W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > March 2019

Silver meeting minutes of 22 March 2019

From: Chuck Adams <charles.adams@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3a2ebbe3-e804-4c0c-a807-04802ffebf29@default>
To: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>, Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Please find below the meeting minutes for the 22nd March instance of the Silver call:

 

   [1]W3C

 

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

 

                               - DRAFT -

 

                 Silver Community Group Teleconference

 

22 Mar 2019

 

Attendees

 

   Present

          jeanne, Chuck, Charles, AngelaAccessForAll, Jan, LuisG, KimD, bruce_bailey

 

   Regrets

          SHawn

 

   Chair

          jeanne

 

   Scribe

          Chuck

 

Contents

 

     * [2]Topics

         1. [3]Upcoming F2F meetings: May and September

         2. [4]update Requirements

         3. [5]Design Principal 2

         4. [6]Design Principle 3

         5. [7]Design Principle 4

     * [8]Summary of Action Items

     * [9]Summary of Resolutions

     __________________________________________________________

 

Upcoming F2F meetings: May and September

 

   <scribe> Scribe: Chuck

 

   Jeanne: Upcoming face to face meetings. Two new web pages

   today, bunch of time this week re-organizing the wiki. Here's

  the info for access view in May...

 

   <jeanne> AccessU <-

   [10]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/2019_May_

   13-15_in_Austin_TX_USA

 

     [10] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/2019_May_13-15_in_Austin_TX_USA

 

   Jeanne: Close to bottom of wiki page. No exact dates yet.

   Sharon Rush offered a room may 15-17 in Austin TX.

   ... Don't need to register for access u unless you want to

   attend sessions.

   ... I sent Sharon a note asking which days she would like us,

   will update info. All of you considering going to access u,

   please come to face to face (come in and out as needed).

   ... Second one is in September. That's in Japan. September

   16-20.

 

   <jeanne> TPAC <-

   [11]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/2019_Sept

   ember_16-20_in_Fukuoka,_Japan

 

     [11] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/2019_September_16-20_in_Fukuoka,_Japan

 

   Jeanne: That's annual TPAC meeting. Don't know which days yet

   we'll meet. We'll probably have a two day meeting. Sent email

   to list today to get folk who aren't as active...

   ... Conf calls are in dead of night for some participants. I'm

   encouraging interest in Austrailia, India, Japan, China folk to

   participate.

   ... Think about it see if you are available, let me (Jeanne)

   know if you are avail for either/both meetings. There will be

   remote participation options. Austin remote may be hard to deal

   with.

   ... Any q on face to face?

   ... Send me an email if you can come.

 

   Bruce: What is the q you didn't want to repeat?

 

   Jeanne: I was talking about problems I had with setting up wiki

   page. Really not relevant.

 

   Bruce: I'm optimistic I can come to Austin.

 

   Jeanne: I think we can get a lot done in Austin. We can show

   progress in June. Show some existing success criteria migrated.

   ... That's one of the things AGWG face to face asked for. They

   wanted to see some completed examples.

 

update Requirements

 

   Jeanne: Requirements document...

 

   <jeanne> [12]https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/

 

     [12] https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/

 

   Jeanne: Tuesday we had a bug in github that wouldn't allow page

   to update with all the work we did after face to face meeting,

   it's now working. Hopefully next time it works.

   ... March 19 when we did the updates. We also have the

   questionairre.

 

   <jeanne>

   [13]https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SilverRequirmentsRevie

   w/results#xq5

 

     [13] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SilverRequirmentsReview/results#xq5

 

   Jeanne: Did we start from the top of the design requirements?

   Design Principals?

 

   Kim: I think we did.

   ... Don't recall how far we got.

 

   Jeanne: I remember talking about definition of intersectional.

   ... One of the things in here... David Macdonald said...

