Minutes of the Silver meeting of 15 January 2019

Formatted version of the minutes:
https://www.w3.org/2019/01/15-silver-minutes.html

Text of Minutes

    [1]W3C

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

                                - DRAFT -

                  Silver Community Group Teleconference

15 Jan 2019

Attendees

    Present
           KimD, Cyborg, kirkwood, AngelaAccessForAll

    Regrets
           Shawn, Charles

    Chair
           jeanne

    Scribe
           JF

Contents

      * [2]Topics
          1. [3]CSUN F2F
          2. [4]Translation to plain language & structure
      * [5]Summary of Action Items
      * [6]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <RedRoxProjects> I can't seem to get into the teleconf

    <scribe> scribe: JF

CSUN F2F

    <Cyborg> hello all

    JS: Jeanne sent out a note last week about a F2F @ CSUN

    <jeanne> [7]https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/94845/2019-03_FtF/

       [7] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/94845/2019-03_FtF/

    M. Cooper has set up a registration form

    Please register. Also, if yo ucannot see the form please advise
    Jeanne

    <RedRoxProjects> still not able to join the teleconf

    <jeanne> Reg form doesn't work for Community Group
    participants, Jeanne will have it fixed.

    If you cannot fill out the form, please email jeanne directly

    JF: asking about F2F logistics W.R.T. the AG WG

    JS: lots of time, there will be joint-meeting with the AG WG
    ... one item on the agenda is to come up with a new name
    (retire Project Silver)
    ... met with M. Cooper and Shawn L about the F2F meetings

    need to finalize the requirements doc, and the all-in-one
    prototype (that combines the 3 major parts of the project)

    <Cyborg> great, thanks, I'm ready to move on it again...

    <Cyborg> yes, separate

    JS: What do we need to do to combine the prototype? How do we
    see the pieces fitting together?
    ... could use some help - lots of tiny moving parts

    <Cyborg> can we possibly post all the links of the pieces here,
    so we know what is on the list for inclusion?

    <jeanne>
    [8]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page

       [8] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page

    <jeanne>
    [9]https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page#
    Current_Prototypes

       [9] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Main_Page#Current_Prototypes

    [Searching for resources]

    <jeanne>
    [10]https://mikecrabb.github.io/silver_taggingSystemDemo/index.
    html

      [10] https://mikecrabb.github.io/silver_taggingSystemDemo/index.html

    <jeanne> Plain Language Prototype
    [11]https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/inde
    x.html

      [11] https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/index.html

    Question regarding the difference between "guidance" and
    "guideline" - "guidance is the looser form... we're not 100%
    sure of language, method, etc.

    Methods: we are operating with the assumption that these will
    be platform specific.

    [Looking at Section Headings in Plain Language]

    Cyborg: not understanding how this ties together however

    [12]https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/Sect
    ionHeading.html

      [12] https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/SectionHeading.html

    <kirkwood> I personally like the simplicity how it is

    <kirkwood> UI and UX should go in design in my opinion

    <RedRoxProjects> I agree on the simplicity of the demos

    Discussion: should the Primary Tabs (see the prototype) have a
    consistent "tab" interface?

    <KimD> My preference: Yes, it should be consistent (which might
    mean not all of them are active sometimes)

    discussion about the "Design" tab: have two constant sections:
    UI and UX (User Interface, User Experience)

    <Cyborg> or even separating them further - UX Design (UI vs
    UXR)

    [13]https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/RA11y_Matrix

      [13] https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/RA11y_Matrix

    [14]https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Role_definition_document

      [14] https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Role_definition_document

    <kirkwood> can we clean it up, consitancy of tense and COGA
    clean. Plan, Design, Develop, Test ?

    <kirkwood> or planning, designing, developing, testing
    {clunkier]

    <KimD> +1 - keep them consistent, then simple/generic

    <kirkwood> my only issue is with the tense ;)

    <KimD> Agree

    <RedRoxProjects> keep it tense agnostic - like in commit
    messages - aim for present as default

    <KimD> +1

    <kirkwood> so Plan, Design, Develop, Test

    <KimD> +1

    <kirkwood> +1

    <RedRoxProjects> +1

    <AngelaAccessForAll> +1

    JS: wrapping for today - TBC on Friday

    <RedRoxProjects> here's to hoping I can get access to the call
    on Friday ...

    <Cyborg> i can work on Design tab methods to see how 4 roles
    fit...

    <Cyborg> for the SC we looked at