- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 13:04:42 -0400
- To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Formatted version of the minutes:
https://www.w3.org/2018/08/28-silver-minutes.html
Text version:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Silver Task Force and Community Group
28 Aug 2018
Attendees
Present
Charles, kirkwood, jeanne, AngelaAccessForAll,
mikeCrabb, Lauriat, Imelda, LuisG, KimD, Jan, jemma,
Shawn, Wilco, Shari
Regrets
Chair
Shawn, jeanne
Scribe
jeanne
Contents
* [2]Topics
1. [3]CSUN face to face
2. [4]Information architecture
3. [5]Tagging
* [6]Summary of Action Items
* [7]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<Imelda> +1
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
CSUN face to face
SL: The survey for CSUN F2F had enough people to go forward,
the preference was for Monday and Tuesday.
... we will go ahead and get a room to meet for those dates
... we should send out a email to the list
Information architecture
MCr: I set up a document on information architecture and put it
out for comments
<Charles> I had to dial in via Skype. WebEx audio not working.
Finally on. Sorry.
[8]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CBk9qG5u5LGJa9pIvou5Jsqx
nZFiROyeuUN6fmhU3D8/edit#heading=h.ha5990ol4jtn
[8] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CBk9qG5u5LGJa9pIvou5JsqxnZFiROyeuUN6fmhU3D8/edit#heading=h.ha5990ol4jtn
scribe: I removed the POUR architecture, so we could have a
more flexible architecture
... I took out A, AA, AAA
... then I added the tagging engine with the same "chemistry"
theme -- Hessite AgTe
... Jeanne set up a document just on the Tagging ideas, which
has had a number of comments
... now we are at the stage of refining the ideas based on the
comments
Charles: I'm concerned that people could interpret "engine" to
mean that the tagging is automated.
MikeCr: I will clarify
Charles: I like removing the numbering
<kirkwood> good work! tagging is very powerful and useful
Shawn: I like removing the number
... it stops the people that reference things by number
... it allows more flexible maintence, since you can add SC and
not have to change the numbering system.
Jeanne: WCAG today has a unique short name for each success
criterion
MikeCr: Inside a database it could have a unique id, but we
wouldn't show that to the public. Maybe it would appear in the
API or maybe it would appear in a uRL address.
... the web team in my org is excited about an API so they
always have the most up-to-date information. They haven't
updated the internal information since 2005 because it is so
difficult to scrape the W3C. They have old information.
Jeanne: I hadn't thought about it because W3C is oriented
toward "don't fork the standard" but people need to customize
information in-house, so we might as well give it to them
MikeCr: The guidelines would be owned by W3C and updated by
them, and the methods could be updated by the community.
... this gets over the hurdle of what is stable and standard,
and also with the flexibility for future-proofing
Shawn: What is the difference between what we do now with SC
and Techniques?
MikeCr: It isn't a big difference, just having the tagging
engine to connect them in more flexible ways
... and condensing the information to show the thing you are
after.
Jeanne: Another difference is to have broader input on the
Methods.
MikeCr: Which does raise the challenge of how to maintain the
quality, but it's a good challenge to have.
Shawn: This is exciting stuff.
MikeCr: I'm not attached to the current state. I want people to
comment and make it better.
Shawn: A next step would be to set up a mini-prototype using
existing WCAG content
... just simulate the tagging engine so that people can see how
it could work
... we can take the normative guidelines and generate the one
document that is the TR normative document that goes through
W3C process.
<LuisG> Jeanne: Very few documents are generated by hand now
<LuisG> ... most are generated
Imelda: Mike, congratulations on a great document. It looks
very good.
<kirkwood> +1 to a great coument. I really like the tagging
aspect.
+1
<Lauriat> +1
<kirkwood> i meant document. ;)
<KimD> +1
Shawn: Everyone please read and add comments
Tagging
Jeanne: New Tagging Ideas document
[9]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nqyIuJ9_goXGHKPa3o9l7pXk
-CYzfsEn22HKK3V61C4/edit#heading=h.t2qkc1obqa4y
[9] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nqyIuJ9_goXGHKPa3o9l7pXk-CYzfsEn22HKK3V61C4/edit#heading=h.t2qkc1obqa4y
<LuisG> Jeanne: Threw together a quick document to gather ideas
and it took off.
<LuisG> ... I took the things Mike had in his IA document to
get people started with it.
<LuisG> ... should we go into detail here?
<LuisG> Shawn: High level and then the details
<LuisG> ... project role maybe by activity instead of role
since folks may do different activities despite their role
+1 for Activity instead of role
<LuisG> ... thinking it may make sense to merge activities and
project stage
<Cyborg> is there a link to the document being discussed?
<LuisG>
[10]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nqyIuJ9_goXGHKPa3o9l7pX
k-CYzfsEn22HKK3V61C4/edit#heading=h.t2qkc1obqa4y
[10] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nqyIuJ9_goXGHKPa3o9l7pXk-CYzfsEn22HKK3V61C4/edit#heading=h.t2qkc1obqa4y
<Cyborg> if you go with activity, just important to be
consistent about that across all
<LuisG> Charles: I don't think everyone considers "web work" a
project. Some of it is "sustain" some of it is "remediation"
which wouldn't be a project.
<LuisG> ... want to make sure it's understood in context
<LuisG> mikeCrabb: Our web team is interested in it applying to
more than just web so we can send it over to marketing
<LuisG> Charles: Or app, etc.
