Meeting minutes
Revision of CAPTCHA Note.
JW: This is the working group note
There is a CFC at the moment
Should conclude tonight
We hope to enable republication, then have a review
<janina> ~https://
This relates to the new W3C process doc etc
JS: E'one here should have voted.
Please do if not.
JW: No dissent
JW: On the substance - there is a proposal that Janina referred to, from Cloudflare to use the Web Authenticaltion API
To assert the user is a person
Then they can proceed. The second part strengthens privacy a la zero knowledge proofs etc
2 part proposal from Cloudflare - interesting as it looks like it will do e'vthing that CAPTCHA does, and could be a comple CAPTCHA replacement
Interesting solution, potentially better than others.
JW: I've drafted changes that describe the proposal
JS: I agree that is a strong proposal that we should give serious consideration to.
JS: We will have some edits
There is also economic advise that should make it into the intro
It is costly to use CAPTCHA, in terms of frustration and wasted time
We need to publish this note as a FPWD
And signal to the community we are working on this document
SH: +1 on the really good data on the cost of using CAPTHCA from Cloudflare
JW: I've a branch, with these changes - not merged
JW: Is that reasonable?
How long do we want to wait for comments? Xmas etc
At least until the end of Jan or Feb for comments.
SH: I'd support that.
RK: Regarding timeline, the holidays are coming soon and I'm not familiar with the process, so can we include that info in email?
And have more knowledge - I'm listening and learning
JW: We want to propose late Jan.
JW: Publication will for sure not happen before Dec.
<Janina updates Raja on process>
JS: This becomes another kerbcut - not just an a11y issue but of benefit for all
JW: I will look for editing opportunitites
JS: <Discussion on previous draft work>
<Zakim> Joshue108_, you wanted to ack Judys request
JW: We are not meeting next week
we can schedule in Dec or Jan
JS: Beginning in Jan?
JW: We can look at their availability.
JOC: No meeting on the 24th
nor the 22nd or 29th
RESOLUTION: RQTF would very much like to meet the Flash mitigation folks in either Dec 1, 8 or 15 or Jan 5th, 12, 19 or 26
@judy - check resolution for possible dates
JS: Anything else on CAPTHCA?
JS: Confirming our bibliography errors?
JW: No issues
Accessibility of remote Meetings.
JW: Thank you Scott for going through the outcomes from TPAC - I have worked thru and added to tracker etc
I've commented etc
JW: Lets do this Async etc on Github etc so we can make progress etc
We can come back in two weeks then. Sound ok?
SH: Sounds good
Lets all look at the issues
There is a label in GH that we can use
We have had not much comment outside of TPAC
If we have issues to discuss, lets do that now?
Good progress
Natural Language Interface Accessibility User Requirements.
JW: We had a good discussion at the WAI CooP Symposium
I've circulated the ref to the chatbot a11y paper that was mentioned
https://
Chatbot Accessibility Guidance: A Review and Way Forward.
https://
JW: Discussion?
JOC: Would this be a useful reference to include?
JW: Not really sure - its more of a lit review - but does highlight issues that we may want to discuss.
JOC: You may give a precis of the issues and we could discuss.
JW: If you have Springer access..
SN: I may do.
JW: I'll finish parsing it. They are planning to release more material in December.
JS: COGA are actively working on comments
JW: <I've been looking at how to transfer repos a la GH>
Synchronization Accessibility User Requirements.
JW: We have had comments from the breakout session
Steve N is looking at issues and is starting to comment
JW: Co-ordination?
SN: A few of these appear to be old issues.
Some are process issues and can be closed.
There was a bibliography comment - a la W3C style.
How you reference a standard etc, journal articles/
JW: We have used that in the past - may need to convert refs.
SN: Specref - I've looked at it - does it apply to journals
<discussion on Specref>
JS: Wait a little Steve until we have ported repositories
SN: I'll review
JS: We can get those into a branch - then we migrate that over to a new repo
Like we did with CAPTCHA
JS: We can work through the comments etc
RQTF and COGA: potential research topics.
JW: These topics are back on the agenda - we have not had a specific list but we have a general idea - that we got at the joint meeting
Anything to say?
JS: Yeah, I've told them there will be scrutiny in terms of the task force workstatements
Mental health issues were not a part of the original assignment, but that was many years ago.
They are not charters to produce deliverables that relate to mental health
Not currently in scope - there is an early non-vetted draft.
I told them we would get to it, and co-ord with AGWG. Likely Jan.
JS: <Gives overview from APA perspective>
JW: Understood
This TF look forward to discussing when the COGA TF approaches us again.
SH: <Discusses dynamic experience of the interactions>
JW: <Answers q on dynamics>
SH: <Doesn't totally agree>