Minutes of Silver Task Force meeting of 30 January 2018

Text of minutes: https://www.w3.org/2018/01/30-silver-minutes.html


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

                               - DRAFT -

                    Silver Task Force Teleconference

30 Jan 2018


          JanMcSorley, JaEunJemmaKu





     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]San Diego face-to-face meeting problem statements
         2. [4]Conformance Survey
         3. [5]Research reviews & updates
         4. [6]San Diego face-to-face meeting invitation responses
     * [7]Summary of Action Items
     * [8]Summary of Resolutions

San Diego face-to-face meeting problem statements

   Charles has softened the language around excluding particular
   people with disabilities and made the edits discussed on a
   previous call.

   Charles: Just need to remove the bits marked for removal.

   Jemma: You can remove, I have a copy of those points elsewhere.

   Charles: Okay, done.
   ... We just need to clean up the ToC in the move over to the
   wiki, though we may want to do that here as well, since we'll
   want to share the document, too.

   Jeanne will look at the publishing route, probably just on the
   wiki, and will also look at the format and such for it.

   Charles: We should just make sure that wherever we post this,
   we should post it with the job stories document.

   Jeanne: Agreed.

Conformance Survey

   Kelsey: Jeanne and I worked on this before, I think we have a
   pretty good draft.
   ... We went through the existing version, trying to simplify
   the language, reorder the questions, and determine the best
   format for each question.
   ... focusing on how effectively WCAG addresses the needs of
   people with disabilities through conformance.
   ... It starts asking about the person's experience level with
   ... Next, rate the effectiveness of WCAG when measuring the
   accessibility of web sites, mobile apps, web apps, documents,
   terminal-based resources, etc.
   ... The next part gets into conformance requirements and the
   participants' knowledge of this.
   ... Some conditional questions, asking more detailed questions
   as applicable.
   ... How confident are you that your organization understands
   the level striving for?
   ... Asking about challenges in understanding the conformance
   levels and such.
   ... The rest gets a little more detailed around WCAG as well.

   Jeanne: If the person answers they don't know about the levels,
   then we skip the rest of the conformance questions.

   Charles: Do we have a participation goal, like 35+ people?

   Jeanne: We have a list of 300 names and email addresses of
   people who want to help with Silver and answer survey
   questions, so I think we're in good shape.

   Charles: If you have pathing of questions where some questions
   conditionally appear, in that list of participants, will we
   have enough who'll not have skipped that?

   Jeanne: Absolutely.


      [9] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rcr_qRZ8qQ-jyP1o1QzmOaJPP4aecyr-7KxUFTC4YEs/edit

   Charles: One last comment about the "your organization"
   phrasing: I think we should reword that in order to cover also
   the case where someone may implement this for a client, rather
   than for their organization.

   Jemma: Are there any questions about asking policy makers?
   Who's the audience for this survey?

   Jeanne: Our target audience are people who are moderate to
   expert WCAG users who are familiar with standards process, so
   people who should understand conformance.
   ... I think it has gone a bit long, what do others think about

   Charles: Good length, we may want to just make the level of
   effort/length clear up front for participants.

   Lauriat & Jennison: Agreed.

   <Charles> Set level of investment expectation in the invite.
   Something like: “Please take this 20 question survey. It may
   take between 30 and 45 minutes.”

   <Charles> dropping off call now.

   Jeanne: Let's get this ready for Friday.

   Kelsey: Will do.

Research reviews & updates

   Shawn: A third of the way through the paper I signed up to
   review, should finish by later this week.

   <scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to look into analysis from Pete McNally

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-156 - Look into analysis from pete
   mcnally research. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-02-06].

San Diego face-to-face meeting invitation responses

   Jennison: Do we have a deadline for wave one before we move to
   wave two?

   Shawn: No, but we should. Let's set it for Friday.

   <Jan> * Hi Jemma! :-)

   Jeanne: Let's set Friday as the date to also have everything on
   the wiki to send out to everyone who has responded so far.

   Shawn agrees with this, but needed to drop off the call before
   saying so.

   trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne to look into analysis from Pete McNally

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

Received on Tuesday, 30 January 2018 15:43:46 UTC