<Joshue108_> Scribenick: Joshue108
<Joshue108_> JW: In light of the Seattle workshop last week..
<Joshue108_> We can say the workshop addressed and touched upon a range of issues in this space.
<Joshue108_> Including the state of current Web Standards - various related accessibility requirements..
<Joshue108_> Formal semantically rich markup etc in glTF and markup on Webpages etc.
<Joshue108_> Focussed on that..
<Joshue108_> Some captions issues and sign language processing were covered.
<Joshue108_> In addition to audio processing oportunities in immersive environs.
<Joshue108_> Also we had a good session on the role of AT in future XR.
<Joshue108_> A good session of other discussions happened also - there will be some reporting created or minutes, may be made available etc.
<Joshue108_> Josh, also had some ideas in new XAUR use cases etc
<Joshue108_> Anything else?
<Joshue108_> JB: At W3 workshop there is a standard follow up a la report.
<Joshue108_> There may also be minutes, but there was captioning also.
<Joshue108_> No verbatum, but there are over a dozen relevant task force and community group follow up.
<Joshue108_> We will come up with some kind of mapping to help participants.
<Joshue108_> Am getting requests for more info.
<Joshue108_> I also meant to say, the input possibilities for creating various alternate input mechanisms, a la WebXR were also mentioned.
<Joshue108_> Intersections with various TFs and CGs etc.
<Joshue108_> Hope that helps.
<Joshue108_> SH: You mentioned discussion on captioning?
<Joshue108_> Care to share more?
<Joshue108_> JW: There is a CG working on captions in this space.
<Joshue108_> Issues around where the speaker is out of the FOV.
<Joshue108_> Interesting that this work is being discussed.
<Joshue108_> JB: I'm team contact to that group - so was also at the XR Access Symposium in July NYC.
<Joshue108_> There were many diff topics and captions in Immersive Space.
<Joshue108_> Christoper @@
<Joshue108_> It didn't just talk about positioning, but any XR/AR issues - interesting group.
<Joshue108_> The timed text group is also looking at 3D and 2D captions - may be merged.
<Joshue108_> JB: I suggest checking it out, meets every other Weds, resuming in Dec.
<Joshue108_> JW: Valuable area of work. We have spoken about positioning in the past
<Joshue108_> Thanks to Judy for background.
<Joshue108_> The details will come when report arrives.
<Joshue108_> We can discuss some of Joshs issues.
<jasonjgw> Josh: additional user needs emerged from the workshop which have now been added to the XAUR draft.
<jasonjgw> Josh: There is the challenge of finding one's place/context in immersive environments when enlargement is used.
<Joshue108_> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Xaur_draft
<jasonjgw> A screen magnification user needs to be able to determine the context of the current view.
<jasonjgw> A second need pertaining to magnification arises from the use of messages/alerts in immersive environments.
<jasonjgw> (How these are to be presented.)
<jasonjgw> A further need relates to resetting of the user's orientation/position. This needs to be compatible with the user's AT, and therefore device-independent.
<jasonjgw> Josh notes that users may lose track of time in these environments; there could be time limits with alerts issued to the user.
<jasonjgw> Josh discusses the application of the "reflow" success criterion of WCAG 2.1 in immersive Web contexts.
<Joshue108_> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Xaur_draft#Immersive_Environments_and_Experiences
<Joshue108_> JW: Any comments?
<Joshue108_> JW: It would be useful if we could review the text for these?
<Joshue108_> Bring it back to next weeks meeting?
<Joshue108_> JOC: Sounds good.
<Joshue108_> JW: We can discuss etc and put it back.
<Joshue108_> JB: There was a lot of potential follow of from this, so I suggest we be deliberate about which ones we follow up on.
<Joshue108_> Josh's suggestion to capture discussion etc is good.
<Joshue108_> I've a few comments and questions around follow up.
<Joshue108_> On some lunch table discussion - wow, that XAUR info is good - great resource etc, people are asking if these are requirements?
<Joshue108_> This was someone new, and they had no context around the word 'requirements'.
<Joshue108_> So we need to be careful that requirements relate to user needs and not 'requirements' for people to conform to.
