14:19:35 RRSAgent has joined #ag 14:19:39 logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/06/02-ag-irc 14:19:39 RRSAgent, make logs Public 14:19:40 Meeting: AGWG Teleconference 14:19:43 agenda? 14:19:51 rrsagent, make minutes 14:19:52 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/02-ag-minutes.html kevin 14:49:49 GreggVan has joined #ag 14:49:57 GreggVan has joined #ag 14:52:31 q+ to say this is the onboarding 14:52:33 q- 14:53:29 CClaire has joined #ag 14:54:01 janina has joined #ag 14:55:03 Stephanie has joined #ag 14:55:38 laura has joined #ag 14:56:29 HaTheo has joined #AG 14:57:05 Helen has joined #ag 14:59:51 NatTarnoff has joined #ag 15:00:14 Helen has joined #ag 15:00:25 giacomo-petri has joined #ag 15:00:27 stevef has joined #ag 15:00:30 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:00:37 present+ 15:00:43 Heather has joined #ag 15:00:55 Present+ 15:01:04 present+ 15:01:09 shadi has joined #ag 15:01:09 present+ 15:01:09 present+ 15:01:12 present+ 15:01:15 AWK has joined #ag 15:01:18 present+ 15:01:20 ryomtoob has joined #ag 15:01:23 Present+ 15:01:24 present+ 15:01:25 bbailey has joined #ag 15:01:28 present+ 15:01:31 present+ 15:01:31 ahick has joined #ag 15:01:35 present+ 15:01:43 present+ 15:01:55 present+ 15:01:55 present+ Laura_Carlson 15:01:55 present+ 15:01:55 scott has joined #ag 15:01:58 Scribe: Laura_Carlson 15:02:05 Scribe: laura 15:02:11 Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag 15:02:26 present+ 15:02:30 Charles has joined #ag 15:02:46 present+ 15:02:51 julierawe has joined #ag 15:02:54 present+ 15:03:19 AP: the first thing that we will start the meeting with is introductions. 15:03:31 present+ 15:03:39 zakim, start meeting 15:03:39 RRSAgent, make logs Public 15:03:41 Meeting: AGWG Teleconference 15:03:42 agebda> 15:03:43 agenda? 15:03:50 I'd like to give an intro 15:03:55 present+ 15:04:10 q+ 15:04:17 BrianE has joined #ag 15:04:17 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:04:17 laura has joined #ag 15:04:17 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:04:17 denkeni has joined #ag 15:04:17 alice has joined #ag 15:04:17 alastairc has joined #ag 15:04:17 kirkwood has joined #ag 15:04:17 hdv has joined #ag 15:04:17 jyasskin has joined #ag 15:04:17 JeroenH has joined #ag 15:04:17 Adam has joined #ag 15:04:17 jedi has joined #ag 15:04:17 Rachael has joined #ag 15:04:17 mgifford2 has joined #ag 15:04:37 Zakim, next item 15:04:37 agendum 1 -- Introductions -- taken up [from Adam] 15:05:09 Zakim, next item 15:05:09 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Adam 15:05:12 q? 15:05:15 LoriO has joined #ag 15:05:16 sam-estoesta has joined #ag 15:05:18 RY: I'm Rachael Yomtoob. I'm no longer with Deque, so l've rejoined as an invited expert. 15:05:21 ack Rachael 15:05:21 present+ 15:05:25 ack ryomtoob 15:05:25 present+ 15:05:28 q? 15:05:32 Zakim, next item 15:05:32 agendum 1 was just opened, Adam 15:05:32 present+ 15:05:37 present+ 15:05:41 Zakim, close item 1 15:05:41 agendum 1, Introductions, closed 15:05:41 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 15:05:41 2. Announcements [from Adam] 15:05:50 BrianE has joined #ag 15:05:50 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:05:50 laura has joined #ag 15:05:50 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:05:50 denkeni has joined #ag 15:05:50 alice has joined #ag 15:05:50 alastairc has joined #ag 15:05:50 kirkwood has joined #ag 15:05:50 hdv has joined #ag 15:05:50 jyasskin has joined #ag 15:05:50 JeroenH has joined #ag 15:05:50 Adam has joined #ag 15:05:50 jedi has joined #ag 15:05:50 Rachael has joined #ag 15:05:50 mgifford2 has joined #ag 15:05:50 Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag 15:05:53 present+ 15:05:55 Zakim, take up 2 15:05:55 I don't understand 'take up 2', Adam 15:05:58 Zakim, take up item 2 15:05:58 agendum 2 -- Announcements -- taken up [from Adam] 15:06:38 probably all day mon & tue 15:06:51 with joint meetings on the thu / fri 15:06:56 ShawnT has joined #ag 15:06:59 present+ 15:07:03 present+ 15:07:06 present+ 15:07:10 present+ 15:07:19 q+ 15:07:57 Katherine has joined #ag 15:07:57 Patrick_H_Lauke has joined #ag 15:07:57 Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag 15:07:57 BrianE has joined #ag 15:07:57 