15:03:42 <laura> laura has joined #ag
15:03:50 <CClaire> CClaire has joined #ag
15:04:00 <laura> present+ Laura_Carlson
15:04:06 <Makoto_U> Makoto_U has joined #ag
15:04:07 <Rachael> present+
15:04:11 <ahick> q+
15:04:15 <CClaire> present+
15:04:16 <Makoto_U> present+
15:04:19 <LoriO> LoriO has joined #ag
15:04:21 <janina> janina has joined #ag
15:04:27 <alastairc> ack ahick
15:04:28 <LoriO> present+
15:04:37 <Heather> alastairc: Introductions.
15:04:57 <jtoles> jtoles has joined #ag
15:05:04 <jtoles> present+
15:05:12 <Jon_Avila> Jon_Avila has joined #ag
15:05:14 <AlinaV> AlinaV has joined #ag
15:05:19 <Jon_Avila> present+
15:05:31 <AlinaV> present+
15:06:35 <Heather> alastairc: Announcements. TPAC in October, agenda is pending. Encourages booking fights. No W3C hotel has been organized yet. Group will meet Monday and Tuesday, and potential cross-group meetings on Thursday and Friday to tackle larger topics. TPAC is week of October 20. TPAC is in Dublin, Ireland. Hope to see people there.
15:06:48 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:06:59 <Detlev> present+
15:07:14 <alastairc> zakim, take up next item
15:07:14 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Policy document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BuZOGxddoZbPRmPB-CoNVfqSCiD0Cm3oaGeDQ3yJRI4/edit?tab=t.7v4fbak4pwa7#heading=h.lszmh82qg0ga -- taken up [from
15:07:16 <Heather> bbailey: Plug Global Accessibility Awareness Day is this Thursday. Lots of presentations, workshops and various events going on.  It's fun
15:07:18 <Zakim> ... alastairc]
15:07:20 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #ag
15:07:24 <julierawe> present+
15:07:26 <Ben_Tillyer> There's a list of events on the GAAD foundations site: https://accessibility.day/events/
15:07:57 <stevekerr> stevekerr has joined #ag
15:08:01 <LenB> LenB has joined #ag
15:08:43 <hdv> present+
15:08:48 <joryc> joryc has joined #ag
15:09:24 <Heather> alastairc: Policy document. Link is above. Want to walk through topics that came up from conformance subgroup. Group has put together a bunch of topics that have come up. Two goals 1) Is there anything else we should be adding or taking away? 2) Who would be interested in working on this document? Work is anticipated to be significant, and the work
15:09:24 <Heather> needs to be done in parallel for the next couple of years. In relation to WCAG 3, there are topics that might not be certain today because we haven't nailed down the conformance model.
15:09:36 <Heather> alastairc: [Sharing screen of Google Doc]
15:10:11 <Heather> alastairc: Encourages not to edit during meeting, but adding comments are ok
15:10:24 <Dirk> Dirk has joined #ag
15:10:44 <AWK> q+
15:11:02 <chrisg> chrisg has joined #ag
15:11:06 <Jen_G> Jen_G has joined #ag
15:11:26 <Jen_G> Present+
15:11:37 <laura> laura has joined #ag
15:11:37 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
15:11:37 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #ag
15:11:37 <Eloisa> Eloisa has joined #ag
15:11:37 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
15:11:37 <Jem_> Jem_ has joined #ag
15:11:37 <jedi> jedi has joined #ag
15:11:37 <hdv> hdv has joined #ag
15:11:37 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #ag
15:11:37 <jyasskin> jyasskin has joined #ag
15:11:37 <JeroenH> JeroenH has joined #ag
15:11:37 <mgifford2> mgifford2 has joined #ag
15:11:37 <alice> alice has joined #ag
15:11:37 <Adam> Adam has joined #ag
15:11:37 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
15:11:38 <Rachael> ack awk
15:11:47 <Heather> alastairc: Main topics: User generated content interface and display, User generated (uncompensated) content, Third Party Content, Bugs...
15:12:28 <Heather> AWK: This seems to be a basic framework for a policy document. Do you feel there were conclusions reached last week on the call about the policy document versus the conformance model, meaning what content will be in which document?
15:13:16 <Heather> alastairc: [pulls up minutes from last week] Decision round does not require testing of provisions to say that we're not going to specify that the testing of provisions via a particular method.
15:13:56 <Heather> alastairc: We have a direction on ATAG topics. And we were looking at the multi-levels versus as well as a conformance, progress-to-conformance score, and do prototyping on that.
15:14:17 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #ag
15:14:17 <sam-estoesta> sam-estoesta has joined #ag
15:14:23 <sam-estoesta> present+
15:15:01 <Heather> alastairc: Need to continue to talk about that to further refine that. There are quite a few topics that are not dependent on the conformance model. Running in parallel, it would be a case to cover something in conformance then we would turn around to make sure it's in the policy.
15:15:30 <Heather> AWK: To summarize, it sounds like we're not entirely sure yet for the number of the things, and the working group didn't make a firm decision one way or another.
15:16:04 <Heather> alastairc: It was decided that we were going to look at paths, and hooks from policy to WCAG, and those are still being captured.
