14:03:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag-act
14:03:23 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/06/28-wcag-act-irc
14:03:25 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:03:26 <Sheri_B-H_> Sheri_B-H_ has joined #wcag-act
14:03:27 <Zakim> Meeting: Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference
14:03:30 <Sheri_B-H_> present+
14:03:30 <Shri> Shri has joined #WCAG-ACT
14:03:37 <jeanne> present+
14:03:41 <bruce_bailey> present+
14:03:55 <jenniferS> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vsp1V2hBpU6Y0vNt-AGP-Y6fOxx1-IjoKgBJ_3bPlfg/edit?usp=sharing
14:04:10 <jeanne> Topic: definitions for the headings outcome proposal
14:07:33 <bruce_bailey> q+ to ask about ACT regulars?
14:08:12 <kathyeng> kathyeng has joined #wcag-act
14:09:33 <mbgower> mbgower has joined #wcag-act
14:10:06 <jeanne> +1 to removing the word "sections"
14:10:31 <mbgower> present+
14:11:20 <jenniferS> Yes, that was my understanding, Bruce.
14:12:04 <JakeAbma__> JakeAbma__ has joined #wcag-act
14:12:11 <JakeAbma__> present+
14:12:16 <kathyeng> thanks!
14:12:23 <ChrisLoiselle> should we not be in wcag-act then moving forward?
14:12:50 <ChrisLoiselle> :)
14:13:00 <kathyeng> I will check in to the ACT meeting
14:13:28 <bruce_bailey> thank you for that digression, makes sense
14:14:41 <ToddLibby> ToddLibby has joined #wcag-act
14:14:50 <jeanne>  Introduce related content sections with a heading that describes it.
14:14:57 <ToddLibby> present+
14:17:11 <jenniferS> Should the transcription tool be running?
14:18:27 <ToddLibby> I am not available to scribe or I would.
14:18:37 <Francis_Storr> Scribe: Francis_Storr
14:19:20 <bruce_bailey> +1 for reword
14:19:58 <Francis_Storr> JS: what do people think about renaming this?
14:20:17 <Francis_Storr> SBH: looks ok, but worried about nesting
14:20:55 <jeanne> q+
14:21:21 <jeanne> ack bruce
14:21:21 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask about ACT regulars?
14:21:27 <Francis_Storr> JS: I'm concerned it's not phrased as an outcome, rather as a guideline.
14:21:30 <jeanne> ack jean
14:22:13 <bruce_bailey> q+
14:22:16 <Francis_Storr> JS: we have a grammatical issue that people are concerned about.
14:22:22 <jeanne> ack bruce
14:22:24 <jenniferS> q+
14:22:46 <Francis_Storr> BB: agree that they're not quite outcomes.
14:23:28 <Francis_Storr> JS: we could say "the product organizes content into sections".
14:23:38 <jeanne> The product organizes related content into sections
14:23:46 <bruce_bailey> q-
14:25:03 <jeanne> The product headings describe or introduce content that follows.
14:25:47 <mbgower> 'the following'
14:25:50 <ChrisLoiselle> These should be broken down as user stories , then talked to who the "user" is when they are reading. “As a [persona], I [want to], [so that].” I think that would help form outcomes and methods. If we are creating around user needs, whether content creator or end user, I think this would be beneficial.
14:26:29 <jeanne> The product introduce related content sections with a heading that describes it.
14:26:34 <ChrisLoiselle> sorry, very loud at my house and can't talk over phone.
14:26:44 <jeanne> ack jenn
14:27:00 <Sheri_B-H_> As a user, I want headings that describe related content
14:27:05 <jenniferS> I didn't get to ask my question. Rather I responded to someone else's.
14:27:20 <Sheri_B-H_> (following Chris Loiselle's suggestion)
14:27:33 <jenniferS> Proposal is: The outcome introduce related content sections with a heading that describes it.
14:29:14 <jenniferS> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vsp1V2hBpU6Y0vNt-AGP-Y6fOxx1-IjoKgBJ_3bPlfg/edit?usp=sharing
14:29:25 <mbgower> Thanks!
14:29:37 <jenniferS> Proposal is: The outcome introduces related content sections with a heading that describes it.
14:29:51 <Sheri_B-H_> Headings introduce related content sections
14:29:59 <bruce_bailey> q+ to ask jennifer about layering outcomes
14:31:26 <Francis_Storr> CL: suggests "as a persona, I want to, so that" structure.
14:31:53 <mbgower> q+
14:31:57 <jeanne> ack bruce
14:31:57 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask jennifer about layering outcomes
14:32:03 <jenniferS> Proposal is: The outcome introduces related content sections with a heading that describes it.
14:32:22 <Francis_Storr> BB: these seem to be moving towards instructions for the content author rather than benefitting an end user.
14:35:24 <Francis_Storr> CL: writing to describe how to make things easier for an end user could make things easier for people to understand what needs to be done.
14:38:05 <jenniferS> That granularity becomes part of the functional needs area, right?
14:38:17 <jeanne> As a content author, I introduce related content sections with a heading that describes the content so that people searching the content can more easily find it.
14:38:20 <Francis_Storr> CL: I'd look at what an assistive technology user would do to navigate headings. I'd also look at what a sighted user would want from headings, etc. It does get granular and you wouldn't get all use cases.
14:39:13 <jeanne> As a content author, I introduce sections of text with a heading that describes it so that people searching the content can more easily find it.
14:39:18 <bruce_bailey> q-
14:39:46 <mbgower> Content is introduced with one or more short text descriptions, in the form of titles and headings
14:40:00 <jenniferS> As a content author, I introduce related material with a heading that describes it so that people can more easily digest it.
14:40:28 <Francis_Storr> MG: I have experimented with different wording for these items.
14:41:45 <Francis_Storr> JS: we need to remember that this isn't just a page - it could be many things
14:42:35 <Francis_Storr> JA: I have been working on functional needs, user needs, and user outcomes and working on user needs for the FAST framework.
14:43:09 <Francis_Storr> ... it seems like we're trying to tackle, in one sentence, all the user needs and outcomes in one sentence, and that makes it hard.
14:48:22 <bruce_bailey> spreadsheet looks great !
14:48:37 <jeanne> q+ to discuss granularity
14:48:55 <jeanne> ack mgower
14:50:08 <Francis_Storr> JA: shows detailed spreadsheet of work in progress for User Needs vs. Functional Needs Mapping, to highlight complexity of trying to define things in one sentence.
14:50:22 <Francis_Storr> JS: this is very cool.
14:50:33 <ChrisLoiselle> q+ To Jake's point, the guidelines need to be technology agnostic, but when we start talking to specific reasons why we are writing the guidelines, technology specific comes into play.
14:52:16 <Francis_Storr> JS: we agreed in the meeting before last that the outcomes weren't granular enough and are now working at a much more granular level.
14:52:31 <jeanne> ack mbgo
14:52:37 <jeanne> ack jeann
14:52:37 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to discuss granularity
14:52:43 <jeanne> ack chr
14:52:43 <Zakim> ChrisLoiselle, you wanted to Jake's point, the guidelines need to be technology agnostic, but when we start talking to specific reasons why we are writing the guidelines,
14:52:46 <Zakim> ... technology specific comes into play.
14:52:48 <Francis_Storr> ...  excited about the spreadsheet - will make migrating content, and more, much easier.
14:53:28 <Francis_Storr> CL: accessibility guidelines tend to be technology agnostic. Spreadsheet is amazing work.
14:53:49 <jenniferS> q+
14:55:05 <Francis_Storr> JS: because so many things rely on headings, it makes the headings item we're working on very difficult.
14:55:35 <mbgower_> mbgower_ has joined #wcag-act
14:55:39 <jenniferS> Proposal: The Outcome introduces related organized content with a heading that describes it.
14:56:14 <mbgower_> Definitions may solve some of this
14:56:17 <jenniferS> q+
14:56:36 <mbgower_> q+ to say that definitions may help make this testable
14:56:45 <Francis_Storr> ... if people think this is a good idea, take this discussion and come back with a proposal on how to phrase the outcome.
14:57:29 <Francis_Storr> JST: the proposal is "The Outcome introduces related organized content with a heading that describes it.
14:57:42 <Francis_Storr> ... ".
14:58:11 <Francis_Storr> ... they all begin with "the outcome".
14:58:40 <jeanne> q+ to talk about the subject
14:58:41 <Francis_Storr> ... It would be good to have the agenda very clear for these meetings.
14:59:58 <jeanne> ack jenn
15:00:05 <jeanne> ack mbg
15:00:05 <Zakim> mbgower_, you wanted to say that definitions may help make this testable
15:00:43 <ToddLibby> got to jump off for work meeting, thank you all.
15:00:54 <jenniferS> +1 to Mike Gower. Yes, the 'explanations' certainly do add the ACT specificity.
15:00:57 <ToddLibby> ToddLibby has left #wcag-act
15:01:09 <Francis_Storr> MG: we're going to stumble around with this work. We could think about the definitions and the ACT requirements. We need to be careful with language so that we create content that's not too long but still provides guidance.
15:01:29 <Francis_Storr> JS: thanks to everyone that's working on this.
15:02:03 <mbgower_> I was making the point that defined terms may give us testable 'pieces' of outcomes, without worrying about that being in the more easily understood outcome.
15:02:24 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
15:02:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/06/28-wcag-act-minutes.html jeanne
17:06:25 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag-act
17:41:52 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wcag-act
18:43:15 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wcag-act
20:43:26 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wcag-act
22:29:20 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #wcag-act