Meeting minutes
<Lisa> next item
<Lisa> next item
<Lisa> close item 1
regrets Jan
Lisa: We don't have quorum yet. We may just do half an hour if we don't have quorum.
<Lisa> (holiday on 31st August
<Lisa> September 7th is Labor day
<Lisa> next item
<Lisa> next item
Lisa: No COGA meetings for those Mondays for our summer holiday.
<Lisa> close item 2
Lisa: I also sent this info to the list.
Lisa: Does anyone have updates they want to share?
kirkwood: I have to leave early today.
<Lisa> close item 3
Lisa: We don't have quorum yet and can't make decisions unless a couple more people join.
Lisa: We have the research call tomorrow.
Lisa: We have the COGA review of WCAG 3 on Thursday.
Lisa: I was thinking this Thursday would be a good time to do Text and Wording if Len or Jan can make it on Thursday.
LenB: Yes, I can make it this Thursday.
Lisa: We can talk about scheduling so people know what to do over the summer holiday.
<Lisa> next item
Lisa: We'll start with Text and Wording and then do scheduling when hopefully more people can come.
<Lisa> close item 4
Lisa: For tomorrow's research call, we want to gather gaps from the WCAG 3 review where COGA wants to gather more research.
Lisa: If we have someone who is committed to doing the research, that would be fantastic.
Lisa: At last week's research call, we decided to do issues papers (research modules) but also wiki pages.
Lisa: For example, if someone wants to know about typefaces and there is no conclusive research, that is probably better as a wiki page.
Lisa: We are going to try to have a full draft of a research module on user testing.
Rachael: Do you mean for an assertion in WCAG 3?
Lisa: I mean a COGA research module (formerly called "issue paper").
Lisa: We're thinking a research module on how to do user testing with people with cognitive and learning disabilities.
Lisa: We think that will be really helpful for WCAG 3 if this COGA resource exists.
Lisa: Are there other areas in WCAG 3 that you've noticed people saying we need more research that is related to COGA?
Rachael: WCAG 3 has notes in the draft where we say more research is needed.
Rachael: If a provision is exploratory, that means it needs more research.
Rachael: There are also provisions at the developing level where we have notes saying more research is needed.
Lisa: If we do a search on the word "research," will it take us to all of these places?
<Rachael> Step 1: Search the editors draft for exploratory https://
Rachael: Step 1: Search the editor's draft for "exploratory."
Rachael: Step 2: If you think exploratory provisions should move forward, they need research that justifies them moving forward.
<Rachael> This needs research justifying the requirements.
<Rachael> Search 2: Search the working draft for the word "Research"
<Rachael> This will show gaps needed to complete a requirement
Rachael: Step 3: If you search the working draft for the word "research," that will show you all of the gaps for provisions that are at the developing level.
Lisa: Please get those to COGA's research group so we can try to look into them.
Rachael: I would focus on the exploratory provisions because at some point we will settle on a scope for WCAG 3.
julierawe: Should we continue to submit GitHub issues showing support for exploratory issues?
Rachael: Yes, it's good to formally submit GitHub issues.
Rachael: If you have research that shows how helpful the provision is, that would help move it forward.
Lisa: We may put in an issue asking what is missing in terms of research.
Lisa: Let's add this to our agenda at Thursday's call for the COGA review of WCAG 3.
Lisa: There is some coordination that is needed between COGA's research group and COGA's WCAG 3 review group.
julierawe: Is there a timeline for the cutoff?
Rachael: I'm guessing it will be in a year. We won't remove things, but they may not make it into the first draft.
Lisa: Are there any surveys you need COGA to complete?
Rachael: No.
Lisa: The research group is small.
Lisa: We may get to it in 3 months time or 6 months time.
Lisa: Not all of the exploratory provisions are related to COGA.
Lisa: Who should decide which provisions COGA should research?
Lisa: We don't know what research they have and don't have.
Lisa: As a first step, we could open a GitHub issue asking what research do you have, what do you need.
Lisa: For example, is there a small area that needs more research, such as double negatives in German.
julierawe proposed that the Thursday group open issues for exploratory provisions asking what exactly do they need and then tag the COGA research group.
<Lisa> what is the reaserch questions that need answers and we can try and find them via litary review
Lisa: We don't want to promise more than we can do.
<Lisa> next item
Lisa: Maybe julierawe should write a letter to the AG in general because maybe there were things the subgroups wanted to add but didn't because they didn't have the research,
<Lisa> next item
ACTION: item: julierawe will ask the AG editors if there are pointed questions where the subgroups urgently need research on topics related to COGA.
Lisa: Do we want to propose any breakout sessions for TPAC?
Lisa: I would imagine the research group would like to have a breakout session again.
julierawe suggested a breakout session that encourages people to say what COGA research they'd like to have.
Lisa: Maybe that could be a short agenda item for an AG meeting.
LenB: There are some APA things we could talk about, like the amounts tag. Are there other things we could be working with them on?
Lisa: Let's discuss on Monday's COGA call and send to Janina.
Lisa: We have the coordination call tomorrow with Janina and I can bounced that off of her.
Can anyone open the link in Rachael's August 10 email titled "TPAC Breakout Sessions Information"?
There is a link that says "View proposed session" and I get an error message.
Lisa: I get a 404 as well.
<Lisa> next item
Lisa: We could make a proposal that is suitably vague?
julierawe noted the deadline to submit a proposal for a breakout session is October 8th.
LenB: Maybe an in-person touchpoint would be helpful: "Come arm-wrestle with us."
Lisa: It's two months away.
julierawe: It could be a continuation of our request for pointed questions about COGA-related research.
Lisa: It could be no one comes.
LenB: I'll be there roving the halls.
Lisa: It sounds like a joint session with AG and a joint session with APA on how we can help you more.
julierawe: As a next step, let's ask Rachael and Janina at tomorrow's coordination call.
Lisa: I remember regretting it last time because it was so much work.
Lisa: Will we have enough in two months to say something new?
LenB: Or is a meeting where we have them tell us what research is missing in their world that they'd like us to help with?
<Lisa> next item
<Lisa> Zakim thinks agendum 7 -- wording proposal for describing our scope and user groups . See
<Lisa> 18:44 * Zakim ... https://
Lisa: Last week we talked about rewording the section where we describe what "cognitive accessibility support" covers.
julierawe: I took a quick look and like that it starts with functional needs but it's dense/hard to skim.
Lisa: Do you want to use suggesting mode to suggest how to make it easier to skim?
julierawe: Yes, happy to.
<Lisa> https://