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:07:57 laura has joined #ag 15:07:57 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:07:57 denkeni has joined #ag 15:07:57 alice has joined #ag 15:07:57 alastairc has joined #ag 15:07:57 kirkwood has joined #ag 15:07:57 hdv has joined #ag 15:07:57 jyasskin has joined #ag 15:07:57 JeroenH has joined #ag 15:07:57 Adam has joined #ag 15:07:57 jedi has joined #ag 15:07:57 Rachael has joined #ag 15:07:57 mgifford2 has joined #ag 15:07:57 q? 15:07:59 jtoles has joined #ag 15:08:04 q+ Patrick_H_Lauke 15:08:07 scribe+ 15:08:08 AP: TPAC 2026, will be a hybrid event. located in Dublin. AG meetings Monday or Tues. 15:08:08 present+ 15:08:22 Makoto_U has joined #ag 15:08:25 Kevin: re-chartering- short extension, which we got late in the day because there were, we got, because there were some, uh, last minute changes requested 15:08:46 Dirk has joined #ag 15:09:03 ... have requested permission to progress that for AC review. 15:09:31 Monica has joined #AG 15:09:37 Gez has joined #AG 15:09:40 present+ 15:09:40 HV: I'm pleased to say that we had a great working session last Friday, and that's me and Jeroen Holscher and Steve Faulkner. 15:09:48 present+ 15:09:48 present+ 15:09:54 Poornima has joined #ag 15:09:59 ack Patrick_H_Lauke 15:10:02 ack me 15:10:05 ...we're at a version that feels like we're ready for note. So we're currently in discussion with with chairs. 15:10:24 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2026AprJun/0035.html 15:10:42 PL: I just wanted to draw people's attention to you've received yesterday my usual WCAG 2.x Task Force backlog meeting email. 15:11:11 present+ 15:11:15 Francis_Storr has joined #ag 15:11:15 laura has joined #ag 15:11:15 Patrick_H_Lauke has joined #ag 15:11:15 Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag 15:11:15 BrianE has joined #ag 15:11:15 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:11:15 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:11:15 denkeni has joined #ag 15:11:15 alice has joined #ag 15:11:15 alastairc has joined #ag 15:11:15 kirkwood has joined #ag 15:11:15 hdv has joined #ag 15:11:15 jyasskin has joined #ag 15:11:15 JeroenH has joined #ag 15:11:15 Adam has joined #ag 15:11:15 jedi has joined #ag 15:11:15 Rachael has joined #ag 15:11:15 mgifford2 has joined #ag 15:11:20 Patrick_H_Lauke++ 15:11:22 ... one's a tiny bit special, because it includes an either-or set of pull requests. 15:11:22 at the start. So we've been deliberating 15:11:31 joryc has joined #ag 15:11:33 present+ 15:11:52 imirfan has joined #ag 15:12:03 ... we've got two PRs that basically fall on either side of the fence on how to interpret it. So yeah, at this stage we'd be interested if people could have a look at it, thumbs up or comment. just so we can get a feel 15:12:16 .. for it. 15:12:55 zakim, next Item 15:12:55 agendum 3 -- Spike results: Progress to conformance score — https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1XshX43F4167UtOU1XKDt7CHcpJyEm4iVhmZXJBp9840/edit?slide=id.p#slide=id.p -- 15:12:58 ... taken up [from Adam] 15:13:03 rm: we are, uh, implementing some of the comments back from the retrospective last week I did want to request that as people queue today to please go ahead and queue two, so queue plus to say, and put your topic in to help chairs manage topics. 15:13:45 Slideset: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1XshX43F4167UtOU1XKDt7CHcpJyEm4iVhmZXJBp9840/edit?slide=id.p#slide=id.p 15:13:46 Eloisa has joined #ag 15:13:46 Francis_Storr has joined #ag 15:13:46 laura has joined #ag 15:13:46 Patrick_H_Lauke has joined #ag 15:13:46 Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag 15:13:46 BrianE has joined #ag 15:13:46 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:13:46 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:13:46 denkeni has joined #ag 15:13:46 alice has joined #ag 15:13:46 alastairc has joined #ag 15:13:46 kirkwood has joined #ag 15:13:46 hdv has joined #ag 15:13:46 jyasskin has joined #ag 15:13:46 JeroenH has joined #ag 15:13:46 Adam has joined #ag 15:13:46 jedi has joined #ag 15:13:46 Rachael has joined #ag 15:13:46 mgifford2 has joined #ag 15:13:47 Detlev has joined #ag 15:13:52 present+ 15:14:07 [Slide 1] 15:14:56 [Slide 2] 