RE: agenda for Silver meeting of 22 November 2019

Summary and my note taking from Friday’s meeting follow.
Unfortunately, there was a glitch, so the minutes are not yet posted.  When then do, here is the URL:
www.w3.org/2019/11/22-silver-minutes.html<http://www.w3.org/2019/11/22-silver-minutes.html>

Summary:

  1.  Peter and Janina reported on Next steps from Content meeting of 19 Nov
  2.  Brief updates from content migration and then discussion of Next steps for moving forward with Content subgroups.
  3.  Jeanne report from Accessing Higher Ground
  4.  Jeanne outlined creating a proposal for sampling in Conformance
  5.  Jeanne briefed on the need for Creating an on-ramp for new participants?

Minutes:

[14:02] <jeanne2> agenda+ Next steps from Content meeting of 19 Nov
[14:02] <jeanne2> agenda+ Next steps for moving forward with Content subgroups.
[14:02] <jeanne2> agenda+ report from Accessing Higher Ground
[14:02] <jeanne2> agenda+ creating a proposal for sampling in Conformance
[14:02] <jeanne2> agenda+ Creating an on-ramp for new participants?
[14:05] <Zakim> agendum 1. "Next steps from Content meeting of 19 Nov" taken up [from jeanne2]
[14:06] <bruce_bailey> ShawnL:  couple points from tues evening
[14:06] <bruce_bailey> SL:  for writing method, what should they look like?
[14:06] <bruce_bailey> ... some will technology specific, some will be technology agnostic
[14:07] <bruce_bailey> ... some that charles wrote up make sense to write up that any technology could implement
[14:07] <bruce_bailey> ... as opposed to some which are very specific for code
[14:07] <bruce_bailey> ... so how do we guide method others through that choice?
[14:08] <bruce_bailey> SL: added comment to doc to not loose comment
[14:08] <Lauriat> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gfYAiV2Z-FA_kEHYlLV32J8ClNEGPxRgSIohu3gUHEA/edit?disco=AAAADgSfF58

[14:08] <Lauriat> Comment from the doc: How do we guide those writing content to write methods across technologies or specifically for a particular technology and how do we support the process of that decision?
[14:09] <bruce_bailey> SL:  seed is planted
[14:09] <bruce_bailey> SL:  Other thing from Tues, for groups writing content
[14:09] <bruce_bailey> ... possibility of having groups not work on topics end-to-end, but look for experts
[14:09] <bruce_bailey> ... writing tests, writing methods
[14:10] <bruce_bailey> ... ex, how to get ACT folks to help?
[14:10] <bruce_bailey> ... get pool of people to write tests
[14:10] <bruce_bailey> ... different group of people to write methods that meet tests
[14:10] <bruce_bailey> ... experts with technology probably different than test authors
[14:11] <bruce_bailey> ... may need help to build up to methods, so progress does not sit on shelf
[14:12] <bruce_bailey> ... idea is to support people in writing the process that is within their expertise, rathter than asking them to be experts with methods as well
[14:12] <bruce_bailey> SL give an example with user needs
[14:12] <bruce_bailey> SL:  call was a small group, but we got good feedback that having point person would be key to process working
[14:13] <bruce_bailey> SL: Q or comments?
[14:13] <bruce_bailey> Peter Korn:  Looking for follow up from silver content meeting?
[14:13] <jeanne2> +1 to someone with continuity
[14:14] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne: valuable to have perspective
[14:14] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  At Accessing Higher Ground, talked to two two vendors, hope to have more participation with testing experience
[14:16] <bruce_bailey> SL:  Would like more perspectives from people in content writing process
[14:16] <bruce_bailey> ... I will finish up writing up summarize and post to list
[14:16] <bruce_bailey> ... looking for more perspective, including people who are not active on calls
[14:17] <bruce_bailey> ... no hard conclusion on writing methods, except maybe case-by-case discussion about which methods should be technology neutraul
[14:17] <bruce_bailey> ... we need a bit more practice and experience to have firm direction on writing process
[14:17] <bruce_bailey> SL:  can document how methods might work as technology neutral, or not
[14:18] <bruce_bailey> ... but also how to reach out and to who for helping volunteers figure out which is which
[14:18] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  For any of the groups, please call me
[14:18] <bruce_bailey> ... i have good ideas of which methods go where
[14:19] <bruce_bailey> ... we want more practice and experience before we invite in more participation from AGWG
[14:19] <bruce_bailey> SL:  agreed, we need to have firmer idea of how to validate decisions
[14:20] <Zakim> agendum 2. "Next steps for moving forward with Content subgroups." taken up [from jeanne2]
[14:21] <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  on cusp of writing methods for color contrasts
[14:21] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne asks about tests
[14:22] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  ambition is to change test
[14:22] <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  Wants to see proposed math, so not quite there yet
[14:23] <bruce_bailey> Chuck: like that my preconceptions challenged, so it has been very interesting
[14:24] <bruce_bailey> ... working with Andy Sommers
[14:24] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  Jeff Whit might be able to help too
[14:24] <bruce_bailey> ... Access higher ground as well
[14:26] <bruce_bailey> Janina:  reminder that W3c has math community group
[14:26] <bruce_bailey> ... looking at Math ML, and SVG and other activies
[14:26] <bruce_bailey> ... also Chemistry ML
[14:27] <bruce_bailey> ... has impact for accessible book, especial in secondary ed
[14:27] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  those math issues not directly related to how to measure color contrast
[14:28] <bruce_bailey> ... would be good to have separate methods for Math ML and Chemistry
[14:28] <bruce_bailey> Janina:  Objective with Chem ML is actually to faciliate exploration of structures
[14:29] <bruce_bailey> ... APA has mandate to track activity across different community groups
[14:29] <bruce_bailey> ... they are keenly instested in accessible text books
[14:30] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  This fits into Silver, because we want good alternative texts, so need to check that Makoto is tracking that work
[14:30] <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  We will need addition math-inclinded folks to verify forumlas
[14:30] <bruce_bailey> Jeane:  No much work on clear words
[14:31] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne ready to starting working on methods - we have some new tests written
[14:31] <bruce_bailey> ... methods start next week
[14:32] <bruce_bailey> Bruce: Media updates happened
[14:32] <bruce_bailey> https://www.w3.org/WAI/media/av/planning/

