Minutes from the Silver meeting of 13 July 2018

Formatted minutes: https://www.w3.org/2018/07/13-silver-minutes.html


Text version of the minutes:

    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                  Silver Community Group Teleconference

13 Jul 2018

Attendees

    Present
           Charles, AngelaAccessForAll, LuisG, KimD, jeanne,
           Cybele, Lauriat, Jennison, shari

    Regrets
           Jan

    Chair
           jeanne, Shawn

    Scribe
           LuisG

Contents

      * [2]Topics
          1. [3]Updates on Silver Requirements (also Issues)
          2. [4]Update on projects (EO, examples from COGA and
             LVTF, others?)
      * [5]Summary of Action Items
      * [6]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <jeanne> scribe: LuisG

Updates on Silver Requirements (also Issues)

    Update on where we are with Requirements Doc

    Shawn: We got lots of positive feedback with folks saying "this
    is a good direction"
    ... One of the questions was "What would happen if we got AGWG
    working on Silver instead of WCAG 2.2?" We weren't quite
    prepared to answer, so said "let's get requirements first and
    then revisit"
    ... They also wanted to know "if we did WCAG 2.2, what would
    most likely go into it?"

    Jeane: That was going back into folks that worked on 2.1 and
    wondering what they wanted to put in 2.2
    ... FYI: AGWG is parent of the Silver community group

    <Charles> In my opinion, 2.x = backlog; silver = new

    Jennison: If AGWG were to shift to Silver, how would that
    affect us?

    Shawn: It would very much change how we're managing the project
    now. We have a lot of prototyping we want to do and it would be
    a major shift. Everyone won't work on all the things. We need
    to have some people work on X. One person manage another
    prototype, etc.
    ... a double edged sword of a lot more people helping, but
    having to also manage a lot of people

    <Charles> 2.x = (broad) response to collected research and
    input from multiple task forces; silver = (narrow) response to
    explicit research of one task force.

    <Charles> but the real distinction is 2.x is locked to not
    alter previous 2.0 – 2.x; silver is specifically altering

    Jeanne: There was a fair amount of pushback about our decision
    to postpone writing a requirement for technology neutral.

    <jeanne> [7]https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/19

       [7] https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/19

    Jeanne: We got some comments in Github about the requirements
    document.
    ... He wanted more reasons why we need guidelines.
    ... Talked about wht would happen if we broaden scope...very
    long and thorough. We should review in detail for a future
    draft
    ... Another comment from David MacDonald about measurability vs
    testability

    <Charles> we also included lawyers

    <jeanne> [8]https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/22

       [8] https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/22

    Jeanne: said we'd need input from lawyers, and other points. I
    replied addressing some of his concerns.
    ... oh, and it seems he's replied already

Update on projects (EO, examples from COGA and LVTF, others?)

    KimD: What about some kind of transition document? The sooner
    you can get people up to speed for changing thinking, it would
    be helpful.

    <Charles> so less onboarding and more “how to use Mac for
    former Windows users”?

    Jeanne: That sounds great. Do you have time to sit with me to
    figure out what should be in it? I've been looking at it so
    long, it's hard to say what should be in the transition doc.

    <jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne with KimD to work on a transition
    document for AGWG to Silver explaining why the change in
    thinking.

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-194 - With kimd to work on a
    transition document for agwg to silver explaining why the
    change in thinking. [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-07-20].

    Jeanne: EO Education and Outreach working group of W3C works
    pretty closely with AGWG, but do educational documents W3C
    makes. Some are difficult to find, but they're very useful.
    ... want to find better ways to link out more to their
    resources. They're doing a project to rewrite Understanding
    WCAG document in plain language
    ... asked if we could take some of their plain language work
    and include it in the prototype so folks have more content to
    work with
    ... was thinking of taking some of Cybele's work in plain
    language and some of the EO work for Understanding and creating
    a file of data to use in prototypes.
    ... Some more tangible data of what Silver would look like

    Charles: Fire thing that came to mind. They must have some
    criteria for plain language. Let's make sure our criteria are
    aligned.

    Jeanne: That'll relate to our Plain Language Style Guide agenda
    item

    Charles: Is it something that can be socialized? Is it public
    knowledge?

    Jeanne: Their email lists are open to the public. So probably
    fine. And if they have a style guide, we could make sure we're
    in line with it
    ... anyone want to take this task of gather data and maybe put
    it in Github?

    Angela: I can help put some of that together if someone can
    help me with Github?

