- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@paciellogroup.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 15:45:28 -0400
- To: WAI Coordination Call <public-wai-cc@w3.org>
Formatted version of minutes:
public-wai-cc@w3.org
Text of minutes:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WAI Coordination Call Teleconference
18 Jul 2018
Attendees
Present
janina, Joanmarie_Diggs, jeanne, MichaelC, Judy, George,
Brent, Katie_Haritos-Shea, tzviya
Regrets
KathyW, JimA
Chair
Judy
Scribe
jeanne, Judy, Ryladog
Contents
* [2]Topics
1. [3]scribe, rrsagent, agenda, next meeting date Aug 1
2. [4]upcoming publications & announcements
3. [5]TPAC, fyi diversity scholarships application closed
4. [6]Webex accessibility, feedback, alternatives
5. [7]Github accessibility, feedback re-gathering
6. [8]two WAI charters with reviews open still, remind AC
reps
7. [9]review of silver requirements
https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/
8. [10]FYI AGWG process input, and what next, discussions
underway
9. [11]common architectural approach/batching for mathml,
chemml, music?
10. [12]any other follow-ups on WCAG 2.1/VPAT 2.1
disambiguation? Thanks for
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-cc/201
8Jun/0010.html
11. [13]Any WG or TF updates or infoshare?
* [14]Summary of Action Items
* [15]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<jeanne> scribe: jeanne
scribe, rrsagent, agenda, next meeting date Aug 1
Judy: Next meeting is August 1, please inform on regrets
upcoming publications & announcements
<George> regrets from George for aug 1
Joanie: FPWD ARIA 1.2, Core AAM 1.2, ARIA Authoring PRactices
1.2 this week
Judy: Are the announcements done? Were those WDs pending
Ralph's review?
<MichaelC>
[16]https://www.w3.org/WAI/CG/Group/draft-announcements#aria-fp
wd
[16] https://www.w3.org/WAI/CG/Group/draft-announcements#aria-fpwd
Michael: I sent draft announcements. I don't recall getting
feedback on them.
Judy: Since they are FPWD, we need to inform people.
Michael: There is a blog post on the draft announcement page
TPAC, fyi diversity scholarships application closed
Judy: The TPAC diversity scholarship application went out to
the home page, chairs list and tweet channel. The applications
closed on Sunday. There wasn't a separate notice to
accessibility groups. Not everyone saw the announcements. There
were people that applied from accessibility area.
... the pool of funds is small
... the application process has closed.
... we are learning from this round in case there is a future
round.
... are there any questions?
<Judy> s/a notice/any separate notice/
Webex accessibility, feedback, alternatives
Judy: Thank you to George for bringing up the issue. People
have mentioned accessibility problems with WebEx and I have
asked what people are using with better accessibility.
... George has mentioned that Zoom has had better
accessibility.
... W3C is piggy-backing on MIT's teleconferencing services
which we get from being hosted by MIT. Another service would be
an additional cost to W3C.
... we would need to document the problems and ways they could
be addressed.
... George would like to run a test of Zoom for a future call.
Maybe the next call?
George: Zoom is excellent. Daisy, Deque, [others] are using
Zoom. Very good features.
... when I am host, I can share my screen, share my audio, I
can even do a live demonstration of the accessibility features
of the website. Even the audio.
... lots of applications, and it is cheap. It has international
dial-in numbers.
Judy: WebEx has many of those features, but when we had tried
testing it didn't seem have good screen reader support.
Katie: Deque switched because it was better accessibility and
was cheaper.
... there are CGs that are using Zoom.
Janina: Is there only a web client or can I use SIP? If it is
WebRTC based?
Katie: YEs, it is WebRTC
George: SIP - they have excellent tech support.
Brent: Zoom has greatly improved the accessibility of the
product. A screen reader user Brent knows says that WebEx and
Zoom have similar features and that if he put the time into
learning all the Zoom features, it would probably be a better
experience.
Judy: Please get any additional info about the practical side
of using Zoom.
... Would people be interested in having the August 1 call be
on Zoom?
George: I won't be there on August 1
<Ryladog> yes, when George can do it
Judy: Let's try it when George is there, on August 15
George: A university gave a list of accessibility problems with
WebEx. I will connect Judy with them for a list of the
problems.
Github accessibility, feedback re-gathering
Judy: Github is another major tool that W3C uses. There is some
progress on this.
... W3C would like to build a list of accessibility issues
... Michael has a list. Are they public?
... they mainly came from LV and COGA
<Judy> scribe: Judy
Jeanne: Silver TF has run into accessibility problems with
GitHub
<Ryladog> Wayne Dick has info on low vision issues with GitHub
and uses his own style sheet
Jeanne: both from LV Silver participants, and COGA Silver
participants
... but FYI I had heard that MSoft had built a custom interface
to their GitHub interface
... and I was trying to find out more info on that
... and right now I'm not up to date on the status of that
project
JB: was that for accessibility issues or otehr issues
Jeanne: it was for usability plus accessibility
Katie: and Wayne Dick has documented some accessibility issues
and had to build his own style sheets
<jeanne> George: The learning curve for parts of Git are a
problem. We need to provide assistance to people who want to
use pull requests.
