Minutes of Silver meting of 7 September 2018

Formatted version of minutes:
*https://www.w3.org/2018/09/07-silver-minutes.html
<https://www.w3.org/2018/09/07-silver-minutes.html>*

Text of minutes:

   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                 Silver Community Group Teleconference

07 Sep 2018

Attendees

   Present
          jeanne, AngelaAccessForAll, Lauriat, KimD, LuisG,
          Cyborg, mikeCrabb, kirkwood, Charles, shari, Jan, JF

   Regrets
          Jemma, MikeCr

   Chair
          jeanne, Shawn

   Scribe
          LuisG

Contents

     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]Meaningful Involvement update
         2. [4]Planning the Cost of Silver discussion meeting
         3. [5]Update on Information Architecture
         4. [6]Update on Plain Language
         5. [7]Update: Discussion on Conflicts between
            Disabilities at the
         6. [8]Github Issues
         7. [9]FYI: Charles spotted Silver in AbilityNet news
         8. [10]Github Issues
     * [11]Summary of Action Items
     * [12]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <jeanne> AG-Facilitators meeting

Meaningful Involvement update

   Cyborg: Should we show the slides?

   Jeanne: Absolutely. Are they ready to be published?

   Cyborg: It should be fine, since this was shared with
   OCAD...knowing this is an iteration.

   <Cyborg>
   [13]https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1dsgjIBp7uEwRr63Z3ZF
   Z6tJ78eRG_qKDS-mjBGqaJwY/edit?usp=sharing

     [13] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1dsgjIBp7uEwRr63Z3ZFZ6tJ78eRG_qKDS-mjBGqaJwY/edit?usp=sharing

   Cyborg: My background is in journalism and I came in to help
   with the plain language prototype and got more interested in
   this project.
   ... one of the concerns I and others have experienced is using
   it like a checklist
   ... and we also want to keep more in the spirit of
   accessibility and include more people with disabilities
   ... I've been working with folks at the Ontario College of Art
   and Design to see if some of the principles of how they work
   could be integrated into Silver.
   ... I've presented a couple of iterations of a "meaningful
   involvement" document for Silver
   ... what is meaningful involvement, how can we make it happen?
   ... not considering PWD as an outside group, but as a part of
   the group
   ... meaningful involvement is very much a part of innovating
   and creating new products and features
   ... as an example, we've had engineers go out into outer space
   to create products that we use on earth. and PWD can help
   create things that are useful for everyone
   ... barriers found at the end of the process can be found
   sooner by having a more inclusive approach. you can reduce the
   cost of reaching out later by including them earlier
   ... how do you get organizations to buy in to this? this is a
   challenging journey for many organizations. they don't know how
   to do it, they have push back, internally, etc.
   ... dealing with working with people with disabilities has been
   put off and we're there now. It may seem intimidating but the
   hope would be that meaningful involvement would help them cross
   that bridge
   ... when you look at other accessibility steps that have been
   taken, having a plan seems to work well. the bronze level could
   be creating a plan, silver would be that they're implementing
   the steps, and gold would be mature meaningful involvement

   <Charles> Not sure how I missed this in previous conversation
   on this topic, but I thought that meaningful involvement was
   about participation in creating Silver – not in organizational
   changes. Isn’t this is advocacy that is outside of the role of
   guidance?

   Cyborg: there are 3 ways of thinking of gold, one is the
   Principles, another is the Plan, and a third would be
   strategies of working with PWD

   Jeanne, could you mention Charles' point in Webex

   Cyborg: This would be specifically within the guidance of
   collaborating with people

   Jeanne: We're including it in this discussion because it could
   influence structure.

   Charles: Are you saying that to be conformant you'd need to
   have these in place?

   Cyborg: That would be the hope

   Charles: How would this include content published by an
   individual?

   Cyborg: Let's jump ahead to some of the issues. This is one of
   the issues, "how do we get people there when there are
   different organization sizes?" How much would they have in
   common in terms of their process? There would probably need to
   be some kind of different strategies of getting there that need
   to be fleshed out.
   ... it's still kind of unclear, we did a decision tree based on
   the size, that there could be multiple pathways to the same
   destination. potentially, organizations could learn from
   other's mistakes.

   Jeanne: What we're looking at is not that individual methods
   aren't associated with a specific level. They have a cumulative
   point overall for the level. We could have points that would
   help companies do the extra work to get to the "gold" level.

   Charles: So in terms of milestones of Silver, this is a task
   within a conformance prototype. That task is basically defining
   one aspect of measurability in one form of conformance. If we
   look at it as a prototype in and of itself, it's a little
   unfair compared to other efforts going on that had research
   that led to the prototyping phase.

   Jeanne: That's one of the advantage of including OCAD since
   they have that research.

   Cyborg: The hope is that in a short time, we can figure out
   what organization are doing where they think they're doing
   well. And those folks would have a place to land...not that
   they'd have to start over.

   Jeanne: Can you make sure Mike Crabb sees this conversation
   explaining it. Just to make sure it's on his radar?

   Cyborg: Sure.
   ... I know for example there are tools and methods to help with
   other guidance areas and I'm hoping that comes out of this too.
   One thing that came out is about the number of organizations
   that don't do this internally, they hire consultants to do it.
   They might know which consultants would know how to get to a
   gold level. Defining the gold standard could make it easier for
   evaluating the program. Some of the concerns are...what do the
   organizations do is they're

   <Charles> a significant assumption to validate is that by
   having {n} inclusive practices = accessible output.

