W3C

– DRAFT –
Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

01 April 2021

Attendees

Present
Albert, Fazio, Fazio_, Jan, Jennie, johnkirkwood, JohnRochford, JustineP, kirkwood, krisannekinney, LisaSeemanKest, Rachael, Rain, Roy, stevelee
Regrets
-
Chair
-
Scribe
ea, Jennie

Meeting minutes

publication updates

Lisa: We have gone to the AG task force
… There was some discussion
… the outstanding issue is Tal

<Rachael> https://github.com/w3c/coga/pull/281/files

<LisaSeemanKest> > We discussed the following options:

<LisaSeemanKest> >

<LisaSeemanKest> > 1. no change

<LisaSeemanKest> > 2. add it in 1 or 2 places in the main persona

<LisaSeemanKest> > 3. Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs

<LisaSeemanKest> > 4. change the persona to remove gender diversity

Rachael: this is a draft pull request that has the changes that came out of conversations with AG

<LisaSeemanKest> > 5. use the pronouns as frequently as would be used naturally

<LisaSeemanKest> >

Rachael: the first changes are just direct links, along with styling
… Next: line 174
… A slight rework to add additional structure to explain how the document works
… Then, reordering by alphabet
… Then, the Tal persona

Lisa: If you have a problem with it on line 174, let us know
… I looked over it with Rachael.
… No information is deleted - it is restructuring

Rachael: Yes. It is more from the perspective of naming the section of the document

Lisa: Let's close 174
… Does anyone feel a strong need to review this?
… We can come back to this when Rachael has the raw git
… The issue with Tal is the pronoun use
… There was not a way to do this that made everyone happy.
… There were discussions on the COGA and the AG lists.
… Some people want the statement "Tal likes to be called"
… The reason we didn't agree with that at the beginning was we felt that people that did not know about this might find it confusing.
… We only put it in to Tal.
… Others just wanted the traditional him or her, and felt this was not the place for this.

<Rachael> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/suggested_edits_23_mach_21/content-usable/index.html#how-to-use-this-document

Lisa: Then you had people that were happy with the small change: Tal like to be referred to as...then put the pronoun into the top part of the persona
… That still left it readable.
… I think someone got feedback from the community, and they felt they were comfortable with that
… John Foliot objected to that - I think his preference was no pronoun at all
… He may object to this one
… Everyone else - if it was not their preference, it might be something they could live with
… Because AG could not come out with a resolution with strong consensus, they deferred it back to us

Rachael: Their resolution was to send it back to COGA
… I also reached out to the diversity group, and they recommended we reach out to people with this lived experience
… The AG felt that not having the gender preference statement in there felt to be a good way to go.

<johnkirkwood_> agree with that

Rain: One of John Foliot's biggest objections was his concern for tokenism
… Could this be addressed by making another one of our personas of a them/theirs, as opposed to working on the Tal decision until the objections are mitigated.

Rachael: I think then we would be debating 2 of these, rather than one
… W3C came out with recommendations that we do this, but we are the first ones
… The question is more about what is the right way to do this
… My personal thought: we diversified on culture, but we don't do a lot more than that
… Just using the name, with the occasional they, you are giving the same space to the gender-diversity space
… Then it becomes a normal part of this document

<johnkirkwood_> +1

Rachael: The other option would be a statement in all of the personas

<Rain> +1 and thank you for the answer to my question

Lisa: You would get rid of the statement Tal prefers they/them/theirs

Rachael: yes.
… If a difficult sentence to read, then add the they/them/theirs.

+1

Lisa: I will do a straw poll, and add Rachael's proposal

<LisaSeemanKest> options: 1. no change 2. add it in once or twice in places in the main persona and Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs 3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal

Lisa: Because of the complexity of the options, I suggest we follow the AG process
… preference, then what you can live with

<LisaSeemanKest> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html#tal-a-student-who-has-dyslexia-and-impaired-eye-hand-coordination

<LisaSeemanKest> Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as they/them/theirs.

<LisaSeemanKest> 6.9.1 Tal Scenario 1: Logging In

<LisaSeemanKest> options: 1. no change

<LisaSeemanKest> 2. add it in once or twice in places in the main persona and Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally

<Rachael> Option 4: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/suggested_edits_23_mach_21/content-usable/index.html#tal-a-student-who-has-dyslexia-and-impaired-eye-hand-coordination

<Fazio> 1

<LisaSeemanKest> 2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona and Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally

Fazio: Now that I look at this, #1 has the pronoun at the end. This is more universally readable
… they/them/theirs often indicates plural, and can be potentially difficult in translation

<LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal

<johnkirkwood_> sorry don’t feel comfortable w/ understanding what language we are voting on

