Minutes of Silver TF meeting of 17 February 2017

Formatted minutes:
https://www.w3.org/2017/02/17-silver-minutes.html


Text of Minutes:

    [1]W3C

       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

                     Silver Task Force Teleconference

17 Feb 2017

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2017/02/17-silver-irc

Attendees

    Present
           jeanne, Jemma, Shawn

    Regrets
           Sarah, Dave

    Chair
           Shawn

    Scribe
           jeanne

Contents

      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]Researcher outreach update
          2. [5]Literature review update
          3. [6]Research project management
      * [7]Summary of Action Items
      * [8]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <scribe> scribe: jeanne

    <Lauriat>
    [9]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Research_P
    rojects#Proposed_Research_Questions

       [9] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Research_Projects#Proposed_Research_Questions

    Shawn: Dave had updates. I've entended the list of research
    questions to include the ones recieved from researchers

    Jeanne: Do we want to accept every question from a researcher?

    Shawn: Let's review wiki page history

    <Lauriat>
    [10]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/index.php
    ?title=Research_Projects&diff=172&oldid=139

      [10] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/index.php?title=Research_Projects&diff=172&oldid=139

    <Lauriat> Question 1: "* How well do W3C Accessibility
    Guidelines communicate that accessibility supports business
    goals by expanding customer reach/growing revenue?"

    Shawn: We discussed this last week and agreed that this was
    valuable research but not directly related to what we are
    trying to do for Silver.

    <Lauriat> Added question #2: "What are the main reasons why
    accessibility is not seen as on the critical path for product
    success?"

    Jeanne: Should we mark it or delete it?

    <Lauriat> Added question #2: "What could W3C do to communicate
    the importance of accessibility to the business community?"

    <Lauriat> Added question #3: "What could W3C do to communicate
    the importance of accessibility to the business community?"

    Shawn: Let's create a separate section for research questions
    proposed but not directly related to the Silver project.
    ... the business reasoning fits into the effectiveness of the
    supporting materials.

    <Lauriat> Added section: "Understanding the guideline
    development process"

    Shawn: David added a new section of questions: "Understanding
    the guideline development process"

    <Lauriat> Category under that: "When organizations choose to
    produce adaptations of WCAG:"

    <Lauriat> Added question: "What aspects of WCAG do people
    drop?"

    Jeanne: These questions look really good.

    <Lauriat> Added question: "What aspects of WCAG are most
    important and why?"

    <Lauriat> Added question: "What aspects of WCAG do people think
    are missing?"

    Shawn: I have seen adaptations drop the line length
    requirements

    <Lauriat> Added question: "What do people change about WCAG?"

    <Lauriat> Added question: "What things are reworded for
    clarity?"

    Jeanne: I have seen adaptations that drop the live captioning
    and audio description requirements

    Jemma: These are more around WCAG itself.

    Jeanne: I think these are some really good questions for the
    interviews.

    <Lauriat> Added question: "How have guideline development
    initiatives outside the field of accessibility engaged and
    solicited feedback from all relevant stakeholders? What methods
    have been particularly effective or ineffective?"

    Shawn: Let's make a new section for WCAG adaptations.

    <Lauriat> Added question: "For guideline development
    initiatives, what have been the key drivers of the timeline
    (whether lag or potential speed efficiencies)?"

    Jemma: I have different categories for the literature review

    <Lauriat> Added question: "What are the factors that determine
    effective (i.e. widespread) adoption of and compliance with a
    new set of guidelines?"

    Jeanne: Important question

    Shawn: That seems like a category of questions

Researcher outreach update

    [scribe notes that all the prior discussion belongs in this
    topic]

    Shawn: We still have to work out how to talk with people who
    are under Non Disclosure.

Literature review update

    Jemma: I have talked with Sarah about what I can share in the
    Zotaro library.

    Shawn: I haven't had a chance to work on my contribution to the
    progress.

    Jemma: I talked with the librarian at my University on "fair
    use" information
    ... she thought that we could share more information that
    Jeanne thought

    Jeanne: I am confident that we can quote relevant results of
    the research (properly cited) in Zotaro as fair use

    <jemma>
    [11]http://guides.library.illinois.edu/coursematerialsandcopyri
    ghtforprofessors/fairuse

      [11] http://guides.library.illinois.edu/coursematerialsandcopyrightforprofessors/fairuse

    Jemma: We have a librarian who specializes in fair use.
    ... this link is what she shared with me.

    Here's what the WAI-AGE literature review published in 2008

    [12]https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-age-literature/

      [12] https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-age-literature/

    Jemma: This is a interesting idea for a template

    Jeanne: We could consider publishing the literature review in
    W3C. But not in two months.
    ... the resources referenced in the literature review seem to
    mostly be publicly available, so these will be useful for
    Shawn's project.

Research project management

    Shawn: I will make a new sheet that is more project management
    oriented. So as the projects solidify, we will have a place to
    keep more management issues.

    Jemma: Can you contact Andrew Arch and introduce me about
    literature review?

    <scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to introduce Jemma and Andrew Arch
    about literature reviews at W3C. [recorded in
    [13]http://www.w3.org/2017/02/17-silver-minutes.html#action01]

      [13] http://www.w3.org/2017/02/17-silver-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Introduce jemma and andrew arch
    about literature reviews at w3c. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due
    2017-02-24].

    rrsagent: Make minutes

    Jemma: Can we review the milestone for the Literature Review?
    We cannot finish in two months.

    Shawn: Yes.

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to introduce Jemma and Andrew Arch about
    literature reviews at W3C. [recorded in
    [14]http://www.w3.org/2017/02/17-silver-minutes.html#action01]

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2017/02/17-silver-minutes.html#action01

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________