- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 15:08:12 -0400
- To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0fd15523-bca9-5428-0f0a-76033a9355e8@spellmanconsulting.com>
Formatted version of the minutes:
https://www.w3.org/2018/04/06-silver-minutes.html
Text version of the minutes:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Silver Task Force Teleconference
06 Apr 2018
Attendees
Present
chaals, Charles, Jeanne_Shawn, Luis
Regrets
Jemma, Jan, Shari, JohnR, JohnK
Chair
Jeanne, Shawn
Scribe
jeanne
Contents
* [2]Topics
1. [3]update on table summaries from the CSUN Design
Sprint
2. [4]layout of Design Sprint report and invitation to
further work?
3. [5]AccessU meeting?
4. [6]layout of Design Sprint report and invitation to
further work?
5. [7]Plain language vs Simple language for writing
Silver
6. [8]Other concurrent work
* [9]Summary of Action Items
* [10]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
update on table summaries from the CSUN Design Sprint
Jeanne: Finished Table 2 including the summary
Shawn: I added the summary for Table 5, what we were trying for
Strictly Testable, but we got beyond it in a complementary way.
<Charles> So, there is a pattern here, where table prototypes
addressed more than one problem.
<Lauriat> Table 5 looked at how testers would go about
assessing a web application using measurements along a gradient
of accessibility as opposed to a strict pass/fail result. The
tool to put together a report of the assessment puts an
emphasis on:
<chaals> [that is helpful. We have a lot of problems to
address...]
<Lauriat> 1. personas: users’ needs come first
<Lauriat> 2. task-based assessment, rather than component-based
assessment. A properly marked up button doesn’t help anything
if the user can’t complete the task at hand. Note: this also
makes a good midpoint of grading between component/tag
assessment and full page / complete processes compliance in the
WCAG conformance model.
Jeanne: We did the same at Table 2. We had also discussed
Difficult to Read, and added some elements from that discussion
into Accessibility Supported prototype.
layout of Design Sprint report and invitation to further work?
Jeanne: I was thinking of organizing it by problem statement,
and asking people for ideas or prototypes where we need more.
Shawn: There is too much detail. We could put all the HMW in a
wiki page
Chaals: We should put a summary of the pathway that we want to
go down, and include all the places where we don't know where
we want to go.
... I would put it at the beginning. Here is our conclusion and
this is how we got there.
<Charles> A possible prioritization of those paths may be based
on degree of completion. So that means we have (at least) 5
prototypes that are in-progress, and (at least) 10 ideas for
prototypes that are conceptual.
<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to organize the rough first draft of
the report
<trackbot> Created ACTION-168 - Organize the rough first draft
of the report [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-04-13].
Chaals: Degree of completion and who is doing the work is
always a good first cut.
Shawn: Pull together the summary, the next steps and how to
investigate the feasibility of doing it.
AccessU meeting?
[11]https://knowbility.org/programs/accessu/
[11] https://knowbility.org/programs/accessu/
Sharron Rush invited us to have a room to meet there.
Jan McSorley suggested that people could drop in the room and
work on a prototype or do user testing and put things in front
of it.
Chaals: We need to get prototypes in front of people and then
be prepared to make changes based on the feedback.
... then the person who designed the prototype has to commit to
moving it forward.
... If people come in and hack on it, then you get a lot of
value, and other people can add to it.
<Charles> If the goal is contribution, then the prototype(s)
must be somewhere that contributors can access, like GitHub
Chaals: It should be somewhere that people can see.
... having something where people can see what you have done on
the first day, so I can poke it and make comments the next
morning.
<Charles> Then we also need a place and method for comments
Shawn: Who can be there?
[12]https://knowbility.org/programs/accessu/
[12] https://knowbility.org/programs/accessu/
Jeanne, yes. Jan & Shari are yes. Shawn is no. Chaals and
Charles are remote possibilities.
scribe: Luis is not attending.
Charles: Even if we don't have progress on prototypes for
people to interact with, it can at least be a recruiting
effort, where we show what we have done so far and talk about
our needs for the summer.
layout of Design Sprint report and invitation to further work?
<Charles> It is also on CodePen already:
[13]https://codepen.io/hallmedia/full/zWpoEd/
[13] https://codepen.io/hallmedia/full/zWpoEd/
Chaals: I could move the prototype from Table 4 into Github.
<Charles> [14]https://github.com/w3c
[14] https://github.com/w3c
Chaals: I'll make a repo and hand over the ownership later when
we have a Silver repo
... both Github and Google docs cause problems for some people.
We do end up shuffling things across different systems and
accommodate people.
Plain language vs Simple language for writing Silver
Charles: I gathered a bunch of resources that can be pasted
into a working draft of research on the topic so we can easily
access the sources if we want to cite them
... the fundamental thing that must be sorted out first is
whether or not we adopt and existing standard or whether we
create them.
... in order to make that decision, we need to look at the
existing standards. Globally, there an almost infinite number
-- some of which are hard to find.
... in the US, there are models that go back decades that maps
plain language to an education grade level based.
Chaals: We have the option of using what they actually say and
adapting that to the best of our ability. We aren't required to
use someone else's standard.
... my experience is that writing simple or plain language is
very hard and we shouldn't get to caught up in the "how-to" of
it. We need to make it, and let people comment on it.
... we don't want to spend months on it.
Charles: Let's have the people who have expertise in this area
advance it to the next step.
... I just prepared resource materials.
... do we need to create a style guide to continue writing to
meet that standard?
... Jeanne mentioned a volunteer effort to convert existing
WCAG 2.1 to plain language.
... the Alan Dalton article last November converted each
success criteria to plain simple language.
<Charles>
[15]https://24ways.org/2017/wcag-for-people-who-havent-read-the
m/
[15] https://24ways.org/2017/wcag-for-people-who-havent-read-them/
Shawn: ANy discussion of needing a style guide should be held
with someone who has expertise in the area.
... let's get a general overview from John Rochford and have
him guide us through the discussion. Then work on the details
of whether we should have our own style guide.
Charles: My hope is that he takes an action item to organize
and lead that effort.
Jeanne: We have five people who have volunteered. I hope one of
them would be willing to organize it.
... we could write the style guide as we go, so we can be
responsive to what works and what doesn't.
Chaals: I think we should write the style guide as we go.
Other concurrent work
Charles: I'm going to see Peter Morville next Wednesday. He is
one of the top 5 IA people in the industry.
Jeanne: Invite him to sign up for the CG. We should have the
draft of the Design Sprint Report for him to look at.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne to organize the rough first draft of the
report
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 6 April 2018 19:08:42 UTC