RE: [EXT] RE using AI minutes

Hi all,

I wouldn’t normally choose AI over human beings, but in this case I know that I would find it helpful. I only offered to scribe once, but it really didn’t work out, due to screen reader accessibility issues with the program. I feel bad that I never offer to scribe, but that is the reason. That said, I would be more than happy to take my turn at editing the notes or transcript produced by AI.

Many thanks,
Jen

JEN GOULDEN, M.A., EDP, UEB Technical
Accessibility Compliance Support Manager
Chair, Braille Authority of North America
Vice-President, International Council on English Braille
613-552-4191 (Cell)
343-804-0333 (Office)
jgoulden@crawfordtech.com<mailto:jgoulden@crawfordtech.com>
Crawford Technologies Inc.
20 Bay Street, Suite 1105
Toronto, ON M5J 2N8
www.crawfordtech.com<http://www.crawfordtech.com/>
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately.

Please consider our environment before printing this email.

Ce courrier électronique est confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.

From: Joe Humbert A11y (Android) <joe@a11yeval.com>
Sent: March 12, 2025 11:29 AM
To: Nayan Padrai <nayan@ecomback.com>; Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
Cc: Todd Libby <toddlibby@protonmail.com>; Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Wendy Reid <wendy.reid@rakuten.com>; Kenneth G. Franqueiro <kfranqueiro@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] RE using AI minutes

You don't often get email from joe@a11yeval.com<mailto:joe@a11yeval.com>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
+1 to Gregg's comments

As someone who: actively participates in 1 task force and 1 community group, has a mobility & dexterity disability and sometimes takes notes (not always totally voluntary), I would welcome the help.

When I scribe, I struggle to keep up and capture what was said accurately. I often miss things that were said completely. I also make spelling and grammar mistakes that I can't correct because I will fall more behind.

Because of the difficulty scribing, I tend to participate less or not at all when scribing.

I also use the Zoom transcript (AI driven?) feature to help make my notes better or to see what I missed, but that is also difficult to look at in real time and scribe what I missed.

Finally, in the smaller meetings I attend, often the same person volunteers to scribe or a random "sacrifice" is chosen which seems unfair. I also definitely don't recommend making new participants scribe because it is not easy and may turn them off to future participation.

Just my thoughts.

  Joe Humbert



On March 12, 2025 10:49:13 AM Nayan Padrai <nayan@ecomback.com<mailto:nayan@ecomback.com>> wrote:
+1 to Gregg’s comments.

Thanks
Nayan

On Mar 12, 2025, at 7:38 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <gregg@raisingthefloor.org<mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org>> wrote:

1   this topic was raised - to help out those who take notes

2 the notes we currently take usually include a fraction of what is said or meant, are often so brief they are not understandable, mostly do not capture even key ideas people present, and often say the opposite of what people intend.

My comment was that we should periodically  - have an AI take notes (or correctable notes per below) and then compare them to the human notes.    Wnen the AI notes ARE more accurate, more complete, and capture key aspects — then we should relieve notetakers from the task and let them participate.

If AI iw worse - we can wait and give it a go again in 6 months or a year.   I will bet a large amount of money they will be more accurate and complete fairly quickly — and we should save the poor notetakers the task and let them participate when they do.    But am happy to be proven wrong if I am.   Always like to new data.

Remember that with what I  prospoesd a person acn look at the summary of what they said seconds after saying it and correct it if wrong.

This is how all the  AI vs Human  arguments should go.  With data rather than either overly positive or negative comments - unless the comments help shape the question or the possible solutions.

Best

Gregg

(and may the best note - taker win)

OH - and we have one more thing -  we should also see which is more accessible as we go.  No idea with would be but one more thing to include in our evaluation.




On Mar 12, 2025, at 2:42 AM, Todd Libby <toddlibby@protonmail.com<mailto:toddlibby@protonmail.com>> wrote:

I see more than enough of AI on LinkedIn and we don’t have to go down the road every tech company is going down these days. Do we?

I am a staunch opponent of using AI especially in scribing. Why take out one of the best ways that a new person that joins the W3C can start to interact?

Can AI understand the contextual meaning of what someone has said that may need a human scribe to hear and to detail as much as possible or in the notes?

What about verbal cues or subtle forms of communication that different people are trying to communicate with?

