Brent: We will record the session today through WebEx. Any objection to that?
... Full agenda today, will preview the Accessibility Roles and responsibility Matrix AARM and then will have an update on Translations. Denis?

Accessibility Roles and Responsibilities Matrix (AARM)

<Denis> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/RA11y_Matrix

Denis: Hi everyone, I met with the EOWG planning team thinking that we would all meet in depth about this resource next week. They suggested that we do an introductory walk-through. So the goal today is to introduce this work and prepare the group for more thorough review and comment next time. Bill, Sean, and I have been working for several months. About 6 weeks ago, Stephane joined and we have been refining and testing our proof of concept. We felt that the fact that we did not always agree about which roles are apporpiately matched with which guidelines, even among the four of us meant that it could be hard to get adoption of this tool with that approach. So we took a step back and decided that rather than starting with a UX approach to determine ownership of each checkpoint, we would build a decision making framework. By flipping it around, the decision tree became the first thing to do. The decision tree then became the way to define a process by which people can determine responsibilities rather than we assign it aribitrarily. So I would like us to look at the decision tree itself as a first intro.

<Denis> Decision tree - https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Role-Based_Decision_Tree

Denis: The concept came from the RACI matrix (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed). There is some difference of opinion about how the terms are defined and applied. Bill's suggested approach was to use categories of Primary, Secondary, and Impact. That was the approach we adopted, keeping the logic of the RACI matrix.
... what we are looking at today is the process/framework that can determine who should have primary ownership. We want you to look for any inconsistancies - poke around this process, please document and see if we have missed anything or anything is unclear.
... all is subject to change based on your input and comments. We hope you will challenge our assumptions. Personally, I approach WCAG by breaking it into granular pieces - I always called them checkpoints. SCs are often too big for assignment to one role and so when broken down into checkpoints or requirements it becomes more clear who would have ownership.
... mapping then becomes more possible and being able to extract a set of requirements for each role from this matrix grid was a goal.

...wanted you all to understand the goal of the decision tree. On the wiki page is an overview as well as the five step process. Looking at the H2 on this page, Primary Ownership, we start by asking questions about the focus of the checkpoint - is it implementation, etc. As we step through, we eliminate roles.

<Denis> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Decision_Tree_Examples

scribe: If none of the other rolesare relevant, we end up with what is left is a UX consideration.
... looking at the examples, we have a couple of scenarios related to images.
...We have over 240 checkpoints, and those are just for WCAG 2.0 and only for manual testing. It will certainly grow larger as we include auto testing and WCAG 2.1.
... (Denis shares screen)
... (walks through examples, see recording for detail)

Denis: What we are hoping to get feedback for is the framework and manage the discussion - just these two pages, the process and the examples. Before we move forward to show the assignment of the checkpoints, we want to let people consider this and focus on it before we move along to the next level of development of the matrix.

Brent: Want you to have some time to expore and look at the decision tree framework and comment on the process itself over the next couple of weeks. First impressions OK today but understand you will have more time to review and comment.

Denis: Yes, once we get the process finalized and approved, we can move through the checkpoints, it will be our proof of concept. Then we can put checkpoints through the finalized process and assign them so that we would have a list for each role.

<Chris> it's making a comeback, Denis!

Deni: for all of the things in the table (shows the screen) we may need to simplify a bit but will have a resource that will include 2.1 and categorize over 300 checkpoints. May start merging the statements of intention together to have a shorter, less daunting list.

Denis: will be asking you (later on) to review the list and see how the group responds. We will work through that in 2019 in small batches so that each month or so we can bring something new for group consideration.
... actual mapping will emerge from that.

<Chris> Great work, Denis.

Shadi: Really really impressive. Just a lot to take in. What does the decision tree help me decide? Is it an evaluation methodology or what?

Chris: We have a big web dev project coming up and will help establish roles across our team

Denis: Shawn had a concern that we were going to be re-writing WCAG in a way. And in fact the way WCAG is written is not helpful to developers, etc. So the goal was to break it down so the meaning was more clear for implementation. Through the process of doing it, we agreed to not share the master list. In that sense it may be seen to be an approach or a methodology.

<Chris> agreed

Shadi: What happens if I don't meet the checkpoint?

Denis: I use something very similar when I do evaluations. 'This is what you must think about when you think about WCAG 1.1.1'

<Norah> Seems to me more of a project management methodology

Sharron: Not sure I understand, is the point not to assign responsibility rather than validate conformance?