15:16:29 <hdv> q+
15:16:58 <alastairc> ack hdv
15:17:21 <sam-estoesta> sam-estoesta has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Jen_G> Jen_G has joined #ag
15:17:21 <chrisg> chrisg has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Dirk> Dirk has joined #ag
15:17:21 <joryc> joryc has joined #ag
15:17:21 <LenB> LenB has joined #ag
15:17:21 <stevekerr> stevekerr has joined #ag
15:17:21 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:17:21 <AlinaV> AlinaV has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Jon_Avila> Jon_Avila has joined #ag
15:17:21 <jtoles> jtoles has joined #ag
15:17:21 <janina> janina has joined #ag
15:17:21 <LoriO> LoriO has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Makoto_U> Makoto_U has joined #ag
15:17:21 <CClaire> CClaire has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Monica> Monica has joined #ag
15:17:21 <erinevans> erinevans has joined #ag
15:17:21 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
15:17:21 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
15:17:21 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Heather> Heather has joined #ag
15:17:21 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #ag
15:17:21 <ahick> ahick has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Jennie_Delisi> Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag
15:17:21 <HaTheo> HaTheo has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Ben_Tillyer> Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag
15:17:21 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #ag
15:17:21 <Charles> Charles has joined #ag
15:17:21 <srvjordi> srvjordi has joined #ag
15:17:27 <Francis_Storr> Francis_Storr has joined #ag
15:17:27 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #ag
15:17:27 <laura> laura has joined #ag
15:17:27 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
15:17:27 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #ag
15:17:27 <Eloisa> Eloisa has joined #ag
15:17:27 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
15:17:27 <Jem_> Jem_ has joined #ag
15:17:27 <jedi> jedi has joined #ag
15:17:27 <hdv> hdv has joined #ag
15:17:27 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #ag
15:17:27 <jyasskin> jyasskin has joined #ag
15:17:27 <JeroenH> JeroenH has joined #ag
15:17:27 <mgifford2> mgifford2 has joined #ag
15:17:27 <alice> alice has joined #ag
15:17:27 <Adam> Adam has joined #ag
15:17:27 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
15:17:35 <Francis_Storr> present+
15:17:42 <stevekerr> present+
15:18:19 <bbailey> q+ to ask if there is prose about using design systems which are strongly a11y-oriented ?
15:18:37 <Charles> q+
15:18:42 <Francis_Storr> Francis_Storr has joined #ag
15:18:42 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #ag
15:18:42 <laura> laura has joined #ag
15:18:42 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
15:18:42 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #ag
15:18:42 <Eloisa> Eloisa has joined #ag
15:18:42 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
15:18:42 <Jem_> Jem_ has joined #ag
15:18:42 <jedi> jedi has joined #ag
15:18:42 <hdv> hdv has joined #ag
15:18:42 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #ag
15:18:42 <jyasskin> jyasskin has joined #ag
15:18:42 <JeroenH> JeroenH has joined #ag
15:18:42 <mgifford2> mgifford2 has joined #ag
15:18:42 <alice> alice has joined #ag
15:18:42 <Adam> Adam has joined #ag
15:18:42 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
15:18:42 <Heather> @hidde: Not sure if this is the right level to take about this. In the case today, with WCAG 2 bugs, I think regulators and monitoring bodies are already have strategies around this. Wonders if it is helpful for us to go to this level of detail when writing to policymakers or trying to inform their decisions. It might be worth trying to make sure
15:18:43 <Heather> we know roughly what they are already doing today to avoid going into too much detail.
15:18:49 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #ag
15:18:57 <alastairc> ack bbailey
15:18:57 <Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to ask if there is prose about using design systems which are strongly a11y-oriented ?
15:19:01 <alastairc> q?
15:19:15 <wendyreid> s/@hidde:/hdv:/
15:19:16 <Heather> alastairc: I think it's an interesting point, especially with EU and US.
15:19:28 <Glenda> q+
15:19:42 <Heather> bbailey: If we have something here about the design system, if there is one.
15:19:43 <AWK> @bbailey that might get us into assertions
15:19:55 <Glenda> present+
15:20:06 <Heather> alastairc: [adding impact of design systems to Potential Topics in document]
15:20:53 <Heather> Charles: Wants clarity around the intended audience of the policy information. My understanding was that the policy is a general sense of any public or private entity that is writing a policy for its constituents or its employees and not regulators.
15:20:55 <kirkwood> +1 to Bruce. similar to 3rd party in some way
15:21:36 <Heather> alastairc: It's people would either create policy or regulation that includes WCAG, or potentially an enforcement or legal perspective.
15:21:49 <Heather> Charles: So not private entities creating policy for their own organizations?
15:21:50 <alastairc> q?
15:21:52 <alastairc> ack Charles
15:21:54 <alastairc> ack Glenda
15:21:56 <Heather> alastairc: Would need to think that through.
15:21:58 <giacomo-petri> q+
15:22:17 <bbailey> U.S. .gov model of design system heavily oriented towards a11y (508) USWDS:  https://designsystem.digital.gov/about/product-values/
15:22:40 <AWK> +1 to Glenda
15:22:42 <bbailey> +1 to glenda
15:22:43 <Charles> i have written internal enterprise policy. having guidance and considerations are useful.
15:22:51 <Jennie_Delisi> +1 to Glenda
15:23:09 <Jon_Avila> q+
15:23:16 <kirkwood> +1 to Glenda
15:23:23 <alastairc> ack giacomo-petri
15:23:30 <Jon_Avila> q?
15:23:31 <Heather> Glenda: Sitting in the US, there are many times where policymakers in government, state and local, at third party or my clients that don't know WCAG, and they expect 100% compliance. Thinks this perspective is very harmful, and it is important that we document this at the W3C. Can't get legislatures who make the wrong decisions because they are
15:23:31 <Heather> asking for 100% compliance, or you can't purchase.
15:24:08 <wendyreid> q+
15:24:33 <Heather> giacomo-petri: Comment about Charles's comment. Thinks it could apply to both internal policy makers in a company a nd those in the government that are making the rules.Want to recognize the WCAG state of accessibility of a product, because they are almost facing the same challenges (pass/fail scenarios)
15:24:35 <alastairc> ack Jon_Avila
15:25:04 <AWK> Would love a poll among the WG members to see how many of us think that an expectation that an entire site (say 100 pages) or similarly complex web will meet all criteria on all pages is reasonable.
15:25:11 <Glenda> Q+
15:25:14 <HaTheo> q+
15:25:32 <kirkwood> +1 to Jonathan
15:26:01 <alastairc> ack wendyreid
15:26:11 <Heather> Jon_Avila: Adding to Glenda's comment. We have to come up with the framework. If we just say 'there are challenges' then it diminishes the effectiveness of WCAG. We need to do this in a way that we provide a framework so they can put that into their regulatory documents or guidance. I think that's the same challenge today. A lot of people are
15:26:11 <Heather> confused about if WCAG is a hard requirement or not. People struggle with that decision; and there should be a way to provide flexibility, and have things that are testable and repeatable.