Keep the AI out of the meetings and let people participate by scribing if they don’t want to jump right in immediately and would prefer to choose to help out and be a silent participant instead.

Personally, AI scribing is a horrible idea as is AI period.



On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 07:09, Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org<mailto:On%20Tue,%20Mar%2011,%202025%20at%2007:09,%20Jennifer%20Strickland%20%3c%3ca%20href=>> wrote:
Hi all,

I appreciate your enthusiasm on the topic. I’d like to remind everyone that @Reid, Wendy<mailto:wendy.reid@rakuten.com> is doing the research and already has covered all what is covered here and more regarding AI transcription for minutes for the W3C more broadly. There are other topics we need to focus on right now.

Additionally, AI transcription does well on some non-English languages for the record (i.e., Chinese, both Mandarin and Cantonese) and referring to “foreign languages” centers English. We have a lot of different people among our members, even if we don’t encounter them during our Europe and the Americas time zone meetings.

Kindly,
Jen



From: Kenneth G. Franqueiro <kfranqueiro@w3.org<mailto:kfranqueiro@w3.org>>
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 at 4:49 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3. org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Cc: Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <gregg@raisingthefloor.org<mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org>>
Subject: [EXT] Re: RE using AI minutes
RE "it is much more complicated than it first appears": I agree. RE "it would be wonderful for the scribes" to be replaced by AI: I disagree heavily. A couple of your notes mention having a human reviewer or shadow-scribe to an AI scribe. This


RE "it is much more complicated than it first appears": I agree.











RE "it would be wonderful for the scribes" to be replaced by AI: I disagree



heavily.











A couple of your notes mention having a human reviewer or shadow-scribe to an



AI scribe. This makes the human scribe's task _harder_, not easier. Now the



human needs to constantly scrutinize the text output of the AI and be able to



correct the past, while simultaneously keeping up with the present verbal



conversation - and hopefully still have the capacity to participate if they



have anything to add.











I consider myself decent at transcribing but recognize that multitasking while



scribing is challenging, and I would absolutely rather do the work myself than



constantly be tracking past, present, and future in both written and spoken



word at the same time.











--Ken











On Tuesday, March 11, 2025 2:26:04 AM EDT Gregg Vanderheiden RTF wrote:



> The topic of AI came up in F2F



>



> to keep from using up too much time there here are some thoughts on ideas



>



>



> 1)  A good way to handle foreign language speaker not being as well



recognized



> - use AI to transcribe



>             - have “backup” scribe that only steps in when recognizer faile



>



> 2) for Off minute comments you can turn off the mike to the AI transcriber off



>  (see note below - where we need a special AI tool not just the one in zoom



-



> for a number of reasons.



>



> 3)  If we use AI summaries -we NEED to implement it in a fashion that



provides



> a method for “in meeting” instant correction of mistakes.  In fact we need



> that for the human done minutes which also often misunderstand and sometimes



> scribe exactly the opposite of what the speaker said



>



>



> 4) Remember the distinction between transcript and minutes



> AI can do both but tends to do the summaries only after a meeting.  This is



> too late for someone to notice that the summary is not complete - is



> inaccurate - misinterpreted - or is opposite of what was said Suggestion



> Need a special tool to change the transcript into summaries on a per



commenter



> basis - like a scribe does that summarization would go into the IRC



> BETTER though would be for these summarizations (minutes) to appear in a



> separate document that is group correctable so that the commenter can



correct



> the AI summary. per #3 above



>



> 5) Speaker ID



> This is often cited as an AI shortcoming.  But it is just as much a problem



in



> human minutes. our best solution to this for both is using queue  and having



> chairs announce each new speaker (as they do) Sometimes things get into a



> back and forth between two people



> Best solution is for each person to say their name before the speak each



time



> ALSO



> If we have a human  “shadow scriber” that is just monitoring the AI - they



> could add speaker names where the AI does not.



>



> 6) for hybrid meetings - I  suggest we purchase more microphones so there is



> no-one



>



>



> IF WE WERE TO USE AI  — given all the above and the comments I  think we



> should build (or find) one that does what we need. When you think about it -



> it is much more complicated than it first appears  to replace or even augment



> the human scribe.   But it would be wonderful for the scribes once you do.



>



> Gregg