Silver Community Group Teleconference -- 22 Mar 2019

Upcoming F2F meetings: May and September

<scribe> Scribe: Chuck

Jeanne: Upcoming face to face meetings. Two new web pages today, bunch of time this week re-organizing the wiki. Here's the info for access view in May...

<jeanne> AccessU <- https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/2019_May_13-15_in_Austin_TX_USA

Jeanne: Close to bottom of wiki page. No exact dates yet. Sharon Rush offered a room may 15-17 in Austin TX.
... Don't need to register for access u unless you want to attend sessions.
... I sent Sharon a note asking which days she would like us, will update info. All of you considering going to access u, please come to face to face (come in and out as needed).
... Second one is in September. That's in Japan. September 16-20.

<jeanne> TPAC <- https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/2019_September_16-20_in_Fukuoka,_Japan

Jeanne: That's annual TPAC meeting. Don't know which days yet we'll meet. We'll probably have a two day meeting. Sent email to list today to get folk who aren't as active...
... Conf calls are in dead of night for some participants. I'm encouraging interest in Austrailia, India, Japan, China folk to participate.
... Think about it see if you are available, let me (Jeanne) know if you are avail for either/both meetings. There will be remote participation options. Austin remote may be hard to deal with.
... Any q on face to face?
... Send me an email if you can come.

Bruce: What is the q you didn't want to repeat?

Jeanne: I was talking about problems I had with setting up wiki page. Really not relevant.

Bruce: I'm optimistic I can come to Austin.

Jeanne: I think we can get a lot done in Austin. We can show progress in June. Show some existing success criteria migrated.
... That's one of the things AGWG face to face asked for. They wanted to see some completed examples.

update Requirements

Jeanne: Requirements document...

<jeanne> https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/

Jeanne: Tuesday we had a bug in github that wouldn't allow page to update with all the work we did after face to face meeting, it's now working. Hopefully next time it works.
... March 19 when we did the updates. We also have the questionairre.

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SilverRequirmentsReview/results#xq5

Jeanne: Did we start from the top of the design requirements? Design Principals?

Kim: I think we did.
... Don't recall how far we got.

Jeanne: I remember talking about definition of intersectional.
... One of the things in here... David Macdonald said...

<jeanne> David McD: I think the "widest range" is too optimistic. I think the word "intersectional" is politicized and may be perceived as partisan. Historically, we've tried to stay away from discussions about class, poverty, privilege, power, and dominance issues in society. How about something like this.

<jeanne> Accessibility guidelines should: Support a wide range of people with disabilities and be created with the consideration of users with individual needs.

Jeanne: I thought was interesting, stuff I experienced, but maybe more of a Canadian issue. Historically we have tried to stay away from ....

Charles: I don't mind the phrase "individual needs", does capture the intent. This is one of those things where a glossary may help.
... What it meant in our docs was people with multiple disabilities.

Jan: We do need to think through that more.

Jeanne: The definition I found for Tuesday was "support the needs for the ....."

<jeanne> Support the needs of the widest range of people with disabilities and recognize that people with disabilities have individual and intersectional needs. Intersectionality is a framework for conceptualizing a person, group of people, or social problem as affected by a number of discriminations and disadvantages. It takes into account people’s overlapping identities and experiences in order to

<jeanne> understand the complexity of prejudices they face

Shri: This definition only talks about overlapping needs of individuals. We should also consider conflicting needs of individuals and give guidance on how developers should be with these scenarios.

<jeanne> Definition of Intersectionality comes from Young Women Boston.

Shri: For screen mag user, need is different for screen reader user (links as an example).

Jeanne: There are many more examples.
... We started a page of conflicts. There are a lot. Not sure how to address that. I hate to put something in requirements for which I don't know the answer. What can we do? I think we can give good advise.
... To solve this problem, I don't think technology is there yet.

Shri: But if we are developing guidelines as futuristic, can we create and keep updating? In my team people face challenges with reconciling needs of blind users and low vision users. Just a thought.

Bruce: At access board. From our perspecive. If silver is apirational in any way, it will not be picked up. It has to be a codification of known best practices.

Jeanne: Personally, I'm leaning towards DM's proposal.
... <repeats DM's suggestion>

Luis: no prob with what DM said... if intersection is politicized, can we replace with something like overlapping?

Jeanne: That would say... I kind of agree with the "widest" being aspirational. <reads and replaces intersectional with overlapping>

Jan: Not sure that overlapping... I don't know it addresses Shri's concerns.
... We need to think about how we address the issue of "conflicting".

