Re: Minutes from Silver Conformance on 12 November

There are some WCAG 2.1 SCs not listed under challenge #1 (human 
involvement needed) which also need human involvement. Is the aim to 
provide comprehensive coverage here (i.e., add those SCs that are still 
missing) or is the list just indicative of the general problem? If other 
SCs should be added I am ready to provide draft text for (at least some) 
that are missing.
Detlev

Am 14.11.2019 um 01:20 schrieb Sajka, Janina:
>
> Minutes from the Silver Community Group teleconference of Tuesday 12 
> November
>
> are provided here.
>
> Hypertext minutes are available at:
>
> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/wcag/conformance-challenges-working-draft/conformance-challenges/
>
> ===========================================================
>
> SUMMARY:
>
> *            Work on our Challenges with Conformance document has been 
> moved to
>
>               github preparatory to its publication as an AGWG First 
> Public Working
>
> Draft (FPWD).
>
> *            Work on the conformance section of the Silver FPWD 
> updated and
>
>               discussed.
>
> *            Also additions to User Scenarios.
>
> ===========================================================
>
>    W3C
>
>                                     - DRAFT -
>
> Silver Community Group Teleconference
>
> 12 Nov 2019
>
> Attendees
>
>    Present
>
>           jeanne, janina, PeterKorn, bruce_bailey
>
>    Regrets
>
>    Chair
>
>           jeanne
>
>    Scribe
>
>           janina
>
> Contents
>
>      * Topics
>
>          1. update on Challenges
>
>          2. FPWD Conformance section
>
>          3. adding to user scenarios
>
>      * Summary of Action Items
>
>      * Summary of Resolutions
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
>    present=
>
> update on Challenges
>
>    <jeanne> Janina: We have moved it to Github. Not much as changed 
> except the technology of Github. Mostly because W3C publications come 
> from Github
>
> https://w3c.github.io/wcag/conformance-challenges/
>
>    <jeanne> ... I went through the document line by line comparing it 
> with Google docs.
>
>    <jeanne> ... the Google doc is marked as deprecated and people are 
> referred to Github\
>
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Challenges+with+Conformance%22
>
>    <bruce_bailey> good first impressions!
>
>    <jeanne> ... the margin notes were moved to issues.
>
>    <bruce_bailey> can we loose quote and slash or unquote in title ?
>
>    <jeanne> Janina: Is it ok with the group to combine some of the 
> issues in Github? The issues can have back-tracing to the original 
> posting.
>
>    <jeanne> ... there are instructions on using Issues in Github with 
> email.
>
>    <jeanne> ... comments can be replies and email with changes, to the 
> branch merge or pull request depending on the level of Github savvy.
>
>    <jeanne> ... these are issues with the Challenges rather than 
> broader issues with WCAG.
>
>    <bruce_bailey> +1 to publishing challenges doc instead of Silver
>
>    Lost audio! brb
>
>    <jeanne> Peter: IN discussing it with the chairs, we agreed to 
> publish it in AGWG. It pertains more to WCAG than to Silver.
>
>    <jeanne> Janina: We got a lot of good comments from Mary Jo, who 
> isn't a Silver participant.
>
>    <jeanne> Jeanne: I'm glad to see this moving along. It will help 
> more people understand the problems that Silver is trying to solve.
>
>    <jeanne> Peter: Timeline-wise - we are interested in comments this 
> week before bringing it to a vote at the AGWG meeting.
>
>    <jeanne> Jeanne: Do you want to be able to say that it has the 
> approval of the Silver Task Force.
>
>    <jeanne> Peter: I want as much additional review and comments 
> before going to AGWG. Thumbs-up from Silver Task Force members can't hurt.
>
>    <jeanne> Bruce: This is the natural outgrowth of the Silver 
> process. Even though the content people haven't been working on it, it 
> came out of the Silver process and that's important to emphasize.
>
> FPWD Conformance section
>
>    <scribe> scribe: janina
>
>    jeanne: Wanting to know what else people would like to see in it, 
> or what we should remove?
>
>    peter: I think I sent you content? Yes? No?
>
>    [people look and decide not]
>