 

   <jeanne> David McD: I think the "widest range" is too

   optimistic. I think the word "intersectional" is politicized

   and may be perceived as partisan. Historically, we've tried to

   stay away from discussions about class, poverty, privilege,

   power, and dominance issues in society. How about something

   like this.

 

   <jeanne> Accessibility guidelines should: Support a wide range

   of people with disabilities and be created with the

   consideration of users with individual needs.

 

   Jeanne: I thought was interesting, stuff I experienced, but

   maybe more of a Canadian issue. Historically we have tried to

   stay away from ....

 

   Charles: I don't mind the phrase "individual needs", does

   capture the intent. This is one of those things where a

   glossary may help.

   ... What it meant in our docs was people with multiple

   disabilities.

 

   Jan: We do need to think through that more.

 

   Jeanne: The definition I found for Tuesday was "support the

   needs for the ....."

 

   <jeanne> Support the needs of the widest range of people with

   disabilities and recognize that people with disabilities have

   individual and intersectional needs. Intersectionality is a

   framework for conceptualizing a person, group of people, or

   social problem as affected by a number of discriminations and

   disadvantages. It takes into account people’s overlapping

   identities and experiences in order to

 

   <jeanne> understand the complexity of prejudices they face

 

   Shri: This definition only talks about overlapping needs of

   individuals. We should also consider conflicting needs of

   individuals and give guidance on how developers should be with

   these scenarios.

 

   <jeanne> Definition of Intersectionality comes from Young Women

   Boston.

 

   Shri: For screen mag user, need is different for screen reader

   user (links as an example).

 

   Jeanne: There are many more examples.

   ... We started a page of conflicts. There are a lot. Not sure

   how to address that. I hate to put something in requirements

   for which I don't know the answer. What can we do? I think we

   can give good advise.

   ... To solve this problem, I don't think technology is there

   yet.

 

   Shri: But if we are developing guidelines as futuristic, can we

   create and keep updating? In my team people face challenges

   with reconciling needs of blind users and low vision users.

   Just a thought.

 

   Bruce: At access board. From our perspecive. If silver is

   apirational in any way, it will not be picked up. It has to be

   a codification of known best practices.

 

   Jeanne: Personally, I'm leaning towards DM's proposal.

   ... <repeats DM's suggestion>

 

   Luis: no prob with what DM said... if intersection is

   politicized, can we replace with something like overlapping?

 

   Jeanne: That would say... I kind of agree with the "widest"

   being aspirational. <reads and replaces intersectional with

   overlapping>

 

   Jan: Not sure that overlapping... I don't know it addresses

   Shri's concerns.

   ... We need to think about how we address the issue of

   "conflicting".

 

   <bruce_bailey> maybe "including people with multiple needs"

 

   Jeanne: Luis you ok?

 

   Luis: I'm fine with that.

 

   Bruce: Including people with multiple needs or multiple

   disabilities? One of the weakness with accessibility standards

   is not covering people with multiple disabilities.

 

   <jeanne> Support the needs of the widest range of people with

   disabilities and recognize that people with disabilities have

   individual needs and multiple disabilities.

 

   Bruce: Just a little bit more concrete than "as wide as

   possible".

 

   Jeanne: Can you paste in IRC?

 

   <Jan> +1 to Charles' comment about multiple needs vs. multiple

   disabilities

 

   Charles: I think the point is multiple needs and not multiple

   disabilities. It quantifies without qualifying. Does not

   concretely say that they are compounded or contrast. Just says

   more than one.

 

   Jan: I like that.

 

   <bruce_bailey> i also like "multiple needs" over "multiple

   disabilities"

 

   <jeanne> Support the needs of a wide range of people with

   disabilities and recognize that people with disabilities have

   individual and multiple needs.

 

   Jeanne: "individual and multiple"?

 

   Charles: I would omit the 2nd instance of disabilities.

 

   <AngelaAccessForAll> +1 but I would say individual or multiple

 

   <jeanne> Support the needs of a wide range of people with

   disabilities and recognize that people have individual and

   multiple needs.

