14:29:04 RRSAgent has joined #ag 14:29:09 logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/08/04-ag-irc 14:29:09 RRSAgent, make logs Public 14:29:10 Meeting: AGWG Teleconference 14:29:25 agenda+ Introductions 14:29:34 agenda+ announcements 14:32:00 MartijnHoutepen has joined #ag 14:33:49 agenda+ WCAG 2 proposed changes https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2026JulSep/0075.html 14:34:10 agenda+ Paths report-back https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pApedUR1EFcQJKlcmnysoKpVGLbAhjivyTh9yXgfuLI/edit?usp=sharing 14:34:19 Bernardo has joined #ag 14:34:24 agenda+ WCAG 3 document breakdown https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/wcag3-document-breakdown/ 14:34:43 agenda+ Can flashing requirements account for zoom? https://github.com/w3c/wcag3/issues/631 14:43:56 Zam has joined #ag 14:45:43 agenda? 14:45:49 present+ 14:51:02 Dirk has joined #ag 14:56:56 LoriO has joined #ag 14:57:07 present+ 14:58:00 HaTheo has joined #AG 14:58:10 LoriO has joined #ag 14:58:59 present+ 14:59:19 present+ 14:59:21 present+ 14:59:28 present+ 14:59:32 Heather has joined #ag 14:59:36 present+ 14:59:38 wendyreid has joined #ag 14:59:40 present+ 14:59:57 Charles has joined #ag 15:00:09 present+ 15:00:09 ashleyfirth has joined #ag 15:00:28 JamesH has joined #ag 15:00:34 present+ 15:00:48 present+ 15:00:53 present+ 15:00:59 CClaire has joined #ag 15:01:02 GreggVan has joined #ag 15:01:07 present+ 15:01:10 erinevans has joined #ag 15:01:14 present+ 15:01:16 Helen has joined #ag 15:01:17 present+ 15:01:23 present+ 15:01:31 present+ 15:01:38 giacomo-petri has joined #ag 15:01:39 present+ 15:01:42 present+ 15:02:11 Patrick_H_Lauke has joined #ag 15:02:21 present+ 15:02:34 scribe+ 15:02:40 BrianE has joined #ag 15:02:45 anton has joined #ag 15:02:55 AWK has joined #ag 15:02:58 Jennie_Delisi has joined #ag 15:03:05 present+ 15:03:12 zakim, take up item 1 15:03:12 agendum 1 -- Introductions -- taken up [from Rachael] 15:03:40 q+ 15:03:44 ack JamesH 15:03:45 bbailey has joined #ag 15:03:53 present+ 15:03:55 Jon_Avila has joined #ag 15:04:11 JamesH: James Harrington. Back with the group. Accessibility professional for 10 years, currently works for CVS Health. 15:04:20 zakim, take up next item 15:04:20 agendum 2 -- announcements -- taken up [from Rachael] 15:04:21 present+ 15:04:22 present+ 15:04:30 Matt_King has joined #ag 15:04:42 Rachael: TPAC is in October. Start making arrangements for attending. 15:04:47 zakim, take up next item 15:04:47 agendum 2 was just opened, Rachael 15:04:49 present+ 15:04:49 Patrick_H_Lauke: No announcements. 15:04:52 zakim, take up next item 15:04:52 agendum 2 was just opened, Rachael 15:04:58 zakim, take up item 3 15:04:58 agendum 3 -- WCAG 2 proposed changes https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2026JulSep/0075.html -- taken up [from Rachael] 15:05:07 s/Patrick_H_Lauke: No announcements./Kevin: No announcements./ 15:05:20 Patrick_H_Lauke: Bi-weekly reminder about the email that went out last week with 4 items... 15:05:49 kirkwood has joined #AG 15:06:03 filippo-zorzi has joined #ag 15:06:19 On one particular item, GitHub collapses the long item, you may need to 'load more' on 4540. Link on the proposed response does not automatically expand. 15:06:21 graham has joined #ag 15:06:27 zakim, take up item 4 15:06:27 agendum 4 -- Paths report-back https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pApedUR1EFcQJKlcmnysoKpVGLbAhjivyTh9yXgfuLI/edit?usp=sharing -- taken up [from Rachael] 15:06:27 present+ 15:06:35 present+ 15:06:41 present+ 15:06:46 s/On/... On/ 15:06:51 Rachael: Path Subgroup is morphic. Reporting back to the larger group. 15:06:54 Slideset: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pApedUR1EFcQJKlcmnysoKpVGLbAhjivyTh9yXgfuLI/edit?usp=sharing 15:07:03 ...Link to slide deck is above. 15:07:06 [slide 1] 15:07:12 julierawe has joined #ag 15:07:12 Laura_Carlson has joined #ag 15:07:14 present+ 15:07:19 rrsagent, make minutes 15:07:20 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/08/04-ag-minutes.html Adam 15:07:31 present+ Laura_Carlson 15:07:45 [slide 2] 15:07:46 ...will go through slides first, then invite members of subgroup to weigh in on slides, then open up queue from the larger group. 