15:27:14 <AshleeF> AshleeF has joined #ag
15:27:39 <alastairc> q+ on goal
15:27:57 <alastairc> ack Glenda
15:28:00 <Heather> wendyreid: There are different things that encapsulate a lot of different things: Organizational policy, Regulatory Policy, and Internal facing policy versus public facing policy. To try to jam into all those into one thing could be difficult for us. Need to define the goal of the document. We are throwing a lot of topics at it, and the size
15:28:00 <Heather> increases.
15:28:35 <kevin> q+
15:28:51 <alastairc> ack HaTheo
15:28:58 <Heather> Glenda: When I'm trying to convince Texas Education Agency to pull off the 100% (which they haven't done), it's like eating at a restaurant that doesn't have a 100% health score. No. The most important part is the SLA when those bugs will be fixed based on criticality.
15:29:04 <kevin> q-
15:29:06 <Charu> Charu has joined #ag
15:29:55 <kevin> -1 to Health score comparison. Difference between health violation is that an accessibility bug could make access to a service impossible to someone.
15:29:55 <Jennie_Delisi> q+ re groups of policy maker stakeholders
15:29:59 <LoriO> q+
15:30:02 <Jon_Avila> When procuring something - the current level of accessibility isn't the only metric - the ability to become and remain accessible over time is important.
15:30:07 <alastairc> ack alastairc
15:30:07 <Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to comment on goal
15:30:13 <Heather> HaTheo: Agrees with Glenda. It's important to note that software is not a combination of the bugs, it's possible that people will use the software without ever encountering the bugs that exist far in (such as settings). Think about if it is inhibiting someone from doing something.
15:31:52 <AWK> q+ to say (again) that the more we can put into WCAG itself reduces deharmonization.
15:31:59 <LoriO> isn't this the same as the starter doc that I brought up last week?
15:32:04 <alastairc> ack Jennie_Delisi
15:32:04 <Zakim> Jennie_Delisi, you wanted to discuss groups of policy maker stakeholders
15:32:22 <GN015> GN015 has joined #ag
15:32:31 <Heather> alastairc: Commenting on the Health Score analogy, the goal of that document is to be the advice to the people who do the regulations, which is what creates the enforcement and that's the difference between compliance and conformance. There's a difference. The goal of this document is to give advice about it.
15:32:31 <Charu> present+
15:33:11 <hdv> +1 Jennie_Delisi
15:33:12 <wendyreid> +1 to Jennie
15:33:25 <alastairc> ack lori
15:33:31 <GN015> GN015 has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Charu> Charu has joined #ag
15:33:31 <AshleeF> AshleeF has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #ag
15:33:31 <sam-estoesta> sam-estoesta has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Jen_G> Jen_G has joined #ag
15:33:31 <chrisg> chrisg has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Dirk> Dirk has joined #ag
15:33:31 <joryc> joryc has joined #ag
15:33:31 <LenB> LenB has joined #ag
15:33:31 <stevekerr> stevekerr has joined #ag
15:33:31 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:33:31 <AlinaV> AlinaV has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Jon_Avila> Jon_Avila has joined #ag
15:33:31 <jtoles> jtoles has joined #ag
15:33:31 <janina> janina has joined #ag
15:33:31 <LoriO> LoriO has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Makoto_U> Makoto_U has joined #ag
15:33:31 <CClaire> CClaire has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Monica> Monica has joined #ag
15:33:31 <erinevans> erinevans has joined #ag
15:33:31 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
15:33:31 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
15:33:31 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Heather> Heather has joined #ag
15:33:31 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #ag
15:33:31 <ahick> ahick has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Jennie_Delisi> Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag
15:33:31 <HaTheo> HaTheo has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Ben_Tillyer> Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag
15:33:31 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #ag
15:33:31 <Charles> Charles has joined #ag
15:33:31 <srvjordi> srvjordi has joined #ag
15:33:38 <kirkwood> +1 to Jennie
15:35:07 <GN015> GN015 has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Charu> Charu has joined #ag
15:35:07 <AshleeF> AshleeF has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #ag
15:35:07 <sam-estoesta> sam-estoesta has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Jen_G> Jen_G has joined #ag
15:35:07 <chrisg> chrisg has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Dirk> Dirk has joined #ag
15:35:07 <joryc> joryc has joined #ag
15:35:07 <LenB> LenB has joined #ag
15:35:07 <stevekerr> stevekerr has joined #ag
15:35:07 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:35:07 <AlinaV> AlinaV has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Jon_Avila> Jon_Avila has joined #ag
15:35:07 <jtoles> jtoles has joined #ag
15:35:07 <janina> janina has joined #ag
15:35:07 <LoriO> LoriO has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Makoto_U> Makoto_U has joined #ag
15:35:07 <CClaire> CClaire has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Monica> Monica has joined #ag
15:35:07 <erinevans> erinevans has joined #ag
15:35:07 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
15:35:07 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
15:35:07 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Heather> Heather has joined #ag
15:35:07 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Jennie_Delisi> Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag
15:35:07 <HaTheo> HaTheo has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Ben_Tillyer> Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag
15:35:07 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #ag
15:35:07 <Charles> Charles has joined #ag
15:35:07 <srvjordi> srvjordi has joined #ag
15:35:10 <scott> scott has joined #ag
15:35:17 <scott> present+
15:35:31 <kevin> qq+
15:35:44 <bbailey> reagent, draft minutes
15:35:53 <bbailey> rssagent, draft minutes
15:35:57 <Heather> alastairc: Commenting on the Health Score analogy, the goal of that document is to be the advice to the people who do the regulations, which is what creates the enforcement and that's the difference between compliance and conformance. There's a difference. The goal of this document is to give advice about it.
15:36:10 <bbailey> s/reagent, draft minutes//
15:36:11 <Heather> Glenda: I want to clarify my perspective. There are multiple groups of policymaker stakeholders involved in conversations, whether we're talking bout laws or internal policies. There's a broader lens to consider for the various policy pieces.
