- 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