IRC log of lvtf on 2017-09-07

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:28:35 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #lvtf
14:28:35 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-irc
14:28:37 [trackbot]: RRSAgent, make logs public
14:28:40 [trackbot]: Meeting: Low Vision Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
14:28:40 [trackbot]: Date: 07 September 2017
14:28:48 [allanj]: chair: Jim
14:29:01 [allanj]: Agenda+ Understanding Docs https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Accepted_WCAG_2.1_SC
14:29:03 [allanj]: Agenda+ New Comments issues
14:29:04 [allanj]: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20lvtf
14:55:13 [alastairc]: alastairc has joined #lvtf
14:59:54 [Glenda]: Glenda has joined #lvtf
15:00:06 [laura]: laura has joined #lvtf
15:01:01 [JohnRochford]: JohnRochford has joined #lvtf
15:01:23 [shawn]: present+
15:01:28 [shawn]: zakim, who is on the phone?
15:01:28 [Zakim]: Present: Jim, JohnR, SteveR, Glenda, Laura, shawn
15:01:38 [Glenda]: present+ Glenda
15:01:59 [alastairc]: present+ alastairc
15:02:01 [JohnRochford]: present+ JohnRochford
15:02:02 [allanj]: agenda+ review SCs not accepted for 2.1 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XShLFX8fxHYYLn8A6avDwu37w9JfnZCGWvAKBpK9Xo4/edit#gid=264773938
15:02:13 [shawn]: present- Laura
15:02:38 [shawn]: present+ Laura
15:02:42 [laura]: present+ Laura
15:02:59 [shawn]: present- JohnR
15:03:05 [shawn]: zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:06 [Zakim]: Present: Jim, SteveR, Glenda, shawn, alastairc, JohnRochford, Laura
15:03:16 [steverep]: steverep has joined #lvtf
15:03:22 [steverep]: present+steverep
15:03:42 [shawn]: present- SteveR
15:03:45 [laura]: Scribe List: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/Scribe_List
15:04:07 [laura]: Scribing Commands and Related Info: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribing_Commands_and_Related_Info
15:04:16 [shawn]: present+ steverep
15:04:17 [Glenda]: Scribe: Glenda
15:04:33 [Glenda]: agenda?
15:05:40 [allanj]: zakim, open item 3
15:05:40 [Zakim]: agendum 3. "review SCs not accepted for 2.1 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XShLFX8fxHYYLn8A6avDwu37w9JfnZCGWvAKBpK9Xo4/edit#gid=264773938" taken up [from allanj]
15:06:50 [Glenda]: Jim: David MacDonald has a spreadsheet that lists (on the last tab) SC’s that did not make the WCAG 2.1 cut. Let’s review to make sure it is accurate for LVTF proposals.
15:07:06 [shawn]: [ Shawn with her WAI outreach hat on has been considering sharing info with the world on what did not get into WCAG 2.1 ]
15:07:23 [shawn]: q+
15:07:51 [allanj]: ack sh
15:08:54 [Glenda]: Shawn: From WAI Outreach, so we want to explain WCAG 2.1 has these SC that are in (and these SC that did not make). Is it useful to include the ones that did not make from a best practice perspective? Or is the ROI not good, too much confusion?
15:09:15 [Glenda]: Alastair: good thing to do, but time it after people have a stronger sense of what is going in.
15:10:30 [shawn]: Glenda: When define what didn't make it, can help people understand what's out of scope. Good tidea. Agree timing, not first priotiy
15:11:04 [allanj]: s/priotiy/priority
15:11:20 [shawn]: s/tidea/idea
15:11:42 [Glenda]: Jim: Lisa recommends a best practices document for things that did not make it into 2.1.
15:12:00 [steverep]: q+
15:12:04 [JohnRochford]: Lisa already has that doc in progress.
15:12:06 [JohnRochford]: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WcfVALVq8PS9CLXUuAfV9Op0wXvI2yJYedj5jO23GTk/edit#
15:12:12 [Glenda]: Shawn: was Lisa thinking of a coga focus, or would it be broader.
15:12:19 [alastairc]: q+
15:12:23 [allanj]: ack st
15:13:11 [allanj]: ack al
15:13:35 [Glenda]: Alastair: hoping it would be wider than coga. An incubation for WCAG 2.2 or 2.3.
15:14:09 [Glenda]: Alastair: we haven’t mapped out how to handle user agent requirements
15:14:42 [Glenda]: John: I think it could be expanded to include other groups like LVTF and MATF.