15:07:49 Makoto_U has joined #ag 15:07:59 present+ 15:08:04 ...Some definitions from WCAG included in deck. 15:08:34 Gez has joined #AG 15:08:39 jkatherman has joined #ag 15:08:43 present+ 15:08:50 present+ 15:08:53 ...terms are for context; we will survey these definitions at a future time. 15:08:58 [slide 3] 15:09:08 Patrick_H_Lauke has left #ag 15:09:17 Rachael: [reading slide 3] 15:09:22 shadi has joined #ag 15:09:56 [slide 4] 15:10:06 ...[reading slide 4] 15:10:07 RRSAgent, pointer? 15:10:07 See https://www.w3.org/2026/08/04-ag-irc#T15-10-07 15:10:22 thelounge has joined #ag 15:10:26 rayianna has joined #ag 15:10:35 present+ 15:10:44 [slide 5] 15:10:45 present+ 15:10:47 ...Outstanding questions noted, but not for today's conversaion 15:10:52 present+ 15:10:52 q? 15:11:05 ...stop sharing, inviting members of subgroup to chime in to correct or add anything that was just read. 15:11:09 q+ to ask 2 specific questions 15:11:10 LiaGoogle has joined #ag 15:11:13 present+ 15:11:23 ack Charles 15:11:23 Charles, you wanted to ask 2 specific questions 15:11:24 present+ 15:11:31 ...over to the broader group for questions, clarifications, concerns, etc. 15:11:38 q+ about process vs. path 15:11:44 q+ 15:12:01 +1 to charles - this is a problem with the definitions for these that should change. 15:12:01 Charles: On the first slide, you had definitions for interactive and non-interactive... 15:12:02 q+ to mention that inputs group wrestling with non-active interactive elements 15:12:15 Rachael: Definitions are out of scope for today's question, but has been noted. 15:12:20 q+ 15:12:37 q+ 15:12:42 ack GreggVan 15:12:59 Charles: On scope, one thing was could interfere with the path Is the thing that could interfere with the path inclusive? 15:13:13 LenB has joined #ag 15:13:15 Rachael: Going with linear queuing to invite others to answer. 15:13:23 present+ 15:13:28 q? 15:13:38 q? 15:13:40 ack bbailey 15:13:40 bbailey, you wanted to mention that inputs group wrestling with non-active interactive elements 15:13:52 GreggVanStatus is separate from identity, when you interact with non-interactive be in a separate group had come up with elements that are not interactive elements. 15:13:53 ack Matt_King 15:14:06 s/GreggVanStatus/GreggVan: Status/ 15:14:06 q+ 15:14:08 Rachael: Adding that note in the slides, but don't want to go in that conversation today. 15:14:30 qq 15:14:31 bbailey: The inputs group is wrestling this to the unavailable interactive elements to the ground. 15:14:32 qq+ Jon_Avila 15:14:48 q- 15:14:55 Rachael: We look forward to you bringing that definition back to us. 15:15:11 ack Jon_Avila 15:15:11 Jon_Avila, you wanted to react to Matt_King 15:15:15 thank you Matt_King for clarifying intersecting paths 15:15:18 ack Jon_Avila 15:15:18 q- Jon_Avila 15:15:53 Matt_King: About Interfering piece. As soon as you include a particular portion of the UI in a path that no other path could also include that same portion because the same element may be involved in completing multiple activities. 15:16:05 Jon_Avila: Please remind me of the process and path relationship 15:16:20 Rachael: Both terms are separate. Process includes every Paget that goes from end to end. 15:16:21 q+ 15:16:48 ...path is focused on the elements and can also span domains. There are slight differences in how they are used and how they are scoped. 15:17:17 Jon_Avila: Follow up. When that's included, what about error states and how that relates to the path? 15:17:45 ack wen 15:17:54 Stephanie has joined #ag 15:18:01 Matt_King: If you define the path for the beginning at a certain point on the page, it will assume that the point to navigate to that point is included in a separate path. 15:18:01 present+ 15:18:11 q+ 15:18:30 wendyreid: There will be cases to have a very strict path, and also may have slightly more expansive. 15:18:50 ... This flexibility allows people to create paths and testing units that reflect how their products are constructed. 15:18:53 q+ 15:18:59 ack GreggVan 15:19:02 ...It's going to be particular to your needs and org/team setup. 15:19:25 GreggVan: I think this is the best treatment of paths that I've seen. It's easy to confuse conformance. 15:19:43 ...What if a path starts int he middle of a page, but you can't to the middle of the page. 15:20:06 ...a path is just a report, if you got to this point and you started here and did this process or path, it would be accessible. 15:20:19 q+ 15:20:37 ...If it were for conformance, then you'd have to add things like that. But this is just for reporting. 15:21:04 ....If we get to the point of using paths, we have to include whatever you are doing in public reporting. You also need to include what is not included in the report. 