<bruce_bailey> maybe "including people with multiple needs"

Jeanne: Luis you ok?

Luis: I'm fine with that.

Bruce: Including people with multiple needs or multiple disabilities? One of the weakness with accessibility standards is not covering people with multiple disabilities.

<jeanne> Support the needs of the widest range of people with disabilities and recognize that people with disabilities have individual needs and multiple disabilities.

Bruce: Just a little bit more concrete than "as wide as possible".

Jeanne: Can you paste in IRC?

<Jan> +1 to Charles' comment about multiple needs vs. multiple disabilities

Charles: I think the point is multiple needs and not multiple disabilities. It quantifies without qualifying. Does not concretely say that they are compounded or contrast. Just says more than one.

Jan: I like that.

<bruce_bailey> i also like "multiple needs" over "multiple disabilities"

<jeanne> Support the needs of a wide range of people with disabilities and recognize that people with disabilities have individual and multiple needs.

Jeanne: "individual and multiple"?

Charles: I would omit the 2nd instance of disabilities.

<AngelaAccessForAll> +1 but I would say individual or multiple

<jeanne> Support the needs of a wide range of people with disabilities and recognize that people have individual and multiple needs.

<Charles> +1

<LuisG> +1

Jeanne: consensus?

<jeanne> +1

<bruce_bailey> +1

<AngelaAccessForAll> +1

<KimD> +1

<Jan> 1

Jeanne: Good alternative. I struggled with "intersectional".

RESOLUTION: "Support the needs of a wide range of people with disabilities and recognize that people have individual and multiple needs." adopted.

Design Principal 2

<jeanne> Support a measurement and conformance structure that can include guidance for a broad range of disabilities, including low vision and cognitive accessibility needs.

Jeanne: We had a number of comments, including disagreements.
... <read one disagreement>

<jeanne> It should be recognised that needs related to disabilities may change over time, particularly as new interfaces and technologies evolve. Many people with cognitive disabilities do not identify as disabled so “broad range of disabilities “ could be too constrained. Perhaps “broad range of access needs” ?

Luis: I agree

Jeanne: <someone> suggested removing the word "can"
... I think that improves it. Someone says include 'age and aging'.
... Other people are discussing "can" and "should".
... One of the things that Michael Cooper said... in final version of requirements we can remove it then. We are going to address people with cognative and low vision disabilities.
... From face to face Bruce suggested breaking it up into 2 sentences.

Bruce: I think it's easier... make 2 statements, it's more words but clearer.

Jeanne: I was struggling with how to lead into the sentence.

<jeanne> Support a measurement and conformance structure that includes guidance for a broad range of disabilities. This includes particular attention to the needs of low vision and cognitive accessibility.

Bruce: I don't like the idea of putting something in that has to be taken out later. As 2 sentences its fine.

Luis: If we have it in 2 sentences, and remove low vision and cognative, we can just remove that sentence.

Bruce: I agree it's an easier edit later. I think it's easier to keep it in later.

<KimD> +1, I like calling it out

Jeanne: Especially with that re-wording we can keep it in.
... A couple of other suggestions on wording, but I like the wording we have.

Jeanne: consensus?

<jeanne> +1

<Jan> +1

<Charles> +1

<LuisG> +1

Jeanne: Any objections?

<bruce_bailey> +1

<AngelaAccessForAll> +1

RESOLUTION: "Support a measurement and conformance structure that includes guidance for a broad range of disabilities. This includes particular attention to the needs of low vision and cognitive accessibility." adopted.

Design Principle 3

<jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities using emerging technologies.

all caps?

Jeanne: We had agreements with just 2...
... One person said... <reads the comment>

<jeanne> Discussion points:

<jeanne> Legacy or end of life cycle operating systems and end of life cycle for adaptive software. What are the cut off points for accessibility support on the web on both topics?

:-)

Jeanne: I think we should defer to a discussion on "accessibility supported". This will be a big conversation. Don't want to go there today.
... Andrew said "I agree it should, but needs speaks more ...."
... I think that's covered by maintenance requirement.

Kim: I thought this one was about embracing new technologies, less about the speed of updates.

Charles: Intent was that guidance would quickly catch up with those things. Flexibility was also in the speed of the document itself.

Jeanne: We could add another sentence.
... Any suggestions on language?
... "Publish regular updates"?

Jan: Aren't we addressing elsewhere?

Jeanne: I didn't see it.

<jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities using emerging technologies.Publish regular updates on a timely basis.

