Minutes of the Silver meeting of 20 November 2018

Formatted minutes:

Text of the minutes:


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

                                - DRAFT -

                  Silver Community Group Teleconference

20 Nov 2018


           LuisG, Cyborg, KimD, Makoto, jeanne, Shawn, Jennison,
           Angela, MikeCrabb


           Shawn, jeanne



      * [2]Topics
      * [3]Summary of Action Items
      * [4]Summary of Resolutions

    Lauriat: We want to start building what we might use as a
    conformance model. Taking existing SCs and things that didn't
    get into 2.1 and building things out.



    Jeanne: We have a starting point, the work that Cyborg, Luis,
    and I did over the Summer
    ... it's a little old, but might still be a good place to begin

    <jeanne> Heuristic evaluation to determine if the alternative
    text explains the issue in the context given. This is a
    task-based assessment, instead of a component-based assessment.
    See Table 5 prototype for images of grading scale. The scale
    ranges from “Can’t Use At All” through “With Difficulty” to
    “Pretty Easy” to “The Best”. The example for “Finding a Hotel”
    using an HTML

    <jeanne> form, has tasks such as “Perceivable: Identifying the
    form”, “Understanding: How to use the form”, “Operable: able to
    complete the form” and “Robust: Code check for HTML
    compliance”. The tester selects the persona of a person with a
    disability that they want to check against, and tests using
    that persona’s restrictions (for example, with mouse unplugged,
    screen turned off,

    <jeanne> etc. That needs to be determined in advance.) The
    tester grades the experience on the scale. (part of a broader
    test of more accessibility needs)

    Jeanne: Maybe we could look at Example 2, the one starting with
    "Heuristic evaluation..."
    ... We could start with the test rules: with the screen turned
    off; using a screen reader

    JF: I'm looking at this. I'm struggling with whether we have a
    definition for "pretty easy?"

    Jeanne: We're looking at that...how do we define that, etc.

    JF: Putting aside "pretty easy," I'm concerned that the test
    rules are focused on a screen reader. Would other rules be as
    effective and have less overhead.
    ... For example, the Web Developer Toolbar will provide alt
    text for every image, etc.

    <Cyborg> just got here, so if there was a link pasted above
    that we're discussing, could someone please repost? thanks

    sure, one sec



    <Cyborg> thanks

    JF: There are ways we can do this testing without a screen
    reader. There might be a lighter-touch test we can do for the
    same thing.

    Lauriat: Maybe we could come back to this as a way of testing

    JF: The real test isn't exposing the text alternative, it's
    whether the alt text is "pretty easy," "the best," etc.

    <Makoto> +1 to JF

    Jeanne: So how do we determine that the accessible name is

    Lauriat: Let's start with "can someone complete the task with
    the text alternative" instead of the visual presented in the

    <mikeCrabb> [7]https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/

       [7] https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/

    JF: If the image has text burned into the image, I also want to
    see the image while I'm evaluating the alt text.

    mikeCrabb: This has examples of what you would want to have in
    the alt text

    Jeanne: So, what should the scale be?

    Lauriat: Right now, we have full page conformance...but for
    task based conformance, we'd need to figure out how to piece
    something together.

    JF: Text alternatives can get a bit granular depending on how
    the image is being used.

    Lauriat: Why don't we start there...the first step for testing
    the alt text is to determine the intention for the image.

    JF: Well, the first step would be if there is a text
    alternative. And then what is the purpose of the image.

    <JF> Locate each image that can be activated as part of the
    user interface. If the image is the only element within an
    interface control, ensure that it has an appropriate short text
    alternative that conveys the purpose of the control or presents
    the same information as the image. If the control also contains
    text content, ensure that one of the following is true: The
    image has an appropriate short text alternative which, together
    with the control's text content, convey

    JF: from the beginning there are contextual decisions that need
    to be made

    Jeanne: We are envisioning these tests would be part of the
    methods. I don't think we're trying to impose a method that's

    JF: So there's the doing and there's the verifying. The doing
    is wide open, the verifying is "you've picked one of the
    methods" is it good?
    ... as an evaluator, I need to see what you've chosen to use
    and does the value string make sense?

    Jeanne: Can you see there being a scale for how well it works
    on the page?

    JF: That's why I was wondering what does "pretty easy" mean? I
    can see it at a high level where a few people could do it,
    because it comes down to each person's definition of "pretty

    Lauriat: Maybe someone has a different definition for "pretty
    easy" or "fantastic" but they'd both be success. What about
    something like "complete failure" "with difficulty" and
    ... like the difference between "Submit" and "Send" for an

    JF: If the alt text is being auto-generated...and they're all
    "button" so they're useless
    ... at that point, is it a pass or a fail?
    ... and it would be a partial pass since it has a text
    alternative, but the value is useless

    Jeanne: That's what we're trying to do

    Lauriat: Can the user complete the task based on the
    alternative text

    JF: There would be need to a similar decision tree that is a
    if/else walkthrough

    <Cyborg> To Luis and Jeanne - I added a comment re: the
    prioritization to the document -- in line with our previous

    Lauriat: I think we should use the same scale for
    everything...just keep what we have as a strawman and adjust it
    as we work through things

    <Cyborg> changing it from 3 point prioritization rather than 4
    point - i thought we went through this

    we hadn't reflected that change in this document

    Jeanne: Maybe we should provide examples of what measurements
    on that scale look like

    Lauriat: Maybe some scales will work for some tasks, but not
    others...that could help inform what we end up using
    ... Let's complete the walkthrough for how to do this for one
    type of image

    Jeanne: I want to give mikeCrabb a chance to talk

    mikeCrabb: There were arguments about what the tags in the
    Information Architecture prototype should be...and not whether
    we should have tags, so that was good

    062.html <- Mark Tanner's email on tagging


    mikeCrabb: I'll be taking a closer look at it next week when I
    have more time

    Jeanne: We also got an alternative scoring proposal...I invited
    him to join us for a meeting



    Jeanne: I created a google doc for it
    ... if folks can look at it, we can continue with this next
    week since we're not meeting on Friday
    ... and we got more responses from AGWG, if you could take a
    look at that in the email
    ... anything new on Plain Language?

    Cyborg: I'm more focused on conformance. I was listening to
    y'all and adding stuff to the document
    ... separating task-based guidance from product-level guidance,

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]

Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2018 16:42:22 UTC