15:15:38 [alastairc]: I think this was the place for future SC? https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Potential_Accessibility_Guidelines
15:15:43 [laura]: Potential Accessibility Guidelines: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Potential_Accessibility_Guidelines
15:15:59 [Glenda]: Jim: anyone want to take a first pass at David MacDonald’s spreadsheet to see if there is anything that is missing or needs to be updated? Jim is pasting in link now.
15:16:03 [allanj]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XShLFX8fxHYYLn8A6avDwu37w9JfnZCGWvAKBpK9Xo4/edit#gid=264773938
15:17:07 [Glenda]: Jim: some of the items listed as “not accepted” are actually folded in to some of the proposed SC. Also, there are some that never got written up…so it would be good to add them. So others can see remaining gaps.
15:17:35 [Glenda]: Shawn: when I get back to the User Requirements document, we can add needs/gaps in there too.
15:17:39 [steverep]: Cannot view Google docs behind corporate walls... I'll have to look later
15:18:12 [JohnRochford]: TOR is your friend.
15:18:49 [Glenda]: Jim: volunteers to review David MacDonald’s spreadsheet (of what didn’t make) by grouping the LVTF items so it will be easier to review.
15:20:39 [alastairc]: Next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivelent).
15:20:58 [Glenda]: John: COGA is planning on starting with user needs first in their doc at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WcfVALVq8PS9CLXUuAfV9Op0wXvI2yJYedj5jO23GTk/edit
15:22:25 [Glenda]: Jim: aside, I did a webinar on the evils of horizontal scrolling (for the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired)
15:24:39 [shawn]: https://www.w3.org/WAI/perspectives/customizable.html
15:25:19 [Glenda]: shawn: cool that we both use the “toaster” example to explain the importance of individuals being able to customize / personalize settings
15:26:06 [allanj]: zakim, agenda?
15:26:06 [Zakim]: I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
15:26:06 [shawn]: s/ cool that we both use the/ cool that the Perspectives video also uses the
15:26:07 [Zakim]: 1. Understanding Docs https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Accepted_WCAG_2.1_SC [from allanj]
15:26:07 [Zakim]: 2. New Comments issues [from allanj]
15:26:07 [Zakim]: 3. review SCs not accepted for 2.1 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XShLFX8fxHYYLn8A6avDwu37w9JfnZCGWvAKBpK9Xo4/edit#gid=264773938 [from allanj]
15:27:00 [alastairc]: ACTION: Jim's next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent).
15:27:00 [trackbot]: Error finding 'Jim's'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/track/users>.
15:27:40 [alastairc]: ACTION: allanj to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent).
15:27:40 [trackbot]: Error finding 'allanj'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/track/users>.
15:27:43 [allanj]: ACTION: Jim to write next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent).
15:28:04 [allanj]: ACTION: Jim to write next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent).
15:28:04 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-101 - Write next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (lv) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from lisa (or an equivalent). [on Jim Allan - due 2017-09-14].
15:28:27 [Glenda]: zakim, close item 3
15:28:27 [Zakim]: agendum 3, review SCs not accepted for 2.1 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XShLFX8fxHYYLn8A6avDwu37w9JfnZCGWvAKBpK9Xo4/edit#gid=264773938, closed
15:28:31 [Zakim]: I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:28:31 [Zakim]: 1. Understanding Docs https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Accepted_WCAG_2.1_SC [from allanj]
15:28:41 [Glenda]: zakim, next item
15:28:41 [Zakim]: agendum 1. "Understanding Docs https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Accepted_WCAG_2.1_SC" taken up [from allanj]
15:29:22 [Glenda]: JIm: Understanding docs are ready to be worked on. See https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Accepted_WCAG_2.1_SC
15:30:25 [steverep]: Feel free to ask me if you need GitHub or git help
15:33:17 [Glenda]: Jim: AG chairs want Understanding docs ready before TPAC, so we can easily publish a good PWD shortly after TPAC
15:35:22 [steverep]: q+
15:35:30 [alastairc]: q+
15:35:39 [allanj]: ack st
15:35:51 [Glenda]: Glenda: suggest that the SC manager draft the Understanding doc…and send an email to LVTF when you are ready for review.
15:36:11 [allanj]: ack al
15:36:14 [Glenda]: Steve: believe we should be deep into Techniques (and Understanding should be well formed)
15:36:46 [Glenda]: Alastair: agrees, we should have Understanding done, and be working on Techniques before and at TPAC
15:37:17 [Glenda]: Steve: recommend making Understanding doc reviews part of this call before TPAC (so we can have LVTF approval on Understanding docs)
15:37:37 [Glenda]: Jim: how should be track comments?
