Minutes of the Silver meeting of 22 January 2019

Thin on minutes, as I can't scribe and talk, but includes some key talking
points, links for context, and a good suggestion for a next focus area.

Formatted minutes: https://www.w3.org/2019/01/22-silver-minutes.html

Plain text:

   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                 Silver Community Group Teleconference

22 Jan 2019

Attendees

   Present
          johnkirkwood, Charles, LuisG, JF, KimD, jeanne,
          kirkwood, Cyborg, mikeCrabb, Shawn, Lauriat,
          AngelaAccessForAll, Makoto, JanMcSorley

   Regrets

   Chair
          SV_MEETING_CHAIR

   Scribe
          Cyborg

Contents

     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]Consolidating prototypes
         2. [4]Conformance model
     * [5]Summary of Action Items
     * [6]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

Consolidating prototypes

   if any links have been put up, could you put them up again
   please? thanks

Conformance model

   <Lauriat> Wilco's issue summary from github:
   [7]https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/40

      [7] https://github.com/w3c/silver/issues/40

   <Lauriat> Language of page prototype:
   [8]https://docs.google.com/document/d/18JyGF-AK8Qgq7DPyVlDYmxoj
   6814rORxuCf0l0oSb7U/edit

      [8]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18JyGF-AK8Qgq7DPyVlDYmxoj6814rORxuCf0l0oSb7U/edit

   is that true when we're looking at outliers with disabilities?
   if 6/10 can understand and 4 can't - don't we need to ask why
   the 4 can't?

   are we getting at methods or at verification of testing?

   you're cutting out...

   Shawn is cutting out

   maybe start that sentence again

   that paragraph

   is there something in the testing that moves accessibility
   towards edge users? (or intersectional users)

   if it is about 50+% pass, or even 80+% pass, who is being left
   out?

   on the task-based assessment...

   i also thought we were moving away from pass/fail...?

   <Lauriat>
   [9]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wTJme7ZhhtzyWBxI8oMXzl7i
   4QHW7aDHRYTKXKELPcY/edit?ts=5c431302#heading=h.vgz70qdsgj5h

      [9]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wTJme7ZhhtzyWBxI8oMXzl7i4QHW7aDHRYTKXKELPcY/edit?ts=5c431302#heading=h.vgz70qdsgj5h

   sorry task-based assessment applies to all my comments...

   so that is tricky at least up here we have the concept of undue
   hardship in our human rights legislation.

   i wonder with task-based assessment if this is possible to
   measure in other non-linear ways, such as - for brainstorming
   purposes - a heat map of barriers that arise during the
   task-based assessment?

   what do you mean Charles? tasks accounting for functional
   needs...can you give an example?

   with cognitive, it is tricky...there are so many kinds and not
   a clear functional need

   task-based assessment and cognitive barriers is going to get
   tricky

   so given this, could we use cognitive and intersectional
   cognitive-sensory disabilities as test our task-based
   assessment?

   i still worry about marginalizing those who are most
   marginalized within disability community if we use
   majority-rules tests...just a thought for future when building
   task-based assessment.

   and there is always the issue of how to verify user testing -
   is it replicable? was there external review? etc. (the issue of
   results fabrication or poor methodology)

   <Charles> understood on marginalized. i think what we need to
   do is to determine if the task evaluation method works, then
   determine if it works for everyone. we have to start somewhere.

   can we spend another session just on task evaluation?

   <Lauriat> Probably a good idea to spend another session just on
   task evaluation, yes.

   <Lauriat> trackbot, make minutes

   <trackbot> Sorry, Lauriat, I don't understand 'trackbot, make
   minutes'. Please refer to
   <[10]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.

     [10] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc

   <Lauriat> trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]