Meeting minutes
<tzviya> Date: 2021-02-02
Tzviya: 1st item agenda: intro to new chairs
… we'll do that into when liz and leonie join.
Welcome back, introduce chairs
Tzviya: an overview: I'm Tzviya - I work for Wiley and I'm a member of the AB. I've been chairing PWE for ~2 years. We decided to merge it with IDCG.
… liz and leonie can introduce themselves.
… we talked about merging the github repos - for now we will keep them separate. I'm working with Tess on how to work with multiple repos.
… issues related to cepc and ombuds in pwe; other issues in idcg repo.
Review charter
<tzviya> https://
Tzviya: charter - we drafted a simple charter - went back to original charter for idcg - have pasted it above.
… idcg started out as a place to share experiences ... we kind of lost that ... one of the most important aspects is to bring that back.
… we will have a discussion forum where we can talk about issues we are facing - if someone faces a difficult issue. People should feel comfortable turning here if they have something they want to discuss.
… we can vote on that charter at our next meeting.
… right now we are leaving both web sites up.
Jeff: before we vote on this we should look at the standard template - we don't have to include everything. We'd like there to be a section about chairing. So it's understood that these are not free-wheeling "smoke-filled rooms" - that there is a process.
<Ralph> Community Group Charter template
Tzviya: For the most part, the template is geared towards deliverables... however we can add a section about chairing.
Ombuds update
Tzviya: next is ombuds update.
Tzviya: we held a meeting about ombuds. update from Judy.
<tzviya> https://
Judy: we went through the ombuds section of the pwe roadmap. On the PWE roadmap there are 4 different areas of work - 1st is revamp of ombuds program, then investigating, training, procecures.
<Ralph> 19-Jan discussion of PWE Roadmap
Judy: we went ombuds tasks... we clarified what some of the items were. we adjusted the other time lines where we needed to change the priority of things.
… we spent most of a call just walking through that. We got on the same page. Now we have to do the work. We need to do some meetings outside of these general meetings to get on task.
… we will also need a similar meeting to walk through the procedures section.
… my suggestion would be to schedule a walk through of procedures section in next week or 2.
Tzviya: thanks for that. I know that we're working on the research part of the ombuds program. We got a little stuck.
Judy: we need to regather the info we found talking about intntl assoc of ombuds. then bring that here.
… everything else is ready to be worked on and we have folks assigned.
… we need to get the procedures stuff going as well.
Tzviya: [intros]
[round of intros of those on the call]
Nomination Guidance
<tzviya> https://
<Ralph> ^^ Create nomination guidance #18
Jeff: on this issue - general background - quite a discussion last year on w3c having nomination guidance. To be nominated for participation in w3c or in a senior group or for a chair... that we should think deeply about diversity.
… original proposal would be to put something simple in our guidance - proposal from Dan...
… as I shared on github, w3m has approved this. we sent it to the AC. So this is now our official guidance.
… this will be part of what we use in our guidance.
<jeff> https://
<Ralph> Call to action: Guidance for diversity now part of our join group pages; elections [to AC Reps and Chairs, 21-Jan]
Jeff: as w3m was processing this we looked at more than the original recommendation - we looked at the comment Toby had made where he had proposed we make available for w3c members to sign on a voluntary basis a pledge which has to to do with diversty in participation of w3c working groups.
… no specifics on the language, etc... we thought it was a good idea.
+1 on this idea.
Jeff: is this a good idea or bad idea? next steps are to create a language of a pledge, socialize with the AC etc...
Sheila: I do like the idea. One of the things people care about - guarantee of inclusivity and safety once folks have joined. We need to make sure we create an environment where once people enter they feel safe.
<tzviya> +1 to sheila
<wendyreid_> +1 to sheila
<estella> +1 to sheila
Sheila: this should also include a pledge to make a space where folks can join safely and comfortably. We benefit w3c by bringing folks in but may not be benefiting them if not a comfortable space.
… we would be remiss to not include that.
+1
<Ralph> Making W3C More Welcoming [IDCG wiki]
Judy: on the idea of giving AC members the option of signing such a pledge - I think that's great. I think Sheila's comment is relevant. Roadmap in IDCG - we had several suggestions there on how to improve the welcoming environment in w3c. I like the idea of building that up front into a pledge.
<Zakim> jeff, you wanted to address Sheila's point
Judy: does anyone have starter text we could react to?
Jeff: Expanding on Sheila's point in 2 ways - making this a safe environment for people to participate in falls into 2 different bucks - one way is things like the code of conduct and implementation - and enhancing that. other part of making a safe environment which says..
… people don't get enough respect inside their own orgs for participating in standards. It might be interesting to include in the pledge wording which says the company [or org] appreciates their participation in standards.
Wendy: First, +1 to what Sheila said.
<Ralph> Appreciating standards work #53
Wendy: one of the steps that is important - more diverse members - 100% support - we need an accompanying pledge - that we (directed at pledge, team, governance group) - that I as a chair also pledge to make sure my group is a welcoming environment - that I've read the CEPC and pledge to [implement it].