15:40:07 [Glenda]: Alastair: Minor comments to the list. Big Changes - make a fork within Github and make changes there, and make pull request.
15:41:14 [Glenda]: Steve: create a branch off the branch, ask Steve if you need help
15:41:29 [Glenda]: agenda?
15:42:44 [laura]: Allowing for Spacing Override: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Allowing_for_Spacing_Override
15:42:47 [Glenda]: Jim: There is a technique’s template (posted on the LVTF wiki) at (Jim pasting in URL)
15:42:51 [allanj]: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Technique_Template
15:43:03 [allanj]: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Technique_Instructions
15:43:04 [laura]: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Techniques
15:43:14 [allanj]: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Writing_WCAG_Techniques_-_Notes
15:43:34 [Glenda]: rrsagent, make minutes
15:43:34 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-minutes.html Glenda
15:43:48 [allanj]: main AG techniques page https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Techniques
15:44:59 [steverep]: q+ to ask about images in Understanding
15:45:10 [Glenda]: ack steverep
15:45:10 [Zakim]: steverep, you wanted to ask about images in Understanding
15:45:46 [Glenda]: Steve: If you put images in understanding, do we have rules of what they can or cannot include? Like screenshots.
15:46:25 [shawn]: Glenda: Allows for screen shot. Just need good description.
15:46:42 [Glenda]: Steve: this is a copyright question related to screenshots
15:47:14 [Glenda]: Shawn: make it generic, so you don’t identify a specific site
15:49:16 [Glenda]: Jim: could keep images on the wiki
15:49:40 [Glenda]: Alastair: I may be able to have a designer help with some of the images we need a generic version of
15:49:58 [JohnRochford]: Must go, folks. Ciao.
15:51:50 [Glenda]: zakim, next item
15:51:50 [Zakim]: agendum 2. "New Comments issues" taken up [from allanj]
15:52:23 [Glenda]: Jim: thank you Laura for tagging all the LVTF issues
15:52:58 [allanj]: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue%20is%3Aopen%20lvtf
15:55:18 [Glenda]: Glenda: How do we handle the request to remove 4.5 to 1 and just go with 3 to 1 on “Graphics Contrast” and “User Interface Component”?
15:55:37 [steverep]: q+ to add more generically, we should have resolutions here for changes we want to SC
15:57:06 [laura]: 2.1 Issues labeled LVTF: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/labels/LVTF
15:57:34 [Glenda]: Alastair: I’d like to catch up on the comments and discuss this at the next LVTF meeting
15:58:06 [allanj]: add agenda item next week...
15:58:21 [allanj]: 3:1 vs 4.5:1 for UI and graphics
15:58:22 [Glenda]: Steve: adding future agenda items like the 4.5 to 1 versus 3 to 1.
15:58:54 [allanj]: borders, what's a graphical object
15:59:05 [Glenda]: q+
15:59:12 [allanj]: ack st
15:59:12 [Zakim]: steverep, you wanted to add more generically, we should have resolutions here for changes we want to SC
15:59:18 [allanj]: ack gl
16:00:23 [steverep]: q+
16:00:41 [allanj]: gs: thought I need 4.5:1 to "see" the random control. the need for higher contrast on text is because consuming at a rapid rate.
16:01:12 [allanj]: .... why glenda softened on the 3.:1 issue
16:02:01 [allanj]: ack st
16:02:18 [Glenda]: Steve: warrents research
16:02:44 [allanj]: +1 to Steve, the reasoning for 3:1 also need research
16:02:54 [Glenda]: Steve: complicated mathematical diagram that you need to follow needs research
16:04:45 [Glenda]: Glenda: difference between rapidly reading text (and needing to see fine differences in letters)…versus staring at a chart. Do humans really “scan” complex graphs.
16:04:48 [laura]: Aries Arditi is the researcher
16:05:11 [Glenda]: Steve: Engineers need to “scan” and compare complex graphs, so I don’t buy it without research.
16:05:54 [allanj]: yes, you are scanning text, etc to gain content. works the same way when using the UI, if I am scanning/skimming the UI for perform a function... why should I have to look harder because of poor contrast on the UI component
16:06:07 [alastairc]: The point from Gregg was (I think) that we read text quickly, so need reasonably high contrast compared to noticing a graphic is there.
16:06:19 [alastairc]: q+
16:07:19 [allanj]: sr: cognitive argument, going to take years to get research either way ... 3:1 or 4.5:1
16:07:22 [Glenda]: Steve: you don’t have enough research to say that 4.5 to 1 is not needed for complex graphics.