15:36:16 <Heather> LoriO: Brought up the idea last week of a beginner, gentle introduction/starter document. This policy document looks much more in depth. Having a beginner/starter document might address some of the issues that are brought up. It might be useful for people who are not in the business of accessibility.
15:36:23 <Heather> @alastair: I think this is a different document.
15:36:30 <Heather> LoriO: Using this policy document to distill down into the other document, it would be helpful.
15:36:38 <Heather> alastairc: Commenting on the Health Score analogy, the goal of that document is to be the advice to the people who do the regulations, which is what creates the enforcement and that's the difference between compliance and conformance. There's a difference. The goal of this document is to give advice about it.
15:36:40 <alastairc> q?
15:36:42 <Heather> Glenda: I want to clarify my perspective. There are multiple groups of policymaker stakeholders involved in conversations, whether we're talking bout laws or internal policies. There's a broader lens to consider for the various policy pieces.
15:36:42 <wendyreid> s/@alastair:/alastair:/
15:36:47 <alastairc> ack kevin
15:36:47 <Zakim> kevin, you wanted to react to LoriO
15:36:52 <alastairc> ack AWK
15:36:52 <Zakim> AWK, you wanted to say (again) that the more we can put into WCAG itself reduces deharmonization.
15:37:08 <bbailey> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:37:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/05/19-ag-minutes.html bbailey
15:37:35 <Ben_Tillyer> +1 to awk
15:37:53 <wendyreid> +1
15:37:53 <Jennie_Delisi> +1 to awk
15:37:56 <alastairc> q?
15:37:59 <Charles> q+
15:38:05 <Ben_Tillyer> q+
15:38:05 <alastairc> ack Charles
15:38:14 <Heather> AWK: Harmonization of policies is a huge concern for any organzation that needs to address more than one geographic location, and to the extent that we can get anything into the document itself into the normative WCAG as opposed to an informative but highly suggested resource for policymakers, the better. We want to make it as easy as possible for
15:38:14 <Heather> them as we can.
15:38:47 <alastairc> ack Ben_Tillyer
15:38:49 <bbailey> s/rssagent, draft minutes//
15:38:59 <Heather> Charles: Can we have a straw poll or some decision of who the audience of this it is. Personally thinks that this document is for anyone writing policy, whether its someone writing a law or writing an organization's policy.
15:39:43 <Heather> Ben_Tillyer: Back on Glenda's point of apps not being accepted if they were 100% compliant. I think that exploring this is something we need to do. Laying out the impact of what non-perfect compliance would be is a key part.
15:39:52 <Charles> Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility – https://www.w3.org/WAI/planning/org-policies/
15:40:29 <kevin> -1
15:40:40 <kevin> q+
15:40:47 <alastairc> ack kevin
15:41:06 <AWK> Primary audience should be legislative policy-makers, IMO. Org policy can be easily changed and doesn't have civil/criminal(!) penalties.
15:41:13 <Heather> alastairc: On Charles's point about a poll. The key reason for us talking about this document at all has been for the kind of policymakers that are writing policies for national or regional level that use WCAG. The question really is are organizational policies included. It hasnt' been ruled out, but it wasn't where the idea came from.
15:41:55 <JeroenH> q+
15:41:55 <Charles> q+
15:42:00 <kirkwood> +1 to Kevin
15:42:08 <alastairc> ack JeroenH
15:42:14 <janina> +1 to Kevin
15:42:30 <Heather> Kevin: Agrees with the language that policy, policymaker, regulator, there's a lot of ambiguity and overlap and difference in how these terms are used, which makes this difficult. The idea of creating an organizational policy for accessibility could be to promote accessibility education, etc, falls within our lane.
15:42:47 <alastairc> ack Charles
15:43:33 <Heather> JeroenH: Agree with Kevin, WCAG is a normative part in Dutch legislation, it would not work if it would be part of WCAG for everyone. I'd love WCAG to be referenced in policy worldwide. I don't think it's going to work if the policy document's going to be part of normative documents considering WCAG.
15:43:41 <alastairc> q+
15:43:44 <alastairc> ack alastairc
15:44:12 <Heather> Charles: Responding to Kevin - makes me confused on previous conversations about the scope of a conformance claim and an organization determining their scope in making that claim and defining it.
15:44:49 <alastairc> q?
15:45:13 <scott> scott has joined #ag
15:45:13 <GN015> GN015 has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Charu> Charu has joined #ag
15:45:13 <AshleeF> AshleeF has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #ag
15:45:13 <sam-estoesta> sam-estoesta has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Jen_G> Jen_G has joined #ag
15:45:13 <chrisg> chrisg has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Dirk> Dirk has joined #ag
15:45:13 <joryc> joryc has joined #ag
15:45:13 <LenB> LenB has joined #ag
15:45:13 <stevekerr> stevekerr has joined #ag
15:45:13 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #ag
15:45:13 <AlinaV> AlinaV has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Jon_Avila> Jon_Avila has joined #ag
15:45:13 <jtoles> jtoles has joined #ag
15:45:13 <janina> janina has joined #ag
15:45:13 <LoriO> LoriO has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Makoto_U> Makoto_U has joined #ag
15:45:13 <CClaire> CClaire has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Monica> Monica has joined #ag
15:45:13 <erinevans> erinevans has joined #ag
15:45:13 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
15:45:13 <AWK> AWK has joined #ag
15:45:13 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Heather> Heather has joined #ag
15:45:13 <filippo-zorzi> filippo-zorzi has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Jennie_Delisi> Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag
15:45:13 <HaTheo> HaTheo has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Ben_Tillyer> Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag
15:45:13 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #ag
15:45:13 <Charles> Charles has joined #ag
15:45:13 <srvjordi> srvjordi has joined #ag
15:45:17 <AWK> It would be really good to get to the bottom of this IRC trouble. Really disruptive.
15:46:05 <Heather> alastairc: A better place to be would be more detailed advice for organizations is how to scope, test, and report on their conformance claims. Doesn't think the policy document would go into the details of how an organization should scope a claim.