15:15:05 Glenda has joined #ag 15:15:05 Eloisa has joined #ag 15:15:05 Francis_Storr has joined #ag 15:15:05 laura has joined #ag 15:15:05 Patrick_H_Lauke has joined #ag 15:15:05 Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag 15:15:05 BrianE has joined #ag 15:15:05 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:15:05 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:15:05 denkeni has joined #ag 15:15:05 alice has joined #ag 15:15:05 alastairc has joined #ag 15:15:05 kirkwood has joined #ag 15:15:05 hdv has joined #ag 15:15:05 jyasskin has joined #ag 15:15:05 JeroenH has joined #ag 15:15:05 Adam has joined #ag 15:15:05 jedi has joined #ag 15:15:05 Rachael has joined #ag 15:15:05 mgifford2 has joined #ag 15:15:05 Patrick_H_Lauke has left #ag 15:15:35 ac: We had two day virtual meeting a few weeks ago on conformance. So, various ideas were discussed in how the WCAG 3 conformance could be, could be different from WCAG 2. 15:15:42 ...3 of those ideas were given to small groups, and this is one of them. It was a progress towards conformance score. 15:16:26 ac: And this is literally copy and pasted from, you know, uh, some rough drafting earlier. 15:16:26 that it could be... the idea was it would show progress on the way to conformance. It would be a score, probably a percentage score. 15:16:34 [Slide 3] 15:18:01 [Slide 4] 15:18:30 [Slide 5] 15:18:58 [Slide 6] 15:19:58 [Slide 9] 15:21:33 [Slide 10] 15:21:44 Jen_G has joined #ag 15:22:04 Present+ 15:22:07 [Slide 11] 15:23:28 [Slide 13] 15:23:35 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tmh4NkJxur7zGCip3vtBd0utDrhN1nR5aZ_EAGnxDkE/edit?gid=0#gid=0 15:24:32 q? 15:25:41 ac: Each person could take, uh, would create a couple of tabs. We would copy across the, um, all the whole list of provisions. 15:25:47 ...We would have, columns per page or per view within whatever product it was we were looking at. 15:25:53 ...Each row had a provision. We were excluding assertions for the purpose of this 15:25:58 ...each cell would be, uh, probably numbered, actually, but we were focusing on pass or fail, or not applicable was counted as not a fail. 15:26:09 ... So, passing a not applicable were equivalent, um, so basically put in a 1 if it failed. 15:26:30 ... Giacomo, who had instance data, he was also putting in instances, rather than just a pass or fail. 15:27:02 q? 15:27:03 q+ to ask the audience or context for: ‘Show progress on the way to conformance’ 15:27:12 q+ 15:27:15 q+ 15:27:17 ack Charles 15:27:17 Charles, you wanted to ask the audience or context for: ‘Show progress on the way to conformance’ 15:27:24 ...so in general, this, the average score, we tried calculating using the average number of fails across conformance units. 15:27:29 ...So if you had 6 pages, how many pages did that fail across? 15:27:42 ...And then we've created an overall percentage for the scope of testing. 15:27:57 present+ 15:28:19 ch: The context question for this whole spike of work is, who is the audience or context in which this progress toward conformance would be made? 15:29:04 ac: this would be building on top of conformance. 15:29:58 ... I think quite useful for internal teams, if you're working on your product, what have you got left to do? 15:30:00 ack GreggVan 15:30:08 ... And, you know, how far away from that are you? 15:30:08 It can also be used for people like procurement 15:30:33 ... But yeah, there are various audiences. 15:31:05 Gregg: On the data sheet, that's the one that broke down all the provisions and tried to list their benefits for each different disability and give them a weight. 15:31:20 ... The goal there was to address a couple of issues 15:31:45 ... including - What if you solve the easy stuff, but the stuff that's really important you skip? So that's why, you know, 1, 2, 3 rating was included. 15:31:53 ... And the other one is, what if you solve all the problems for one group and leave the other group hanging? 15:32:00 ack Detlev 15:32:04 ... And that's the reason why it has 4 columns. 15:32:40 q? 15:33:14 detlev: Wondering whether this spike group considered having a graded result? 15:33:28 thought: in the US, orgs are risk averse. hence accessibility statements have “we strive to meet WCAG 2.2 AA” to strategically avoid any specific claim of conformance. it would take significant culture change to convince orgs to publicly disclose the progress toward conformance. 