RE: Remote meetings wiki restructure work

Thank you, Scott, for working on this draft.
Some comments appear below.

  *   Section 1.1.1: “Standard remote meeting platform” – would “stand-alone remote meeting platform” be a better term to use?
  *   Section 1.2 – “accessibility awareness of host participants”: do you mean “hosts and participants”, or hosts only? It isn’t clear to me.
  *   Section 1.2 “In the case of the remote meeting platform, if captioned video playback is not implemented in the software then the tool fails the WCAG requirement”. I suggest citing the exact requirement here.
  *   Section 1.2 – in the discussion of captions, it isn’t clear which case is being considered: captions of recorded content played in a meeting, of live meeting content, or both. I think this discussion could be clarified.
  *   Section 2.1.2: It isn’t clear to me where the quoted material from the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines starts and ends – it should probably be in block-quoted paragraphs.
  *   Also in the discussion of UAAG: “this standard applies t remote meeting software that incorporates web browsers or other agents for its presentation mechanism”. It isn’t clear to me what components would be subject to UAAG (e.g., media players implemented in JavaScript and provided as a component of a Web application). I suggest clarifying.
  *   Section 2.1.3 – “where remote functionality is an embedded function” - The intent here isn’t clear. Is this referring to cases in which collaborative content creation is included as part of the meeting platform? If it is an embedded remote meeting platform in which the larger application supports content creation, then the issue is with the larger application rather than with the remote meeting aspect, and probably lies outside the scope of this document.
  *   Section 2.1.4: Are there other aspects of RAUR that should be highlighted here? This hasn’t been updated with revisions to RAUR, hence the open question.
  *   Section 3.1.1 – “automatic speech recognition (ASR) technology to generate captions will not yield sufficiently high quality…” Is this always true, or should it instead read “will typically not” to allow that it may be adequate in some contexts?
  *   Section 3.1.2: There appears to be some duplication here of earlier material related to the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines. Perhaps consolidation (with everything in the one place) is possible, or, at least, there should be a cross-reference to the earlier discussion.
I have sent Scott a copy of his draft that incorporates some (largely editorial) changes.
I look forward to discussing this further at the Task Force meeting.

From: Scott Hollier <scott@hollier.info<mailto:scott@hollier.info>>
Sent: Monday, 12 April 2021 21:16
To: public-rqtf@w3.org<mailto:public-rqtf@w3.org>
Subject: Remote meetings wiki restructure work



________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________