15:21:15 ack Jon_Avila 15:21:29 Jon_Avila: Following up to Matt's question. 15:21:56 ...Would there be a prerequisite for a path? Or a definition of the relationships between paths? 15:21:59 q+ 15:22:20 ack awk 15:22:30 ...To Gregg's point, since it's starting from an element, is someone supposed to help them get to that point to start their experience if they can't get there? 15:22:42 q+ to answer AWK 15:22:55 q+ 15:22:57 q+ 15:23:07 ack Matt_King 15:23:07 AWK: Asking if the working group made a decision about whether paths were part of conformance or not, and believes the answer was 'no.' 15:23:26 q+ 15:23:28 ...Asking that question again, it's worth bringing up to the group. 15:23:47 Matt_King: I can try to address JOhn's question. This was intentional on my part; not sure about the subgroup. 15:23:58 s/answer was 'no.'/answer was 'not yet.' 15:24:20 ...No explicit statement on that you need to specify whether or not there are other paths that are a prerequisite paths or dependency paths. 15:24:32 ....But generally going to be the case that there's a lot of dependency paths. 15:24:42 ack Rachael 15:24:42 Rachael, you wanted to answer AWK 15:25:04 ...If you're evaluating a specific scope, there will be dependencies of any particular UI scope on any other UI scope. 15:25:15 q+ 15:25:21 +1 AWK and Rachael 15:25:30 ack GreggVan 15:25:37 Rachael: Chair hat on. I appreciate AWK question, and agrees that the decision has not been made. 15:25:56 ...I appreciate you highlighting that it is part of the question that's coming back to the group in the proposal. 15:26:15 s/JOhn/John/ 15:26:20 ...now would be a good time to consider whether it should be or not, and if you disagree with it or not. 15:26:32 ...this is part of the question we are asking here. 15:26:55 Matt_King_ has joined #ag 15:26:56 GreggVan: This has not been part of conformance. It can be in a statement of non-conformance. 15:27:06 q? 15:27:09 ack wendyreid 15:27:13 q+ to ask if we are straw polling for paths in conformance 15:27:22 ...I don't think we should ever endorse the idea that people with disabilities only have a right to access certain aspects, while we make other aspects available to everyone else. 15:27:25 +1 to Gregg 15:27:52 wendyreid: We should also fill people in with some more of the background on the path discussion. It's a big thing. 15:27:54 Jen_G has joined #ag 15:28:18 ...It's a concept that anyone who's done auditing on a product will be familiar with. 15:28:57 ...When communicating internally versus externally, the message may be different. 15:29:24 ...For example, when there are things like shared components, you may call out when these things happen. 15:29:29 ack AWK 15:29:31 q+ 15:29:37 Present+ 15:30:03 ...This humanizes what can be a fairly dense set of informational levels and it allows us to communicate it in a way which makes it generally understandable to all types of players. 15:30:13 AWK: I think we should be thinking about paths. 15:30:32 ....We have a problem with WCAG 2 today, there are very few sites that can conform. 15:30:47 ...We don't want to discriminate against people with different types of disabilities. 15:30:49 Wilco has joined #ag 15:31:04 q? 15:31:07 ...I'm not at all confident that we're going to wind up with a single level of conformance. 15:31:10 ack Matt_King 15:31:23 ...I think we need to be thinking about this as a component of conformance. 15:31:44 Matt_King_: Wrestling with the question about what it means to say that paths would/nt be part of conformance. 15:31:56 q+ to propose next steps 15:32:18 ...My understanding is when you make a conformance claim, you can make it for a page; it's not against measuring a path or measuring to a page. 15:32:19 s/discriminate against people with different types of disabilities./discriminate against people with different types of disabilities, but today sign language users can't access WCAG 2.2 AA content as one example. 15:32:36 q+ 15:32:40 ack charles 15:32:40 Charles, you wanted to ask if we are straw polling for paths in conformance 15:32:50 ...It's against the provisions. I thought all conformance claims had to be scoped in some meaningful way. So who cares what the scoping mechanism is. Does it matter? 15:33:13 Charles: Rachael, are we trying to answer the question of yay or nay, is this part of conformance? 