 

   <Charles> +1

 

   <LuisG> +1

 

   Jeanne: consensus?

 

   +1

 

   <jeanne> +1

 

   <bruce_bailey> +1

 

   <AngelaAccessForAll> +1

 

   <KimD> +1

 

   <Jan> 1

 

   Jeanne: Good alternative. I struggled with "intersectional".

 

   RESOLUTION: "Support the needs of a wide range of people with

   disabilities and recognize that people have individual and

   multiple needs." adopted.

 

Design Principal 2

 

   <jeanne> Support a measurement and conformance structure that

   can include guidance for a broad range of disabilities,

   including low vision and cognitive accessibility needs.

 

   Jeanne: We had a number of comments, including disagreements.

   ... <read one disagreement>

 

   <jeanne> It should be recognised that needs related to

   disabilities may change over time, particularly as new

   interfaces and technologies evolve. Many people with cognitive

   disabilities do not identify as disabled so “broad range of

   disabilities “ could be too constrained. Perhaps “broad range

   of access needs” ?

 

   Luis: I agree

 

   Jeanne: <someone> suggested removing the word "can"

   ... I think that improves it. Someone says include 'age and

   aging'.

   ... Other people are discussing "can" and "should".

   ... One of the things that Michael Cooper said... in final

   version of requirements we can remove it then. We are going to

   address people with cognative and low vision disabilities.

   ... From face to face Bruce suggested breaking it up into 2

   sentences.

 

   Bruce: I think it's easier... make 2 statements, it's more

   words but clearer.

 

   Jeanne: I was struggling with how to lead into the sentence.

 

   <jeanne> Support a measurement and conformance structure that

   includes guidance for a broad range of disabilities. This

   includes particular attention to the needs of low vision and

   cognitive accessibility.

 

   Bruce: I don't like the idea of putting something in that has

   to be taken out later. As 2 sentences its fine.

 

   Luis: If we have it in 2 sentences, and remove low vision and

   cognative, we can just remove that sentence.

 

   Bruce: I agree it's an easier edit later. I think it's easier

   to keep it in later.

 

   <KimD> +1, I like calling it out

 

   Jeanne: Especially with that re-wording we can keep it in.

   ... A couple of other suggestions on wording, but I like the

   wording we have.

 

   <jeanne> Support a measurement and conformance structure that

   includes guidance for a broad range of disabilities. This

   includes particular attention to the needs of low vision and

   cognitive accessibility.

 

   Jeanne: consensus?

 

   <jeanne> +1

 

   +1

 

   <Jan> +1

 

   <Charles> +1

 

   <LuisG> +1

 

   Jeanne: Any objections?

 

   <bruce_bailey> +1

 

   <AngelaAccessForAll> +1

 

   RESOLUTION: "Support a measurement and conformance structure

   that includes guidance for a broad range of disabilities. This

   includes particular attention to the needs of low vision and

   cognitive accessibility." adopted.

 

Design Principle 3

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities using emerging technologies.

 

   all caps?

 

   Jeanne: We had agreements with just 2...

   ... One person said... <reads the comment>

 

   <jeanne> Discussion points:

 

   <jeanne> Legacy or end of life cycle operating systems and end

   of life cycle for adaptive software. What are the cut off

   points for accessibility support on the web on both topics?

 

   :-)

 

   Jeanne: I think we should defer to a discussion on

   "accessibility supported". This will be a big conversation.

   Don't want to go there today.

   ... Andrew said "I agree it should, but needs speaks more ...."

   ... I think that's covered by maintenance requirement.

 

   Kim: I thought this one was about embracing new technologies,

   less about the speed of updates.

 

   Charles: Intent was that guidance would quickly catch up with

   those things. Flexibility was also in the speed of the document

   itself.

 

   Jeanne: We could add another sentence.

   ... Any suggestions on language?

   ... "Publish regular updates"?

