Re: Efficient iteration outside of meetings

I second Mike’s comments.

We talk about being inclusive and using plain language and simple interfaces.

GitHub is the most complicated way know for collaboration.   Very effective and efficient for programmer and people used to code and pull requests — but just the interface for GitHub requires training — and a programmer like mind.


I know we use it internally — and that is fine.

but it would be great to have something else for review and comment if we want to engage the people we want to engage in review and contribution to our work

Best

Gregg





> On Sep 6, 2024, at 4:11 AM, Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com> wrote:
> 
> I suspect that most of us would are familiar with, and comfortable with, collaborative editing of documents.
>  
> However, “GitHub branches, PRs, and reviews” is generally an environment in which I am too unsure to be able to actively participate or even completely understand what is being proposed/done. So, removing the barriers of our current process (which is also one that is relatively unfamiliar to me) by moving in that direction would create quite a large barrier for me.
>  
> If I am the only one that feels that way, then no problem, there are plenty of very good contributors in the group, but I suspect that there could be others who are less comfortable relying too much on “GitHub branches, PRs, and reviews”.
>  
> Best regards
>  
> Mike
>  
> From: Mitchell Evan <mevan@tpgi.com>
> Sent: 18 January 2024 20:47
> To: Mary Jo Mueller <maryjom@us.ibm.com>; public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org
> Subject: Efficient iteration outside of meetings
>  
> Hi Mary Jo,
>  
> I made this specific comment regarding 4.1.2 (closed), but it points to a more general concern…https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/discussions/302#discussioncomment-8173826
>  
> My more general concern could help greatly with our efficiency working on WCAG2ICT. I feel that as much as half of all our time we spend, both on the calls and outside the calls, could be saved if we (1) are clearer about the specific proposals we’re responding to and (2) have a faster way to iterate on new proposals and get them in front of our fellow team members.
>  
> Example of high efficiency: the rapid iteration we did on last Friday’s call, where we pasted a dozen iterations of a proposed note into IRC.
>  
> We can’t do everything in a live working session, so we urgently need to find an asynchronous approach. In my experience, these are much more rapid that what we’ve been attempting for WCAG2ICT:
> An online collaborative office document (Google Docs or Microsoft Word)
> GitHub branches, PRs, and reviews
>  
> I realize those platforms have their own significant learning curves and barriers, perhaps especially for assistive technology users. Nevertheless AGWG has used collaborative office documents for rapid iteration. For comparison, our current reliance on GitHub issues and questionnaires certainly raises barriers for me, which don’t seem to be getting better after a few months, and I believe are problematic for our Task Force as a whole.
>  
> I propose we start small and see if it works. For #302, would you please put the relevant text into an online Word or Google Doc (your preference), make it publicly read-only, and editable by Task Force members?
>  
> Thanks in advance (and thank you for all the amazing work you do for our Task Force!)
> Mitchell
>  
> Mitchell Evan (he/him)
> Senior Accessibility Engineer
>  
> <image001.png>
> TPG Interactive
> www.tpgi.com <https://www.tpgi.com/>
>  
> A Vispero Company
> https://vispero.com/
> +49 1525 89 50 540
> +1 510 375 6104
>  
> This message is intended to be confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message from your system and notify us immediately.
> Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken or omitted to be taken by an unintended recipient in reliance on this message is prohibited and may be unlawful.