- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 10:54:36 -0400
- To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Formatted minutes:
https://www.w3.org/2018/05/15-silver-minutes.html
Text of minutes:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Silver Community Group Teleconference
15 May 2018
Attendees
Present
LuisG, JakeAbma, alastairc, Lauriat, Jennison, Roy,
MichaelC, kirkwood, jaeunjemmaku, jeanne, Imelda,
Charles
Regrets
Chair
Shawn, jeanne
Scribe
jeanne
Contents
* [2]Topics
1. [3]Requirements document review and next steps
2. [4]Design PRinciples draft
3. [5]project plan updates and next steps
* [6]Summary of Action Items
* [7]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
Requirements document review and next steps
Shawn: We had a meeting with the AGWG chairs on Friday to work
on a plan of how we will work together.
... trying to figure out how to simultaneously work on WCAG 2.2
and Silver
... we are not going to recharter this year, we will keep
working on Silver, but will publish editor's drafts instead of
FPWD.
Jennison: Does that change our timeline?
Shawn: No, it is the same timeline, but will have a different
status on the documents
... the Requirements document is the first thing we want to get
approved by the group
... we will write a more high level requiremnts document, then
flesh it out as we do more user testing
Charles: Will the Editors draft be high level, or will it be
segmented?
Shawn: we will have a detailed structure, and add content as we
get WCAG translated
Jeanne: I recommend detailed structure, and limited content
that can be increased as the year progresses.
<jemma> +1
Shawn: I want to work on the Requirements and review what
Charles has written for the Design Principles
... we wanat to stay focused on: These are the problems we want
to solve with Silver.
<alastairc> +1, there are key things to present & agree before
an official pub, such as conformance model and structure.
Design PRinciples draft
Charles: These are high level statements. This is a techneque
used in standards work to help work into requiremnts
... Support more people with disabilites
... Include more global considerations and participation.
Be written in simple language.
Be measurable, but not dependent on passing all criteria.
Be flexible to emerging needs.
Be about and for people – not technology.
Be open to the world (feedback and contribution).
Be accessible.
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
Shawn: I think measureble is too detailed
<jemma> does "silver becoming practice guide" mean that it will
not be part of WCAG?
jeanne: I think we should drop the clause that makes it more
detailed and just say be measurable. '
Charles: We need a mechanaism for feedback and change of how
the world is using Silver
Shawn: I think 8 and 3 are very similar
Luis: ??
<LuisG> yes, luis
Alastair: Do we have to also state what in WCAG 2 is being
intentionally kept? It would also be useful to specify what we
want to maintain as well as what we want to change
... Include how we will work out the potential conflicts
between WCAG 2 and Silver would be overcome
<Lauriat>
[8]https://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-wcag2-req-20060425/
[8] https://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-wcag2-req-20060425/
<LuisG> I think with 3 and 8, they're saying different things,
but we're getting hung up on 8 including the phrase "the
world." I think what 8 is saying is that it should be easy to
give feedback and contribution.
<alastairc> Um, less between WCAG 2.0 and Silver, more between
the conflicting requirements for Silver (e.g. ambiguity of
criteria vs plain language).
Shawn: It's useful to look at the requirements of WCAG 2.0 when
it was transitioning from WCAG 1.0
<jemma> The primary goal of WCAG 2.0 is the same as 1.0: to
promote accessibility of Web content. Additional goals
discussed in this document are: Ensure that requirements may be
applied across technologies Ensure that the conformance
requirements are clear Design deliverables with ease of use in
mind Write to a more diverse audience Clearly identify who
benefits from accessible content Ensure that the revision is
"backwards and forward compatible"
<jemma> this is what Shawn read from above url
Imelda: Is there a visual that describes the overlap of WCAG 2
and Silver
<alastairc> Thanks Charles, good solution for that part.
Charles: Lets add a sentence to say we are building on WCAG 2?
Shawn: But we also are building on other accessibility
guidelines
Jemma: In emerging needs are you talking about emerging needs
of technology or emerging needs of people with disaiblites?
Shawn: both.
<Charles> I made a visual for my GAAD presentation that
attempts to show the overlap of the AG and CG:
[9]https://drive.google.com/open?id=19BmvbJNKfGlSbNnFpq52SRIacF
3tk7oV
[9] https://drive.google.com/open?id=19BmvbJNKfGlSbNnFpq52SRIacF3tk7oV
Jemma: We are trying to reduce vagueness, so we should be more
clear in the principles
Jeanne: I think we could include this in the principles
Shawn: We don't want it to be restrictive
Luis: Should we talk about having the content based on more
data and research
Charles: +1
<Zakim> alastairc, you wanted to ask whether we need to be
explicit about things that should be retained from 2.0, and
also whether we can state how conflicting requirements will be
dealt
Charles: Be research based or evidence based
Luis: Be data informed
Shawn: That might not be clear
... I put a placeholder for that principle in the Design
Principles
Alastair: Should we say we will include improving accessiblity
through process
... if it were scoped to asking a process of "did you include
this?" recommending process instead of a discrete success
criteria
Shawn: This comes into the use cases, but it isn't covered by
the principles
Michael: I think some of this should be left to the prototype
<jemma> These are the concepts I read for each principle. 1.
extended coverage of disability 2. inclusiveness 3. broadened
participation 4. measurability 5. flexibility for change;
people and technology 6. priority for people, not technology 7.
easy feedback process 8. accessibility of the guideline. 9.
data informed.
Michael: whether the research is linked to the guidelines, that
should be part of the prototype
Shawn: Be data informed and evidence based.
... Strive to be data informed and evidence based.
Jemma: Why did we remove 7?
Charles: we merged it with 3
Jennison: Be accessible should have Be accessible and useable?
... because we want to make it easier to use and gives a nod to
the usability and accessibility continuum.
Jemma: +1
<jemma> meta comment, Michael?
Charles: I struggle with that because useable is more a degree
Michael: This might be reactive to WCAG 2, the design
principles should stand on their own.
... if we are thinking about "more" then we might miss some new
ideas for Silver
<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to work on the Requiremnts/ Design
Principles this week.
<trackbot> Created ACTION-176 - Work on the requiremnts/ design
principles this week. [on Shawn Lauriat - due 2018-05-22].
Shawn: The Design Principles will be the introduction to the
Requirements
project plan updates and next steps
<Charles>
[10]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hharMRHLrqALWjcBp9M_F-u
ZPEh73wt8Bgoe47Yfnjo/edit?usp=sharing
[10] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hharMRHLrqALWjcBp9M_F-uZPEh73wt8Bgoe47Yfnjo/edit?usp=sharing
Charles: I have updated the recruitng for the IA
... I wrote a definition in the Information Design tasks.
Jeanne: Would everyone please review this document and be
prepared to discuss it on Friday?
'chair: Shawn, jeanne
<scribe> ACTION: Imelda to design a visual to help explain the
relationship between WCAG 2 and Silver
<trackbot> Created ACTION-177 - Design a visual to help explain
the relationship between wcag 2 and silver [on Imelda Llanos -
due 2018-05-22].
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Imelda to design a visual to help explain the
relationship between WCAG 2 and Silver
[NEW] ACTION: Shawn to work on the Requiremnts/ Design
Principles this week.
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2018 14:54:58 UTC