W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > March 2019

Minutes of Silver meeting 8 March 2019

From: Shawn Lauriat <lauriat@google.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 15:03:49 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGQw2hmhbye8ooV68hVw+CkscMjky7FBROWpCm4WSnb46PdCeg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
Formatted minutes <https://www.w3.org/2019/03/08-silver-minutes.html>

Text of minutes:


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

                               - DRAFT -

                 Silver Community Group Teleconference

08 Mar 2019


          jeanne, Chuck, JF, Charles, AngelaAccessForAll, shari,
          Lauriat, Jennison, Cyborg, Jan, LuisG, KimD


          jeanne, Shawn



     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]last minute CSUN F2F details and questions
         2. [4]CSUN Silver presentation
         3. [5]Combined prototype work
     * [6]Summary of Action Items
     * [7]Summary of Resolutions

   <jeanne> present?

   jeanne: some last minute details for the CSUN meeting

last minute CSUN F2F details and questions

   <scribe> scribe: LuisG

   <Cyborg> sorry if you posted a link, could you please repost



   jeanne: this is the page for everyone at the CSUN F2F meeting
   including remote folk
   ... we'll be starting at 8:30 a.m. Pacific Time working with
   AGWG first thing in the morning
   ... meeting in Anaheim Marriot room 312
   ... that is also on the wiki page
   ... please no more registrations

   JF: Looking forward to meeting everyone

   Lauriat: likewise

   jeanne: if you are a member of the community group, I will send
   you credentials privately to get into the meeting first thing
   in the morning. we'll be using their webex, so it's a different
   set of codes
   ... you won't be able to get into their webex because of how
   the W3 permissions are set up
   ... 8:30 to 12 with Guidelines working group. you should arrive
   by 8 so you can be ready to work by 8:30.
   ... we're going to need to come up with a name for the
   guidelines since "Silver" is the project name and we need
   something before it gets too much visibility
   ... we're going to give a status update of where we are and
   then we'll be getting a plain language workshop.
   ... we've given some of the templates from last fall for
   example guidelines and methods...they're going to help us
   translate those to plain language
   ... we're also invited to their team dinner; the wiki page has
   been linked

   <Lauriat> Dinner info link:

      [9] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Main_Page/CSUN2019_teamdinner

   cyborg: what about for chatting or video?

   jeanne: will probably have to use IRC for chat, I don't believe
   they use video
   ... we'll be able to share the link for the presentation; we
   might be able to broadcast it through the webex screenshare

   cyborg: would remote be able to participate in the plain
   language workshop?

   jeanne: it'll be in our room, so you should be able to.

   cyborg: if there are slides, I would like to participate in
   that as well

   jeanne: we'll try to get as much stuff on webex
   ... anything else on CSUN?

CSUN Silver presentation

   jeanne: Lauriat and I were working on the CSUN presentation



   Lauriat: we don't need to go through slide by slide...because
   it's 31 slides...but at a high level...
   ... brief background intro, goals, and overall plan with a "we
   are here"
   ... we'll probably edit the Draft Requirements after our

   jeanne: should we give some examples of SC moving into silver
   or should we prune that?

   JF: I think it would be extremely useful. the AG working group
   will be talking about WCAG 2.2; I think it would be appropriate

   jeanne: this is going to be for CSUN presentation, not the AGWG

   JF: generally of the same opinion

   chuck: to the general audience, it's probably a key thing
   people would be looking for

   LuisG: agreed

   cybele: I noticed that meaningful involvement is listed, but
   not included in the slides

   jeanne: I was actually hoping I could get an idea from you of
   what could go in there

   cybele: I can try and put something together...how should I get
   it in there?

   jeanne: you could just send it

   LuisG: should we mention we're looking for a name?

   lauriat: maybe at the start that Silver is the name of the
   project, not the guidelines

   cyborg: is the timeline in slide 4 still accurate?