Jeanne: Maybe predictable instead of timely.

<jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities using emerging technologies.Publish regular updates.

Angela: I would go with... I agree iwith "publish regular updates". timely would have to be quantifiable.

Jeanne: Looking at agwg group, that's always a point of contention.
... Everybody ok with that?

Charles: This is a design principal and not a requirement?

<KimD> Accessibility guidelines should: Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities using emerging technologies, and support related updates to the guidelines.

Charles: What if it's tied more specifically to first part of sentence? Principal is that guidance keeps up with emerging technology. Implies that we are accepting change requests or community input, not just publishing updates.

Jeanne: Good point.

<jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities and keeps up with emerging technologies.

<jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies.

<KimD> Is this helpful: Accessibility guidelines should: Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities using emerging technologies, and support related updates to the guidelines.

<jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities and keeps up with emerging technologies. The information structure allows guidance to be added or removed.

<jeanne> Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies. The information structure allows guidance to be added or removed.

Jeanne: consensus?

<KimD> +1

<Jan> +1

<AngelaAccessForAll> +1

<bruce_bailey> +1

<LuisG> +1

<jeanne> +1

<Charles> +1

Kim: need to drop

RESOLUTION: "Be flexible enough to support the needs of people with disabilities and keep up with emerging technologies. The information structure allows guidance to be added or removed." adopted.

Design Principle 4

<jeanne> Follow accessibility guidance in creating the Guidelines. Note: This will be come a Requirement once the Conformance section is completed.

Jeanne: This is one of the ones I updated, doesn't match survey.
... I added note: This will become a requirement once the conformance section is completed.
... Survey could use more clarification. Lots of similar comments.
... This is the dog food question. What is a non slang way to be a second sentence to clarify it?
... I think I did.
... ..."follow accessibility guidance in creating the guidelines".

Charles: Adding the phrase "in creating" makes it more narrow. The gist of the dog food idea is that the RESULT is accessible, not just the creation process.

Jeanne: Very good.
... Let's try that instead.

<jeanne> Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note: This will be come a requirement once the Conformance section is completed.

Bruce: Why is the note there?

Jeanne: That came of agwg meeting. People wanted it to be a requirement. We pushed back. Didn't know how to phrase.
... Are we going to say "guidelines must meet bronze or silver or score or however we are going to do it"?

Bruce: When you say it becomes a requirement it sounds like a SC or method.
... The specifics of what is accessible will be clear once conformance section is complete.

Jeanne: How about "a measurable silver requirement"?

Bruce: it's a measurement on not of.

Jeanne: "This design principal will move to the requirements section".

Bruce: That works.

Jeanne: We can determine a specific measurement.

<jeanne> Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note: This design principle will move to the Requirements section once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a specific measurement compliance.

Jeanne: How's that?
... Thoughts?

Bruce: Good for me.

<LuisG> +1

<bruce_bailey> +1

Jeanne: consensus?

<jeanne> +1

<Jan> +1

<AngelaAccessForAll> +1

<Charles> conformance not compliance

RESOLUTION: "Accessibility guidelines must be accessible. Note: This design principle will move to the Requirements section once the Conformance section is complete and we determine a specific measurement of compliance." adopted.

Charles: "compliance" is something that happens after us.

Jeanne: We are saying in this one that we also have to comply.
... I deliberately used it.
... related to candidate recommendations.
... I'm ok to use it.

Luis: What's difference between conform and comply?

Jeanne: Comply is a score. Conform: We have to prove that what we are writing works in the real world.

Charles: My understanding is different. I didn't know that there was a different definition.
... In WCAG it's used... these things measure how well a thing conforms to the guidelines. Compliance from a legal perspective is when the guideline is cited.

Jeanne: Let's go with conform.
... I keep trying to re-inforce...

Jeanne: I think you are right.

<jeanne> +1

Bruce: Products conform, agencies comply.

<LuisG> +1

<bruce_bailey> +1

<Charles> +1

<jeanne> +1

<AngelaAccessForAll> +1

Jeanne: Will think about how we can do this faster...

Bruce: Line by line is a lot of work.

Jeanne: Maybe another pass...
... More comments came after agwg meeting.
... I could send in email and we could vote in email.
... I'll see if I can do that.

trackbot, end meeting

- DRAFT -

Silver Community Group Teleconference

22 Mar 2019

Attendees

Contents

Upcoming F2F meetings: May and September

update Requirements

Design Principal 2

Design Principle 3

Design Principle 4

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output