Minutes of Silver meeting of 23 February 2018

Note that the formatted minutes has a link to the early draft of 
research summary document that should have been public, but I pasted in 
the editable link by mistake.  This link has been corrected to the 
public link in the text version of the minutes below.

Public link to Silver Research Summary is:

Link to formatted minutes:

Text of Minutes:


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

                                - DRAFT -

                     Silver Task Force Teleconference

23 Feb 2018


           Aiden, Charles, John, Kelsey, Shawn, jeanne, Jan

           David, Shari, Jessica, Jennison, jemma




      * [2]Topics
          1. [3]Updates on the research projects: surveys,
             interviews, data analysis
          2. [4]The Silver Files doc
          3. [5]Addressing Imelda's concerns on Job Stories
          4. [6]Updates on the research projects: surveys,
             interviews, data analysis
          5. [7]updates to the Problem Statements
          6. [8]The Silver Files doc
          7. [9]Conformance survey update
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      * [11]Summary of Resolutions

    Jeanne: Everyone had a +1 on the job stories except one person.
    We'll revisit that later.


      [12] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ropTpocIdthjnkaGILjZRPrerAFGDNGXVstSOny45Zo/edit#gid=0

    Jeanne: Research updates - I have the research summary doc. Job
    stories are complete...just need to address one comment.
    Problem statements are complete. Now we get into the individual
    studies (usability survey). Summary is in research projects

    <jeanne> Scott Hollier

      [13] https://drive.google.com/drive/u/1/folders/0B_4nqHo0m9E7eXZJeGNJeHZOVGM

    Jeanne - 6/9 student papers are complete. Eleanor paper is also
    almost complete. We need to look at paper by Scott Hallier (IOT
    Report Final).

    <scribe> ACTION: Jan to complete analysis of IOT report

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-157 - Complete analysis of iot report
    [on Jan McSorley - due 2018-03-02].

    Imelda & Dave working on International Translations - this
    won't be done for design sprint.

    Jan and Jeanne are working on the interviews

    <scribe> ACTION: Jeanne and Jan to create meeting to discuss

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-158 - And jan to create meeting to
    discuss interviews [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-03-02].

    John: Conference feedback - Looking into category shifts, redid
    the bar charts. There was one large category - people going to
    non W3C sites to get accessibility info.

    Jeanne: I'd like to take that info and make it more visual -
    but we can't use the numbers for all of the question

    John: It wasn't meant to be a scientific survey, more about
    gauging people's feeling.

    Jeanne: bar charts on where do you go are very factual. The
    other questions I just don't feel like the data is valid. It
    wasn't design to be categorized and counted. It was designed to
    extract conclusions.

    <JohnM> Conference feedback data is being collected here:

      [14] https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1MFeLzIF6qTR2HBQExlPMa4YvUChbYIUM

    Jeanne: We have a goal of sending the package to participants
    next Friday. I'm concerned that this won't be completed on
    time. Worried about timing so we can complete summary document
    by Friday.
    ... We also need to update the problem statements. Key research
    should be included here. We need to give attendees enough time
    to review the summary document. We also have a the literature
    review. Should hear from Jemma on Tuesday with status on
    completed paper. She's focusing on conformance.

Updates on the research projects: surveys, interviews, data analysis

    <jeanne> all the above information.

The Silver Files doc


      [15] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1POs7orJ4ALB0bq5_vyo4v8RxDcr-5ctwD1noVgpXuJc/edit#slide=id.gc6f73a04f_0_0

    <scribe> ACTION: Kelsey, John and Jeanne need to set up meeting
    about conference feedback research

    <trackbot> Error finding 'Kelsey,'. You can review and register
    nicknames at

      [16] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/track/users

    <Jan> I had to drop for another meeting, but will try to keep
    an eye on IRC

    <scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to set up meeting about conference
    feedback research

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-159 - Set up meeting about conference
    feedback research [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-03-02].

    Shawn - Everyone who's participating should have an
    understanding of Silver. I can look at when we started the
    research. Having researchers do things started in March.

    Jeanne: Everyone can scan the summary slides. It would be good
    to get some fresh eyes looking at the goals slide. Do it by
    usability, conformance and maintenance...order doesn't matter.
    Do research themes and then problem statements.
    ... Near the end, I included the research sources. Here I plan
    to list every project and the links to it. I grabbed a
    definition of usability - do we want to include these in our
    definitions? Did pick up on some of the themes of our research.
    Touches on audience feedback.

    Charles: For summary slides, we need to adjust the design to
    improve the color contrast (due to aqua color).

    Jeanne: We're looking at the structure first. Then we'll flow
    the content into the structure.

    Charles: Summary slides should include higher global

    Shawn: I'm lumping that idea in with the different perspectives
    (different countries and regions etc...)

    Charles: We should use the word "participation" so that you
    have the voice of more people from more places.

