W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > May 2021

Re: Minutes of the Joint ACT- Silver - AG meeting of 14 May 2021

From: Frederick Boland <frederickboland@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 00:00:34 +0000 (UTC)
To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>, AG WG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <28467668.1162231.1621382434303@mail.yahoo.com>
 Define the terms used in the normative parts of the specification:https://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#define-terms-principle
Some basic guidelines to follow when writing a definition:1. A definition does not need to contain every piece of information known about a subject2. Keep it simple3. Avoid complicated terms4. Avoid specialized terms5. Avoid circularity

    On Friday, May 14, 2021, 1:32:46 PM EDT, Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com> wrote:  
 
   
== Summary ==
    
   - Wilco introduced a summary of ACT rules and how they are used.  Jeanne gave an overview of the Outcome: "Headings organize content" and how it fits into the WCAG3 architecture.   
   - We discussed the Outcome "Headings organize content".  We agreed that we needed more precise definitions to make this outcome testable, particularly for "logical blocks" and "sections". There was a concern that "section" can be confused with HTML markup definitions.   
 
   - We agreed that definitions were needed (as opposed to ACT  Rules) at the Outcome level because it is a technology neutral level and ACT Rules are more technology-specific.    
 
   - We agreed that Silver and ACT would work together to make more precise definitions of terms in the Outcomes.    
 
   - We did not agree about defining terms that could have definitions that could conflict with with other W3C and other specifications (such as PDF).  We ended the discussion since there was no agreement on the wording of the resolution.  Some felt that general terms, like headings were broad terms that could be defined and were needed for plain language understanding.  Others were concerned that the terms could conflict with normative definitions.  A compromise that we would define relationships to existing definitions in other specs was not acceptable to some.  Draft of the resolution that ultimately was not accepted by some was: "That the Outcome (technology neutral) level of WCAG3 have definitions of key terms. Silver will work with ACT to ensure definitions are precise, and will document relationships to existing definitions." 
   - We discussed the Critical Error for "Headings organize content".  We discussed how to define "process" and tabled that for later discussion with AG and Silver.  There is a request for proposals for more precise definitions of "process".   Not everything will have a critical error.  Many thought that there should not be a critical error for this Outcome.     
 
   - The next meeting will focus on Methods and inclusion of ACT rules, including where the rules conflict with WCAG3 Methods.  We will not use the survey again, as many thought it was not productive in raising key questions to discuss.     
 
 
== Questions for later ==
    
   - How to determine that a heading is missing?    
 
   - Finding the right word for a definition is important. How do we do that without conflicting definitions.      
 
   - Should examples at the Method level move to the Outcome level? The example is using white space to to separate content.    
 
   - How to include the counting for scoring and the way different circumstances can be counted. What to do when the count is not the same across different outcomes?
   - How to prototype the definitions so that we can see if customizable definitions work?     
 
   - How do we define process? - this should be discussed with AGWG   
 
 
== Minutes ==
 
https://www.w3.org/2021/05/14-wcag-act-minutes.html
 
   
Received on Wednesday, 19 May 2021 00:01:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 19 May 2021 00:01:53 UTC