- 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