- From: Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 19:44:13 +0100
- To: Coralie Mercier <coralie@w3.org>, Inclusion and Diversity Community Group <public-idcg@w3.org>
Thank you Coralie, and Chaals for scribing and Judy for help managing the queue. On 09/07/2020 18:15, Coralie Mercier wrote: > >> On 9 Jul 2020, at 09:30 , Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com> wrote: >> >> Day: Thursday 9 July 2020 >> Time: 3PM UTC (Please convert to your local time) >> >> 1. Finalising the statement >> 2. Finalising the actions included in the statement >> 3. How we can offer more support (Dan and Wendy) >> 4. How we can make W3C more welcoming (Tzviya) >> 5. How we can do more outreach (Judy and Barb) >> 6. How we can do more to avoid discrimination (Tess and Judy) >> 7. How we can share more information (Judy) >> >> IRC: irc.w3.org #idcg >> Zoom: >> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/internal-idcg/2020Jun/0008.html > > The minutes from today’s meeting are available (thanks chaals and WendyR for scribing!): > https://www.w3.org/2020/07/09-idcg-minutes.html > > Text version: > ============= > Inclusion and Diversity CG > 09 July 2020 > > [2]Agenda. [3]IRC log. > [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-idcg/2020Jul/0020.html > [3] https://www.w3.org/2020/07/09-idcg-irc > > Attendees > Present > chaals, Coralie, Dan Appelquist, heathervescent, hober, > jeff, Judy, Killian_Downing, Léonie, melanierichards, > tzviya, wendyreid, wseltzer > Regrets > Florian, Vagner > Chair > Léonie > Scribe > chaals, wendyreid > > Contents > 1. [4]Finalising the statement > 2. [5]Intros > 3. [6]Finalising the actions included in the statement > > Meeting minutes > > <koalie> [7]Previous (2020-07-02) > > [7] https://www.w3.org/2020/07/02-idcg-minutes.html > > Finalising the statement > > <tink> [8]https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/proposed-statement > > [8] https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/proposed-statement > > LJW: Added Judy's text summarising the actions and taking up > themes. > > JudyB: We should talk about status > > LJW: We are wordsmithing the statement, seems people are > generally happy with it except we need to finalise the set of > actions we would like to add - which is the next agendum > > <Zakim> wseltzer, you wanted to add "privacy" to > "accessibility, security, and internationalization" > > WendyS: Would you like continued edits, if so, how? > > <Judy> +1 to including privacy > > <koalie> +1 > > LJW: By email is best, and I will try to work them in. Do you > have something specific? > > <dka_> +1 > > WS: Add privacy into horizontal review areas > > LJW: Yeah we should do that live > > <hober> +1 to including privacy > > WendyR: I can do that > > DKA: What happened with Amy's comments? > > LJW: Didnt incorporate them. I disagreed with the first > suggestion. > > [Wendy reads out Amy's email] > > <wseltzer> [9]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/ > internal-idcg/2020Jul/0004.html > > [9] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/internal-idcg/2020Jul/0004.html > > <wseltzer> [I thought we had previously made a different edit > to address that first comment, but don't see it reflected on > the wiki] > > WS: Are there other texts, that are getting out of synch? > > <Zakim> dka_, you wanted to ask about Amy's comments? > > LJW: I haven't seen other replies so don't think we had agreed > to any edits. > > WS: Thought we had already agreed to an edit that would have > addressed Amy's first comment. > > LJW: I thought I put up the latest agreed version on the wiki > > JudyB: I have deja vu on this too and think we had addressed > it. We need to do some archaeology to figure that out > > LJW: The phrase "who we are and what we do" was a change made > by a meeting a couple of weeks ago - is that what people are > thinking of? > … needed to talk about both us as a group of people as well as > the work we do, as things we would like to change. > … I think we are trying to acknowledge that until we have a > diverse community we cannot be confident that what we work on > actually covers the needs of everyone. > … please propose edits via the list. > > JeffJaffe: Amy raised some issues, Léonie you disagreed with > one, do we have a consensus on the call about whether we > recognise those issues > > LJW: Odd question, we should definitely recognise them, and > think the mechanism should be email. > > JJ: OK. > > Heather: Think the point of the statement is in support of > Black Lives Matter, not to put a focus on W3C and the past, but > to acknowledge we have issues with a lack of diversity that has > had unintended consequeneces in what we have done and that we > are only now undertstanding. I think the statement is > reiterating the intention to create technology for everyone, > but the point is that in solidarity with Black Lives Matter, we > set out to be inclusive but to do that we need a new level of > involvement. > … so to be successful this needs to be focused on supporting > Black Lives Matter, not what W3C has done. > > <tzviya> +1 to