- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@paciellogroup.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 09:43:34 -0400
- To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Better late than never.
https://www.w3.org/2018/10/09-silver-minutes.html
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Silver Community Group Teleconference
09 Oct 2018
Attendees
Present
Lauriat, KimD, mikeCrabb, kirkwood
Regrets
Chair
Shawn, jeanne
Scribe
jeanne
Contents
* [2]Topics
1. [3]TPAC meeting & presentation plans
2. [4]Plain language prototype
3. [5]Conformance update
4. [6]Information architecture update prototype
* [7]Summary of Action Items
* [8]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<Lauriat>
[9]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/TPAC_2018_
Agenda
[9]
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/TPAC_2018_Agenda
TPAC meeting & presentation plans
[reviewing the agenda and discussion of the AGWG activity]
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
The ideas are starting to come toward giving AGWG the style
guide and ask them to re-write existing success criteria in
plain language with tagging .
CHarles: We could divide the WG into small groups -- some with
existing success criteria, and some with SC that didn't make it
into WCAG 2.1 (as a stress test)
Cybele: Would this be a valid test, because some people
objected to them.
Shawn: We could do a totally fake test -- like, "every page has
to have a picture of a dog" so we can have them focus on the
process.
Charles: The challenge is time. The participant will be focused
on imagining the scenario, instead of writing it simply.
Shawn: I want to test the maintainability of it. FOr plain
language, I want to test the Style Guide.
Two groups: one to work on Information Architecture
(maintainability) and one to work on Plain Language (convert
existing content).
Charles: It would be research, not usability testing. This is
not statistically valid confirmation of something, yes or no.
Shawn: But we could take the results and turn it into an
Editor's Draft. It would need more work because we don't have a
solid conformance model yet.
... This exercise takes advantage of their expertise without
them having to be on Silver calls.
<mikeCrabb>
[10]https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/FlavorPrototype/sit
e/1-1-1/index.html
[10]
https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/FlavorPrototype/site/1-1-1/index.html
Charles: Do a card-sorting exersize to determine tags we hadn't
considered.
[discussion of a card sorting exersize]
Charles: If that is a stretch, then we probably shouldn't do
it.
<mikeCrabb>
[11]https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/newPlainLanguage/prototypes/P
lainLanguage2/index.html#section1
[11]
https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/newPlainLanguage/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/index.html#section1
Jeanne: We could run three groups and have the 3 people there
lead each one.
Plain language prototype
Mike Crabb did a working prototype of the plain language tabs.
<mikeCrabb>
[12]https://mikecrabb.github.io/silver_taggingSystemDemo/guidel
ines.html
[12]
https://mikecrabb.github.io/silver_taggingSystemDemo/guidelines.html
<mikeCrabb> [13]https://github.com/mikecrabb/silverTaggingAPI
[13] https://github.com/mikecrabb/silverTaggingAPI
Cyborg: I commented on the plain language prototype. My chief
concerns were including a tab for Usability Testing or
Person-centered testing and whether there is consideration of
product-wide guidance. This seems to be focused on component
level guidance.
<mikeCrabb>
[14]https://silvertagapi.azurewebsites.net/api/categories
[14] https://silvertagapi.azurewebsites.net/api/categories
Jeanne: Mike, is there any update on on Information
ARchitecture
<mikeCrabb>
[15]https://silvertagapi.azurewebsites.net/api/categoryTags/3
[15] https://silvertagapi.azurewebsites.net/api/categoryTags/3
There is no front end interface yet, but there are queries that
are working. I should have a front end working by Tuesday.
Conformance update
Information architecture update prototype
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
Received on Friday, 12 October 2018 13:43:56 UTC