>    Peter: Seems I'm working on something for the Explainer
>
>    <jeanne> Janina: Explainer needs a what we mean by organizations
>
>    <jeanne> 
> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ED-Draft-js-Oct/guidelines/explainer.html
>
>    <jeanne> Main FPWD draft 
> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/ED-Draft-js-Oct/guidelines/index.html#scoring-conformance
>
>    Argh. Lost audio again!
>
>    jeanne: In the process of moving architecture to Explainer because 
> it fits better there
>
>    Peter: Just now sent you text
>
>    ... Selecting a bullet to 3.3 to note we want to address some of 
> the challenges we've found with 2.0 model
>
>    Joe: Asks about process practice
>
>    Jeanne: Notes we've found challenges with 2.0 for all sized orgs
>
>    Peter: Yes could be a separate bullet, or an addition to this bullet
>
>    Jeanne: Another important thing to include is to move away from the 
> 100% binary fail or pass model
>
>    <jeanne> TOlerances
>
>    Jeanne: We are supposed to call that tolerances
>
>    ... Will be running potential language by Shadi who has spent a lot 
> of time on this
>
>    ... One example Shadi raised is driving 1 mile over the speed limit 
> would not likely draw a ticket, but 30 mph would
>
>    ... Another Shadi example was that the same threshold bump in the 
> hotel entry was more of a barrier for a wheelchair userfollowing a 
> long international flight, than just arriving for dinner at the hotel 
> after a cab
>
>    ride from home
>
>    ... Shawn talks about a google problem where they cannot reach WCAG 
> conformance because of a hidden iframe that no user would ever 
> actually reach, but tools find it and fail the page
>
>    peter: shifting to tolerances is powerful and worth exploring futher
>
>    ... the iframe is a great example--the user never gets there so it 
> doesn't matter, but it fails
>
>    ... Or an image with a caption that explains all that's needed
>
>    jeanne: has minimal impact
>
>    peter: doesn't material impede the user from getting done what they 
> need to get done
>
>    ... liking "materially impact" but can further consider
>
>    jeanne: So, if we were to putthis in our goals, what would we say?
>
>    peter: a conformance model that would tolerate errors that don't 
> materially impact pwds
>
>    ... Consider that a first draft!
>
>    jeanne: Everyone OK with "materially impact?"
>
>    [agreement]
>
>    jeanne: anything else?
>
>    ... will continue to raise this
>
> adding to user scenarios
>
>    <jeanne> 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PsMDJ4MLmTv8WeIhtFsGj-nJDwJhuzI8ATMAS2UuWa4/edit?ts=5db83f59#heading=h.ywxwuch4lj7t
>
>    jeanne: Notes Kim Dirks has added content
>
>    <PeterKorn> We're at the 45 minute mark, so I'm going to re-start 
> my WebEx so I can keep talking (not that I'm trying to right now)
>
>    jeanne: Kim started in #5: user generated content
>
>    ... i.e. how to encourage a11y in uploaded videos and photos
>
>    <jeanne> What about uploading photos, graphics and video? How to 
> encourage or ensure accessibility? (with uploaded photos and videos, 
> 1.2.1-1.2.9 and 1.1.1 are often violated.)
>
>    <jeanne> Third party content can be copyrighted or have other 
> intellectual property restrictions, making it difficult or impossible 
> to adapt that content and make it accessible.
>
>    <jeanne> Always Under Development: As a consequence of an evolving 
> website, there are sometimes older legacy components which may be very 
> difficult and expensive to update as new SCs are implemented.
>
>    <PeterKorn> sorry; it is again taking forever for WebEx to connect me.
>
>    jeanne: Anything to add for "highly dynamic content?"
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> Summary of Resolutions
>
>    [End of minutes]
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Present: jeanne janina PeterKorn bruce_bailey
>
> Found Scribe: janina
>
> Found Date: 12 Nov 2019
>
> ----------------------------------
>
> Janina Sajka
>
> Accessibility Standards Consultant
>
> sajkaj@amazon.com <mailto:sajkaj@amazon.com>
>

-- 
Detlev Fischer
Testkreis
Werderstr. 34, 20144 Hamburg

Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45

http://www.testkreis.de
Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites