Meeting minutes
Coordinating across groups (8-8:30)
Rachael: Task forces are creating documents and asking for input. Document comes to publication. Some things are then delayed.
… We wanted to talk about a strategic plan on working more effectively as a group.
… Around document generation, we are looking to brainstorm processes and procedures.
<jeanne> +1
<shadi> +1 to having this discussion!
Wilco: I think we need context to the conversation.
<LisaSeemanKest> I can give examples in both directions
MichaelC: Not highlighting any group specifically, but providing examples.
Issues experienced
On content usable, there were late arriving issues , as well as EO.
Accessibility User Requirements that APA was working on, but another group came in late, causing delays off of late comments coming in.
Scheduling, notifications, working through comments to process them to include in document.
We are looking to improve the commenting and review process to schedule appropriately time management wise.
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say what has worked with Silver coordination
Jeanne: It is an issue around Accessibility within W3C, groups working on specs not related to Accessibility then have a lot of comments coming in on Accessibility.
What has worked with Silver is getting on agenda of a specific group and have an opportunity to identify early in the process.
The problems that occur are fundamental to the document, it is very helpful to get the info in advance. Example is FPWD in Silver. We needed input on big items first.
Attending meetings and being on the agenda is integral to early success.
<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to add a little more context
Shadi: Thank you for raising the point here.
… The late arrival of comments is a result. The the coordination points and dialogue is the cause during the early stages. Groups tend to silo. Proactive action is needed on stakeholders.
… The mechanisms to fix the cause and not just the late comments.
Lisa: It goes both ways on receiving and giving comments. Problems that arise is whether I get a ping on the issues.
… If something is on the WAI list vs. another list, it can be difficult to read through all of the emails.
I think a table or something that has a list of who you want to ping as a reference. Perhaps having a person reach out as well.
Another option is a table of drafts that can be sorted for the ability to review , once a week or whatever cadence is.
If people are talking to Cognitive, per se, that when they talk to that, the group is notified in part of the process.
<Kim_patch> +1 to liaison and central place to look. Using email this way is inefficient for everyone
Rachael: The word ignored is not unique to COGA. We are all passionate and we don't want to have it personal. It is an acknowledgement that we all feel that way, but we need to find a way to move forward.
MichaelC: My comments are on solution brainstorming.
Janina: APA has the issue of looking at everything.
… We would take a look at issues at last call , and that no longer exists. We try to find the specs at FPWD , possibly earlier.
<LisaSeemanKest> were is wai anounce?
Janina: If there are issues that need tracking , we review it. For example, we have the APA dashboard. We could possible look at WAI announce as being tracked .
… You can do it from an archive.
<janina> https://
Lisa: I'm not sure where wai announce is exactly.
Janina: Posts link to wai announce.
Lisa: How to make usable issues - I like the idea of joint calls. Earlier in the process is better.
Solutions
Lisa: Persona , with an issue, or per topic .
Kim: Vocal plus on central location vs. email etc.
… A please look would be beneficial.
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to noodle on review dashboard and routine walk-throughs and to +1 and better structure liaisons and to formalize definition of ¨all¨? and to mention varying interpretations of the process and to talk about identifying review windows and to mention W3C solutions and WAI solutions
<MichaelC> https://
<shadi> +1 to dashboard for WAI publications
<MichaelC> https://
MichaelC: Requesting reviews from APA does exist. We are looking at intra WAI review specifically. We may want to do more in WAI than other groups.
<janina> FAST form is: http://
<LisaSeemanKest> leasons do not always work
Liaisons and responsibilities can be looked at to make sure they in fact , reaching out and doing what they should be doing.
… there have been review windows , where it was productive . An early review window could be beneficial.
… this call could be a call that would walk through the dashboard itself, if needed.
<LisaSeemanKest> +1 to what all means
<Rachael> Proposed Next Steps: Michael to explore dashboard options, Further discussion on Liaisons, Create resources and optionsto help coordinate
<jeanne> +1 for review of the Dashboard
Rachael: Dashboard discussion would be beneficial.
Lisa: Liaison training would be beneficial.
MichaelC: Reviewed by would be part of the dashboard.
<janina> +1000 to Shadi
Shadi: The review or cross group should be part of the leadership. This needs to be working group chairs down to task force facilitators.
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to mention theoretical vs practical responsibilities and to mention harmonized approach, wheel reinvention
MichaelC: Group leadership in theory would do that, but in we are all involved in the process.
Wilco: Isn't this call the coordination call to do this specific task?
Rachael: This is more AG specific than WAI.
<jeanne> +1 for Wai Coordination Call, but it doesn't happen well
MichaelC: The WAI coordination call is an option, but we'd need to review further.
Rachael: We could try to move this to the WAI call.
Wilco: The WAI call is later and every week.
<shadi> +1 to late evening for EU folks
MichaelC: We could raise an agenda topic on that call when needed.
<Rachael> Proposal: FYI to WAI, AG and APA to work through options via email.
<shadi> +1 to Michael
MichaelC: Let us run through this on the mailing list and review decision in detail. We need more WAI groups to be involved and AG should be the one to start this process.
Janina: APA is working on items that may impact WCAG 3
Lisa: We should integrate our work in to how AG is doing this , a good dashboard could do this.
<Rachael> Proposal: FYI to WAI, AG and APA to work through options via email and revisit this next month
Lisa: If we should be coordinating with groups that we aren't please let us know.
<janina> +1
<Wilco> +1
<jeanne> +1
<shadi> +1 to proposal
<Chuck> +1
+1
<Kim_patch> +1
<alastairc> +1
<jon_avila_> +1
Rachael: We are to let WAI we are doing this. AG to then work with working groups etc. via email. We will then talk to what we have done over the month and decide next steps.
Rachael: To Lisa, you are one of the people on the emails. We will have checkins on the topic as we move forward.
<stevelee> +1
Low vision taskforce update
<janina> Bye for now!
<Rachael> Chris: Met with Shaw H on getting the taskforce up and running. Email for participation will go out.
<Rachael> ...Started a github project for the taskforce. Plan on using that project tracker. Will be updating the wiki as well. Two main objectives. Accessibility requirements for people with low vision.
<Rachael> ....Still planning meeting times, etc. Working through it.
https://
<Rachael> ...should be open to everyone.
<jeanne> Thank you SO much for helping out WCAG3, we have needed your input very much
JonathanA: We will also work with the Contrast groups as well.
?
<LisaSeemanKest> wishing you a lot of luck!
Jeanne: I wanted to point out a seminar that occurred in Axe-Con on fonts and visual contrast of text.
EO video review request
Wilco: Videos not public, but you can still sign up.
<jon_avila_> Font study https://
JonathanA: I have the link and can share.
<shadi> Project description: https://
<shadi> Overview on scripts and personas: https://
<shadi> Example script: https://
<shadi> Redesigned Understanding document: https://
<jeanne> It would be good to have a BBC rep on Low VIsion
<shadi> Redesigned Understanding document with video: https://
<shadi> Project planning board: https://
Shadi: We want to provide an alternative to the heavy text in understanding documents. Perhaps 30 second videos to supplement or help the text.
… For example , project description, overview on scrips and personas , redesigned understanding document. The last link provided is the project work around this planning board.
… This should not go beyond what is in Success Criteria . The EO chairs suggested a review. We are going to do these as public surveys.
<LisaSeemanKest> i find it overwelming. would need a walk though
Shadi: Final approval will include other groups. Goal is to be involved as these develop. Batch process , around 10 scripts per review.
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to talk about content, style, timeline, completeness, use in other resources, production
MichaelC: The development of videos is similar to previous conversation. I.e. content on videos, set of video complete or not , etc. We do need to review on what the videos will contain.
… The issue of styles of videos in part of lack of guidance and or different editors needs to be reviewed. Timeline also should be reviewed.
… The videos could be used more widely used , so coordination points on all of this is important.
Lisa: Understanding project management of this will be significant.
… there should be a way of identifying which groups are impacted.
<LisaSeemanKest> Great
Shadi: You are welcome to look at this effort whenever. This is not the main way of coordination. When we have a set of scripts that are mature. We will announce through the channels. WAI coordination would be advised. Same here for other groups.
Shadi: I wouldn't want to deciding on what groups review what beforehand and leave out anyone.
<alastairc> Suggest focusing on an initial one or two before a rough draft is roled out across all
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to ask about transition to WCAG3 guidelines?
<shadi> +1 to Alastair
<LisaSeemanKest> (I couldnt find a script - whch one was that)
<alastairc> one example: https://
<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say coordinate *before* scripts
Jeanne: I really like the script. I am looking at it from WCAG 3. I would like to not brand with a specific SC. I.e. WCAG 2.x vs. WCAG 3. User need specific vs. SC specific.
MichaelC: I think which scripts are being generated when and how, then tangents may happen that we don't want.
Shadi: We did that in EO. I am happy to do that with other groups for what SC you want or don't. Most wanted to see scripts first.
Shadi: I am looking for specific actionable step for what's next.
<jon_avila_> The scripts should also be written to include all visual details so no additional audio description is needed - unless we want to have a video demonstrating non-embedded audio description
MichaelC: Groups may give feedback as to what is important and what topics on entire WAI topics rather than individual EO scripts.
<LisaSeemanKest> need to go to next call. Thanks folks
Rachael: Shadi and Michael will review offline via email on the topic of scripts.
Kim: Who is coming up in scripts?
Shadi: There will be personas and we will cast off of that. We are trying to make them as real as possible.
<Rachael> Since some folks have to go, please plan on attending next month. We have lots to keep working through.
Kim: Real people will be used? Speech users would need to be looked at. Users to look at the users within the scripts would be beneficial.
<alastairc> Thank you , bye!