15:46:19 <Heather> alastairc: [Back to Google document Conformance Discussion / Decisions]
15:46:41 <kevin> rrsagent, make minutes
15:46:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/05/19-ag-minutes.html kevin
15:46:49 <Heather> alastairc: [Reviews main topics section]
15:48:04 <alastairc> Survey for joining for joined the the group that works on this https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/policy_subgroup_26/
15:48:16 <alastairc> Outline of policy doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BuZOGxddoZbPRmPB-CoNVfqSCiD0Cm3oaGeDQ3yJRI4/edit?tab=t.7v4fbak4pwa7
15:48:16 <Heather> alastairc: Question now is: can anyone think of anything that should be included that hasn't been already added to the list? You can put a comment in the document or email the chairs. Two links: Survey to join the group, and the other link to be put in IRC.
15:48:19 <alastairc> q?
15:48:21 <Charles> q+
15:48:25 <alastairc> ack Charles
15:49:01 <Heather> Charles: Potential topic: Frequency of revision of the policy. Need consider how frequently that policy may be revisited.
15:49:13 <Heather> q+
15:49:20 <alastairc> ack Heather
15:49:23 <alastairc> scribe+
15:49:40 <alastairc> Heather: Common topic, is sharing test results, with things that pass and fail.
15:49:44 <Jennie_Delisi> q+ re outline of subgroup expectations
15:49:44 <alastairc> scribe-
15:49:57 <alastairc> ack Jennie_Delisi
15:49:57 <Zakim> Jennie_Delisi, you wanted to discuss outline of subgroup expectations
15:50:37 <Heather> Jennie_Delisi: Looking at the survey, doesn't know the subgroup expectations. Asks to describe the meeting times or timeframe.
15:51:00 <Heather> alastairc: That will be an ongoing thing. Anticipates a meeting this week, and stuff to draft or review. Assumes it'll be 2-3 hour/week commitment.
15:51:03 <alastairc> q?
15:51:26 <Heather> alastairc: Sees no other comments. Please email chairs if anything comes up.
15:51:29 <alastairc> zakim, take up next item
15:51:29 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Retro https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DxCVBtsbxgOS0mLpoJ4Ur1nU0_MadKzE6q9PGg_MBzE/edit?tab=t.bzymfqyhn1za#heading=h.je7f0zo52our -- taken up [from alastairc]
15:52:20 <Heather> alastairc: Retrospectives are done about every 6 months. Captures positives and negatives.
15:53:47 <Heather> alastairc: Reviews comments from last retrospective, and what has been done, such as the project board for subgroup work (tracking across subgroups), there has been some investigation of AI tools for discussion summaries, etc.
15:54:05 <Rachael> q+
15:54:28 <Heather> alastairc: Asks for a queue to talk about contents under Reviewing progress. [Adds notes in real time to document]
15:54:38 <alastairc> ack Rachael
15:54:57 <Heather> q+
15:55:03 <AWK> q+
15:55:08 <AWK> "hired" lol
15:55:14 <alastairc> ack Heather
15:55:32 <alastairc> ack AWK
15:55:33 <Heather> alastairc: New chair in Pacific time.
15:55:44 <Heather> Heather: Subgroups have filled up.
15:55:55 <Heather> AWK: Shifted focus to conformance as a focused topic.
15:56:13 <erinevans> present-
15:56:49 <Heather> alastairc: Action was intentional. We set 2025 to focus on the guideline content. Back to the draft at the end of 2024, and then 2025 we shifted more to the content side, and are swinging back to other topics, like conformance.
15:57:03 <Heather> AWK: Thinks we've shifted focus appropriately now, which will allow us to make progress.
15:57:10 <alastairc> q?
15:57:51 <kevin> q+
15:57:59 <alastairc> ack kevin
15:58:00 <Heather> alastairc: Asks how people have found the subgroups work.
15:58:37 <Heather> Kevin: Lots of chat about Adam as a new chair being a positive, which I agree with. Can anyone write into the Google Document directly? It might be easier for people.
15:58:59 <Heather> alastairc: Let's spend 10 minutes for people to contribute to the Google Document Retro.
15:59:17 <wendyreid_> wendyreid_ has joined #ag
15:59:40 <Heather> Kevin [access logistics]
16:00:13 <Heather> scribe-
16:00:57 <HaTheo> kevin sent a email to you with my preferred gmail account
16:02:03 <alastairc> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DxCVBtsbxgOS0mLpoJ4Ur1nU0_MadKzE6q9PGg_MBzE/edit?tab=t.bzymfqyhn1za
16:06:55 <Dirk> i don;t have write access and requested it
16:07:18 <Jennie_Delisi> *Positives: recap for those who may benefit from a quick refresher on a topic.
16:07:32 <giacomo-petri> giacomo-petri has joined #ag
16:08:17 <Jennie_Delisi> * Positives: consistent options provided so people can contribute using more than one method
16:08:27 <Dirk> works now! thanks :)
16:10:39 <wendyreid_> wendyreid_ has joined #ag
16:10:39 <Francis_Storr> Francis_Storr has joined #ag
16:10:39 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #ag
16:10:39 <laura> laura has joined #ag
16:10:39 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #ag
16:10:39 <Eloisa> Eloisa has joined #ag
16:10:39 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
16:10:39 <Jem_> Jem_ has joined #ag
16:10:39 <jedi> jedi has joined #ag
16:10:39 <hdv> hdv has joined #ag
16:10:39 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #ag
16:10:39 <jyasskin> jyasskin has joined #ag
16:10:39 <JeroenH> JeroenH has joined #ag
16:10:39 <mgifford2> mgifford2 has joined #ag
16:10:39 <alice> alice has joined #ag
16:10:39 <Adam> Adam has joined #ag
16:10:39 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #ag
16:12:39 <Rachael> scribe+
16:12:50 <Rachael> alastairc: Starting with positives. Read document.
16:14:28 <Rachael> ...Small groups responsible for looking after a topic is helpful.
16:15:04 <Rachael> ...comments on the positives?
16:15:09 <Rachael> ...what went poorly?
