W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > June 2017

Minutes of Silver Task Force meeting of 27 June 2017

From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:37:19 -0400
To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8fd3d003-473d-7f3a-4da6-f7655737cd10@spellmanconsulting.com>
Minutes formatted in HTML:

Text of minutes:


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

                                - DRAFT -

                     Silver Task Force Teleconference

27 Jun 2017

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2017/06/27-silver-irc


           Jeanne, Jennison, Jan, Sarah, Shawn




      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]Research project sheet review
          2. [5]Vacation schedules (should we cancel July 7?)
          3. [6]Web Professionals article
          4. [7]Open action item review
          5. [8]Bonus Survey - WCAG Usability study
      * [9]Summary of Action Items
      * [10]Summary of Resolutions

Research project sheet review

    Jan: Concerns with Bob Dodge, hasn't heard from him in weeks.
    ... give up on Stephanie
    ... catching up with Klaus next week
    ... haven't heard from Nancy
    ... Mike has responded and is available to meet
    ... Scott, Klaus and Mike are scheduling time this week.
    ... Tyson is getting ready to meet
    ... maybe Jemma could reach out to Stephanie, I keep getting
    out of office messages. She hasn't responded.
    ... I am out at a conference on Friday. I will be here next
    ... I will be out the week of the 10th.

    Sarah: Stanley is moving along. Pete has launched his survey
    ... He will launch it externally in July. He will use an
    incentive from Bentley.
    ... he wants to make sure it is ok with W3C.

    Jeanne: I don't remember any rule about incentivized surveys,
    and I do remember a survey a couple years ago that offered an

    Sarah: Pete will launch the survey after July 4. Remember that
    the last question is an offer to do interviews.
    ... he is also looking for contacts from the stakeholder list.
    ... Phil hasn't responded in a while. We had some initial
    discussion, but he hasn't responded so I think we should move
    the project to the "interested" list.

    Shawn: I'll leave it in the list, but with a note with the

    Sarah: David Swallow has a few questions from a few weeks ago
    that aren't resolved: one about the stakeholder list and one
    about compensation.

    Jeanne: What timeline does he have for the project? Arranging
    compensation for research participants takes longer.

    Sarah: He doesn't have a timeline other than the project
    timeline. The sooner the better.

    Jeanne: Policy is drafted and has gone to W3C lawyers. We
    should use it.

    Sarah: What about the followon outreach?

    Jeanne: You are right that isn't done yet. I won't be able to
    work on it until July, but it's at the top of my list to do.

    Sarah: Shay is still on the project intentions list. She asked
    if theColeman Institute could get additional funding support.
    It hasn't been solidified.

    Jeanne: Jemma reported on Friday that she is pursuing getting a
    grant from her university to help with the literature review.

Vacation schedules (should we cancel July 7?)

    Shawn: Away for the next 10 days.

    Sarah: I am available 30, 7, and 14. I won't be available the
    week of the 17th. I will be available on the 24.

    Shawn: Let's keep July 7. Jeanne, Jan and Sarah can attend.

    Jennison: I won't be available next week.

    No meeting on 4th, we will meet on the 7th.

Web Professionals article

    Sarah: It is an article for a magazine, Web Professionals. Mark
    responded to the initial Stakeholder email in January. I
    forwarded it privately to the active team. He outlines what he
    is looking for.
    ... he has room for two pages of information including images.
    ... he wants us to write the article.
    ... He is hoping to get it by July 1.

    Shawn: I can write up the info by friday, or I will email Mark
    to say we can't make the deadline.
    ... I'll send it around so we can adapt it to an intro for the
    wiki page.

Open action item review

      [11] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/track/actions/open


      [12] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/track/actions/open

    action-15 due 14 July

    <trackbot> Set action-15 Add expectations to research page due
    date to 2017-07-14.

    action-54 due 14 July

    <trackbot> Set action-54 With Jennison as lead, reach out to
    accessibility meetup organizers. due date to 2017-07-14.

    close action-89 preparation is done, ready for a meeting agenda

    Sarah: The preparation is done. It's ready for a meeting agenda
    to discuss.

    Shawn: can you send it around?

    Sarah: Can we talk about it Friday?

    action-92 due 7 July

    <trackbot> Set action-92 Set up a WBS form for the Stakeholder
    opt-in form. due date to 2017-07-07.

    action-98 assigned sarah

    action-98 due 30 JUne

    <trackbot> Set action-98 Research timeline info for david's
    blog post from research deadline and overall timeline. due date
    to 2017-06-30.

    action-99 due 7 July

    <trackbot> Set action-99 Draw up budget based on notes from
    david and discussion in the tf meeting. due date to 2017-07-07.

Bonus Survey - WCAG Usability study

    Sarah: I have been thinking about a survey that we could
    produce as a task force instead of from the researchers.
    ... Pete is running a branch in his own survey about usability
    of WCAG
    ... How easy to learn, how easy to use, how easy to teach? are
    factors of usability.
    ... I envisioned a survey tool that would list the WCAG A
    success criteria and have a selection of "this is easy to
    learn" or not
    ... I don't want people to have to think a lot about it, just a
    quick evaluation of how easy they are to learn.
    ... it's more of a gut check on the success criteria usability
    of the success criteria.
    ... It's studying the success criteria as a user interface

    Shawn: I think it's a good idea.

    Sarah: We think we know which are hard or easy.

    Shawn: It is particularly interesting from the teaching aspect.
    We need to get this in front of different groups. We may think
    it is clear, but others may be confused. Meaningful Sequence is
    an example.

    Sarh: We have to trust people to just click on what is on the
    page, and not google it and read about it. It isn't real
    science, because we can't control the outside factors, but the
    purpose is to give us a sense of what is needed.

    <scribe> ACTION: Sarah to work on the WCAG Usability Study
    survey for 7 July 2017 [recorded in

      [13] http://www.w3.org/2017/06/27-silver-minutes.html#action01

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Work on the wcag usability
    study survey for 7 july 2017 [on Sarah Horton - due

    Jennison: Is it sent to Stakeholders or the world?

    Shawn: Both, I recommend.

    Sarah: we can use the demographic questions to determine the
    level of knowledge.

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Sarah to work on the WCAG Usability Study survey
    for 7 July 2017 [recorded in

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2017/06/27-silver-minutes.html#action01

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 27 June 2017 14:38:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:41 UTC