Minutes from 8 January

Minutes from the Silver Task Force and Community Group teleconference of
Friday 8 January are provided here.

===========================================================
SUMMARY:
*            FPWD transition request has been sent.
*            Discussion of adjustments to meeting times and dates; a poll is
              forthcoming
*            Brief subgroup reports
===========================================================

Hypertext minutes available at:
https://www.w3.org/2021/01/08-silver-minutes.html

===========================================================
   W3C

                                                                                                            - DRAFT -
                                                                                               Silver Task Force & Community Group

08 January 2021

   IRC log.

Attendees

   Present
          AngelaAccessForAll, CharlesHall, Chuck, Francis_Storr, Jan, jeanne, Jemma, KimD, Lauriat, mgarrish, PeterKorn, Rachael, sajkaj, sarahhorton, shari, SuzanneT, SuzanneTaylor, uxjennifer

   Regrets
          Bruce, David, Sukriti, Todd

   Chair
          jeanne, Shawn

   Scribe
          sajkaj

Contents

    1. update on publishing
    2. Meeting schedule time changes for 2021
    3. update on publishing

Meeting minutes

   <uxjennifer> +

  update on publishing

   <Chuck> https://github.com/w3c/transitions/issues/303

   ca: Transition request for FPWD has been forwarded

   ca: Track progress at above link

   ca: Anticipating new issues emerging as a result of moving to FPWD; suggest time to discuss

  Meeting schedule time changes for 2021

   js: SSeveral requests to change time and day

   js: Of course we eventually move to AGWG's Tuesday 11AM Bopston time

   js: That puts Silver plus AGWG participants on the phone from 9:30 AM to 1:00 PM Boston with a brief 30 minute break (perhaps)

   js: But there's also the challenge of participation across North America, Europe, and Japan

   js: Asking for discussion ... We will follow with a poll

   <Jemma> It would be a good idea to have one meeting only.

   js: So, for now, let's narrow down what's in the poll

   <Chuck> janina: SInce we are heading to an 11am on tueday's in boston, how about same hour different day?

   <PeterKorn> +1 to that idea

   sj: Suggests 11AM Boston some other day of the week because we're going to that time on Tuesdays anyway

   sl: Suggests a rotating time schedule

   <Jan> Doesn't 11:00 a.m. Eastern put a burden on our Asia participants?

   sl: Was original idea of two meetings at disparate times

   <Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to propose maybe a rotating time?

   sl: Notes it could be a bit tricky to track what week

   <Chuck> -0.0001

   ca: Slight objection to rotating; perfers consistency

   <Lauriat> +1 to not wanting to over-complicate things. :-)

   ca: Prefers early in the day -- even though I'm Mountain Time!

   <KimD> +1 I will not be able to meet at changing times.

   rm: Suggests a non 11AM time to share the pain

   <Jemma> It is 4:14am in Japan now.

   sj: Notes a later day Boston time is problem for Europe

   <CharlesHall> proposal: shorter meetings, more frequently, and distributed

   js: Originally, we didn't have much Euro participation

   <Lauriat> Note: we've also had periodic interest in Australia and I think India, so I don't want to completely discount other time zones, even if we focus on the current participants.

   <Jan> It's 7:15 p.m in the UK right now.

   js: Notes Friday Euro participation low for just that reason

   <CharlesHall> and 4:15 in tokyo

   pk: Given importance of Makoto's contribution suggesting 10AM Boston

   <CharlesHall> additional proposal: take advantage of our W3C Slack community

   Francis: Willing to do 6:30 Pacific to help with Makato

   pk: 7AM would make biggish difference for me -- also have late meetings

   ch: Shorter meetings, less frequently

   ch: Suggests using slack

   js: Please explain

   ch: Allows nonsynchronous

   js: How does that help as a substitute for a meeting?

   ch: Not substitute, just another option

   cl: Likes the idea of a recording one can audition asynchronously

   sl: Sill not understanding what slack would contribute that we don't already have

   <Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to mention meeting minutes, resolutions, and summaries emailed out.