15:33:56 ac: yeah. So we did look at the first two case studies I'm will show , how to break down the instances. 15:34:05 ... we did talk about that kind of severity issue, and I will come to that in the conclusions. 15:34:24 [Slide 17] 15:35:24 Charles, it wouldn't be for use to ask organizations to disclose anything. This is really just providing a way to answer the questions around distance from conformance. It might be the case that regulators request that any such scoring be made public. 15:36:00 q+ to ask about the category weighted scores 15:36:05 [Slide 18] 15:36:57 q+ 15:37:29 ac: including the proportional instances seems to help. It correlates more closely to the user experience, 15:38:18 ack Ben_Tillyer 15:38:18 Ben_Tillyer, you wanted to ask about the category weighted scores 15:38:20 ... Given that this is just two sites, we would need to rerun this across more sites 15:38:34 ... from the other sites we were working on, that most sites score above 50% by default, even pretty awful ones. 15:38:45 ... You need to include a lot of different types of content in order to score worse than 50%. 15:38:54 q+ to speak to the categories use 15:39:06 ack GreggVan 15:39:43 BT: Amazing. The range that you've you've got for the per disability categories. And I was thinking that if I had those ratings of any product. 15:39:52 ... Beyond, I would probably look to ignore the the higher percentage points. If I was using the disability category. 15:40:28 gregg: Yeah, the question was, you said it had poor experience. and the, what does poor experience meant? 15:40:40 ... Is it for someone with a visual, or a cognitive, or a hearing, or physical, or with no disability? 15:41:06 ack Rachael 15:41:06 Rachael, you wanted to speak to the categories use 15:41:38 q+ 15:41:45 w3 has joined #ag 15:41:46 GP: So essentially I have created in the other sheet in the website sheet a visual score because the audience of this user testing was primarily people with visual disabilities. 15:41:49 graham has joined #ag 15:41:54 present+ 15:42:02 Present+ 15:42:07 ack GreggVan 15:42:25 q+ to ask about the weighting 15:42:34 I guess my impression of the categories was that they weren't going to so much be weighted as they were setting minimums to ensure. 15:42:46 rm: My impression of the categories was that they weren't going to so much be weighted as they were setting minimums to ensure. 15:43:06 ack Jennie_Delisi 15:43:06 Jennie_Delisi, you wanted to ask about the weighting 15:43:31 gregg: it might be useful to have two scores if you're doing this. One of them is overall, including pass if you don't have this, and one which is. 15:43:59 gregg: don't count it if you don't have it, um, because that would help you to not have somebody think it's really good when, in fact, it really... nobody's even tried to make it accessible. 15:47:30 w3 has joined #ag 15:47:30 Eloisa has joined #ag 15:47:30 Francis_Storr has joined #ag 15:47:30 laura has joined #ag 15:47:30 Ben_Tillyer has joined #ag 15:47:30 BrianE has joined #ag 15:47:30 wendyreid has joined #ag 15:47:30 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:47:30 denkeni has joined #ag 15:47:30 alice has joined #ag 15:47:30 alastairc has joined #ag 15:47:30 kirkwood has joined #ag 15:47:30 hdv has joined #ag 15:47:30 jyasskin has joined #ag 15:47:30 JeroenH has joined #ag 15:47:30 Adam has joined #ag 15:47:30 jedi has joined #ag 15:47:30 Rachael has joined #ag 15:47:30 mgifford2 has joined #ag 15:47:45 q+ to ask about option to amplify the difference 15:47:54 ack Jennie_Delisi 15:47:54 Jennie_Delisi, you wanted to ask about option to amplify the difference 15:48:11 ac: it's worth saying, so this website, the first website, is a big content site with a lot of stuff on each page, which is why you've got so many checks. 15:48:11 And why, you know, because you're having to count every instance that could have failed. 15:48:23 ahick has left #ag 15:48:57 q+ to mention the opposite of these "high" numbers 15:49:08 jd: If we are using the scale of 100. for the percentage-wise into limiting away. So if you're saying the biggest range is between 60 and 95%. 