Shawn: Shadi, at the surface, the decision is only who in the development process is responsible for 'this.' Maybe we need to be very mindful of the fact that it is *not* an evaluation methodology but an assignment of responsibility.

Denis: We wanted something to simplify the process so that people understand what is their responsibility in the implementation of accessiiblity within the developemt life cycle.

Shadi: It is very very related to the work in the Accessibility Testing Methodlogy group and so we need to tie down the focus. Don't want to move forward without some level of coordination between the groups and development of shared understanding.
... manual testing is an issue that has emerged and would like to explore the overlap and see how we can work together.

Denis: Silver is also working along the lines of role based guidance and needs to be aligned. As this resource grows it is likely to brush up against what others are doing so yes, the work of other groups has relevance and we should find ways for all of us to be aware and consistant among the work.

Shadi: There is a slight nuance between the two - WCAG existsalready and is widely known and adopted. Silver is still in exploratory stages.

Denis: Silver TF has only 4 or 5 people in it. A small group to lay a foundation for a huge effort. Better to be aligned now while it is small. I may join the Silver TF and be liaison between the two.
... since it is in the evolutionary stage, this would be a good time to be aligned. Anything else makes no sense.

Denis: Helpful to learn more about WAI staff perspectives. The purpose is to express WCAG in language understandable by developers and designers rather that WCAG-speak so I want to maintain that perspective as well.

Brent: When meeting with my colleagues at Pearson there is often that disconnect. They don't understand the language. It is often hard to assign and split up the responsibility based on the SC. Having the checkpoint, a more granular approach seems very helpful.

<Norah> +1 to Brent's comments

Brent: I have been struggling with this for two years at Pearson, getting people to understand what part of the work is their responsibility.

Denis: Rather than basing on people's opinion of what belongs to whom, we saw the need to develop a decision making process. When it is objective, there is less tendency to push back.

Sharron: Yes that is the beauty of this process.

<rjolly> +1 to Norah's comment about this being an excellent resource for Project Managers.

<Laura> +1 to Norah's comments

<Chris> +1 project management, team coordination in general

Norah: I second what Brent said. This is very very useful for someone in a PM role. Provides the evidence for doing analysis and assigning responsibility. Often there are assumptions with no accountability. I think this is much more relevant to project maangement than evaluation. Very very useful.

<yatil-in-oslo> +1 to usefulness - often when you say "you failed x.y.z" the response is that nobody was responsible for that. This ties together well with the testing because you might be able to better pinpoint where in the process a11y felt flat

Denis: Thank you. To remind you about the EO assignment - it is to look at these two pages and provide feedback. Feel free to look around if you want to but your comments are meant to help us refine and finalize the framework, the decision making process. Then we can use your comments to improve the whole process.

Brent: How would you like to get comments, questions submitted?

Denis: I will be out of pocket until around Wedneday. While there are only two pages, I expect that since it is dense, we may want to take this week to just look around understand it, ask questions. No need for a survey at this time.
... think about the reasoning, the logic behind it. Can we truly default to UX if it does not fit in other steps? Those are the kinds of questions. Shake the foundation, does it hold?
... this is important. If it is not solid, the rest will not stand.

Shadi: And shall we invite other groups to comment?

Denis: Maybe work a while among oursleves before we pass it over.

Shadi: Since you are asking for conceptual review, may be sooner rather than late.

Denis: I am thinking of speaking with the Silver TF to be sure we are aligned. I will have those discussions, but had not thought there would be interest from the AGWG.

Shadi: Maybe individuals rather than the whole group - I can think of a few.

Denis: I welcome comment from whomever is willing to provide them. I would rather we get input while it is being developed.
... I want it to be useful through the future.

<yatil-in-oslo> Can we just send an FYI around and invite early comments?

<yatil-in-oslo> Just to make sure people are aware.

Denis: I see no problem with that.

Brent: What did you mean by the AG has the right to interpret? They don't seem to actually interpret, it seems they do not want to do that. They seem to leave it up to others.

Shadi: The authority for interpretation belongs to the AG group.

Shadi: looking at it from the POV that whether they 'want' it is less of a question than de facto, that is their authority. Only thinking that among that group there is experience and a practical technical perspective that could be helpful.

Shawn: Even though they are not doing this exact work, we always ask for AGWG review. They are in the process of clarifying the Understanding documents at this time.