<sheila> +1 to Wendy
Wendy: at TPAC we did wonderful training for the breakout leaders at TPAC. I'd like to see similar training for chairs.
<Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to distinguish betweeen CoC and inclusivness
<sheila> Jeff, in response to your question: the relevance of the safety piece to recruitment is that you need to align your language with the reality internally. in other words, need to ensure that our recruitment language outlines the challenges and benefits to joining as someone from an underrepresented background.
Tzviya: vehemently agree with Sheila and Wendy. Great to have this pledge - and we have to say "inclusiveness" but we have to explain what inclusiveness means.
<tzviya> https://
Tzviya: we need to have some training.
<jeff> [AB issue on Appreciating standards work
<jeff> [Thanks, Sheila.]
Tzviya: this is a video that explains inclusiveness and bias, e.g.
… if you try to intellectually traing people about bias - then people won't get past their own biases.
<Ralph> [Tzviya cites Tinna Nielsen, "Nudge behavior for a more inclusive world", TEDxAarhus]
Tzviya: so we all strive for a welcoming environment but how can we make people feel they belong.
… can be terrifying to join a TPAC for first time.
Tzviya: action item is to figure out how to include inclusiveness in this pledge.
<Zakim> estella, you wanted to ask if there are any available guidelines with DOs and DON'Ts
Estella: question - are there guidelines for sharing dos and don'ts?
… sometimes difficult to overcome own bias. Having proper guidelines will help people.
Annette: One idea - having people from underrepresented groups vet whatever text we put into an agreement.
… I think that makes a lot of sense.
Tzviya: good point.
Tzviya: estella, to some extent the CEPC itself is a list of dos and don'ts - but we don't have guidance on welcoming new people.
… we need specific wording for the nomination guidance. we can work on that offline.
Tobie: LF has some resources on this. I can look at them and come back. Could be useful for this group.
Tzviya: Please put a comment on the issue.
AOB
<Ralph> ^^Create inclusive language references #17
Create inclusive language references #17
Tzviya: inclusive language - can we agree to a reference for inclusive language and get it out to the wider community?
Jeff: the team - have been active in putting a plan together to clean up the known problems - e.g. removing master/slave - helpful points to working groups - we have a plan for the known problems but the problem is the unknown problems.
… if the work here can point the team to the right lexicon that would be a good next step.
Tzviya: I would welcome feedback.
… the issue of pronouns in things like use case documents is a hot topic.
… i think we should offer guidance.
<Jemma> ARIA changed the github name from "master" to "main".
Jeff: 3rd category is the unresolved problems - use of pronouns an example - known issue but unresolved problem.
Tzviya: question for those non-native english speakers. All the referenes are in english - we do primarily publish in english but we do translations into e.g. french, japanese, korean...
Judy: we have up to 26 translations on e.g. the a11y guidelines.
Tzviya: AOB
Plain Language
Jemma: on translation - it's important to have plain language english language. The issue comes when english is written in a very complex way - rather than easy to read. We should also focus on plain language.
+1
<sheila> +1
Dan: in the TAG we often find that we feedback [plain language] issues
… when we evalute explainers or APIs
… asking people to use simpler terms
… part of our recent review of the Design Principles document was to make the language simpler
… people in this industry who are native speakers and have expertise tend to use complex and flowery language
… this also seems to me to be related to the question of pronouns in Use Case documents
… maybe there's an overlap on both issues
… the TAG reviews Use Case documents
… and might be able to add these to our review criteria
<tzviya> https://
Estella: directed to last comment on plain language - fully agree - just reminding that EO group - we have guidlines on plain language and pronouns -
… I will put link in IRC
<estella> https://
Judy: on WAI we have been trying to do some work on plainer language - with the goal of making our specs more translatable. We looked at developing dedicated glossaries - to support volunteer translations...
… extremely difficult. Getting more translatable language guidance has been hard.
… we need a better strategy.
<tzviya> https://
<Jemma> +1 with Judy
Tzviya: someone who has worked in this area - focusing on voting instructions - lots of resources there.
<Jemma> +1
Jemma: based on my recent experience reviewing Korean translation of EU a11y guidlines - most challenging was how to say specific words in Korean - certain words that Korean govt is already using. .. spending a lot of time finding the right translation in Korean.
… having a glossary of tems in different language a good idea.
Tzviya: a lot of ideas on how to make docs more readable. Some overlap with the TAG on ways we can implement this.
Ada: The issue which we'd already marked for the agenda -
Update the term 'Prejudice' in the Glossary #162
<Zakim> Judy_, you wanted to ask about next meetings
Tzviya: a PR and lots fo comments on the associated issue - the def of descrimination in CEPC - we will we discuss next ime.
Meeting Schedule
Judy: Logistical question - are we going to weekly joint meetings or bi-weekly?
Tzviya: we are meeting every other week.
… it is at this time at least for now - we will re-asses when time changes happen. 15:00 UTC. Next meeting will be on 16th of Feb.
Judy: task force walk through on policy and procedures?
Tzviya: Go ahead.