[14:32] <bruce_bailey> https://www.w3.org/WAI/media/av/changelog/

[14:33] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  OT we have code to turn off WebEX pings now
[14:33] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne asks Charles about Point of Regard
[14:34] <bruce_bailey> Charles:  time and template and format remain a challenge
[14:34] <bruce_bailey> ... feedback on template last week was good
[14:34] <bruce_bailey> ... expect to have some time to dedicate to topic
[14:35] <bruce_bailey> ... premature to ask for other to help
[14:35] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  Jim Allen and Wayne Dick are willing to help with tests and methods
[14:36] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  no one on call for alt text, but have been talking with Makota and will follow up more
[14:37] <bruce_bailey> Bruce:  what is plan for getting more detail from current 1.1.1 into text
[14:37] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  Yes, that is main thing working on with Makota
[14:37] <bruce_bailey> ... will be drawing from current EO material which is really pretty mature
[14:38] <bruce_bailey> ... as discussed last week, that gap informed making corrections to process
[14:38] <bruce_bailey> ... not fault of group working on alternative text, gap happened from my [Jeanne] not helping enough probably
[14:39] <bruce_bailey> SL:  That really informed us, as chairs, for supporting groups doing the writing of guidelines and methods
[14:40] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  helped with design process of being data driven
[14:40] <bruce_bailey> ... so this experience is keeping with our design principles
[14:41] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne calls for volunteers for current and new guidelines?
[14:41] <Zakim> agendum 3. "report from Accessing Higher Ground" taken up [from jeanne2]
[14:41] <jeanne2> Topic: AGWG and Challenges document
[14:42] <bruce_bailey> TOPIC:  AGWG and Challenges Document
[14:42] <bruce_bailey> Peter Korn:  broad praise for activity, but lots of specific editorial suggestions
[14:43] <bruce_bailey> ... Janinia has lead for grouping comments and feedback and making responsive edits
[14:43] <bruce_bailey> ... hope to have done by Dec 3rd
[14:43] <bruce_bailey> ... then hope to ask for consensus to go foward with FCPWD
[14:43] <bruce_bailey> Janina:  edits include comments from Jeanne and DetLev
[14:44] <bruce_bailey> PK: There was also discussion about if Challenges Doc was from AGWG or Silver Task Force, agreed to keep as AGWG doc
[14:45] <jeanne2> Jeanne: I sent Janina the work that Charles Hall did on the Problem Statements and the results of the Silver Design Sprint
[14:45] <bruce_bailey> Chuck:  JF and others had concern for purpose and next steps
[14:46] <bruce_bailey> Janina:  there was a build hiccup, so AGWG was not seeing latest version
[14:46] <bruce_bailey> SL: +1 to peters summary, draft looked at during call had lots of comments
[14:46] <bruce_bailey> ... but clear concensus was that Challenges Document important and close to being ready to go out
[14:47] <bruce_bailey> PK:  Having a comprehensive view of issues is important for Silver and other work
[14:47] <bruce_bailey> SL:  Important insight for conformance model
[14:48] <bruce_bailey> Janina:  Any major revision will benefit from insight of 20 years of experience
[14:48] <Zakim> agendum 3. "report from Accessing Higher Ground" taken up [from jeanne2]
[14:49] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  Gave well attended talk at Higher Ground
[14:49] <bruce_bailey> ... two universities joined up to community group
[14:49] <bruce_bailey> ... Buffalo and Denver
[14:50] <bruce_bailey> ... talked to tool vendors and have vebal agreements to have technical people join tests
[14:50] <bruce_bailey> Janina:  full room was first day at 8 am
[14:51] <bruce_bailey> ... good questions and lots of enthusiasm
[14:52] <Zakim> agendum 4. "creating a proposal for sampling in Conformance" taken up [from jeanne2]
[14:53] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  In conformance meeting last week, we have good consensus around sampling, have several different proposals
[14:53] <bruce_bailey> ... we would like to have techniques for sampling written up
[14:53] <bruce_bailey> ... we want statistically valid samples, so that large organization can test resonable sub-sets
[14:54] <bruce_bailey> ... testing template and pattern libraries is also possible
[14:54] <bruce_bailey> ... Makota has example with Japan
[14:54] <bruce_bailey> ... DetLev has example from EU/Germany
[14:55] <bruce_bailey> ... Frederick Boland (formally with NIST) has paper on sampling
[14:55] <bruce_bailey> ... also EM Document
[14:55] <bruce_bailey> ... want to put a group together to draft some proposals
[14:56] <bruce_bailey> ... if you have suggestions or concerns, please also forward those to chairs or to list
[14:56] <Zakim> agendum 5. "Creating an on-ramp for new participants?" taken up [from jeanne2]
[14:56] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  Last topic for today, we are starting to bring in new people
[14:57] <bruce_bailey> ... Cybel was recruiting at Access Toronto, and reports that Silver is moving too fast for people to return to process
[14:58] <CharlesHall> i had also created this draft invitation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13sdUsdgoEAHXN2OqXwLZRnUmsEVsD3l7bDsN9bttGOE/edit?usp=sharing