Fazio: I think this is a great compromise

Rachael: option 1 - current state, we will get an objection

<LisaSeemanKest> 1. no change

Rachael: We do not have an option for adding the pronoun to all of it

<LisaSeemanKest> 2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona and Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally

<LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal

Rachael: we were given the authority to make the decision. If we get a formal objection, it will delay publication

<LisaSeemanKest> 5. add pronouse to each one

Rachael: 2 come with known objections. 1 - John Foliot. 3 - I will object

Lisa: We don't have to be afraid of an objection - I think it won't be too bad

1. is no change, but will get objection

<LisaSeemanKest> 2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona and Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally

(read options above)

<johnkirkwood_> 2 they will add they in appropriate places with flow

<LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal

<LisaSeemanKest> 5. add pronouse to each one

Chris: I'm confused between some of the options

<Fazio> 1

Rachael: I think 1 and 2 are the same at this point

Lisa: I disagree
… 1 does not have they in the 1st paragraph, and does not have Tal in the pronoun statement
… 2 gets rid of the objection from John Foliot, I think

Rachael: I am not sure

Rain: I agree that 1 and 2 will get an objection from John Foliot

<LisaSeemanKest> 1. no change

<LisaSeemanKest> 2. add they in once or twice in places in the main persona and Tal like to be referred to (pronouns) as Tal/they/them/theirs .>3. change the persona to remove gender diversity aturally

<LisaSeemanKest> 4, rachaels new proposal to take out the pronoun statment but use they them in tal

<LisaSeemanKest> 5. add pronouse to each one

<LisaSeemanKest> 4 then 2

<Fazio> 1

<LisaSeemanKest> (just to get rid of the bjection

<Rachael> 4 then 2 then 5

<Chris_Weidner> 5 then 1

<Rain> 4 (can live with 5, and am personally happy with both 1 and 2 but would like to get past the objection)

<stevelee> 4

<EA> +1 to Rachael's 4 then 2

<krisannekinney> 4

<Fazio> 1 or 0

<MichaelC> 4

4

<johnkirkwood_> 4

Lisa: I see 4 getting consensus

<Chris_Weidner> I can live with 4

Lisa: #4 puts it in where it falls in naturally

Resolution: go with #4 in order to not have an objection

Lisa: can anyone not live with #4?

Lisa: Rachael - is the other thing we need to do to get to publication is to resolve the issues that you posted to the list?

<Rachael> We can discuss on the list

Lisa: Has anyone read the email and feel they need more discussion?
… Hopefully we can pass it on the list.

tal

jan and silver

<Jan> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p-FayvZYonpDIlojblFSofi_KzjNdY5SrBOKauvV0u8/edit?usp=sharing

Jan: this is the link to the clear words deadline that was submitted for WCAG 3 in the 1st public working draft
… I'm here to talk about how to build a bridge between COGA and Silver

overveiw of working with silver

Jan: There was a lot of work done by different groups of people
… They started with clear and common words
… We were in the midst of doing that work, and then the draft of Making Content Usable was released
… We proposed that we stop and rethink what we were doing
… Our public working draft was coming out.
… We decided to align with the work COGA was doing in this area.

<Fazio> +1 to the alignment with Content Usable

Jan: I want you to see the template that was used, and the type of content we would have to provide.
… The idea is that your group would give guidance on the next proposed guideline we would add
… Silver wants to have one publication per quarter.

<Fazio> 6 have been approved for wcag 2.2 choose one of those

Jan: COGA can identify guidelines that they want in the next publication, then we can work with COGA subject matter experts
… for example, those with expertise in the use of symbols
… I know it won't be simple, but these are examples of how we will work this out.
… Once COGA identifies a guideline for the next Silver/WCAG 3 publication, then we will pull together a smaller group working for 3 months
… at an additional time each week, to complete this document
… The group would need research, examples for how they will be implemented, as well as ways to test the guideline
… I met with Lisa and Rachael - they suggested that we look at the possibility of using the user stories to be the guideline, then
… the patterns could be the outcomes

Lisa: Working with Silver, we would have to prioritize the user stories

Lisa: for each objective we have 2 or 3
… COGA would do the prioritization of what to do 1st
… We won't have time for everything
… Then the 2nd thing we would do is with a subgroup, we would put the user story into the Silver template

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p-FayvZYonpDIlojblFSofi_KzjNdY5SrBOKauvV0u8/edit

Lisa: If COGA members volunteer for one subgroup, they aren't volunteering for all of them
… It would be a 3 month commitment
… I think the first thing we want to do is be sure people understand the request

<Jan> I am having some audio issues

Jennie: the state of Minnesota reviewed the working draft, and then look at the everyday use of it - will there be further tasks that subgroups can do to address this?

