Re: Minutes from Silver meeting of 30 October 2018

 To increase flexibility in the categorization of different types of content and to attempt to provide equivalency in scoring different types of content, a possibility might be to have the tester choose what Silver requirements it is appropriate/relevant/applicable to test against, and then have the test results normalized by a division process (illustrated following).   This way the tester can "customize" their testing and scoring to fit the particular situation at hand, as well as provide a means for comparing and contrasting different scores.  Explanation of what requirements are being tested and why would need to be documented.  

 This needs much more thought, but it might work like this:  A Silver score could be the sum of "weighted" test results per test divided by the sum of the weights for the different tests, and could be a decimal number between 0.0 and 1.0 in all instances, regardless of the content and number of requirements chosen to test .   The weights could indicate the relative importance of that requirement to overall accessibility of the content as well as other pertinent factors, and weight values would also be between 0 and 1. The tester would need to explain how they assigned values to the weights for each test to come up with the results.   

  Much more explanation and thought is needed on this idea, but a sample formula might be: 
Silver score (for some content) = (w1t1 + w2t2 + ..  wntn) /(w1 + w2 + .. + wn), where the w's are the respective weights for tests 1 to n and the t's are the scores for each Silver requirement (1 to n) chosen. 


    On Friday, November 2, 2018, 11:33:49 AM EDT, Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@paciellogroup.com> wrote:  
 
 Apologies that these minutes were not completed on the 30th.  More 
people attended the meeting than are in the minutes:  I have adjusted 
them in the email, because I can't change the actual minutes. I also 
corrected some comments that were minuted about the slides. Scribing is 
difficult when I'm talking quickly.

Formatted minutes (incomplete attendance. See below):
https://www.w3.org/2018/10/30-silver-minutes.html

Text of Minutes: (corrected to show who attended as best as I can remember)

    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                  Silver Community Group Teleconference

30 Oct 2018

Attendees

    Present
          Cyborg, Makoto, LuisG, KimD, JF, Angela, Jeanne, Jennison,
          Charles, jkirkwood

    Regrets
      Shawn

    Chair
          Jeanne

    Scribe
          Charles

Contents

      * [2]Topics
          1. [3]Update from the W3C TPAC conference
          2. [4]New slide deck with updated Conformance prototype
            details
      * [5]Summary of Action Items
      * [6]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

Update from the W3C TPAC conference

    jeanne: enthusiastic and positive comments during TPAC, and
    contacted by Access Board
    ... some concern that conformance was not further along
    ... received practical suggestions for rulesets and how things
    can be tested vs tests themselves

New slide deck with updated Conformance prototype details

    <jeanne>
    [7]https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1YGwCbQ1xXILFihGl4YzH
    uvmiheDxtkge5V7fD7-t_sM/edit#slide=id.g4672a50df4_0_133

      [7] 
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1YGwCbQ1xXILFihGl4YzHuvmiheDxtkge5V7fD7-t_sM/edit#slide=id.g4672a50df4_0_133

    jeanne: there was concern that we were just plugging wcag into
    silver

    “silver is not a silver bullet”

    <LuisG> JR we're looking at
    [8]https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1YGwCbQ1xXILFihGl4YzH
    uvmiheDxtkge5V7fD7-t_sM/edit#slide=id.g4672a50df4_0_133

      [8] 
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1YGwCbQ1xXILFihGl4YzHuvmiheDxtkge5V7fD7-t_sM/edit#slide=id.g4672a50df4_0_133

    jeanne: this deck helps everyone find links to learn more, dive
    deeper, or contribute
    ... flattening the structure and tagging content is the general
    agreed direction for information architecture
    ... the WG was very interested in how wcag principles and SC
    are retained. no objections on methods.
    ... there was a LOT of discussion on finding ways to keep the
    wcag numbering. assurance was provided that numbers would be
    retained as tags.
    ... it was made clear that the scope goes beyond web content

    <Cyborg> Did you raise issues of task-based and project/overall
    guidance?

    john f: home automation is a good use case to cover things that
    are web based with an ecosystem beyond a browser

    john k: agree. especially for cognitive and speech

    jeanne: the information architecture prototype is on Mike
    Crabb’s git hub account. uses a functioning API but has limited
    bandwidth.
    ... the WG was enthusiastic about the goals of the plain
    language prototype
    ... plain language style guide will be on agenda Friday

    <jeanne>
    [9]https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/Secti
    onHeading.html

      [9] 
https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/SectionHeading.html

    jeanne: it was made clear that there is technical language that
    still needs work in prototype
    ... the prototype itself – planning tab – emphasizes that
    accessibility needs to be addressed early in a project (shift
    left)
    ... the prototype includes links to wcag and EO content
    ... within the conformance prototype, the bronze silver gold
    has a greater global understanding than A, AA, AAA

    the conformance model is still getting a lot of great
    discussion

    Cybelle: the methods should have 3 layers like the other 2
    columns

    jeanne: if we start with test (test-driven), we can discover
    the edge / stress cases, and THEN make a guideline that can be
    tested and should be easy to test

    <Cyborg> This is the person who talks about Social Return on
    Investment (SROI) in relation to disability, who would be good
    to speak with about conformance:
    [10]http://www.rod-group.com/meet-team

      [10] http://www.rod-group.com/meet-team

    jeanne: the example test exposes needs for user agents to meet
    the guidance
    ... similarly, authoring tools should enable setting language

    we have to define “task-based”

    john f: methods in conformance need to scale

    jeanne: people try to game systems. All conformance is
    vulnerable to this. Silver is helping reduce this through categories
    in the point system.
    ... the point system would be supported by an algorithm
    ... functional performance and human needs are part of
    conformance, but may not have the same point values.
    ... the lowest score determines the total score. achieving 20
    gold and 1 bronze = a bronze total.

    cybelle: people that span multiple categories of needs actually
    have a compound need.
    ... process is as useful to consider as outcome

    that may require some explicit definition. process has a very
    broad and ambiguous use.

    <Cyborg> what i was suggesting is that with multiple
    disabilities, barriers can be greater than the sum of their
    parts. and so by only looking at individual disabilities, we
    can miss things.

    kim: this may bias ability to score when the site is very
    limited in scope

    <Cyborg> also cognition is so complex in terms of needs - can
    include so many different things

    jeanne: we got interest in volunteering.

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]