Re: Some material for next meeting

So I just spent some time splitting the “agenda” page into a main “Agenda” and a separate discussion TALK page.

The Agenda page:  https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Agenda <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Agenda>
Is now composed mainly of either bullet point agenda items to discuss, or for a proposal, the minimum of what the proposal is (not the background discussion).

The background discussion of agenda items and proposals is now on the talk page:

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Talk:Agenda <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Talk:Agenda>

So I moved all of Sam and my comments to the discussion page in an attempt to keep the agenda page easy to parse. At the top of the TALK page is some discussion/help for formatting


Thank you


Andy

<address redacted for list>


> On Aug 31, 2021, at 6:01 AM, Bruce Bailey <Bailey@Access-Board.gov> wrote:
> 
> +1 to using the Talk pages.  The AG WG does not have this as a routine habit but it is certainly a good idea.
>  
> +1 to considering a name change.
>  
> When you make an edit, there is prompt to characterize the edit.  Please do use that.
>  
> The “View history” feature will expose edits and who made them.  The UI is not great for many people.
>  
> Everyone has the same write permissions, so please focus on additions and editorial changes.  To date, we have not had significant problems with edit wars (as routinely happens on Wikipedia).
>  
> Controversial or more deliberative materials can go to a new page or associated Talk page.
>  
> Please strongly favor semantic wiki code over visual formatting effects.
>  
> Finally, one of the main benefits IMHO from having a routine meeting cadence, the wiki, and GitHub is less email traffic.
>  
>  
> From: Andrew Somers <andy@generaltitles.com> 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 8:19 AM
> To: Sam Waller <sdw32@cam.ac.uk>
> Cc: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Some material for next meeting
>  
> Hi Sam, the traditional way to add comments to a talk section on a wiki page is to begin each sentence with a colon to indent, and use multiple colon as needed (I.e. If the previous commenter was  two colons indented then the next commenters should use three columns to indent. 
>  
> Then end the last sentence with four tildes ~~~~ after the last sentence in a section, which then adds your name and date.
>  
> :commenter one~~~~
>  
> ::commenter two~~~~
>  
> :::commenter one again in reply has now used three colons to indent three times, indicating a new comment~~~~
>  
>  
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> On Aug 31, 2021, at 3:25 AM, Sam Waller <sdw32@cam.ac.uk <mailto:sdw32@cam.ac.uk>> wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear all
>  
> Thanks to Andy for making an excellent start on identifying some of the issues with 2.x and proposing some critical agenda items.
>  
> I've added some comments to Andy’s Wiki page, I started my comments with [SDW] and finished with [end], although I wasn't really sure if this was the preferred way to add these sorts of comments, so please let me know if there is a better way for adding review comments and/or highlighting them as being mine. Many thanks.
>  
> Best wishes
>  
> Sam Waller
> University of Cambridge, Engineering Design Centre
> 01223 332826
>  
> From: Andrew Somers <andy@generaltitles.com <mailto:andy@generaltitles.com>> 
> Sent: 27 August 2021 10:41
> To: public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org <mailto:public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>>
> Subject: Some material for next meeting
>  
> Hey everyone, 
>  
> Nice meeting so many new members in teh Turs morning meeting!!!
>  
> I’ve outlined a few topics I feel are important, and added some discussion in advance of the next meeting in two weeks.
>  
> I posted them to a page on the LVTF Wiki here: <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Flow-vision-a11y-tf%2Fwiki%2FAgenda&data=04%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cf63f57099f524cd39f3908d96c79a6bf%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637660092019504110%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=gAeYmETzZAmRncYkT0yOA5A0pLN6SaCgQGnPMtryeGg%3D&reserved=0>
>  
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Agenda <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Flow-vision-a11y-tf%2Fwiki%2FAgenda&data=04%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cf63f57099f524cd39f3908d96c79a6bf%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637660092019514065%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=ST8H0Y7x0zs1xVe1eZgxB8r3nJeXZfQCYv5SO%2B1rD2s%3D&reserved=0>
>  
> Essentially it discusses scope, technology needs, proposed CSS properties, and also a sample criterion for contrast for WCAG 2.3, but using the APCA math (please note this is an unevaluated draft).
>  
>  
>    Contents
>   • 1        Proposed Agenda Items for the Thursday Meetings
>               • 1.1      Scope of the Reborn LVTF
>                           • 1.1.1   A proposal to create a Visual Accessibility Task Force.
>               • 1.2      New CSS and Related Technologies
>                           • 1.2.1   Background
>               • 1.3      Proposed Font Size Related CSS Property
>                           • 1.3.1   Examples
>                           • 1.3.2   Companion Property
>                           • 1.3.3   Examples
>                           • 1.3.4   Font Meta Data??
>               • 1.4      Proposed LVTF Key Agenda Items
>                           • 1.4.1   Silver/WCAG 3
>                           • 1.4.2   WCAG 2.x
>                           • 1.4.3   CSS/HTML/Browser Technologies
>               • 1.5      Should the LVTF be Renamed?
>               • 1.6      Proposed WCAG 2.3 Alternate Contrast SC (APCA lite)
>                           • 1.6.1   Guideline 1.5 Visually Distinguishable, Advanced Alternate to 1.4
>               • 1.7      SC 1.5.3 SAMPLE DRAFT — NOT FOR PRODUCTION
>                           • 1.7.1   Success Criterion 1.5.3 Readable Contrast
>  
>  
> Thank you
>  
> Andy
>  
>  
> <Address Redacted for Listserv>