<Joshue108_> JB: Also in trying to point people to resources etc, and looking at WAI WG and TF pages, I found that pointing people to TF landing page isn't good.
<Joshue108_> They don't know what to look for.
<Joshue108_> Am concerned that the TF homepage needs work.
<Joshue108_> Needs to be updated, currently this content is unclear.
<Joshue108_> Jason, Janina - sorry to raise this again - we could be missing opportunities for engagement.
<Joshue108_> Is this on the list to get updated? Whats the status?
<Joshue108_> JW: Thnx for the reminder. Yes it is on the list.
<Joshue108_> It may need W3C staff to make the changes.
<Joshue108_> The main wiki page gets updated regularily.
<Joshue108_> Maybe not ideal landing spot.
<Joshue108_> JB: You have access to workplan page?
<Joshue108_> JW: I'd need to find out.
<Joshue108_> If not on wiki or GH i don't know how to modify it.
<Joshue108_> JOC: Happy to help Judy with that.
<Joshue108_> JW: If ok with Janina - Josh and I can work out some changes.. maybe Judy can review.
<Joshue108_> JB: If you can do that, thats great.
<jasonjgw> Josh: suggests we'll need to move much of our material to GitHub to facilitate opening of comments/issues.
<jasonjgw> Josh notes interest from workshop participants in submitting comments.
<jasonjgw> Josh: affirms the desirability of collaboration regarding use of GitHub in this context.
<jasonjgw> Josh notes the value and significance of issue tracking to broader participation in development.
<jasonjgw> Josh emphasizes the need to be able to read documents and comment effectively.
<jasonjgw> Josh's comments are particularly pertinent to people who are not part of the process and who wish to participate by providing comments on drafts.
<jasonjgw> Josh is interested in mirroring content across multiple channels, and wishes to see a path to better engagement for receiving feedback on work in progress.
<Judy> [JB: notes that some people who want to contribute come from non-developer backgrounds and want alternative input channels to Github]
<Judy> [JB: did not object to multi-channel input]
<jasonjgw> Josh: notes that coordination is occurring regarding next steps to be taken in response to the workshop.
<jasonjgw> Josh would like to restructure the XAUR document and to focus entirely on user requirements (in the sense of user needs - noting Judy's earlier comments).
<jasonjgw> There is a second document - formerly known as a primer.
<jasonjgw> Josh wishes to focus XAUR on user needs, with other material moved elsewhere - especially the discussion of semantics for describing the immersive environment/objects/interactions.
<jasonjgw> Josh is contemplating an XR semantics page to address these issues separately.
<jasonjgw> The current XAUR draft has been edited accordingly.
<Zakim> janina, you wanted to scope Judy's comments to the web interface and to say +1 to splitting, but be consistent in doc naming
<Joshue108_> JW: I don't remember the into material, but a point of clarification that these are user requirements and not implementation requirements.
<Joshue108_> So how they are satisfied is not addressed here, this is out of scope.
<jasonjgw> Josh: the XAUR draft was initially conceived as an entire framework - user requirements, semantics, etc., whereas the scope is now to be narrowed and should include the kind of clarification of scope that Jason suggested.
<jasonjgw> Josh: XAUR as a prefix to the names of other modules is problematic, as those modules would not be concerned with "user requirements" (i.e., needs).
<jasonjgw> Janina affirms.
<Joshue108_> JOC: I covered e'thing.
<jasonjgw> Josh clarifies: the editing/reorganization across documents is ongoing.
<Joshue108_> JW: Josh is going to trim XAUR doc to just user needs and put other stuff elsewhere.
<jasonjgw> Josh is still working on this and will report progress next week.
<jasonjgw> We note the CAPTCHA Note erratum, endorsed by an APA CfC.
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) Default Present: jasonjgw, Joshue108_, scott_h, SteveNoble, janina, Judy Present: jasonjgw Joshue108_ scott_h SteveNoble janina Judy Found ScribeNick: Joshue108 WARNING: No scribe lines found matching ScribeNick pattern: <Joshue108> ... Inferring Scribes: Joshue108 WARNING: 0 scribe lines found (out of 143 total lines.) Are you sure you specified a correct ScribeNick? Found Date: 13 Nov 2019 People with action items: 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]