 

   Jan: Aren't we addressing elsewhere?

 

   Jeanne: I didn't see it.

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities using emerging technologies.Publish regular

   updates on a timely basis.

 

   Jeanne: Maybe predictable instead of timely.

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities using emerging technologies.Publish regular

   updates.

 

   Angela: I would go with... I agree iwith "publish regular

   updates". timely would have to be quantifiable.

 

   Jeanne: Looking at agwg group, that's always a point of

   contention.

   ... Everybody ok with that?

 

   Charles: This is a design principal and not a requirement?

 

   <KimD> Accessibility guidelines should: Be flexible enough to

   support the needs of people with disabilities using emerging

   technologies, and support related updates to the guidelines.

 

   Charles: What if it's tied more specifically to first part of

   sentence? Principal is that guidance keeps up with emerging

   technology. Implies that we are accepting change requests or

   community input, not just publishing updates.

 

   Jeanne: Good point.

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities and keeps up with emerging technologies.

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies.

 

   <KimD> Is this helpful: Accessibility guidelines should: Be

   flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities using emerging technologies, and support related

   updates to the guidelines.

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities and keeps up with emerging technologies. The

   information structure allows guidance to be added or removed.

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies. The

   information structure allows guidance to be added or removed.

 

   <jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

   disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies. The

   information structure allows guidance to be added or removed.

 

   Jeanne: consensus?

 

   <KimD> +1

 

   <Jan> +1

 

   +1

 

   <AngelaAccessForAll> +1

 

   <bruce_bailey> +1

 

   <LuisG> +1

 

   <jeanne> +1

 

   <Charles> +1

 

   Kim: need to drop

 

   RESOLUTION: "Be flexible enough to support the needs of people

   with disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies. The

   information structure allows guidance to be added or removed."

   adopted.

 

Design Principle 4

 

   <jeanne> Follow accessibility guidance in creating the

   Guidelines. Note: This will be come a Requirement once the

   Conformance section is completed.

 

   Jeanne: This is one of the ones I updated, doesn't match

   survey.

   ... I added note: This will become a requirement once the

   conformance section is completed.

   ... Survey could use more clarification. Lots of similar

   comments.

   ... This is the dog food question. What is a non slang way to

   be a second sentence to clarify it?

   ... I think I did.

   ... ..."follow accessibility guidance in creating the

   guidelines".

 

   Charles: Adding the phrase "in creating" makes it more narrow.

   The gist of the dog food idea is that the RESULT is accessible,

   not just the creation process.

 

   Jeanne: Very good.

   ... Let's try that instead.

 

   <jeanne> Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

   This will be come a requirement once the Conformance section is

   completed.

 

   Bruce: Why is the note there?

 

   Jeanne: That came of agwg meeting. People wanted it to be a

   requirement. We pushed back. Didn't know how to phrase.

   ... Are we going to say "guidelines must meet bronze or silver

   or score or however we are going to do it"?

 

   Bruce: When you say it becomes a requirement it sounds like a

   SC or method.

   ... The specifics of what is accessible will be clear once

   conformance section is complete.

 

   Jeanne: How about "a measurable silver requirement"?

 

   Bruce: it's a measurement on not of.

 

   Jeanne: "This design principal will move to the requirements

   section".

 

   Bruce: That works.

 

   Jeanne: We can determine a specific measurement.

 

   <jeanne> Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

   This design principle will move to the Requirements section

   once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

   specific measurement compliance.

 

   Jeanne: How's that?

   ... Thoughts?

 

   Bruce: Good for me.

 

   <jeanne> Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

   This design principle will move to the Requirements section

   once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

   specific measurement of compliance.

 

   <LuisG> +1

 

   <bruce_bailey> +1

 

   Jeanne: consensus?

 

   +1

 

   <jeanne> +1

 

   <Jan> +1

 

   <AngelaAccessForAll> +1

 

   <Charles> conformance not compliance

 

   RESOLUTION: "Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

   This design principle will move to the Requirements section

   once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

   specific measurement of compliance." adopted.

