<Lauriat> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/TPAC_2018_Agenda
[reviewing the agenda and discussion of the AGWG activity]
<scribe> scribe: jeanne
The ideas are starting to come toward giving AGWG the style guide and ask them to re-write existing success criteria in plain language with tagging .
CHarles: We could divide the WG into small groups -- some with existing success criteria, and some with SC that didn't make it into WCAG 2.1 (as a stress test)
Cybele: Would this be a valid test, because some people objected to them.
Shawn: We could do a totally fake test -- like, "every page has to have a picture of a dog" so we can have them focus on the process.
Charles: The challenge is time. The participant will be focused on imagining the scenario, instead of writing it simply.
Shawn: I want to test the maintainability of it. FOr plain language, I want to test the Style Guide.
Two groups: one to work on Information Architecture (maintainability) and one to work on Plain Language (convert existing content).
Charles: It would be research, not usability testing. This is not statistically valid confirmation of something, yes or no.
Shawn: But we could take the
results and turn it into an Editor's Draft. It would need more
work because we don't have a solid conformance model yet.
... This exercise takes advantage of their expertise without
them having to be on Silver calls.
<mikeCrabb> https://w3c.github.io/silver/prototypes/FlavorPrototype/site/1-1-1/index.html
Charles: Do a card-sorting exersize to determine tags we hadn't considered.
[discussion of a card sorting exersize]
Charles: If that is a stretch, then we probably shouldn't do it.
<mikeCrabb> https://rawgit.com/w3c/silver/newPlainLanguage/prototypes/PlainLanguage2/index.html#section1
Jeanne: We could run three groups and have the 3 people there lead each one.
Mike Crabb did a working prototype of the plain language tabs.
<mikeCrabb> https://mikecrabb.github.io/silver_taggingSystemDemo/guidelines.html
<mikeCrabb> https://github.com/mikecrabb/silverTaggingAPI
Cyborg: I commented on the plain language prototype. My chief concerns were including a tab for Usability Testing or Person-centered testing and whether there is consideration of product-wide guidance. This seems to be focused on component level guidance.
<mikeCrabb> https://silvertagapi.azurewebsites.net/api/categories
Jeanne: Mike, is there any update on on Information ARchitecture
<mikeCrabb> https://silvertagapi.azurewebsites.net/api/categoryTags/3
There is no front end interface yet, but there are queries that are working. I should have a front end working by Tuesday.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154 of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Present: Lauriat KimD mikeCrabb kirkwood Found Scribe: jeanne Inferring ScribeNick: jeanne Found Date: 09 Oct 2018 People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]