15:49:10 ack giacomo-petri 15:49:10 giacomo-petri, you wanted to mention the opposite of these "high" numbers 15:49:13 ...If that number could then have a way of getting amplified in terms of its granularity, we might notice a greater difference between certain ones, and I'm not sure if this. 15:50:14 This is fantastic information - really helpful 15:50:35 GP: If we look at the, not the average value, but the final success criteria that are passing, they are 19 out of 55, which in terms of conformance, it is a very low score. 15:50:48 ......But this is not reflected by the user testing. So it's a tricky one because, yeah, probably with those with distance towards conformance, numbers are quite high. 15:51:10 ...But on the other end, the current conformance score based on pass-fail success criteria, it is the opposite, so you are scoring very low, even though your website is not so bad. 15:51:51 ac: the way I'm thinking about that is because this site has really big pages with a few issues on it that are spread out, but there's quite a variety of issues across the pages as well. 15:51:58 ...It sort of hits all these triggers, but somebody who's actually using the site is only going to be encountering a subset of those, because they don't explore the whole of every page. 15:52:39 [Slide 21] 15:53:50 q? 15:53:59 rrsagent, make minutes 15:54:00 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/06/02-ag-minutes.html Adam 15:54:50 ac: Andrew Hick had an unweighted score. We've got the average pass rate, and then the weighted score. 15:55:30 [Slide 23] 15:56:56 [Slide 24] 15:58:18 [Slide 25] 15:59:21 ac: the judgment call on severity was the hardest part of training. Although the results were fairly consistent. 16:00:01 [Slide 26] 16:00:30 q+ 16:00:35 q+ 16:00:37 ac: unless it was built without responsive design, by the time the team reached 4.8, all of the functional needs were supported except for blind and motor impaired people 16:00:45 Heather has joined #ag 16:00:55 scribe+ 16:03:07 alastairc: [Slide 29] When trying to align the score with user experience for pwd, the following factors: Severity, proportionality, provision level, and disability categories. Thinks we may need to add a 'safety' level. 16:03:26 q+ to ask about positive gamification 16:04:40 is the link to the presentation in IRC? 16:05:18 thanks, Adam! 16:06:05 q? 16:06:08 alastairc: Reads [slide 30-31] Adding complexity to the site, you are more likely to have barriers. There's a potential, depending on how the provisions are written to create reverse incentive for things. This would handle cases for not applicable. 16:06:11 ack GreggVan 16:06:16 anton has joined #ag 16:06:38 present+ 16:06:43 GreggVan: One slide said "Except people who are blind and have physical disabilities" - does this mean one or the other, or people that have both. 16:06:51 alastairc: Good question, unsure, but can find out. 16:07:23 GreggVan: Idea of subtracting 50 from the score, thinks it might be a good idea because it seems that anything that scored less than 50 would be pretty much inaccessible. 16:07:26 ack wendyreid 16:07:26 wendyreid, you wanted to ask about positive gamification 16:08:21 q+ to say I think gamification is outside of conformance 16:08:33 q+ 16:08:36 q+ on gamification and positive efforts 16:09:39 wendyreid: Noticed that we put notes about gamification, and wonders if there's a positive side to gamification that could be considered. Knowing that gamification can positively influence motivate organizations to strive to achieve. One of the possible conclusions is around severity, and maybe give examples and guidance. for example, checkout flow 16:09:39 has a checkout button that's not labeled is more severe than an unlabeled banner. People need to understand how to get the highest gain in both usability and in the score, this might be motivating. It's hard to determine where to put effort to get those numbers up. 16:09:43 ack Rachael 16:09:43 Rachael, you wanted to say I think gamification is outside of conformance 16:09:48 q+ to say that Gamification and Gaming are two completely different things. (the fact that they use the same root "game" is a quirk of English) Gamification is great as Wendy pointed out. Gaming the system is not. 16:09:48