16:08:07 [allanj]: ack al
16:09:42 [allanj]: be careful about research argument.
16:09:59 [Glenda]: Alastair: this research could take significant time. Consider falling back to 3 to 1. May have to restrict it to not include very, very complext graphs. What about gradiations of color.
16:10:21 [allanj]: gordon legge: Bottom line: Contrast requirements for form controls should be equivalent to contrast requirements for text. https://www.w3.org/2017/06/15-lvtf-minutes.html
16:10:24 [Glenda]: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net
16:11:30 [allanj]: https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/interview-brian-suda/
16:11:36 [laura]: Gordon Legge’s Forwarded message : https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-tf/2017Jun/0054.html
16:12:27 [allanj]: https://vimeo.com/109208423 Brian Suda - designing with data
16:12:49 [Glenda]: https://www.amazon.com/Practical-Guide-Designing-Data-ebook/dp/B0058ZWZ8C/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1504800749&sr=8-1&keywords=a+practical+guide+to+designing+with+data
16:12:52 [laura]: Legge: “If we equate individual text letters and form controls for visual size and proximity of nearby images, there is no reason to believe that contrast demands will be different.”
16:12:59 [steverep]: q+ Tiller?
16:13:16 [allanj]: ack st
16:13:22 [allanj]: ack ti
16:13:44 [laura]: Legge: “In fact, one could make the argument that poor contrast can be a greater problem for form controls. Text is usually binary--black on white. As long as any part of the text character is above threshold, the whole symbol is likely to be above threshold. Sometimes, form controls use grayscale coding. Even if the bounding contour is above the viewer's contrast threshold, it may be the case that information coded with grayscale shading may be below thresh[CUT]
16:14:30 [laura]: Legge: “Bottom line: Contrast requirements for form controls should be equivalent to contrast requirements for text.”
16:14:47 [Glenda]: http://www.perkinselearning.org/videos/webcast/visual-acuity-testing-part-2-acuity-cards-and-testing-procedures
16:16:41 [Glenda]: Jim: leading researchers clearly have said this contrast is just as important for non-text essential information.
16:17:24 [allanj]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtUlonNewGk
16:17:58 [allanj]: ^^^ Rethinking Color and Contrast - Jared Smith ID24 2017
16:17:59 [Glenda]: Alastiar: sceptical of this,
16:18:21 [laura]: Rethinking Color and Contrast – Jared Smith : #ID24 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtUlonNewGk
16:18:46 [Glenda]: Alastair: there are some oddities…but looking across all the different groups of low vision, color blind, older vision…be careful making assumptions. We have a solid baseline.
16:19:11 [steverep]: q+ will also reach out on color vision tests to my doc
16:19:31 [allanj]: Create research issues section on Research wiki page
16:20:22 [Glenda]: Alastair: color vision can be very, very different for people with low vision (even if they have color vision)
16:20:25 [allanj]: ack sr
16:21:01 [allanj]: hmm, contrast vs acuity limit
16:21:03 [Glenda]: Steve: I’ll reach out to my doctor about a contrast test, with little color dots that you try to put in order from darkest to lightest. There is a measure that comes out of it.
16:23:40 [allanj]: sr: black on white vs white on black have same contrast level, but for many white on black is difficult to read. glare sensitivity.
16:23:44 [Glenda]: agenda?
16:24:44 [laura]: bye
16:24:57 [Glenda]: zakim, close item 2
16:24:57 [Zakim]: agendum 2, New Comments issues, closed
16:24:59 [Zakim]: I see nothing remaining on the agenda
16:25:17 [Glenda]: trackbot, end meeting
16:25:17 [trackbot]: Zakim, list attendees
16:25:17 [Zakim]: As of this point the attendees have been Jim, JohnR, SteveR, Glenda, Laura, shawn, alastairc, JohnRochford, steverep
16:25:25 [trackbot]: RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:25:25 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-minutes.html trackbot
16:25:26 [trackbot]: RRSAgent, bye
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-actions.rdf :
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Jim's next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent). [1]
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-irc#T15-27-00
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: allanj to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent). [2]
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-irc#T15-27-40
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Jim to write next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent). [3]
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-irc#T15-27-43
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Jim to write next step after a review, would be to gather info from the (LV) user-requirements, and the content requirements, then use those to fill in the doc from Lisa (or an equivalent). [4]
16:25:26 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/07-lvtf-irc#T15-28-04