- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 13:01:44 -0400
- To: "Jason J.G. White" <jason@jasonjgw.net>
- Cc: public-rqtf@w3.org
Thanks, Jason. Much appreciated! I figured we'd want to discuss 6.3 because it drops the Note we had saying A-I can't be relied on. My edit takes a different approach, namely that the user should decide whether the A-I generated summary is useful. It may not be stated as usefully as we might want, but I do think it's the better direction. Janina Jason White writes: > Thank you, Janina. > > I made some editorial corrections to the new text under User Need 14, and > corrected a markup validity error later in the document (of my making, not > Janina's). > > My changes are now included in Janina's branch. > > I approve of the reorganization of the introduction and the new requirements > 14. I propose we merge Janina's changes, which of course does not prevent us > from further editing the added requirements. > > On 22/4/24 12:10, Janina Sajka wrote: > > Colleagues: > > > > I have created yet another draft of potential edits to CTAUR. The draft is available for your consideration here: > > > > http://raw.githack.com/w3c/ctaur/js2404a/ > > > > > > Summary of Changes: > > > > The former Sec 3: "User Need Definition" is now moved to the > > Introduction as Sec 1.2. > > > > * The former Sec 1.2: "Scope and Applicability" is moved > > * to the end of the introduction as a new Sec 1.6. > > > > * Sec 6.3 is expanded with additional requirementsthat we'll need > > * to discuss. Essentially, it suggests any user should be able to > > * request an A-I generated summary for themselves of either > > * content under development, or of any comment thread that the > > * collaboration tool knows about. > > > > Best, > > Janina > > > > > > This draft: > > > > 1.) Restores discussion of custom keyboard mappings and unique menu > > usage to the Introduction, but doex so by moving that content to the > > last paragraph of the relevant section. I believe this now reads > > sensibly. > > > > 2.) Attempts an initial glossary entry for WYSIWYG, which you'll > > recall was questioned by COGA in issue 58: > > > > https://github.com/w3c/ctaur/issues/58 > > > > While we don't customarily refer to Wikipedia in our glossaries, > > the Wikipedia page for WYSIWYG seems particularly helpful to me. > > > > Best, > > Janina > > > > > > Janina Sajka writes: > > > Dear Jason, Scott, All: > > > > > > I've been mulling Sec. 9 vs Intro and I'm not convinced 9 is enough > > > alone. I don't yet have proposed edits, though. > > > > > > Since we use the Intro to paint the picture from a user's scenario, I'm > > > now inclined to keep something about standard conventions in the intro > > > because it's just as important as notifications and the other > > > problematic features we talk about in the Intro. The more I look at this > > > the more convinced I am what we had was just positioned wrong. I'm now > > > inclined to put something at the very end of Sec. 1.2. > > > > > > As for Sec. 9 I'm not convinced it'c clear enough or strong enough. But, > > > as I say, I have no edits yet and am likely to get to this before late > > > today at the earliest. > > > > > > So, maybe we resolve this concern this time around, or maybe it's > > > another edit for the next working draft. I propose we not let this topic > > > hold us up from updating the working draft in preparation for our > > > meeting with COGA. I don't believe this particular issue is of > > > significance to them. It's more of a screen reader and/or keyboard > > > command user feature. > > > > > > Best, > > > Janina > > > > > > > > > Jason White writes: > > > > On 2/3/24 08:56, Janina Sajka wrote: > > > > > I'm thinking our preference for controls that reflect standard > > > > > expectations over arbitrarily mapped keyboard shortcuts is an important > > > > > requirement. I propose we migrate it out of the Introduction and into > > > > > our requirements, though I'm not sure yet exactly where I think it > > > > > should go. > > > > > > > > > We created section 9 and included this requirement there, but we didn't > > > > remove it from the introduction. I propose removing it from the > > > > introduction. > > > > > > > > Janina, are you satisfied with the way it's stated in section 9, or should > > > > we revise that further? > > > > > > > > I'll fix the introduction. > > > -- > > > > > > Janina Sajka (she/her/hers) > > > Accessibility Consultant https://linkedin.com/in/jsajka > > > > > > The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) > > > Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures http://www.w3.org/wai/apa > > > > > > Linux Foundation Fellow > > > https://www.linuxfoundation.org/board-of-directors-2/ > > > -- Janina Sajka (she/her/hers) Accessibility Consultant https://linkedin.com/in/jsajka The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures http://www.w3.org/wai/apa Linux Foundation Fellow https://www.linuxfoundation.org/board-of-directors-2/
Received on Monday, 22 April 2024 17:01:50 UTC