16:16:07 <graham> graham has joined #ag
16:16:11 <graham> present+
16:16:18 <Rachael> AWK: Directions changed and there were a number of times where out subgroup had to come back to clarify. Its a hard thing to get right. Not criticizing but it is something that represented friction.
16:16:30 <Rachael> ...guidelines subgroup when adding ACT tests.
16:16:45 <bbailey> +1 to AWK concern for subgroup instructions -- and inputs had benefit of editor and later co-chair
16:17:20 <Rachael> alastairc: We are hoping that the editor's group and presence in subgroups can allow us a forum that lets us have a central group that then spreads out to subgroups.
16:17:21 <kirkwood> use ai for effective goal setting for group to be effective
16:18:21 <Rachael> q+
16:18:25 <bbailey> +1 to AC that chair coordinator meeting bringing info to editor members of subgroup.  Effort towards communication apparent and improving.
16:18:27 <alastairc> scribe+
16:19:02 <scott> q+
16:19:13 <alastairc> Rachael: Love to hear more, how to balance: avoiding re-doing work, pointing to previous things. Welcome more thoughts.
16:19:14 <Rachael> ack Rachael
16:19:17 <alastairc> ack scott
16:19:23 <kevin> q+
16:20:02 <Rachael> scott: Views in particular had a lot of pushback. Technology evolves and I think that comments like we
16:20:11 <hdv> q+
16:20:15 <stevekerr> q+
16:20:19 <alastairc> ack kevin
16:20:42 <Rachael> we've already tried that and its impossible isn't helpful. Comments that your ideas are invalid are rubbish. We shouldn't be doing that to people.
16:20:43 <alastairc> ack hdv
16:20:51 <AshleeF> AshleeF has left #ag
16:20:54 <wendyreid> q+
16:20:59 <Rachael> kevin: Later on there is a desire to avoid relitigating content.
16:21:06 <Rachael> ...need for balance.
16:22:06 <Rachael> hdv: I am invested in the views discussion but would have left otherwise. Comments made were not made in a helpful way. Didn't value the newer knowledge and perspectives.  Important that we don't shut each other down.
16:22:08 <alastairc> ack stevekerr
16:22:26 <bbailey> Thank you Hidde for hanging in there!  The views discussion ended up in a good place I think, and I was not optimistic about that.
16:22:46 <scott> agreed. i'm glad Hidde stuck with it :)
16:22:52 <Jennie_Delisi> +1 to having a way to distinguish newer perspective / updated considerations
16:22:56 <Rachael> ...stevekerr I think it could be helpful to point to a github discussion for people who are newer to catch up and self evaluate their ideas.
16:23:17 <Rachael> s/...stevekerr/stevekerr:
16:23:39 <alastairc> ack wendyreid
16:23:50 <alastairc> q+
16:24:57 <Rachael> wendyreid: This is something that we really have to think about how to address in a constructive way. The working group has such a long history on topics but particularly conformance that we need a way to document the topics and the at the time consensus. This really ties into the other comments about belittling comments.
16:25:19 <stevekerr> +1 wendyreid
16:25:24 <hdv> +1 wendyreid
16:25:35 <Rachael> ...we don't say "here is the place you can see the previous discussion. Take a look and let us know."
16:25:45 <alastairc> ack alastairc
16:25:47 <Rachael> ....we also have revisionist history going on.
16:26:19 <Jennie_Delisi> q+
16:26:52 <Charles> +1 to alastairc ‘so much stuff’ – still overwhelmed coming back into this work
16:27:14 <Rachael> alastairc: I got on queue to comment. Seems like there should be a simple way to point to it but there is so much stuff. Our source of truth is often what we actually published before. We will always have this tension between people who are new and people who have been working on it.
16:27:28 <imirfan> imirfan has joined #ag
16:27:49 <alastairc> q?
16:27:51 <alastairc> ack Jennie_Delisi
16:27:54 <Dirk> I sadly have to drop. this is a great discussion! thanks for doing this!
16:27:56 <kirkwood> q+
16:28:15 <Rachael> ... change "it didn't work" to "it didn't work because of..."  to give us something to address. On the other side, when someone said it didn't work because of...  the new idea has to address it
16:29:22 <alastairc> q?
16:29:25 <alastairc> ack kirkwood
16:29:42 <Rachael> Jennie_Delisi: I am also a person who has also tried to raise some concerns. I don't feel like I'm being pushed down but it feels like you are trying to push through something with such weight. Issues come up that feel like they are hard to change.
16:30:25 <Rachael> kirkwood: Should we follow a legislative approach where a person sponsors a topic to help better track things. Close itiems.
16:32:09 <Glenda> Can we limit air time for a person?  There is such a domination of the time by just a few voices.
16:32:22 <Rachael> q+ to speak to Glenda's point
16:32:24 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #ag
16:32:33 <alastairc> ack Rachael
16:32:33 <Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to speak to Glenda's point
16:32:36 <Wilco> q+
16:32:36 <alastairc> scribe+
16:32:38 <HaTheo> can we request airtime in the queue?
16:33:17 <alastairc> Rachael: asked coga about this. Their suggestion was for one of the off chairs (not chairing), keep a timer that's not a zakim count down.
16:33:21 <AWK> In teaching "wait time" is the concept of allowing students who aren't the first with their hands up to process a question and get ready to engage. The IRC queue is the opposite of this.
16:33:26 <Glenda> Yes please!
16:33:27 <hdv> q+
16:33:29 <alastairc> ... that doesn't have the challenges with wait time.
16:33:35 <alastairc> q+
16:33:36 <alastairc> ack Wilco
16:33:37 <kirkwood> minute warning on timers would make more accessible
16:34:04 <kirkwood> ask for those who haven’t spoken +1
16:34:04 <Ben_Tillyer> q+
16:34:04 <kevin> q+
16:34:04 <Rachael> Wilco: In ACT, I ask for people who haven't spoken up to join in. Straight up invite htem.
16:34:04 <Jennie_Delisi> +1 to Wilco
16:34:05 <alastairc> ack hdv
16:34:10 <Rachael> hdv: I would love to see time be limited.
