- From: Sajka, Janina <sajkaj@amazon.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 18:09:45 +0000
- To: "public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <a388e30afa9a4c92b2951260c4d8e346@EX13D28UWC001.ant.amazon.com>
Minutes from the Silver Conformance Options subgroup teleconference of
Thursday 11 February are provided here.
===========================================================
SUMMARY:
* Deep dive on Principle #6 and critical errors
===========================================================
Hypertext minutes available at:
https://www.w3.org/2021/02/11-silver-conf-minutes.html
===========================================================
W3C
- DRAFT -
Silver Conformance Options Subgroup
11 Feb 2021
IRC log.
Attendees
Present
Bryan, Jeanne, Jeanne Spellman, Jemma, JF, John_Northup, KimD, PeterKorn, sajkaj, sarahhorton, Spellman
Regrets
Azlan, Bruce, Wilco
Chair
sajka
Scribe
John_Northup
Contents
1. Agenda Review & Administrative Items
2. Revisiting Principle #6 re Critical Failures
Meeting minutes
Agenda Review & Administrative Items
Janina: Some inconsistencies between google doc and working draft.
Revisiting Principle #6 re Critical Failures
Janina: Revisiting principle 6; what is a critical error.
Jeanne: Rachael and I do not disagree on critical errors; it's the final resolution of the critical error. Concern that critical error for flashing (zero) may be averaged out by higher scores in other areas and thus
overlooked.
<PeterKorn> https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/#conformance-levels-0
<PeterKorn> For content that conforms to the bronze level: The total score and score within each of the functional categories MUST be at least 3.5; and Views and processes MUST NOT have critical errors.
Peter: Doesn't see how the calculation method could result in the outcome that Jeanne describes.
Jeanne & Peter: Discussion on calculations and possible outcomes.
Rachael: Low scoring items that are not critical do balance out, but the purpose of the critcial error is to be a hard stop. Would not agree with a model that passed critical errors.
John F: Ensure we are not focusing on flashing; other errors are critical.
Janina: ... but flashing is life-threatening...
John F: Other things can be life threatening too depending on content and context.
Peter: There has been a discussion about the difference between content itself being life-threatening, and the context being life-threatening.
Peter: Marvel film trailer may trigger a seizure. Does it make a difference if the content is third-party? Do we treat this content differently if there is a warning?
Janina: Proposal to look at WCAG 2; possibility to programmatically correct problems; e.g., user agent detecting and stopping flashing.
<Zakim> sajkaj, you wanted to reconsider programatic solutions to flash, audio on load, etc
Brian: Challenging/impossible to catch every use case; need to keep it simple to drive adoption.
Jemma: If blocking a video is preferable to warning, how to score that?
Janina: Don't know yet.
Peter: Focus on creating use cases; then will move toward solutions.
Jeanne: Use cases valuable at this stage.
Peter: More to discuss about bugs?
Peter: Do we have an opinion on what should happen when a critical error is found?
John F: Do you mean time frame for remediation? A score is at a certain point in time...
John F: Discussion of lag time between scoring and remediation - if no followup evaluation, then old score is still the latest.
Janina: Scheduling by priority...
Jeanne: Met yesterday with DHS Trusted Tester, discussed measuring a11y errors compared to other bugs. They were cautiously enthusiastic.
Jeanne: Goal is a11y bugs treated same as other bugs. Just as critical as security or usability bugs.
Jeanne: They are enthusiastic about the point system and critical errors because it helps with VPAT
Bryan: Likes prioritizing by severity.
Sarah: Are we talking about bugs as equivalent to critical errors, or bugs with different degrees of severity?
Janina: Trying to specify that a11y bugs are as important as other bugs; not de-prioritized.
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to note that a11y, security and privacy bugs are *MORE* critical than other software bugs, due to legal obligations.
<JF> Precious metals like gold and silver are measured using the "troy" system where there are 12 ounces in a pound. If you normalize everything to mass a pound of feathers is 454 grams and a pound of gold is 373
grams, therefore the feathers are technically heavier.
John F: Bugs related to security, privacy, a11y... not all bugs are created equal.
John F: Legal obligation puts a11y ahead of other bugs.
John N: Likes the idea of commingling a11y and other types of bugs, so that a11y isn't diminished.
Peter: So much content is programmatically-generated--a bug in the script that generates content over several pages, which may become critical.
Janina: The challenge is finding those instances.
Sarah: Perhaps not refer to "critical bugs" due to confusion with existing term "critical errors".
Peter: Discussing equivalence across diff types of bugs (security vs a11y)...
Jemma: Seeking clarity around critical errors
Sarah: Not quite far enough along with Errors work to definitively answer.
Bryan: Is the word "critical" a stumbling block, even though the general principle is appropriate...
Sarah: Principle is sound. Use case introduces the issue of time... should that factor into the conformance model...
John F: Just because something is critical, the fix may not take immediate effect. Score could change moment by moment as content changes...
<JF> Time issue *IS* real, but shold it have an impact on "Score"?
<Jemma> I think that Peter is touching the issue of impact scope of "critical error"
Peter: Acknowleging the time issue, while we also try to consider a11y in the context of other bugs...
Sarah: Much about culture/practice/procedures that should weigh into conformance - beyond just products...
<PeterKorn> bye bye
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).
----------------------------------
Janina Sajka
Accessibility Standards Consultant
sajkaj@amazon.com<mailto:sajkaj@amazon.com>
Received on Thursday, 11 February 2021 18:10:03 UTC