<Cyborg> yes re: dividing design
<Cyborg> especially if you want to include more usability
testing
<LuisG> Jeanne: Cameron also said there could be different
kinds of "designer"
<Cyborg> there is an issue with graphics people doing usability
testing without any related experience
<LuisG> Shawn: Merged project role and project stage into
activity. Added debugging to testing activity...someone trying
to make something correct might not look in the "testing"
activity, but might look in "debugging" activity.
<Cyborg> is debugging not part of maintenance?
<LuisG> ... for the technology side of things, we could have it
by technology but with web/mobile "mobile web" ends up having
same overall requirements as the hardware interface.
<LuisG> ... I'm not against having technology, just talking
through how we have those two related ideas. Interactions being
"I have a mouse/keyboard/monitor" or "I have a touch screen
with nothing else"
<LuisG> mikeCrabb: I was thinking of development technology.
<Cyborg> I think the Assistive Technology issue is what type of
assistive tech is being used for specific criteria?
<Cyborg> some criteria might apply to some AT and some might
apply to others?
<LuisG> ... do we make a distinction between the device and the
software?
<LuisG> Shawn: I started with "interactions" because...you may
have a small Chromebook running a desktop version of Chrome and
next to that you can put a tablet that has a hardware keyboard
and it will look the same, but one is running Chrome and
another running Android so two completely different interfaces
for Google Docs
<LuisG> ... the interactions as far as the hardware goes is the
same.
<LuisG> ... we could have keyboard, mouse, touch screen, etc.
interactions...VR interactions
<LuisG> mikeCrabb: Should we have an interaction tagging
category?
<LuisG> Shawn: I think...so. You could have the same spoken
interface with your phone as with some flower pot device.
<LuisG> Jenna: We may eventually need to get to the device
level in the methods. The interactions could be different on
different devices. I like doing it based on interactions.
<LuisG> Charles: There are hundreds of input devices, and all
sorts of screen types
<LuisG> ... I can use a sip/puff with my phone, or switch with
laptop, braille device with laptop, etc.
<LuisG> Jemma: If you're using switch, we talk about
accessibility of the switch.
<LuisG> ... Jeanne said "we should deal with device
eventually." what do you mean by that?
<LuisG> Jeanne: Kind of what Shawn was saying about it becoming
fractal. It shouldn't be a part of our architecture.
<LuisG> mikeCrabb: Where is the responsibility of
designers/developers to implement this. When does the a11y tree
take over?
<LuisG> Shawn: example, the sip and puff or switch...these are
things that rely heavily on correct use of semantics and click
target size, but the guidelines don't exist for the
devices...it's just that the guideline enables that
interaction. "A spatial screen with some device interacting
with it."
<LuisG> Jeanne: It's an interesting problem. John McNabb
brought this up a while ago. We used to say switch devices were
covered under keyboard...but actually it doesn't work the same
under mobile...they need separate guidance.
<LuisG> ... this is why I like doing it by interaction
<LuisG> Jemma: I think interaction comes first and device
second.
<LuisG> Shawn: That's a good way to put it.
<LuisG> ... how does this scale up? It's difficult to
articulate what level it should be at. Once we involve the
world and rest of the working group...we would need to make it
absoluately clear so that it's impossible to misunderstand what
level it's at.
<LuisG> ... however, activities and technology platforms that's
a little more straight-forward. Want to include something about
interactions, but when it comes to tagging, other people not
here will contribute to the tagging.
<LuisG> Jemma: Keyboard interaction would be viable since
<LuisG> Shawn: Some of it comes down to where are the
boundaries? There are guidelines around game controllers and
designing interactions so that it's more accessible.
<kirkwood> Establishing a specificl ane powerful tagging
protococl/methodolgy could result in a fantastic end result of
Silver.
<LuisG> Shawn: +1 to that
<mikeCrabb> Same! +1
+1
<LuisG> ... going through this exercise can make it more clear
for someone coming in
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
Kim: I have developers that want to know: "I want to know
everything about headings" or "I want to know everything about
page structure" Where would that go?
Shawn: We don't have a category for that.
... I think there is a point where we have to rely on others
about it. Like: ARIA can tell you everything you need for a
slider. On the platform level, there are accessibility
guidelines for Android. We might link to it.
jeanne: I would like that.
MikeCr: That could be done in the tagging engine, we could link
to an external resource.
Shawn: The challenge would be for brand-new technologies that
don't have robust documentation of how to do accessibility. For
example, virtual reality doesn't have robust documentation.
<Charles> I think the tagging should avoid naming UI patterns
– even if they only link to external resources. UI patterns are
typically the result of trends vs usability and change fairly
frequently as a result.
Shawn: we could contact companies who develop platforms and ask
them to create documentation than we can reference it. It would
prod people into doing the right thing. Increasing the
accessibility overall.
<jemma> jemma: Dr.Westine and I am wondering whether we can
share GAG and WCAG survey research result with Silver TF
<jemma> jeanne: We are at the different project stage and have
multiple meeting agenda items
Jeanne: We have been running over the agendas for each meeting,
and we aren't working on content right now. I would really like
to address this after we have the architecture and prototypes
doen
... I think this would be valuable when we reach the content
stage. I think we want to include gaming.
<jemma> jemma: I think it is ok. We just wanted to know whether
we can have 5 min time slot during Friday meeting.
<jemma> jemma: we just wanted to give thanks for all the
support from Silver TF.
<jemma> we were very appreciative of your support.
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2018 17:05:10 UTC