    Jeanne: This is a longstanding action item. We should have
    examples of items that didn't get into 2.1 that we want to get
    into Silver so we can test whatever prototypes for structure to
    see if the new examples work in the structure.
    ... suggested we used Accessible Authentication. Didn't get in
    for 2.1 because not strictly testable
    ... suggested doing a usability test under "these"
    circumstances, can you log in. If you turn off monitor, unplug
    mouse, etc. can you log in?
    ... didn't fit WCAG model, but could and should meet Silver
    model
    ... low vision may ask us to test focus indicator usability
    ... the other that is testability related is...something
    related to font family. It was turned down because too hard to
    test all of the fonts a user could have on their system.
    ... willing to share a lot of data with us.
    ... So we have 3 examples of things we can do usability testing
    of the prototypes with
    ... and as we get them done, we can set up tests

    Cybele: I have my own list of things that didn't get into 2.1
    ... why prioritization of A, AA, AAA? What are the biases
    around that?
    ... Bias around impossibility or difficulty and that's a
    problematic bias for people with cognitive disabilities.
    ... the other is around conflict. Some disabilities have
    conflicting needs with others
    ... is it better to have fixed vs sortable information, for
    example

    Jeanne: This is a good place to bring this up; maybe not the
    best time. A, AA, AAA is something that came up for us. We
    would want a different system and we're working towards that.
    ... Regarding font family advice and conflicts, we'll probably
    deal with it more in 2019
    ... unless you think we should do something structurally to
    address conflict

    Cybele: In brick-and-mortar world there is literature for
    dealing with conflict. Some general principles on accommodating
    people with diverse needs would be useful

    Kim: I second Cybele's thoughts on this.
    ... from speech input point of view, there are conflicts that
    people don't typically see

    Charles: Something we accounted for was when SC were related to
    others or couldn't be achieved because of conflicts...something
    in the structure that shows relational or conflict path between
    criteria

    <jeanne> ACTION: LuisG to start writing up a list of tests to
    be performed on the prototypes

    <trackbot> Error finding 'LuisG'. You can review and register
    nicknames at
    <[9]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/track/users>.

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

    <jeanne> ACTION: Jeanne with LuisG to start writing up a list
    of tests to be performed on the prototypes

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-195 - With luisg to start writing up
    a list of tests to be performed on the prototypes [on Jeanne F
    Spellman - due 2018-07-20].

    Charles: Google Doc would probably be better. Need to figure
    out What is our testing strategy and then...
    ... we need some mechanism to compare it to something else.
    ... one of the strategies should be a comparative one. So we
    can determine if one is a winner depending on how it scores
    against something else.
    ... but that might not be the only strategy.

    Jeanne: For now we just want to capture the ideas we had today.
    ... We only have your two examples for plain text.
    ... thought we could start working on strategy for style guide.
    i think kim said we should get it from EO
    ... that's a great place to start. Kim/Cybele, what did you
    learn from writing the text that should be included in a Silver
    styleguide?

    <Charles> some of the resources in this doc had style guides:
    [10]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LPMbnOGKS4B6LIQ3_vQ0NFK
    K7LYUgM3TO7nCc7OOacs/edit?usp=sharing

      [10] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LPMbnOGKS4B6LIQ3_vQ0NFKK7LYUgM3TO7nCc7OOacs/edit?usp=sharing

    Kim: Just made language as clear as it could be. See if you can
    make it clearer with the existing confines.
    ... when you have versions of things, cutting down a long story
    for a radio copy
    ... starting one of them and not going too back-and-forth is a
    key thing
    ... it's tough doing plain language from a moving target. Doing
    a pass through preserving the information is a useful thing to
    do.

    Jeanne: I want to show your work to the AGWG as something they
    can do in 2.2

    Cybele: Putting the audience at the center and thinking about
    what's currently out there helps.
    ... I went to the guidelines and the Understanding documents. I
    looked at blogs for people explaining it to others. What
    worked, what didn't work, etc.
    ... I thought about the people that tend to hold back
    accessibility improvements. A manager not wanting to spend
    money, a creator looking for a minimum viable product, etc.
    ... people that see it as difficult and want to make it easier
    for them
    ... make the standard more accessible for them

    <Charles> Style from John Rochford example: Some principles I
    employed are: using 1 or 2 syllable words that are common;
    reducing sentence length; using active voice in the present
    tense; replacing non-literal expressions, such as “turn up the
    sound” to “make the sound louder”; using examples, such as the
    above, to illustrate a point; and lists instead of long
    sentences.

    Cybele: I continue seeing a11y done at the tail end of
    projects. What would help create a culture shift
    ... Reframing the structure and leading with where people were
    at in terms of people that experience barriers.
    ... People fixated on "I'm doing a mobile app" and getting them
    to understand that's not how everyone will use it.
    ... from a specific language perspective. Reducing the reading
    score.
    ... it could probably be reduced even further, but thought it
    gave somewhere to start from

    Jeanne: We'll talk more on this when we have more examples.

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne with KimD to work on a transition document
    for AGWG to Silver explaining why the change in thinking.
    [NEW] ACTION: Jeanne with LuisG to start writing up a list of
    tests to be performed on the prototypes
    [NEW] ACTION: LuisG to start writing up a list of tests to be
    performed on the prototypes

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]

Received on Monday, 16 July 2018 17:47:55 UTC