15:33:36 q+ to give example where paths helpful to conformance 15:33:36 Rachael: Please weigh in on pros, cons and perspectives on this question. My suggestion is to weigh in on if it should be or not. 15:33:56 q+ to weigh in on considerations for conformance 15:34:16 ...Subgroups next step is to pull together the surrounding documents and informative content, and then circle back from that to understand what a conformance model might look like. 15:34:26 q- 15:34:31 ack Jon_Avila 15:34:38 ...Would like the group to express their thoughts on whether this should be in conformance or not, so that could be taken into account in the design of the proposal. 15:35:11 Jon_Avila: I think it hinges on a bullet on the updated path definition to where it says all elements and states within the scope of conformance claim must be covered by at least one path. 15:35:30 q+ to say what I think it means for this to be part of conformance 15:35:43 ...If you want something on the site/page to be covered in conformance, it would need to be covered in a path. 15:36:11 ...If we don't have paths as part of conformance, and we use paths for reporting and testing, then I don't think it makes sense to require a path for every piece. 15:36:23 ack ggreg 15:36:28 ack GreggVan 15:36:31 q+ 15:36:41 ...If that piece is already being covered by a non-path type coverage. I don't think we need to force people to create paths just for the purpose of creating paths. 15:37:17 GreggVan: There was a comment that everything needs to be scoped, so it doesn't matter what the scope is - we have units of evaluation for each provision. 15:38:06 q+ 15:38:07 ...If you defined conformance to all the paths, they would be good for assigning work and for reporting internally, and for reporting progress toward conformance. 15:38:36 ack bbailey 15:38:36 bbailey, you wanted to give example where paths helpful to conformance 15:38:36 paths could be helpful to encouraging conformance because it allows a claim on a smaller subset 15:38:38 ...asks for anyone who's arguing for path as conformance, to indicate how they justify that idea of having not everything accessible. 15:39:20 q+ 15:39:40 bbailey: I'm rebutting Gregg. I think having passes for conformance by having a smaller subset of things. I like the example of the footer. 15:39:51 ack charles 15:39:51 Charles, you wanted to weigh in on considerations for conformance 15:39:56 paths could be helpful to encouraging conformance because it allows a claim on a smaller subset 15:40:13 ...It would allow the site owner to make a conformance claim for shopping, but would include partially non-conforming pages. 15:40:36 Charles: I agree with Matt's description that a path is a method to define the scope of what the conformance claim is. 15:40:58 ...Heard the other concerns; if it's part of conformance, which I believe it can and should be, it still has caveats. 15:41:28 ...If you have a defined scope of the activity and getting to that activity, then we need to be able include that. 15:41:35 ack Rachael 15:41:35 Rachael, you wanted to say what I think it means for this to be part of conformance 15:41:58 ...Clearly identifying what's not in the path and what's not in the claim, I believe that is a good dependency to have if we put it in conformance. 15:42:17 Rachael: Chair hat on/off. Addressing Matt's question about what it means to be part of conformance. 15:42:47 ...We have conformance, we have the word term or phrase progress toward conformance, and we have partial conformance, which could be partial non-conformance. 15:42:52 ...These are all different. 15:42:56 s/I like the example of the footer/I like the example of the inaccessible footer on a path that is otherwise conforming/ 15:43:17 ... We we say conformance, a path would be sufficient when making a conformance claim. 15:43:31 q? 15:43:32 ...The concern that Jon raised is about the elements that are part of the path. 15:43:34 ack Matt_King 15:43:35 a 2.x way of making my point is that there is at least one non-interfering and non-disrupted path to point A of any scoped path. 15:43:45 q+ to discuss some needs which require a path 15:43:49 +1 for Rachael vision 15:43:50 ...By saying it's part of reporting and testing, I believe that we are saying that it is not part of conformance. 15:44:24 ...We are saying that you couldn't just claim conformance of a path. You'd have to include it in a set of pages, or a process, but you could reporting progress towards conformance against paths. 