Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

Meeting minutes

<LisaSeemanKest> agenda, Status and updates (any publication coordination)

<LisaSeemanKest> what we work on next. See spreadsheets

<LisaSeemanKest> ,

<LisaSeemanKest> wiki page

<LisaSeemanKest> and

<LisaSeemanKest> Threads: priorities again

<LisaSeemanKest> and

<LisaSeemanKest> research topics

<Rain> congratulations Roy!

<Jennie> Yeah Roy!

<JustineP> Indeed, congrats Roy!

Status and updates (any publication coordination)

a few more W3C WAI editorial details to be finalised

lisa: the ag group have a survey on this ^^^

<Rachael> link to survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/content-usable-publication/

<EA> Just so sorry I cannot make it on Tuesday due to PhD student

Rachael: would be good if COGA TF people could attend the AG meeting on Tuesday where it will be discussed

<Jennie> It is now blocked on my calendar with a note that nobody can book over it :)

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/content-usable-publication/

lisa: best if we have as many people as posisble fill in the survey too - only a single question

<Rachael> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/content-usable-publication/results

rachael AG meeting 11:00 13:00 Eastern. Good it you read the survey results before

<Rachael> meeting link page: https://www.w3.org/2017/08/telecon-info_ag

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage#Timelines_and_actions

Jennie: something GOCA related came up at work. Where should I add it so it is considered for next iterations

rachael: I suggest GitHub https://github.com/w3c/coga/issues and add the "Next version Tag"

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/PlanningPage#Timelines_and_actions

jennie: is somehting to do with 'deletions'

Lisa: Good and bad practice images will be good for the web version

Jennie: John K and Rain have expressed interested in that. Is anyone else?

see mail list in Agenda item 3 - lets make sure it is not missed

<LisaSeemanKest> request not waist work done

Shall work on technical-publication.md and get you to review

<stevelee> Lisa: justine can you ask the icon creators to tweak them so they look like a set.

<stevelee> Justine: yes

<stevelee> Lisa: lets say 2 weeks

Rachel: most issue now closed - will check EO's are taken care of.
… would like 15 mins with others after this meeting to discuss the issues that need a response
… seem to be jus tthose that do not yet have a draft response

what we work on next. See spreadsheets https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YH4YETBmAdhfL9p8FK5ATUiXDGibeJh66psQCSUAvLQ/edit#gid=0

<LisaSeemanKest> rain: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2021Mar/0058.html

<LisaSeemanKest> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2021Mar/0066.html

<cweidner> +1

<EA> +1

Lisa: our user research document, helped us collect and organise.

also the issue papers - which are more horizontal compaired to vertical research

neither have been published but have a wealth of information.

Then there is Gap analysis - highlights where there are problems.

also not published

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YH4YETBmAdhfL9p8FK5ATUiXDGibeJh66psQCSUAvLQ/edit#gid=0

so wht are our priorities - see this spread sheet

4 tabs to make more managable

from Rachael's emial it seems we will work on one bits topic at any time. Then 2 or 3 Research/pub items

<EA> Has personalisation been missed?

may have projects with the various groups at any time so can track them

lisa: personalization under AG

EA: also soe issue papers

Lisa: ongoing work so have a added to groups tab.

ea: yes happy as interested in symbol personalisation etc

lisa: about to go to CR - so crucial time to review - is a high priority for us
… making it "active" in the spreadsheet

Rachael should include AG and ACT

<Rachael> stevelee: The WAI website (Shawn) should be on this list. They have content

steve: add WAI website editorial

lisa: also W3C tools

<Rain> +1 to this conversation and having us involved

<Jennie> +1 it operationalizes are participation. Really like Rain's suggestion.

<Jennie> our - not are

<Albert> Question: Do we also send liaison to RQTF (research question task force)?

KrisAnne: working with everone is actually goo as we want to cover all people not a suset

<stevelee> rain: suggest one person nominated as contact for each group to better manage the interactions and make less daunting

Lisa: agree, was toying with that

<krisannekinney> me apologies but i need to drop.

<EA> Is there an overall formal list of liasion people for all the groups?

John: agree should formalise liaisons -

<stevelee> lisa: at least one person - and some tooling for tracking

<stevelee> +1

<Albert> +1

<cweidner> +1

JohnK: would be useful to have a plain language explanation for each sheet

<EA> +1

<Rain> +1

<JustineP> +1

albert: i'm comfortable with this approach

Rachael: more TFs are looking at collaboration, we are leading. AG chairs are looking at this an may be including more common ideas

<LisaSeemanKest> acl a

albert: can I get a better picture of what liaison will be and do

lisa: someone joins another group to keep a view of what they are doing. so APA review other publications for accessibility. Our Liaison will pick up on things coga might be interested in getting involved in.

<johnkirkwood> liason: also serve as a single point of contact, too. i feel

john: that often help single point of contact so they do pass issues that come up

<Albert> Thank you everyone for explaining

lisa: yes but do not make decision on behalf of TF

steve: headsup and keep info flowing

lisa: lots to do but this will help us not spinning our wheels.
… propose we make a start next week
… a few from each sheets

<LisaSeemanKest> 2-3 reaserch topic ?

jennie: when we talk about topics can we get idea of proposed timescales

<Rachael> I agree with 18 months for mental health

lisa: lets try filling it in... eg mental health: 18 months, issue paper: 3 months

Rachael: a question of what the TF want to focus on

rain: sensible to limit to 2 rather than 3

<Jennie> +1 and then also updates as appropriate

steve suggest we make sure the research behind each pattern is traceable. As well as adding new research

EA: do we have a mental health expert in the TF? The previous one seems ot have moved on

Lisa: review methodology and recruit who we need - both academics and representatives of people with such issues.

have separated this out.

EA: probably is one of the largest and most complex

lisa: we dont HAVE ot do it.

EA but we decided early it should be included in our scope.

rachael: als othink is incredibly import and and either we tackle or new set up new TF, but so much overlap

lisa: 3 things

1) review method and recruit

2) review mental health

3) community engagement with external research

<LisaSeemanKest> methodolgy and then work on mental health

<EA> +1

<LisaSeemanKest> +1

eh we recently found we needed to better understanding recent terminology used by people themselves

<cweidner> +1

<JustineP> +1

<Rain> +1

<Rachael> +1

<Albert> +1

<Jennie> +1

<johnkirkwood> +1

Q: was do we start with above

<LisaSeemanKest> comunity engment in reserch and prefrences new suggetions

lisa: methodology and mental health. It is

<LisaSeemanKest> +1

<LisaSeemanKest> comunity engment in reserch and prefrences new suggetions

lets leave that till next week

<cweidner> Have to drop now. Thank you all!

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/Teleconference_cheat_sheet

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fc7TI8V6dNgFrD6wzGR8CjbbtO7Az0U-zYylrRSy8QQ/edit#

– DRAFT –
Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

18 March 2021

Attendees

Meeting minutes

Status and updates (any publication coordination)

what we work on next. See spreadsheets https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YH4YETBmAdhfL9p8FK5ATUiXDGibeJh66psQCSUAvLQ/edit#gid=0

Diagnostics