Meeting minutes
<Scott_h> present_
Accessibility of Machine Learning and Generative AI draft.
Janina: no progress on first item
… under the weather and other things that have gotten in the way. Very frustrating.
… assuming energy holds up, tomorrow is OK
jasonjgw: keep up to date on what's happening in this space
… received international coverage, a little difficult to effectuate.
Janina: calling for equal access. And that's what the Pope's getting at. Not totally divorced.
jasonjgw: keep watching out for announcements that we believe may have long term significance? Nothing recently that strikes me. Playing around with Google's AI search mode.
Janina: default is top three results is Google AI generated?
Scott: I don't think Australia picked that up yet, but prob not far away
jasonjgw: do have to be careful. But ordinary web search can do old or inaccurate info...need to compare. AI is much more specific/precision advantage.
Janina: might be worth noting in the paper
jasonjgw: can directly anwser vs pull multiple sources and synthesize
Stacey: some people (including those who don't know the subject) just don't do the due diligence in checking the data provided, check the source, make sure it is accurate.
jasonjgw: Some people are skeptical. Cognitive science usage behind this. Not sure if appropriate or not, but can share the info on this. Eveyone on this meeting can read it if they choose. Don't have the reference ready (on hand)
Miscellaneous topics.
stacey: have a coleague that would be a great ddition
janina: providing link to join
stacey: great, will progress with him
janina: IETF - is ther esomething we should/could be doing with them
so going to Vienna to attend
Game accessibility.
jasonjgw: John - any questions you want us to think about as you continue working on this?
Jpaton: did Matthew send list?
Janina: no. keep nudging on that, especially if nothing by the weekend
jpaton: he came to talk to us at the beginning of this foray, and talk about his concerns. Gap analysis - got quite a bit down. Focus on user experience and intentional friction in gaming, multiple disabilities, collaborative...gaming requires that challenge (has to have friction). A11y tries to remove friction. without the friction it's no longer
a game. So intentional friction is challenge the game is around. Gamers can identify, just right. Too hard is frustrating too easy is boring. Identify the intentional friction, Then it's everythign else. a11y issues and poor interfaces and anything like that. Of course, focused on a11y but it's everything around that. So have a section from Ian
Hamilton, games a11y special interest group, and game a11y paradox...anything talking about user requirements and a11y of gaming needs to note that some of that friction needs to be left alone. Yo've lost what makes it worthwhile.
Scott: if you ahve a game on a mobile device that uses haptic feedback, from screen reader haptic feedback might interfere and might make it confusing...would that be a negative friction situation?
jpaton: that would be an additional layer - like bubble pop game...if standard a11y guidelines say make it as easy as possible (remove time limit, line the bubbles along a single line,...but that removes the game. It's recognizing what the essential intentional friction of the game is. In some ways you can modify, so even if ina shooting game where
you see enemies and have crosshairs...that has a lot of visual elements you can modify with spatial sound and audio aiming. It would be down to understanding the intentional friction you want to keep, what's inherently inaccessible (hidden images game with the cluttered scene) you can't really make that a non visual game without fundamentally
altering which changes the game. I think the guidelines would need to identify what the challenge is and what you need to keep. It will always be inaccessible to someone. You might have a puzzle game, but then the puzzle is a mental challenge and some people might not be able to work on it due to cognitive abilities. Games have to preserve the
intentional challenge while trying to eradicate the unintentional challenge in the game playing
Janina: i like the framing
jasonjgw: a book cowritten by cognitive psychologists...most effective strategies for learning. The distinction is desirable and undesirable difficulties.
jpaton: 8 out of 10 right and set at that level and if right level to urge people on without making it too easy or too hard...
john: looking at existing resources/guidelines
Game Accessibility Guidleines, AbleGamers, WCAG ACB, XAUR, MAUR,
HTML note on gaming very short
janina: yes several years old now too
john: Digital Accessibility Framework,, Michael Cooper
idea - goign back to user needs,
looking at abilities or lack thereof need to be accommodated
jason: ISO standard on user accessibility eneds may be helpful
ISO 29138
john: good progress
john: anything else?
janina: like the framing a lot
johN; protect the game - accessibility can't result in game not being something peopel want to play it
john: important to identify ideal user experience
jason: update next wek?
john: yes
<JPaton> https://