George: the learning curve for GitHub is pretty steep;
<scribe> scribe: Jeanne
Janina: There is arcane language, like "pull request"
Jeanne: The command line interface is more sophisticated than
the GUI.
Judy: Jeanne, can you reconnect with the MS A11y working on GH?
Jeanne: I was working through Angela Hooker in Microsoft, and I
will ask her if W3C can connect with them about their issues.
Judy: I will let you know the next steps.
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to talk about GH a11y issues
two WAI charters with reviews open still, remind AC reps
<Ryladog> I did it today for Knowbility
Judy: We still have charters open, please remind your AC rep to
vote in favor of the charters. They close next week.
... we still don't have as comprehensive a response as I am
hoping for.
... People may have thought they were the same request and not
two separate charters.
<Brent> Can you tell me if Pearson has responded.
<Ryladog> Has Knowbility voted on APA?
Michael: Janina and Joanie have been reminding organizations.
There is an automated reminder a week before.
Judy: I will talk to the Comm Team and tell them we need a
clarification email that there are two separate charters.
Joanie: Some organizations will do an internal review and often
spend a week or more doing an internal review. When the charter
first comes out, that's the best time to do the ping of the AC
reps.
Judy: Some large companies need to take a charter through legal
review cycle because of the IP issues.
review of silver requirements
[17]https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/
[17] https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/
[18]https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/index.html
[18] https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/index.html
<Ryladog> scribe:Ryladog
Jeanne: this is the second draft, we got really food feedback
from AGWG
... Intro section is large, how it compares, then Opportuniies
discovered during research
... turned research into Design ststaements, took to CSUN, have
been working
... second section is the Design Principles that we wish to
follow, 9 items
... specifically calls out LV in COGA
... then Requirments, which are simple. We will have 3 rounds
... prototypes, then Public Editors Draft, then we will do one
more pass of Reqs before Charter
... the 4 are: 1. multiple ways to measure is meant to help
COGS issues
... we will broaden the ability to measure, ie rubrics,
usability testing
... 2. mpre flexible
Judy: Did silver talk to the Acccessibilty Task Force for
feedback
... want to include possibility for AI inclusion and AI tests;
basically wondering whether "AI readiness" needs to be taken
more into account in the Silver requirements
... User testing changes the conformance aspect
Jeanne: we have, met at last TPAC, and MaryJo reviewed it at
AccessU, and we are tryingto set up a meeting this week
George: we have the Accessibility Checker for ePub, and the
feedback we are gettingis that there are so many manual tests
that it is a problem
... people want more automated tests
JUdy: yes there are scalability concerns
... what is the Feedback cycle
Jeanne: we are probably goingto do another draft in Aug
<jeanne> ... please give feedback by 31 July
<jeanne> scribe: jeanne
FYI AGWG process input, and what next, discussions underway
<MichaelC>
[19]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2018JulSep/
0063.html
[19]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2018JulSep/0063.html
Michael: There was a an email sent to the working group
... it's a proposal for collecting input on how we can improve
the process in a structured manner.
... there is another week of feedback on the proposal
... then we will open the window for public feedback
Katie: I responded already to address the issues:
Michael: It is mainly for AGWG, but there are stakeholders
outside the group.
... there are multiple channels with varying levels of
confidentiality
... there is a channel for confidential information even from
the AGWG chairs and staff contact.
<Ryladog> That is very good Michael, allowing anonymity
Michael: the next step will be for the chairs to come up with a
process that will be worked on in September-October
... we cannot fix every problem due to resources or conflicting
priorities
... it will be an improvement, it will not be perfect.
Judy: Good management of expectations
... it would be helpful to forward the note directly into the
task forces.
... I look forward to hearing what the next steps will be.
common architectural approach/batching for mathml, chemml, music?
<Ryladog> A VPAT 2.2 is coming soon for item 10
Judy: defer to 4 weeks when George will be on the call.
Janina: I will send some thoughts to WAI-CC list
George: Diagramm Project has asked me to post questions aobut
chemml. Can I post about it?
Judy: Go ahead. I am interested to seeing of W3C could
contribute to bringing ChemML onto the Web.
Tzviya: I would like to talk aobut ChemML and publishing. I
won't be here for 15 August.
any other follow-ups on WCAG 2.1/VPAT 2.1 disambiguation? Thanks for
[20]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-cc/2018Jun/0010.h
tml
[20]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-cc/2018Jun/0010.html
Judy: Shawn had put out a clarification.
Katie: There are a couple pieces missing.
Judy: Let's try to coordinate. I was talking at M-enabling and
with people from Access Board. There was no coordination
between VPAT 2.1 has nothing to do with WCAG 2.1
... can we set up the W3C Comm Team, the Access Board, and ITIC
that clarifies that it isn't related to WCAG 2.1
... I will take the action item to coordinate a message.
Any WG or TF updates or infoshare?
Judy: Please send updates to WAI-CC email list or agenda
request for the next meeting.
... no burning issues
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2018 19:45:51 UTC