heathervescent > > <wendyreid> +1 > > <wseltzer> +1 to heathervescent > > <wendyreid> +1 > > LJW: Jeff, did I misunderstand your question? > > <dka_> +1 to heather's comments. > > JJ: I don't think so, I was unclear how we were going to > address this. Moving to the mailing list is fine. > > WendyR: Looking at the comments I agree with you Léonie, I > don't understand the first comment. I have tried to keep this > simple, and resist wordsmithing because we have the bad habit > of complicating things. > > <koalie> 0 to heather's comment, for the record > > WendyR: think the final comment is great, agree. > > [chaals: If I have understood correctly, I don't really agree > with Heather's comment] > > Tzviya: Should we take a minute to introduce new members? > > <Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to recommended intro new members > > Intros > > WendyR: co-chair of publishing, work for Rakuten > > Chaals: Chaals Nevile, have been various things around W3C in > various organisations for a couple of decades including WG > chair, AC rep, AB member, staff member, and participant in a > range of groups > > Coralie: co-chair with Léonie of this, head of comms at W3C > > DKA: Dan Appelquist, work for Samsung, co-chair TAG > > Heather: New co-chair of Credential Community Group, been > around about 3 years, ran into someone who wasn't supportive of > diversity. I am a futurist running a consultancy and I am very > organised. > … Putting together a diversity plan for the credentials > community group. > > Jeff: Jeff Jaffe, W3C CEO. Interested in seeing Heather's > strategic plan for diversity. My focus here is less on > statements and more interested in hearing about the actions and > whether we can take them across W3C. > > <shawn> [ Shawn Lawton Henry, W3C Staff, Accessibility > Education and Outreach. (lurking in IRC until her topic comes > up : How we can make W3C more welcoming) ] > > Killian: I am an archivist and counseloor for Europeana. I am > here to listen - Europeana are looking to improve diversity > from our network of privilege. We want to look to have > discussion before taking approrpiate action. > > Mel: Melanie Richards, Microsoft, been in different WGs at W3C, > currently focused on some controls stuff. Excited to make web > standards more inclusive and accessible. > > Tess: Tess O'Connor, Apple, TAG member, and been in other > groups for years. > > Tzviya: Tzviya Siegman, Wiley, co-chair Publishing WG, am on > AB, co-chaired the group workig on the code of professional > conduct. > > WendyS: Stragtegy lead at W3C, eager to help work on diversity > > Judy: Judy Brewer, W3C director of Web Accessibility > Initiative, interested in diversity and intersectionality and > happy W3C is looking at being more aware of and taking more > action on racial justice issues. > > Léonie: On AB, co-chair of webapps WG and this group, happy to > be chairing these meetings with a little help from my friends. > > Koalie: Nice work Léonie, thanks for doing this. > > Finalising the actions included in the statement > > <wendyreid> [10]https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/ > Ideas-for-ID-CG-actions > > [10] https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/Ideas-for-ID-CG-actions > > <jeff> From Judy's email: "W3C commits to take actions in the > areas of learning, messaging, outreach and inreach, creating a > welcoming environment, supporting participants, technical > development, governance, and continuous improvement." > > Judy: I looked across proposed actions, and minutes from the > meetings, to try capturing comprehensively the set of actions > that it sounds like the ones we would take up, to fill in the > blank on the statement we have been drafting. > … In initial message I had detailed examples of actions we have > discussed or people have volunteered for. Jeff and Léonie both > noted we shouldn't include things where we don't have a > volunteer identified, and I support that. > … Think we do better being conservative in commitments. Since > then I put a suggestion that we organise the action ideas page > to match this taxonomy but didn't want to go in and do that > without agreement. THink it would help scan and see where we > have gaps that we should look to cover, > > LJW: Sure, please make the edits. > > JB: If we recategorise it that way, if we have a volunteer for > each effort, would people feel comfortable with the less > detailed but more comprehensive statement, or are we not there > yet? > > JJ: If we have a volunteer for each area that would be great. > Named leads and example expected tasks would be a nice package. > > <Zakim> dka_, you wanted to suggest moving quickly is important > here. > > <koalie> [I have a language-related issue: distinction between > "less detailed" and "more comprehensive"?] > > DKA: I am starting to lose track of what all the actions are > leading up to. I think the focus should be on making a fast > statement, because we are losing relevance to the community we > are trying to reach. What are the actions we need before the > statement comes out? > > JB: An advantage of the generic