    Jeanne: "Easier to reference" is important to include for
    consultants and people who work in the legal field
    ... If someone could find a quote to go with the "maintenance"
    slide, that would be good.

    Shawn: I'm fine with including something around more timely
    updates. The working group should support that (an 18th month
    turn around).
    ... I really like the structure of the doc. I think it's going
    to work well.

Addressing Imelda's concerns on Job Stories

    Jeanne: Once we have this done, I'd encourage the group to
    publicize it. Let us know if you'd like to blog about it. Feel
    free to send it to the group before publishing...not a
    requirement, though.


      [17] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2018Feb/0029.html

    Charles: If we remove the word "socially" - so it says "I can
    share my experience." Then it won't be interpreted as social

    <scribe> ACTION: Charles to write a response to Imelda about
    job stories update

    <trackbot> Error finding 'Charles'. You can review and register
    nicknames at

      [18] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/track/users

    Jeanne: It's really important to get all of the comments in
    advance - we need to make sure everyone's comments are taken
    care of. Good to do these things in advance.

Updates on the research projects: surveys, interviews, data analysis

updates to the Problem Statements


      [19] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1POs7orJ4ALB0bq5_vyo4v8RxDcr-5ctwD1noVgpXuJc/edit?usp=sharing

    Jeanne: Problem Statements - I was looking at some themes from
    the research. Not seeing them reflected in the problem
    statements, particularly in the conformance area. We picked
    themes from research just from the literature review.
    ... Structural problem in WCAG, keeping ppl w/ cognitive
    disabilities (and others) from being included. Structural
    requirement of testability. We don't have this in our problem
    statements right now.

    Charles: I don't have an issue with adding 1 more problem
    statement and goes from 10-11 statements. Does anyone have the
    appropriate themes from research that can get pasted in the
    ... I will write a new statement for this new testability
    problems statement. Is there anything else we need to add?

    *problem statement


      [20] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Silver_Design_Sprint_Proposal

    Jeanne: Conformance is a tricky section. This is an important
    theme: All or nothing conformance vs. percentage of conformance

    Charles: Claims are based on a point in time. So there needs to
    be a process to know whether or not the conformance still

    Shawn: Given the number of problem statements, we probably
    won't make serious headway on all of them. Focus on high
    priority problems. Look at the problem statements in relation
    to each other. It would make sense to group that way. It would
    be great to get ideas around how to solve conformance. The
    purpose of design sprint is to get serious brainstorming
    happening and to come up with more creative solutions. I don't
    want to artificially constrain that.

    Jeanne: The monitoring and accessibility supported aren't our
    top priorities. The thing we have solve is how to we serve the
    needs of people w/ cognitive disabilities w/ Silver.
    ... Solving testability vs. non-testable needs. Authoring tools
    kind of jumped out but that's still minor at this point.
    Evolution life cycle for the guidelines - do you feel like
    that's covered under maintenance?

    Charles: We're not highly explicit on the impact to policy.
    ... Policy makers are included in the governance statement. So
    we're addressing that.

    Jeanne: Scaling is about the structure and not about scaling
    for breadth of scope. How do we bring in new platforms or
    totally new areas?
    ... Governance should include more about the process.
    ... W3C process could do the process better. We're inviting
    people who have experience doing this in their own working
    groups. That will be very helpful for us.

    Charles: We tried follow the format of how the statements are
    written. But these things were already in categories.

    Jeanne: We want to make sure participants get the scope of all
    different pieces that fit into the problem.

    Charles: Will take a stab at writing a new statement for

    <scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to set up meeting with Charles next

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-160 - Set up meeting with charles
    next week. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-03-02].

The Silver Files doc

Conformance survey update

    <Lauriat> Kelsey: We closed the conformance survey yesterday at
    5:00. I hoped we'd get at least 50, and we got close at 48.

    <Lauriat> …I've gone through results, and for some we have
    answers very split, making it difficult to draw conclusions,
    but other questions have fairly clear indications.

    <Lauriat> …Not sure how to summarize the results, whether by
    powerpoint or some other format, but I do want to make sure we
    have a summary written up.

    <Lauriat> Jeanne: For consistency, I think a paper write up
    would work best. Let's get the themes first for the summary,

    <Lauriat> Kelsey: Not sure what the timeline is for completing
    a paper, but will do my best.

    <Lauriat> Charles: I think the first couple of steps are
    following the pattern Dave used on the usability survey. Make a
    folder in Google Drive for the data and start a key findings
    document (I can help you with that).

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Charles to write a response to Imelda about job
    stories update
    [NEW] ACTION: Jan to complete analysis of IOT report
    [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne and Jan to create meeting to discuss
    [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to set up meeting about conference
    feedback research
    [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to set up meeting with Charles next week.
    [NEW] ACTION: Kelsey, John and Jeanne need to set up meeting
    about conference feedback research

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]

Received on Tuesday, 27 February 2018 18:08:22 UTC