Re: Missing scribing notes

Thanks Alastair. Also to you and Rachael for extensive scribing duties 
at TPAC.

Josh

------ Original Message ------
From: "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com>
To: "GLWAI Guidelines WG org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: 20/09/2016 10:42:12
Subject: Missing scribing notes

>We lost connectivity in the meeting room, these are the scribe notes 
>from the end of the first session today:
>
>  Judy: As a midpoint reflection, this is an impressive amount of work. 
>If we're looking for a decision today, worried that we might loose time 
>by trying to move fast. There are also a lot of people not here.
>Shawn: We looking for a non-binding decision here, we'll send it out to 
>the working group with the reasoning for the chosen option. Not looking 
>to make the decision until end of Oct.
>   Disconnected
>Shawn: Most flexible option. Overall goal is to have a focus on what 
>will have the most flexibility long term, so as technology changes we 
>can iterate the guidelines and have something more flexible as a 
>result.
>Shawn: Emphasis will be on outreach to the most diverse people & 
>groups. Stakeholder interviews are more similar to the design approach, 
>with a wide net. Self reporting is not as comprehensive, similar to 
>faster-progress option. Focus in scope & sizing will be on 
>organisations which have a track record of having flexibility in their 
>approaches.
>Shawn: In analysis, will be a little more comprehensive. Communication 
>will be as-per the other options. Analysis: Would be a meeting of the 
>sub-group... (networking issues impacting IRC)
>Shawn: Experimentation - we'd also focus on prototypes which include 
>the mechanics of updating. We'd probably do some A/B testing, but 
>definitely need to valid the prototypes. No focus groups in this one.
>Shawn: Desirability testing would be a part of this one.
>Shawn: In the production and evolution phase, the flexible option is a 
>bit different as there are more unknowns that wouldn't be established 
>until the earlier phases.
>Shawn: Milestones wouldn't just be until we get to silver (launch), 
>then what are the milestones afterwards.
>Shawn: Also unique to this option is some crowd sourcing. Ultimately, 
>we want people to be able to come in and identify gaps, an agile 
>iteration cycle.
>Q:  has this been done before in other standards processes?
>Shawn: We'll find out in the research phase.
>Jeanne: The low-cost is our least attractive option, more volunteers, 
>fewer surveys, no contextual interviews, informal research into other 
>areas. Much of the discussion would be on the WCAG email lists. 
>Unlikely to do the literature review.
>Jeanne: Minimal personas, but would do the user-stories. Multiple 1/2 
>day teleconferences to discuss findings and doing reports.
>Jeanne: In production phase, it will be typical ways we do things 
>today.
>Jeanne: We'll ID the editors, follow the general process we do things 
>today. This is basically the backup.
>Jeanne: Take the break-time to discuss and refine your thought, 
>everyone should have a chance to speak and we'll collate thoughts and 
>use the flip charts etc.
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2016 09:49:38 UTC