list is we could agree on it > today and get a statement out. Jeff's suggestion means we only > need to confirm 7 or 8 people that we could achieve now, > instead of many more. > > JJ: Agree we should get moving. I have also seen many > organisations produce vacuous statements. As a matter of > personal taste, if we are serious more of the conversation > needs to be about what we do, not just what we say. > > <Judy> "W3C commits to take actions in the areas of learning, > messaging, outreach and inreach, creating a welcoming > environment, supporting participants, technical development, > governance, and continuous improvement." > > [chaals: +1 to being more focused on doing stuff than making a > statement at the expense of it being correct] > > <koalie> [11]https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/ > Ideas-for-ID-CG-actions > > [11] https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/Ideas-for-ID-CG-actions > > JB: We have an action ideas list - does someone have the link > and can we see who has signed up for actions? > > LJW: Agree with Dan, we have to ask the AC for consent and > expect that to take 4 weeks. Doing both of these makes sense - > come out today with a short list of actions with named > responsible people would be good. Longer path of adding more > detail as we work would serve us well. > > JB: Can I read out the 8 areas and see if we have a volunteer > for each? > > LJW: Yep, that's the agenda. > > JB: Learning - Tzviya and I have been talking about it, there > has been a discussion on the IDCG internal list > > TS: (that was an accident) > > JB: Could you volunteer to lead on that? > > TS: Yes. > > JB: Messaging. Last time we asked Coralie if she could help - > could you lead that one? > > JJ: This has to be done through W3C commnuications, so it has > to go through W3C in any case, so I don't see another way than > making Coralie the lead. > > Coralie: OK, I am volunteered. > > JB: Outreach and inreach. I am willing to help, could lead if > there isn't someone who wants to but would be delighted if > someone would like to. > > TS: The hiring issue is hard for people to volunteer, this has > to be taken up by W3C staff. > … There's a lot of complexity in here to deal with. > > WS: We have a bunch of volunteers on the wiki for a slightly > different set of categories. Feels like we are repeating > ourselves in a slightly different key… > … so I am losing the thread a bit too. > > <Zakim> wseltzer, you wanted to discuss these categories > > LJW: Can we map volunteers we have on the wiki to Judy's > structure? > > JB: Idea of taxonomy is to see if we can back a high-level > statement and find someone responsible in each area. The > disconnect I see is people may have volnteered for sub-level > actions, but that's why I think we are doing this exercise. > > <wendyreid> +1 Léonie > > LJW: If we want to include a list of actions in the statement > they need to be precise. Otherwise if we are describing general > stuff it is hard to look at it and see what to expect in terms > of outcomes. > > <Judy> Coralie here is the list of higher-level actions I'd > suggested: "W3C commits to take actions in the areas of > learning, messaging, outreach and inreach, creating a welcoming > environment, supporting participants, technical development, > governance, and continuous improvement." > > LJW: We can put the things we have into higher level > categories, but I think we need to choose the right thing for > the here and now first. > > <Judy> [12]https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/ > Ideas-for-ID-CG-actions > > [12] https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/Ideas-for-ID-CG-actions > > Coralie: I was confused because I was reading from the wiki, > and seeing stuff that didn't match. Now I think I got to the > same page. > > <Judy> [JB: yes we were in the middle of a re-mapping to see if > we can back the proposed high-level action statement] > > WR: I think I agree weith Léonie we should list the more > concrete actions. No problem with broader categories, but need > to have something people can see the outcomes in a reasonable > amount of time. > … there are names attached to many actions. I can put my name > on stuff to make it happen. I think we have a good list to > start from. These can produce more things we will do, it isn't > like this problem gets fixed with a few months of one-off > actions. > > <Zakim> Judy, you wanted to briefly state why I'd proposed this > categorization for an action statement > > JB: I had noted we still had a hole in our statement for what > we could commit to. Looking like turning the list of actions > into a stetement it looked piecemeal. Other organisations have > made some principled statements of concern, not what re they > giong to do. > … also looked at some organisations saying what they are doing > and their comprehensive plans to address what they are > improving, and I felt we were close to a situation where we can > say we are trying to look at the whole organisation. If someone > thinks they can turn the existing action list into something > for a statement I would encourage that. > … I would prefer a statement that covers comprehensive change > then backed by concrete actions. > > <koalie> +1 to what Léonie is saying > > LJW: think it is a question of how we get to something > happening quickly. Incorporating the introductory statement > describing thecomprehesive set of areas to work, but then we > should identify the actual concrete actions we can be held > accountable for in the short term. > … I think the world at large will expect us to produce more > information further down the track. > > TS: So, the proposal is to have the text that we talked about, > and instead of the itemised list of actions we would have the > sentence Judy proposed? > > <tink> The version of the proposed statement here includes the > suggested paragraph from Judy Brewer: [13]https://github.com/ > w3c/idcg/wiki/proposed-statement > > [13] https://github.com/w3c/idcg/wiki/proposed-statement > > TS: and that means we have specific items, but not the detailed > list of actions we will do? That speeds up the process and > allows us to take further action… > > LJW: Yes. > > DKA: Yes. > > <tzviya> W3C commits to take actions in the areas of learning, > messaging, outreach and inreach, creating a welcoming > environment, supporting participants, technical development, > governance, and continuous improvement. > > <koalie> +1 > > LJW: So in final 7 minutes, can we make a dash through the > things where we have volunteers, and see how many can be added > to the list? > > <jeff> +1 to have diversity fund on the list > > <wendyreid> +1 > > <hober> +1 > > LJW: more support with diversity fund; Dan and Wendy are > leading it. Support or objections? > > <melanierichards> +1 > > DKA: +1 > > <koalie> +1 > > <dka_> +1 > > <chaals> +1 > > LJW: Invited expert fee waiver. This already exists. Suggest we > include it. > > JJ: There are no fees for TPAC this year for anyone. > > <chaals> 11 > > <Judy> 0 > > <jeff> +1 > > <tzviya> 0 > > <koalie> 0 > > <dka_> 0 > > LJW: let's leave that out. > … Making W3C more welcoming. No volunteers for group welcomes. > > Tzviya: we have a group working on that, me, Shawn, Tess, > Barbara, … > > <wseltzer> [and I volunteered to be among that group] > > JB: Matches a higher-level categorisation too > > LJW: is that clear enough to add to the list? > > TS: Think so > > <koalie> +1 > > chaals: +1 > > <wendyreid> +1 > > <Judy> +1 > > <jeff> +1 > > <dka_> +1 > > <wendyreid> +1 > > <hober> +1 > > LJW: OK, add that one. > > [resolved] > > LJW: More outreach encompasses a number of different items > > <Zakim> dka_, you wanted to opine that making a statement that > includes even a partial list of actions is better than not > issuing a statement. > > Jeff: Previous includes CEPC and includes draft with more > detail on racism. CEPC has more detail on all sorts of > unacceptable behaviours. Prefer we don't just call out racism > but be more inclusive about what is unacceptable. > > LJW: Good point will update the wiki. > > <hober> +1 to Jeff > > LJW: happy for open office hours to be added, has traction. > > <wendyreid> +1 > > chaals: +1 > > <dka_> +1 > > <jeff> +1 > > <Judy> 0 > > <koalie> +1 > > JB: I focused more on other stuff in the last week so I didn't > synch up. I am gravitating towards the higher level categories > -this is outreach and inreach. I think it will be a whole > cluster of actions. > > <melanierichards> +1 to outreach > > LJW: Include outreach as a general action? > > <koalie> +1 > > chaals: +1 > > <Judy> +1 > > <hober> +1 to outreach, -0.5 to inreach > > JB: is term inreach too confusing > > <dka_> +1 to outreach > > <tzviya> +1 to outreach > > <wendyreid> +1 > > [chaals: I don't love the term inreach: 0 for that bit] > > LJW: Equity Review Board? Tess is leading - are you still up > for it, everyone should we include it? > > <koalie> +1 > > Tess: We should. We should work on defining it more clearly. > > <tzviya> +1 to ERB > > <jeff> Avoid discrimination: +1 to the concept; -1 on ERB > until/unless ERB is better framed. Glad to hear that Tess is > working on it. > > <dka_> +1 to ERB > > Tess: we can list it appropriately described > > <wendyreid> +1 to ERB > > <Judy> +1 > > <hober> +1 to ERB/governance > > JB: I proposed governance as a category to cover this, couldn't > find equity review board commonly > > [chaals: +1 to ERB and think that is better than describing it > as governance.] > > <koalie> thanks chaals for scribing, tink for chairing > > LJW: will share by email to try and get agreement on list and > get to AC for review. > > [Thank you Koalie for cleaning up the minutes] > > <koalie> [you're very welcome] > > > Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by > [14]scribe.perl version 121 (Mon Jun 8 14:50:45 2020 UTC). > > [14] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html > > > -- > Coralie Mercier - W3C Marketing & Communications - https://www.w3.org > mailto:coralie@w3.org +337 810 795 22 https://www.w3.org/People/Coralie/ > > > > > > -- Director @TetraLogical https://tetralogical.com
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2020 18:44:35 UTC