16:34:33 <Rachael> ...A timer or explicitly saying you have 2 minutes or please talk about 1 topic at a time.
16:34:50 <Charles> q+
16:35:13 <alastairc> ack alastairc
16:35:26 <Rachael> ..many of us have a list of notes of things to respond to. This is the only meeting in my life I have to do that. I also support inviting people. Also saying You've already spoken, let's hear from others first.
16:35:31 <HaTheo> q+
16:35:32 <kirkwood> timer + invitation
16:35:46 <Rachael> alastairc: If we have a timer and keep people to one topic it may cause people to jump on repeatedly.
16:35:49 <kirkwood> yes it will but we hould try it
16:35:55 <Glenda> Q+ (to say that a person who wants to talk for more than half of the meeting, can submit their comments in writing)
16:35:59 <alastairc> ack Ben_Tillyer
16:36:01 <Rachael> ...I'm not sure that will be much better. If we have more people getting on queue that would help.
16:36:18 <Glenda> Q+
16:37:15 <Rachael> Ben_Tillyer: I was in a round table in the W3c where time to think was used. I don't think it would work exactly as used but a question was posed, and then it went around the entire group for each person to speak for a set time max.
16:37:21 <HaTheo> q-
16:37:25 <kirkwood> time to think!! +1 to Ben Tillyer
16:37:51 <JeroenH> +1 to Ben!
16:37:52 <Rachael> ...I think you would have to take into account people who don't want to speak to provide feedback in another form.
16:38:08 <alastairc> ack kevin
16:38:12 <Rachael> ...there is scope for it to be modified.
16:38:21 <Rachael> kevin: We tend to get 40 people in the group which makes it difficult.
16:38:34 <kirkwood> let us not dismiss Ben’s experience
16:38:40 <Rachael> ... a reflection, I have seen broader discussions happening and more people getting engaged.
16:38:55 <HaTheo> +1
16:39:01 <alastairc> kirkwood - not dismissing, but figuring how it would fit
16:39:03 <Heather> +1 to Kevin's comment about +1ing ;)
16:39:19 <alastairc> ack Charles
16:39:21 <Rachael> ...I think that people +1 point in chat is really helpful. Not joining queue to repeat but there is a lot of value in +1 to give understanding of where things are.
16:39:21 <hdv> +1 to using +1
16:39:31 <hdv> q+ to praise feedback via surveys
16:39:44 <Ben_Tillyer> Found this pdf, unsure of the licencing... https://srinathramakrishnan.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/brief-summary-of-time-to-think.pdf
16:40:01 <Wilco> +1 Charles, this group is difficult to participate in
16:40:12 <alastairc> q?
16:40:13 <AWK> Chairs can allow more time as needed
16:40:15 <Rachael> Charles: I like the ideas being discussed about limiting time and topics. Limiting time makes me nervous and we need to allow people time to make a point. Different communication needs. I do like the idea of limiting topic.
16:40:19 <alastairc> ack Glenda
16:41:12 <alastairc> ack hdv
16:41:12 <Zakim> hdv, you wanted to praise feedback via surveys
16:41:13 <Rachael> Glenda: I do think there are people who speak for a long time who have good things to say but they have trouble being concise. Can we encourage them to submit it in writing? Send us a UTube of their lecture.
16:41:15 <Rachael> q+
16:41:16 <Charles> +1 to Glenda on ‘succinct’ which makes my point on time
16:41:21 <Eloisa> +1 Glenda
16:41:34 <Rachael> hdv: I have noticed that surveys do include people more.
16:41:36 <alastairc> ack Rachael
16:41:45 <JeroenH> +1 to Hidde
16:42:01 <Ben_Tillyer> q+
16:42:10 <hdv> s/do include people more./sometimes get responses from folks who don't always speak in meetings, I think that's a great mechanism in our toolkit./
16:42:11 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
16:42:20 <Rachael> Rachael: Should we reintroduce surveys?
16:42:25 <alastairc> Rachael: Do people support surveys? Had moved to github more from previous retro, but is it helpful for people?
16:42:31 <laura> +1 to surveys
16:42:31 <alastairc> ack Ben_Tillyer
16:42:32 <Wilco> +1 Much prefer surveys over GH discussions
16:42:40 <Rachael> alastairc: Broader participation in surveys than in github discussions.
16:42:40 <AWK> +! to surveys
16:42:49 <AWK> s/+!/+1
16:42:59 <Rachael> Ben_Tillyer: Do we copy surveys into github?
16:43:01 <Rachael> alastairc: We cross link
16:43:05 <ShawnT> I think so people find GitHub overwhelming
16:43:12 <kirkwood> some people don’t look at github
16:43:25 <JeroenH> +1 to surveys
16:43:34 <bbailey> +1 for surveys -- but after initial discussion
16:43:37 <bbailey> q+
16:43:39 <kirkwood> +1 to surveys
16:43:42 <alastairc> ack bbailey
16:43:42 <ShawnT> Are surveys available to the public?
16:44:00 <Rachael> bbailey: The discussion forums are nice because you can reply, etc. But I am a big fan of surveys.
16:44:38 <Rachael> alastairc: We can use github to prep discussions and surveys to move towards decisions.
16:45:12 <Rachael> ...we have a couple about participans making belittling comments or irrelevant comments.
16:46:20 <hdv> q+
16:46:27 <alastairc> ack hdv
16:46:29 <Rachael> ...Is that along the feasibility point of view or the user point of view? I don't think we should tackle these here but please send a note to the chairs to help us address that.
16:47:27 <Detlev> strong +1 to HDV
16:47:42 <Wilco> q+
16:47:47 <Rachael> hdv: I've noticed a couple of times in the last year that people poke holes in proposals by trying to find the loopholes. I don't think that is the most helpful way to spend our time because it assumes we can create a loophole free standard. We cannot. WCAG 2 has them and WCAG 3 has them. It isn't productive to spend time on them unless they are big ones. Small ones -- our time is better spent.