 

   Charles: "compliance" is something that happens after us.

 

   Jeanne: We are saying in this one that we also have to comply.

   ... I deliberately used it.

   ... related to candidate recommendations.

   ... I'm ok to use it.

 

   Luis: What's difference between conform and comply?

 

   Jeanne: Comply is a score. Conform: We have to prove that what

   we are writing works in the real world.

 

   Charles: My understanding is different. I didn't know that

   there was a different definition.

   ... In WCAG it's used... these things measure how well a thing

   conforms to the guidelines. Compliance from a legal perspective

   is when the guideline is cited.

 

   Jeanne: Let's go with conform.

   ... I keep trying to re-inforce...

 

   <jeanne> Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

   This design principle will move to the Requirements section

   once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

   specific measurement of conformance.

 

   Jeanne: I think you are right.

 

   <jeanne> +1

 

   Bruce: Products conform, agencies comply.

 

   <LuisG> +1

 

   <jeanne> Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

   This design principle will move to the Requirements section

   once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

   specific measurement for conformance.

 

   <bruce_bailey> +1

 

   <Charles> +1

 

   +1

 

   <jeanne> +1

 

   <AngelaAccessForAll> +1

 

  RESOLUTION: "Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

   This design principle will move to the Requirements section

   once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

   specific measurement for conformance." adopted.

 

   Jeanne: Will think about how we can do this faster...

 

   Bruce: Line by line is a lot of work.

 

   Jeanne: Maybe another pass...

   ... More comments came after agwg meeting.

   ... I could send in email and we could vote in email.

   ... I'll see if I can do that.

 

   trackbot, end meeting

 

Summary of Action Items

 

Summary of Resolutions

 

    1. [14]"Support the needs of a wide range of people with

       disabilities and recognize that people have individual and

       multiple needs." adopted.

    2. [15]"Support a measurement and conformance structure that

       includes guidance for a broad range of disabilities. This

       includes particular attention to the needs of low vision

       and cognitive accessibility." adopted.

    3. [16]"Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with

       disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies. The

       information structure allows guidance to be added or

       removed." adopted.

    4. [17]"Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

       This design principle will move to the Requirements section

       once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

       specific measurement of compliance." adopted.

    5. [18]"Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note:

       This design principle will move to the Requirements section

       once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a

       specific measurement for conformance." adopted.

 

   [End of minutes]

     __________________________________________________________

 

 

    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by

    David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([20]CVS log)

    $Date: 2019/03/22 19:01:57 $

     __________________________________________________________

 

     [19] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

     [20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

 

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

 

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56

Check for newer version at [21]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/

scribe/

 

     [21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

 

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

 

Succeeded: s/Requirement/requirement/

Succeeded: s/COnformance/Conformance/

Default Present: jeanne, Chuck, JF, Charles, AngelaAccessForAll, shari,

Lauriat, Jennison, Cyborg, Jan, LuisG, KimD, JohnRochford, Lauriat_, Red

RoxProjects, bruce_bailey, corbb, Makoto, kirkwood, RedRoxProjects_, dbo

udreau, Rachael_

Present: jeanne Chuck JF Charles AngelaAccessForAll shari Lauriat Jennis

on Cyborg Jan LuisG KimD JohnRochford Lauriat_ RedRoxProjects bruce_bail

ey corbb Makoto kirkwood RedRoxProjects_ dboudreau Rachael_

Regrets: SHawn

Found Scribe: Chuck

Inferring ScribeNick: Chuck

Found Date: 22 Mar 2019

People with action items:

 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.

You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

 

 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this

warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain

a link to the original IRC log.)

 

 

 

   [End of [22]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

 

     [22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

 

Regards,

Charles Adams

 
Received on Friday, 22 March 2019 19:08:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 22 March 2019 19:08:21 UTC