Brent: We can send out the email with links and ask people to review and prepare questions for next week's meeting. And you and your team as well could develop specific questions. I appreciate the great overview Denis - thank you!

Outreach, W4TW

Brent: Have been doing typical outreach, WAI announcements, etc. Please be aware of the two outreach campaigns and we are asking everyone to use the month of December for WAI resources, especially these two. Add information or language to the wiki.
... has anyone done outreach on these resources?
... I can start. Once the BizCase published, I met with my accessibility team and others who were struggling with management buy-in. I went through the 4 priorities and the Case studies and the research that demonstrated it. It was taken extremely well, they liked the case studies and said they would use the content in building budgets and talking to managers.
... other ideas?

Shadi: Haven't done but witnessed at an IAAP event. Paul from Barclays presented and there was a great shoutout about the BizCase and it was great to see the attention.

Laura: LOC has reorganized its IT personnel and I have been asked to document the need. I appreciate the resources and am appreciating all that EO does and looking forward to Denis work which I think will be tremendously helpful.

KrisAnne: I had someone who is at a new company where they do nothing about accessiiblity - she asked me what to do. The first thing I sent was the BizCase to send up the chain. All of us do outreach by being advocates and will have a chance to influence others.

Howard: I presented on a workshop about teaching accessiiblity and I used the BizCase as part of my slides and will be using it whenever I present.

Norah: We have been re-tweeting the announcements of new resources and sharing content with listserves. Will revisit again and present on the BizCase.

Brent: This is great, please document thiese kinds of activities if you can on the wiki.
... work for this week has been covered with Denis' ask for review.

Translations

Shawn: Turning the recording on and sharing the screen...OK! Thanks to all who have been helping with the translations. Working for severl weeks, going through several iterations. The proposal is to list the languages across the top which is the most common location.
... a challenge is that many sites that translate at all tranlate the whole site or only translate content and not navigation.
... putting languages across the top makes it look quite site-wide and could be misleading. Considered different option.
... where we ended was to have the list across the top and something like "this page" and at the end we have a link for them to get other pages in other languages. What I want to get OK on is that people are comfortable with how they are listed, what happens when you link, etc. Are there any questions about the UI for what is listed and what happens when you click.

Brent: The listed language means that the page is available in that language.

Shawn: we decided to leave English first because it is the original, definitive version.
... it only shows languages that are available for that page.

Denis: What happens with the white space?

Shawn: It is right-aligned.
... that is where we expect people to look for it.

Brent: Does the right alignment change with languages that align differently?

Shawn: We are working on it.

<Denis> +1

<Norah> +1

Brent: When you see a page that lists other pages in other language - what will it look like?

<Denis> Why not have a label that says something like "translations available:" and then that contextualized list?

Shawn: When you activate "Other pages, etc" you will come to a page that lists all the languages that we have translations in. When you click that language you will get a list of all translations in W3C that are in that language.

<Brent> +1

Brent (more questions, listen to recording for detail)

<Laura> +1

Denis: What are pros and cons?

Shawn: Brainstorms for the label tended to short words, phrases and something that wraps well. Another idea was "All translations" whether icon is included or not. We have two different types of audience. One is the audience of people who want the info in their language. The other is the audience of translators to keep quality high and avoid duplication.
... All pages, all languages seems long

Denis: I have an issue with the word translations because one is the original which is not a translation.

<Brent> +1 to "this page in"

Denis: what about "this page in..."

Sean: I agree with that suggestion.

Denis: Important to keep the distinction, not familiar with the translation icon and I would be upset with the wrap to two lines. maybe a slider of some kind where you might scroll within that line - it could be done accessibily, also a demonstration of sophisticated implementaions in accessible way.
... maybe the solution is to use a menu

Shawn: yes that was considered, please read
... the background. Among the i18n group, there is strong preference for the language to be be visible.
... My takeaways are several +1, suggestions for labels and against wrapping...anything else?

Brent: When in another language, English is still bold -?-

Denis: I am impressed that everything I raised was already considered, very thoughtful.

Shawn: I am not a user of translations so I needed to gather input and use cases from those who did. Also got a lot of time getting input from W3C as they revamp how they approach translations. Wanted to be sure we were considering everything and that it was documented.
... once again EO work informs W3C work.

Shawn: Thanks all, wanted to present and please send comments as they occur to you.

Brent: Will get email out to summarize what is needed. Thanks to all for last minute meeting.

Sharron: Great attendance, thanks everyone.