Meeting minutes
LS: don’t have a big group
LS: planning page, there a couple of things coming
… David i see you sent view to list
David: i still need to do paper
LS: were there more to add to literary review?
david: will have to look, visula onset one so far
LS: Justine and Abby not here
LS: did mapping user stories, and reviewed two papers for lit review
Albert: did review Rachael helped me, wasn’t useful
LS: very good
LS: jennie some things for July 30th
Jennie: we met with designer and meeting set for a month from now, and work various tools next 2 weeks
LS: ok everyone on top of action items
LS: main thing EO and Silver and AG on agenda
draft for community group https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-Mk1ygGNCpkH7UA5fW1aVtgk-Z7MWDY6Zr95nnlDjnM/edit
LS: to setup a community group we discussed making a community group
LS: not difficult to setup, but keeping going will be fair amount of work
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
LS: need a mission statement
LS: i sent to list at top of document , make primary activity and mission clear
LS: do people want to read over, we can see it here written out
LS: (reading the mission of community group)
Jennie: question how we provide list of contibutors, do we need to specify?
… some may wonder if name will be published
LS: if join group anonymously we can add a sentence we think
Rachael: shouldn’t be published
Jennie: for those not own guardian language to provde language
JR: I can dig up if you want them
LS: discussing guarian language we need wording
Jennie: i have history with writing can work with John Rochford on this
Jennie: think we have to be careful
Jennie: governors advisory has a stakeholder group
JR: legal folks need to review I think
LS: need to bring up with W3C
Kris Anne: is this a community group to be able to participate anonymously
… certainly think we need a decent solution before publishing
… guardianship is a concern i think as well
<Rachael> I am in process of drafting a proposed anonymous policy but it will be a few weeks till its approved. I think we can publish the Point of Contact and move forward knowing this is important and in process
LS: I believe Roy and Michael can possibly have a plan to move forward
Roy: just want feedback, some differnce between commmunity group anyone can join without royalty free commitment
Roy: due to patent and copyright risk in W3C publication will be differnet in terms of task force and community group
Roy: in task force must join AP or AG group
Roy: for community group can do some publication in different format, such as community group note
LS: talking about anonymous issue
LS: drafted proposed anonymous policy, in meantime point of contact needed
Roy: should talk to Michael to see if join anonymously
LS: we want to share personal experience not publicly, if you prefer to join anonymously for moment Roy
+1
<Rachael> +1
<cweidner> +1 provided anonymous join is ok
<LisaSeemanKest> +1
LS that ok for anymously?
<krisannekinney_> +1
<Jennie> +1
LS: we want people to join anynmously
LS: guardianship we need to circle back
LS: may make suggest to COGA rather than creating policy don’t need to go through process of joining APA, AG etc.
LS: are people comfortable with that?
Roy: i suggest we not mention that
CW: can you provide a line of wat community group able to do
LS: is that Chris?
CW: yes
LS: participation and making deliverables
LS: everyone in group participates in many different ways
<Fazio> You must be accepted into a W3C Working Group in order to join a Task Force. Anyone can join a Community GROUP
LS: this group is going to be a big learning curve to participate in helpful way, comes with a time commitment and patent policy
<Fazio> For COGA only APA and AG Working Group members can join
LS: it’s quite a high bar to join
LS: we are possibly missing a broad participation by the community, good place needed for participation an opportinity where users and other interested and involved that don’t have full set of expertise to participate
LS: can aldo be shorter term
Chris: i understand why would want this, have experts but don’t have time commitment to join, wether a not this would be an opportunity to pug in other members without the time commitment and what in Task Force can’t do in community group
LS: the process can draft themselves, the advisory role, the ask is smaller. potentially different clusters, as a developer could say this is great guidance, what do you think of my product
<Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to say including that clarification would be helpful in the document
Chris: that is helpful
Rachael: community groups might not be directly related to working groups, understanding expectations
LS: we’ve written about sharing with COGA, whould we add two sentences, i’m afraid of confusing people
LS: don’t want to lose people, will be a bit of challenge to make understandable, does anyone want to suggest text
Roy: if you want this community group give task force input, maybe we could add link think it’s ok to add
Roy: mailing list and github reposity for this community group?
LS: no
LS: very provisional, add two sentences and guardianship
Jennie: if list an email list need to think about that from an anonmous perspective
<Jennie> Like "Town Halls" - great idea - could be smaller Town Hall style conversations
suggested ptotential of zoom call
LS: zoom sounds like a potential good idea
LS: do we want do a poll that happy in direction
LS: we can finalize wording on list
Jennie: would it be possible to have a couple of days to review, to see if key pieces to discuss on call rather than list?
LS: yes will leave it in so can review
<Jennie> *thank you
<Jennie> +1 1 week sounds reasonable
LS: we can start reviewing for the week no straw poll
EO servey https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K87FbKnCj67DcCjnvbf0oheMRTRypdFinIVDtF-xr8I/edit#
LS: really want to get to survey, they want us to review their user stories
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
Kris Anne: think all are ready and four might specifiically need our feedback
… how the user stories now being presented, biographies, barriers, and favorite part resources available
… wanted to know if something to support or make changes
… see that someone needs to know a bit more on the ‘why’
… a comment said: doesn’t explain accessibilty for memory loss
… EO wants to make sure COGA has given input
LS: better to do review together?
Kriss Anne: initial though if easier to do review as a group sometimes confersation is helpful
… if we had time could dedicate time next week, if can as a group, if anyone wants to look at it, if want to split it up
LS: this is very important, either next week or week after we can donate half call to do it
LS: they have given us to the 26th
KrisAnne: can get more time think another 2 weeks will be ok
LS: this will be more useful feedback, probaly could get more constuctive feedback and that takes longer
KrisAnne: more detall and strike a balance, not trying to be too specific only have 9 and trying to keep the number low, could end up with so many stories. want to give good feedback and more globally accessible
LS: another thing is TPAC agendas
LS: give us two or three weeks
KrisAnne: if people have chance to look at before meeting next week it would be helpful
Jennie: just question about TPAC
LS: community group discussion was good
LS: is question about TPAC about agendas
Jennie: like to put in draft document for review, will do today
<LisaSeemanKest> eo work : https://
LS: one start collecting comments on EO goup here is our page in google doc
LS: people please add comments to that document
LS: might need subgroup meeting
<LisaSeemanKest> tpac : https://
LS: started drafting agendas
LS: my proposed is in google doc
LS: proposed feedback on accessibile authetication
<LisaSeemanKest> accessible authification thread: https://
LS: this is the thread
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
LS: make sure people are comfortable with that
summary of accessible authetication
<LisaSeemanKest> https://
LS: disussion with JR and Abby above
LS: regarding EO, and what trying to achieve
LS: empathisize and understand is an important goal
LS: let people understanding that COGA users are relevent here
LS: try an undue a bit of feeling or stereo types
LS: are there other important things that we want to get accross?
LS: main aims for personas to help empathisize and that coga are key audience are tazrget market group
KrisAnne: agree, bring awareness, including those groups, all of personas existed before, trying to make connection for designer and develops making it better
… they are looking for feedback for description of person
… will let know need a couple of more weeks
LS: to make more constructive suggestions