15:44:46 Conformance requirement requires complete processes. 15:45:05 ...My report that your process is conformant; you wouldn't be completing conformance against smaller units that span that space. 15:45:27 Matt_King: I think part of the problem is that I've never seen a conformance claim in over 30 years of working in the industry. 15:45:31 +1 to Matt_King. i have not seen a conformance claim since the days where people used the WCAG 1 gif in their footer circa ~2003 15:45:38 ack wendyreid 15:46:02 +1 to wendyreid 15:46:24 +1 to distinguishing between contexts 15:46:32 ...You could currently say that I want to make a conformance claim for a page, don't make paths for the sake of making paths. 15:46:43 ...I think every single element on a page is part of some type of user activity or flow. 15:47:06 ...Paths are really just a way to scope things by purpose, as opposed by their location. 15:47:21 q+ 15:47:30 wendyreid: Want to challenge Gregg's assertion that has automatically equal content not being covered. 15:48:04 q+ to ask for input from those who have not spoken and wrap topic 15:48:15 ...Condsidering the explanations of using paths in a conformance context, I think in reporting, this can be very infuriating because it depends on how the product team has chosen to segment their product 15:48:23 ack GreggVan 15:48:26 ...and the context of how they are explaining things. 15:48:48 ...I think this can be explained in informative guidance and we can provide people with ways to do that. 15:49:13 ...I think it's helpful to separate out those unites because they are both equally valid, but they are slightly different. 15:49:18 s/assertion that has automatically equal/assertion that paths automatically equals/ 15:49:48 q+ 15:49:50 GreggVan: Process is part of covering WCAG. If you have a login in order to shop, then your login page has to be included. 15:49:53 Sorry, need to drop. Will catch up with the minutes. 15:50:30 ack Jennie_Delisi 15:50:30 Jennie_Delisi, you wanted to discuss some needs which require a path 15:50:43 s/Sorry, need to drop. Will catch up with the minutes.// 15:51:14 ... It is critical to be able to include conformance claims so that enforceability in court based on what is being claimed. 15:51:54 ack Jon_Avila 15:51:55 +1 15:52:01 Jennie_Delisi: Are we comfortable saying it's not required? The challenge I'm having is that I can imagine that there could be a need for us in the future to say a path is critical. 15:52:35 Jon_Avila: Defining what is included in the path might be tricky, such as needing 'help.' What if someone needs the help link in the footer to complete the path? 15:52:46 ...It's hard for us to know when the user will and will not need that. 15:53:24 ...If you can define the paths and you can report on which paths are included, and then which part partially nonconformist or partially conformant. 15:53:41 ack Rachael 15:53:41 Rachael, you wanted to ask for input from those who have not spoken and wrap topic 15:53:56 ...Someone would then have to determine what is sufficient and if that is sufficient for whatever purpose. 15:54:21 Rachael: Chair hat off. Jennie, to your question - because we are proposing this as a unit of testing in addition to page views and elements... 15:54:30 would a format or channel for help ever occur in real-time within a session in order to complete an activity? 15:54:37 Paths give context. thereby opportunity to give support without need to have everything on a page. 15:54:47 q+ 15:54:47 ...I believe we would still have able to say, this particular requirement must be testing at the path level without this being considered a sufficient unit of conformance... 15:54:57 ...where a conformance claim could be made against only a path. 15:55:04 ack Matt_King 15:55:18 ...personally, don't a sufficient unit of conformance with addressing the concern you raised. 15:56:00 ...Chair hat on, I want to open the conversation to the concern raised, and encourage everyone in the group to weigh in. Very open to hearing everything; we are not voting today. 15:56:21 q+ to answer Matt's question to me -- or you can skip if you want to keep this tuine for others 15:56:21 Matt_King: I still have the same question over and over. Gregg, when you said someone goes into court and say, "I conform"... 