16:47:50 <alastairc> ack Wilco
16:48:05 <Ben_Tillyer> +1 to touching on "better use of time" soemtimes
16:48:11 <Ben_Tillyer> s/soemtimes/sometimes
16:48:39 <Rachael> Wilco: I really disagree with you on this one. I know I do this. One of the reason we started ACT is because so much was unclear. If we don't do it then the work moves downstream.
16:48:42 <alastairc> q?
16:48:43 <ShawnT> +1 to Wilco
16:48:54 <kevin> Weirdly I am +1 to both Wilco and Hidde!
16:49:01 <Jennie_Delisi> * is some of this about the timing of that input? Maturation point of the idea?
16:49:03 <Rachael> alastairc: I think this one is a balance. I think it is better to have the discussions before we publish.
16:49:36 <Rachael> ...maybe a timing thing. Maybe "Taking a step back how does this fit into the wider scheme of things in order to balance things."
16:49:50 <Ben_Tillyer> Do we need to look at improving our aproaches to when we "mark something to come back to"?
16:50:32 <kevin> q+ to comment on consensus
16:51:12 <Rachael> Ben_Tillyer:  Good for the group to highlight loopholes but when they take over the meeting but sometimes we  need to discuss what we came to discuss and put something to a to do list.
16:51:16 <alastairc> q+ helen
16:51:23 <alastairc> ack kevin
16:51:23 <Zakim> kevin, you wanted to comment on consensus
16:51:38 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
16:52:22 <kirkwood> good point regarding ‘consensus’
16:52:24 <Rachael> kevin: Consensus is very very hard but ridiculously important. We don't want to just wear people down. The challenge is to ensure we have enough space to garner the strong sense of agreement without shutting down debate.
16:52:43 <Rachael> ...also interested in ideas on how to avoid exhaustion.
16:53:12 <JeroenH> q+
16:53:20 <alastairc> ack hel
16:53:25 <Rachael> alastairc: We would appreciate examples of that but not public.
16:54:05 <JeroenH> q-
16:54:19 <alastairc> ack JeroenH
16:54:19 <Rachael> helen: For the derailed topics, would it be better to allow it to continue after hte meeting or provide a way for the passionate people to discuss the topic.
16:54:52 <Rachael> alastairc: It does depend a bit on whether we need to get to a decision or not.
16:55:43 <Rachael> ...when chairing it's easy to get sucked into the discussion. It helps for someone to ask "should we address this somewhere else?"
16:56:02 <stevekerr> q+
16:56:07 <alastairc> ack stevekerr
16:56:46 <Rachael> stevekerr: This came up last week, we were told that things have been attempted before or that is not the way that it works now as a way to close off a discussion instead of exploring nuances of the topics.
16:57:06 <Rachael> ...When I do raise my hands I do feel I need to come very prepared. In some cases the discussion seems to get closed off quite quickly.
16:57:36 <Rachael> ...its like maybe I should have tried to contribute. We need to open up conversations on certain topics.
16:58:04 <Wilco> +1 Steve
16:58:07 <alastairc> q+
16:58:27 <Rachael> ...I understand wanting to close the door if its been discussed before but at the same time we do need to discuss new approaches to these topics.
16:58:59 <bbailey> q+
16:59:05 <Wilco> q+
16:59:16 <Heather> present-
16:59:21 <stevekerr> q+
16:59:27 <alastairc> ack alastairc
16:59:28 <Rachael> alastairc: Where we have had a discussion before and we've reached conclusions it should be OK for anyone to say why can't we discuss that route or why can't we explore that option. Then we pull the history without ending the conversation so the discussion can move forward from there.
16:59:31 <alastairc> ack bbailey
16:59:33 <stevekerr> q-
16:59:53 <alastairc> ack Wilco
16:59:53 <JeroenH> +1 Bruce!
16:59:58 <Rachael> bbailey: I want to say something about how hard chairs are working. The fact that you all are working hard is apparentl.
16:59:59 <Glenda> +1 to Bruce’s comment on the hard work of leading AGWG by the Chairs.
17:00:03 <hdv> +1 bbailey! thanks for all the hard work the chairs are doing
17:00:13 <Eloisa> +1 bbailey
17:00:18 <kirkwood> +1 to BBailey
17:00:26 <Jennie_Delisi> +1 to Bruce
17:00:32 <hdv> siiick
17:00:34 <Rachael> Wilco: The best feedback we get is from new people to the group when they ask questions. Those perspectives are really valuable. Need to avoid dismissing that we've talked about it before.
17:00:45 <hdv> s/siiick//
17:01:00 <Charles> Charles has left #ag
17:01:00 <Rachael> alastairc: We might pick up some of this next week. It is useful for working out how things are going so we can approve. Thank you everyone!
17:01:03 <JeroenH> thanks!
17:01:17 <ShawnT> present+
17:01:28 <kevin> rrsagent, make minutes
17:01:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/05/19-ag-minutes.html kevin
17:01:37 <alastairc> zakim, end meeting
17:01:37 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been alastairc, Ben_Tillyer, bbailey, Eloisa, wendyreid, Jennie_Delisi, Azlan, Charles, filippo-zorzi, Heather, kevin, ShawnT, ahick, AWK,
17:01:40 <Zakim> ... giacomo-petri, JeroenH, LenB, kirkwood, erinevans, Helen, HaTheo, Monica, Laura_Carlson, Rachael, CClaire, Makoto_U, LoriO, jtoles, Jon_Avila, AlinaV, Detlev, julierawe, hdv,
17:01:40 <Zakim> ... Jen_G, sam-estoesta, Francis_Storr, stevekerr, Glenda, Charu, scott, graham
17:01:40 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
17:01:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/05/19-ag-minutes.html Zakim
17:01:46 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, alastairc; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
17:01:46 <Zakim> Zakim has left #ag
17:05:13 <LenB> LenB has left #ag
17:15:33 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
17:25:45 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
17:34:21 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
17:42:19 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
17:58:47 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
18:20:01 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
18:28:13 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #ag
18:50:52 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
18:51:41 <Stephanie> Stephanie has joined #ag
19:26:57 <Azlan> Azlan has joined #ag
19:58:26 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag
20:14:35 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #ag