Minutes of Silver meeting of 21 September 2018

Formatted version of the minutes:
https://www.w3.org/2018/09/21-silver-minutes.html

Text of minutes:

   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                 Silver Community Group Teleconference

21 Sep 2018

Attendees

   Present
          Lauriat, AngelaAccessForAll, Jemma, KimD, johnkirkwood,
          Olaseni

   Regrets

   Chair
          SV_MEETING_CHAIR

   Scribe
          Lauriat

Contents

     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]Conformance discussions (context categorization,
            insights vs. personas, use cases)
         2. [4]personas
         3. [5]Plain language
     * [6]Summary of Action Items
     * [7]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

Conformance discussions (context categorization, insights vs.
personas, use cases)

   Discussing categorization of types of sites and how that would
   introduce a lot of added complexity and scale of maintenance
   problems, as well as having the difficulty of labeling and
   categorization in the first place.

   For the social media site, as an example, the difference in use
   of machine learning for image captioning comes from the fact
   that users tend to not add image captions to the images they
   upload to the site, so the social media site would handle this
   instead as a part of authoring tool accessibility.

   Jemma: A site can't control the users and how they create
   content, though.

   Lauriat: We have ATAG now that talks about how to measure this.

   Jemma: So not necessarily about the end result but about the
   mechanism available to meet the end result?

   Lauriat: Not so much, kind of both about the end result and the
   methods to get there.

   Charles: Next in that doc, the issues of personas.
   ... once you get into defining them, you inherently discount
   other people.

   Lauriat: Going to defer to those with more usability experience
   on this one.

personas

   Charles: Focusing on user need can still make the need
   relatable, without needing to go through naming of a person and
   a specific disability. Rather, a person who cannot see the
   screen, rather than going through the reason why and
   specifically identifying a disability.

   Lauriat: Does this sort of thing need to exist specifically in
   the guidelines, or just in supplemental materials like in WCAG
   today?

   Charles: At least in tagging of everything, we'll need to use
   this for that functionality.
   ... so inclusion in terms of conformance, but not necessarily
   the guideline itself.
   ... Which brings me to the last point about the document of
   heuristic evaluation for conformance.
   ... Since different people would come to different conclusions,
   you'd need to do these tests more than once and then interpret
   those varied results.

   <jemma> rrsagents, make minutes

   Lauriat: I wanted to include some manner of usability testing
   for conformance in order to cover what we do today in
   interpreting the usability of a given use case, ex: alt text
   quality.

Plain language

   <AngelaAccessForAll>
   [8]https://docs.google.com/document/d/10ZvjQXPc-l73oPPewOfGb44L
   8qJ6vO9JrZv-nBAkzn8/edit?usp=sharing

      [8] https://docs.google.com/document/d/10ZvjQXPc-l73oPPewOfGb44L8qJ6vO9JrZv-nBAkzn8/edit?usp=sharing

   <jemma> lauriat: Our plan is using this style guide beyond just
   writing guidelines.

   <jemma> lauriat: one way to test this guide may be picking a
   specific guideline in understanding document and try to rewrite
   it.

   <jemma> angela: before that I would like to flesh out more and
   get a feedback from Cybel(?)

   <jemma> lauriat: please try to reach out to them via email.

   <jemma> olaseni: is this only for web site or other platforms?

   <jemma> angela: Our plan is using this universally.

   <jemma> charles: this style is for writing guidelines.

   trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]