   jeanne: I'll adjust them to be a little more accurate

   <JF> +1 to Shawn

   lauriat: I just made a best guess...they're not completely
   arbitrary, but they're subject to being adjusted at any time

   cyborg: I noticed in the content there are a lot of topics
   related to some issues I've raised up around data protection.
   will those folks be in our meetings, can I connect with them

   jeanne: it's hard to do..someone would have to agree to attend
   the session and give the question to the person giving the
   session...not sure they give the email address of those giving
   the sessions anymore
   ... presenters usually get mobbed, so it's hard to get to them
   ... if there are any particular ones, shawn or I can try to
   reach out to them

   Charles: there's a general practice or someone curating a list
   of links to slide decks, so the community is sharing what they

   cyborg: please keep me in the loop for that

   jeanne: we can post them to the Silver list as we see those pop
   up in social media
   ... I've created a status deck based on content from the CSUN
   slide deck, should we review that?

   lauriat: maybe just post a link



Combined prototype work

   jeanne: I would like to get the combined prototype into a nicer
   format before the face to face meeting



   jeanne: this is a mockup of what the combined prototype could
   look like

   <Lauriat> More direct link to the doc:


   jeanne: we have talked about different ways of sorting or
   filtering the guidelines
   ... I also wanted to show a principle of "only seeing
   perceivable" etc.
   ... it would use real arrow instead of keyboard arrows, but
   that's what I had
   ... in the actual guidelines section, I took some of the
   samples that people wrote and I used those for the listing of
   what guidelines could look like..with a link to more details
   ... the section headings one is the only one that links to the
   actual prototype..and if I have time I'll move the others into
   the prototype
   ... it's very sketchy but I thought it was a good idea to show
   people the sketchy part before coding it up

   <Charles> i think it could be even less fidelity approaching
   zero, like a priority guide:


   cybele: it seems a little overwhelming
   ... some of that is related to organization, some ??, but
   mostly it not being clear hierarchy or ??

   <Charles> when something is this level of fidelity, people
   infer that it is either representative or prescriptive

   cybele: I think the first page would give someone an idea of
   how usable it would be...so the simpler the better

   jeanne: not sure this would be the first page they would see
   ... maybe if they asked for the guidelines

   lauriat: I think the point is important; a lot of people see
   the guidelines first
   ... they don't link to the overview or introduction
   ... agree a lot of this comes from overall UX considerations; I
   want to make sure we work with the folks in education outreach
   WG and figuring out what kinds of resources we should say we
   need in order to present something usable
   ... as well as accessible, obviously, but we should include
   things like a UX designer or UX tech writer to try things out
   and make sure we're presenting something that's understandable
   and usable to people

   JF: looking at simple language, I have some concerns about some
   of it..can I verify this is just a draft?

   jeanne: yes, this is very much a draft
   ... it's basically a step above Lorem ipsum

   JF: I think most people we know scan and don't read everything.
   when you're sharing, I would draw attention to the first
   paragraph. I went directly to scanning through the headings

   Lauriat: +1 I think that note is more on the prototype than an
   introduction to the guidelines.. we should make it clear that
   "this is not real"

   <Charles> I think a comparative outline is more effective: WCAG
   next to the proposed outline

   cyborg: the key words to me are "very early draft" and "not
   proposed as content for silver"

   lauriat: I think that would help especially for the information
   architecture aspect
   ... we might want to do comparisons at a couple of levels

   <Charles> per Cybelle and other comments, this feels like a
   comp for a UI. per Shawn, people will react to the design.

   lauriat: want to carefully consider the design aspects. it has
   a pretty severe effect on how people perceive what's in front
   of them...if the rough prototype is complex, it might give the
   wrong impression that it's because of the information
   ... this kind of prototype is for people that have asked for it
   since we've given them others in isolation, but they wanted
   this to see how everything fits together

   <Cyborg> UX feels overwhelming and disorganized, too busy and
   not addressing needs of audience approaching Silver for

   lauriat: maybe we could still share some of this but with
   enough caveats of "this is early draft" "not edited" "not at
   the right level" etc.

   jeanne: thank you, I've been scribbling a lot of notes

   <Cyborg> Search to big topics to individual guidance might be a
   next start to prototype?

   lauriat: and we're at time. see folks at CSUN!

   <Lauriat> trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]
Received on Friday, 8 March 2019 20:04:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:45 UTC