15:56:32 ack kirkwood 15:56:48 ...it feels like very non-specific language. I'm really trying to figure it out. When we scope a conformance claim, you could have a list of page... 15:57:21 ...a list of views, and a list of activities. What are the purposes of those things? Still trying to wrap my head around that idea of having a unit of conformance that is comprehensive. 15:57:55 kirkwood: Want to mirror some of the things that were said around cognitive arena and emphasize having the ability to give information through a path... 15:58:19 ...I've been in the courtroom and making accessible paths either physically or digitally. 15:58:21 Matt_King i think conformance claims by URI are spelled out in https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#conformance-claims 15:58:42 ...I think it's a very important aspect and opportunity to make paths and making accessible paths that we can give support and information. 15:58:50 jkatherman has left #ag 15:59:39 ...it's important for us to move past this whole page view only approach. 15:59:47 FWIW, inputs working discussion page on active elements is at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18RDQH1piGOCjae1RTymHaP-M_2RXHoXF0WDHqYvw14w/edit?pli=1&tab=t.qzkufnpvguun 16:00:29 s/page on active elements/page on interactive active elements/ 16:00:39 Rachael: Encourages all feedback to be heard. Please contribute here; if you email chairs then they will get it to the subgroup and make sure your voice is heard. 16:00:46 ...Time for a 10 minute break. 16:00:52 scribe- 16:01:05 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:01:06 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/08/04-ag-minutes.html bbailey 16:01:53 janina has joined #ag 16:01:57 present+ 16:02:24 5 minute break. 16:05:08 https://w3c.adam.page/agwg/timer/ 16:05:29 zakim, take up item 4 16:05:29 agendum 4 -- Paths report-back https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pApedUR1EFcQJKlcmnysoKpVGLbAhjivyTh9yXgfuLI/edit?usp=sharing -- taken up [from Rachael] 16:05:36 zakim, take up item 5 16:05:36 agendum 5 -- WCAG 3 document breakdown https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/wcag3-document-breakdown/ -- taken up [from Rachael] 16:05:57 zakim, pick a scribe 16:05:57 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Rachael 16:06:02 zakim, pick a scribe 16:06:02 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Jennie_Delisi 16:06:10 zakim, pick a scribe 16:06:10 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Jennie_Delisi 16:06:12 zakim, pick a scribe 16:06:13 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose ashleyfirth 16:06:22 zakim, pick a scribe 16:06:22 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose CClaire 16:06:32 Sorry, can't do it today 16:06:34 zakim, pick a scribe 16:06:34 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose BrianE 16:06:47 zakim, pick a scribe 16:06:47 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Stephanie 16:07:01 scribe+ 16:07:22 s/Sorry, can't do it today// 16:07:25 survey results: https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/wcag3-document-breakdown/results/ 16:07:28 Rachael: Next thing is to pick up the WCAG 3 document breakdown 16:07:36 ... we've been discussing this for several weeks 16:07:56 ... we're starting at user-generated content, and only look at the survey for simplicity 16:08:03 ... [recounting results] 16:08:10 https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/wcag3-document-breakdown/results/#xusergen 16:08:39 summary: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1l9VWE8GQNqJpPTNsfmPQudSUgQx-Oiis31N8OCD914k/edit?slide=id.g3f5cb4ac4bd_0_70#slide=id.g3f5cb4ac4bd_0_70 16:08:51 ... I put together a summary 16:10:02 ... from a majority standpoint, there's more towards including it in some way normatively 16:10:17 ... but can go both ways 16:10:19 q+ to ask about time from publishing user-generated content to evaluating it 16:10:47 ... going to the survey results 16:11:04 ... for user generated content, I'm going to talk to the callouts for those in favour of conformance 16:12:06 q+ 16:12:14 ... Matt King objects if not included, orgs should think about user-gen content on their platforms, we have the technology now 16:13:09 ... the group should not police third-party content, but we cannot control every user submission. The problem may not be the user but the technology or authoring experience 16:13:31 ... question of whether this is a legal issue 16:13:56 ... user generated content is a reality on many websites, but some of the requirements may be better covered by standards like ATAG 16:14:14