   <KimD> +1 to SL - I think we're covered with email

   ca: Also not opposed but don't understand the value add

   <CharlesHall> we have that channel - #silver-wcag3

   rm: A dedicated slack channel would aggregate text conversations; could keep audio recordings limited to participants

   sj: asks about slack accessibility?

   pk: disappointing

   <CharlesHall> to that point, Slack is now owned by SalesForce

   Jennifer: Suggests MS Teams ...

   <CharlesHall> Slack has a dedicated accessibility team

   js: Notes use of non sanctioned tools within W3C work is an issue

   <CharlesHall> sorry, i have to drop :(

   <Chuck> Janina: Issue is that there may not be much support difference with what Zoom provides.

   sj: suggests similar to Zoom

   pk: except that captioning is builtin; whereas on Zoom it's an add

   <uxjennifer> Peter is correct. Zoom uses Otter.ai as the add-in to support captions & transcript

   js: That could be a big advantage with hearing disabilities people

   rm: Seeing better captioning and better screen reader integration in Teams

   jennifer: Teams would be everything in one place; but con is everything on one platform

   Jennifer: Would be willing to ask about Ms possibly donating for W3C use

   <Jan> captioning abilities for zoom: https://www.washington.edu/accessibility/videos/zoom/

   js: Suggests not just yet, but phps

   js: We should simply check whether or not there's already conversation about Teams

   kd: Likes much of the a11y support in Teams even though not usually an Ms fan

   js: Let's get back to the when focus ...

   js: There's also still the proposal to more times of shorter duration

   <Chuck> janina: Issue with shorter meetings is setup and followup time that isn't helped by having a shorter meeting, and issues with meaty topics.

   <Chuck> janina: And we didn't resolve the large topic.

   <KimD> +1 - shorter meetings may be less effective

   <shari> i agree with janina

   sj: Notes setup and post actions aren't helped by more frequent shorter mtgs; and often we need time for discussion

   dk: Rotating would not work for me; Keep Tuesday is best for me

   dk: Really don't want to make it harder for Makoto

   dk: Maybe a different day with the same Friday time might get more Euro participation

   Susanne: +1 to same time as Friday and keeping Tuesday

   <Chuck> janina: There's merrit to keeping tuesday and moving friday to another day, so that not eating into weekend.

   <Chuck> janina: The only real choices are Thursday and Monday's, given that other days run into other calls.

   <Jemma> just let you know that there are w3c ARIA and ARIA AT meetings on Thursdays.

   <Jemma> mainly Thursday afternoon.

   <KimD> +1 to Thursday at roughly this time (could be later too for me)

   pk: More likely to have more conflict midday than at early 8AM Pacific

   <PeterKorn> This time on another day is more likely to have periodic conflicts for me.

   <PeterKorn> 8am PT / 11am ET or 9am PT / noon ET would be the best choice for me generally.

   js: Looking at moving this meeting earlier; believe we have enough for a poll

   <Jan> But - is the AGWG time out of bounds for Japan?

   js: Please look for a link to the poll!

   <PeterKorn> I need to drop now.

   <PeterKorn> Thanks. Also Happy New Year.

   <Chuck> not a lot from multiple people, but a huge amount from one person

   Jennifer: Asks about our level of Asian participation? If not, would a friendlier time garner more participation?

   js: It's always been an issue; mostly in support of Australia; but never a lot of additional participation

   js: Makoto participates, even though it's 11:30PM for him

   jennifer: wonders whether we tried for long enough?

   js: for about a year

   jennifer: OK

  update on publishing

   <Chuck> janina: Conformance group has added in scope out of scope and timeline data to the top of the wiki. That's captured in an email to the silver list and AGWG.

   <Chuck> janina: I added a parenthetical to our scope statement.

   <SuzanneTaylor> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XlT8IWlD9crki24ILyzbmQUjxZzl0Cv5jGa8m5gmQRo/edit?usp=sharing

   susanne: Also did Errors; but currently in Google Doc

   susanne: Expect something ready for hearbeat wd

   js: Notes fpwd has more items covered, ie intellectual property, etc

   js: updated working drafts are not the same level of attention

   js: but always announced

   js: Just not as many blogs and commentaries, etc



----------------------------------

Janina Sajka
Accessibility Standards Consultant
sajkaj@amazon.com<mailto:sajkaj@amazon.com>