[14:58] <bruce_bailey> ... these were people working before, so we need ways to be less intimidating
[14:58] <bruce_bailey> ... thanks Charles
[14:58] <bruce_bailey> Jeanne:  NO MEETING FRIDAY NEXT WEEK
[14:58] <bruce_bailey> ... USA Thanksgiving
[14:59] <jeanne2> Friday, no meeting
[14:59] <jeanne2> Tuesday, we will have meetings
[14:59] <jeanne2> rrsagent, make minutes
[14:59] <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/11/22-silver-minutes.html jeanne2
[15:00] <jeanne2> regrets+ Shari



From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 8:12 PM
To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Subject: agenda for Silver meeting of 22 November 2019


== Agenda ==

agenda+ Next steps from Content meeting of 19 Nov

agenda+ Next steps for moving forward with Content subgroups.

agenda+ report from Accessing Higher Ground

agenda+ creating a proposal for sampling in Conformance

agenda+ Creating an on-ramp for new participants?

== Links ==

Minutes from Content meeting of 19 November<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2019%2F11%2F19-silver-minutes.html&data=02%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cfbe2bef3ac4c40b79b3908d76ee91ffd%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637099819851020205&sdata=SKY%2BCV7LmzxI51IciJH0%2BASZFsAuz%2FlvlVeOytBA2D0%3D&reserved=0>

Content Writing Process<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1gfYAiV2Z-FA_kEHYlLV32J8ClNEGPxRgSIohu3gUHEA%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cfbe2bef3ac4c40b79b3908d76ee91ffd%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637099819851020205&sdata=%2FIJbUHVS8Iza0ZiiSU1KuORxj9TT8pl3S2eCENIos2g%3D&reserved=0>

Sampling in Conformance

  *   Makoto's report on <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1SVDWemejSSBPPqJl4t_KBGeXWsFNWjHv0JW1y6RWgdg%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cfbe2bef3ac4c40b79b3908d76ee91ffd%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637099819851030169&sdata=doZXfMqpkaSFcCLH5TpEAtlkLd8PJvuXbCmBsnlFUok%3D&reserved=0> Conformance model of JIS X 8341-3:2016<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1SVDWemejSSBPPqJl4t_KBGeXWsFNWjHv0JW1y6RWgdg%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cfbe2bef3ac4c40b79b3908d76ee91ffd%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637099819851030169&sdata=doZXfMqpkaSFcCLH5TpEAtlkLd8PJvuXbCmBsnlFUok%3D&reserved=0>
  *   WCAG-EM <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG-EM%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cfbe2bef3ac4c40b79b3908d76ee91ffd%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637099819851040127&sdata=8DKjX%2F3xkN0ZFR4daPqksR%2BxVeUNFCQKyc5tHFbiM1w%3D&reserved=0>
  *   Detlev's report on What Could Simplified Monitoring mean...<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fteam-usability.de%2Fen%2Fteamu-blog-post%2Fsimplified-monitoring.html&data=02%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cfbe2bef3ac4c40b79b3908d76ee91ffd%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637099819851040127&sdata=57%2FEQws%2BN92CXxx8Z1H3coSVABAMaplwzLlxR%2BXrPq8%3D&reserved=0>

== Conference Call Info ==

https://www.w3.org/2017/08/telecon-info_silver-fri<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2017%2F08%2Ftelecon-info_silver-fri&data=02%7C01%7Cbailey%40access-board.gov%7Cfbe2bef3ac4c40b79b3908d76ee91ffd%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637099819851050086&sdata=LBhjGvgm5dopMECVF2rNg%2B6GWqUjzISWoaXj1ZqX0aI%3D&reserved=0>