<Jan> Can Jenni repeat the question about testing or type it into IRC?

Fazio: Is this template COGA specific, only for COGA? Or for all success criteria?

Here is my point again for Jan's benefit:

The state of Minnesota reviewed all of the working draft.
… Some of the concerns were about how this will impact everday use
… how to test, how to use as part of procurement...
… Will a task of the subgroup, or could a separate part of the subgroup tasks be
… To walk through the everyday use of this - to support adoption, acceptance - right from the beginning?

<Jan> The template is not COGA specific - all guidelines use this template.

(end of recap for Jan)

Lisa: Jan - do you have audio now or prefer to type?

<Jan> I have spotty audio

<Jan> I am watching IRC

Lisa: Do you want to type in a response to Jennie?
… Rachael and I looked at making content usable, and thought it might be better to start with one that isn't too hard
… to see how it works together

<Fazio> I'll work on Reedundant Entry which requires processes not relying on memory

Lisa: We have a lot of the research already

<LisaSeemanKest> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html#help-user-story

Lisa: We were thinking of starting with the first subgroup on findable help user story
… Then we could get the hang of using the template

Rachael: Part of what meant "easy to do" - something that worked with the 2x process
… It is fairly familiar in our minds because of the 2x process
… We could show the pieces that had to be left out at this time
… Whereas clear language would be more difficult to test

Lisa: Jan - maybe the answers can come by email?

<Jan> Yes - I am sorry

Lisa: For everyone else - does this sound like a good process? Priorities decided within COGA

<Jan> Please email me your questions

<johnkirkwood_> +1 to the process

<Chris_Weidner> +1

<Fazio> +1

+1 to the process

<Jan> jan.mcsorley@pearson.com

<Rain> +1

<krisannekinney> +1

<EA> +1

<Jan> I don't know what happened to my audio.

<Fazio> lol

Lisa: I think we can work out the process for the first one, and that may address Jennie's question

Lisa: Thank you Jan
… Is everyone comfortable with this subgroup being the first starting point for findable help?

+1 - I would like to be on that subgroup

<Rain> +1 - I would also like to be on the subgroup if there is room

Lisa: Does anyone have any objections?

Lisa: I think I would like to be on at least the first subgroup

John K: When the subgroups are created - can everyone be invited to the initial call to get an understanding of the process?
… Then they don't have to join, but can better understand what is expected

Lisa: We will prioritize together, then can understand what the interactions will be with the subgroup
… What I was thinking - the subgroup makes a first draft, then brings it to COGA
… Would that work?
… I think the 1st one will be experimental

<Chris_Weidner> I would love to have a document I could get more feedback on from subject matter experts in my organization.

Lisa: For the 2nd one we would be able to say what was the most helpful

John K: Sounds good to me

<Rain> +1

Rain: Alert
… We will be sending an email to the COGA group with a link to a slide deck later today

image subgroup

Rain: This includes wireframes we want to turn over to the designer
… To create an image or images that meet our needs
… Please look at it before the next meeting, before we turn it over to the designer

*Thank you to John K too!

iraur

raur

Fazio: In the APA meeting yesterday
… we talked about COGA's objections
… Janina suggested that if it will take longer to resolve, that we let it go to publication, and then edits could be made in a future release

Lisa: Can we ask them to put in a note that comments that there will be changes from us?

Fazio: yes, she had said we could do that

Lisa: Does she have a draft of the note?

Fazio: No, but we can send an email to ask for the draft

Lisa: Chair-hat off - I think it is reasonable, depending on the note

*Can someone take over scribing at 1 minute before the hour - forgot I have a hard stop

Lisa: What do other people feel?

Lisa: We have a google doc started to collect our feedback

Rachael: I am inclined to let them publish with the group

publish with the note
… then we have a couple of months to put in our agenda

Fazio: the XAUR and the RAUR - are we saying this for both docs?

Lisa: We have not discussed the other one

<EA> Yes I can scribe

<Jennie> Thank you EA!

<Chris_Weidner> I also need to drop. Thank you, all!

<Rachael> +1 to coordinating on the note but letting them move forward

Lisa said it depends on the note - wants them to link to Coga resources - only agree if the note is liked and linked to page of comments

<Fazio> +1 upon agreement to a note

No ojections

<Rain> +1

<krisannekinney> +1

If any one objects please send a note to the list. Provisional Ok but note needs to be linked to comments.

please can you do it LIsa

<Rachael> trackbot end meeting

Summary of resolutions

  1. go with #4 in order to not have an objection
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/thye/they

Maybe present: Chris, Lisa