   Cyborg: not ready for it. Or maybe they haven't been involved
   with accessibility but have had involvement in other domains
   ... for some it might be a smaller leap than others

   Jeanne: Thanks for presenting this and for including OCAD's
   expertise.

   <JF> +1 to Charles

   Jeanne: Charles' point make sense and definitely something we
   need to keep in mind.

   Cyborg: If there are folks with other thoughts, I would welcome
   the feedback and welcome to communication. Thanks!

Planning the Cost of Silver discussion meeting

   Jeanne: I sent out a draft of the email I wanted to send out,
   but haven't gotten any feedback. So let's have a brief
   discussion of where we want to go with this discussion?

   <jeanne>
   [14]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VLP5o8mwcPwnQkKXccw6AmL
   6V__VOFyrqmJ-FB0pXfM/edit#heading=h.v1y7ccahpl82

     [14] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VLP5o8mwcPwnQkKXccw6AmL6V__VOFyrqmJ-FB0pXfM/edit#heading=h.v1y7ccahpl82

   Charles: These are less arguments and more points and
   counterpoints.

   Shawn: Yeah, we should organize it more by topics.

   Charles: We should think of this upcoming meeting in terms of a
   goal of the meeting. And maybe structure this document to help
   that.

   Shawn: I would less claim that we'd reach into a conclusion.
   I'd rather have a goal of (if we can categorize the topics)
   coming to a conclusion of where we should investigate into each
   of these.
   ... If we make a conformance model that makes one of these
   objectively worse, then we should investigate that.
   ... It's not "if" we take cost of adoption into account; more
   "how" we take cost of adoption into account

   Jeanne: We have a spreadsheet to kind of help address this.

   JF: One of the things that came out about cost is the priority
   of constituents. I'm sensing moving the developers and owners
   of the content to the first spot...don't want to lose that
   things should be better for end user.
   ... cost is important for content creator, but having to weight
   the cost to creator vs user, I would make sure the end user
   trumps the content creator.

   <Zakim> JF, you wanted to also ask about "priority of
   constituents" as part of the discussion

   <Charles> +1 to JF

   +1 to JF

   <Lauriat> +1

   Jeanne: What we're working on in the structure conversation is
   creating it to have the flexibility to find the sweet spot
   ... anyone want to take this document and organize it by
   topics?

   Charles: I'll add some comments, but not sure if I can
   reformat.

   Jeanne: Anything you can do is welcome.

   Olaseni: i've got view-only for the document

   Jeanne: Send me an email with your google email and I can give
   you permission

Update on Information Architecture

   Jeanne: Not sure there is anyone here to give comment on this.

   Shawn: Checking for the email he sent to the list

Update on Plain Language

   Jeanne: He won't have time for now, so on to next topic.

   <jeanne>
   [15]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CBk9qG5u5LGJa9pIvou5Jsq
   xnZFiROyeuUN6fmhU3D8/edit#heading=h.b1dz0h25u639

     [15] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CBk9qG5u5LGJa9pIvou5JsqxnZFiROyeuUN6fmhU3D8/edit#heading=h.b1dz0h25u639

   Jeanne: but this is the document he was working on

   Angela, anything new on Plain Language?

   Angela: Not finished with documents based on Cyborg's outlines.
   I like where they're going. Should be able to finish them up
   over the weekend.

   Jeanne: Cyborg, is the prototype you showed us publicly
   viewable? can we share it?

   Cyborg: They're in last meeting's minutes.

Update: Discussion on Conflicts between Disabilities at the

   Jeanne: Wanted to give a quick update about handling conflicts
   between different disabilities. Met with facilitators of most
   AG task forces. They had a long conversation about some of the
   problems of conflicts between disabilities.
   ... Accessible name/label causes problems for speech users. Low
   vision users needing to enlarge vs reducing scrolling, etc.

Github Issues

   <JF> WebAIM Survey:
   [16]https://webaim.org/projects/lowvisionsurvey2/

     [16] https://webaim.org/projects/lowvisionsurvey2/

   Cyborg: Sent an email with some other conflicts.

   Jeanne: Do we have a document where these are all stored?

   Cyborg: Don't think it was in a shareable form.

   Jeanne: We need to make sure we have a place to store these.
   ... Any other comments before moving on?
   ... okay, then the last one

FYI: Charles spotted Silver in AbilityNet news

   Jeanne: There are some github issues we need to get on.

   <jeanne> [17]https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues

     [17] https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues

Github Issues

   Jeanne: here's a link to the issues. some are associated with
   cost of silver discussion
   ... we now have tagging so they can be tagged as appropriate.
   ... Shawn, can you do more of this? they send me email notices
   that got lost in my flood.

   JF: I'm having the same problem with the Silver emails. But I
   can take some time looking at it.

   Jeanne: We need some way of keeping an eye on it.

   Shawn: I can try to pay more attention. Maybe at least route
   them to the folks working on it.

   Thanks JF!

   nice seeing you again

   Jeanne: And last item is that Charles saw Silver in an article!
   ... it was a little old information, but glad they did it.

   <Lauriat> trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]