– DRAFT –
Silver Task Force & Community Group

Scribe List

<Lauriat> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Scribe_List

<jeanne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Scribe_List

I can scribe

Accessibility for Children preliminary functional needs

SuzanneTaylor: Maude is co-chair of community group

jeanne: Accessibility for Children community group, Suzanne liaison, accessibility needs for children

SuzanneTaylor: Maud Stiernet founded group
… getting CG more active, contribute to WCAG 2 and other standards
… working on user needs, thanks Jeanne
… get feedback on functional needs based on accessibility for children research

Maud: Google docs presentation

<Maud> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12soj2a8-QvySeXmVI7J4b_cpiLpB-0RU/edit#slide=id.p1

<Lauriat> Possible to open access to anyone with the link?

<Lauriat> (getting access denied when I try to open the link)

Maud: Children have different profiles from adults, different rhythms, need instant feedback
… less predictable, evolving competencies

<jenniferS_> Will you please share your screen, so we don't have to miss due to access issues?

<SuzanneTaylor> should be fixed now @Lauriat

Maud: research gap, disabled children as online users

<jenniferS_> I can't open where I work — due to rules.

Maud: have teens, education, wanted also for younger

<Lauriat> Fixed, thank you!

Maud: age appropriate features
… reason why created group, also started working on methodology, evidence-based, work with users

<jenniferS_> * seeing the slides would be helpful

Maud: define new concepts, common language/understanding
… sharing screen, reviewing slides
… communicate about work at conferences
… provide accommodation, sponsoring sign language interpreter, include children
… review goals 2021, 2022,
… functional needs for children with disabilities
… lit review, is there existing research, identify remaining questions, advocate for more
… document work in notes, create list of considerations for spec writers to use

SuzanneTaylor: Document with initial notes on functional needs

<SuzanneTaylor> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14rnfFNVcagTra4pj2940mjRwP6krbjGlZG9mCIC2Y7o/edit?usp=sharing

SuzanneTaylor: share through zoom?
… steps on how to write categories, found many reasons why children might have different needs
… looking at WCAG 3 functional needs, decided to write up as functional needs
… took 2 categories, pull activity back and explore user needs
… e.g., braille experience, if student using that and others using game, braille student might miss out
… looked at functional needs and tried to frame categories same way
… looked at stories, experiences with products/students, made progress, students given multiple ways to access materials
… students struggling with choosing
… e.g., math image, tactile, text description, meets different needs, problem is choosing
… users need balance between agency and guidance

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say would like review in functional needs subgroup

SuzanneTaylor: do these seem helpful as functional needs to get children's needs into WCAG 3

MichaelC: Look good, helpful, working on structure, would like others in group to review content
… invite to meeting, might have suggestions

<MichaelC> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1POhgI_xHZtSoNbHFp3r5HYIkl6ePaP8DC5d90SZ1tF4/edit#gid=470134919

MichaelC: functional needs/users needs mapping, matrix
… interesting to see if they fit

SuzanneTaylor: Should reach out?

MichaelC: Email group, also will raise on call

<MichaelC> public-a11y-functional-needs@w3.org

SuzanneTaylor: Will continue work, come back in few months

give feedback to Test Reliability on announcing change of natural language

Wilco: Test reliability, start applying process to one outcome
… programmatic language, have test rules
… start looking for examples, edge cases
… example of when important, when not
… ran into question, how much needs indication
… talked through examples, seems need isn't strong, more like preference
… isn't ideal for individual words, disruptive
… asked people, mailing list, clear examples where words were problem
… didn't find much guidance/research
… write programmatic language for blocks of text but not every word
… indicate for para, not words

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to say Wondering whether to use lang specific TTS should be configurable

janina: As tts user, agrees switch can be disruptive, prefers something can control as user

Lauriat: Look for google research

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to offer to see whether I can find some research that Google might have that we can share (thinking Maps)

Lauriat: with maps, voice changes with place names, might be research

MichaelC: Daily life in bilingual city

shadi: would config support needs, context based, might be different preferences depending on context

janina: Map to something easy to switch
… list of email subjects, leave alone, funny mistakes

Wilco: Provide examples
… not strong opposition?

janina: Cares a lot about topic

Lauriat: Guide others through how to make decisions

Wilco: Tricky, WCAG 2 based on language, about what tts understands, pronounces, real outcome is correct pronunciation

Lauriat: Would be confusing in some cases to have words pronounced correctly
… correct depends on context

Wilco: Everyone want paragraph
… Fair?

janina: Yes, structures can be problem

Wilco: How to define block, will continue work on it

janina: Mispronunciations that are correct

integrating ATAG and UAAG into WCAG3

<jeanne> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MCQG_MIaEyC3nfwkWGoDWS6XQzMykXeC7qOOjj8AG8M/

jeanne: Set up doc to capture issues, discussion questions, info to start working on issue
… used example, good format to share with AGWG
… provides context
… github issue, #503, listed examples
… core questions, how to make clear nature of barrier
… charter non normative, change when recharter

<Lauriat> Q1: How to make it clear (Issue 503) that when a barrier needs to be addressed to clearly identify if it is user agent or content author responsibility?

jeanne: commit to rewriting

<Lauriat> Q2: Our charter states only non-normative guidance for User Agents and Authoring Tools. Does that need to change when we recharter?

<Lauriat> Q3: Are we willing to commit to writing each method to target just one of Content, UA or AT?

jeanne: at identifying core questions stage
… mutiple methods specialized by platform, do we want to do that

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to comment on recharter

JF: Q2 re charter, WG doesn't decide, AC will approve/reject, was point of contention last time
… open to looking at it, we don't get to decide

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to mention db and to mention audiences and to say I would like crisp boundaries

MichaelC: Would need AC approval, we get to propose
… need clear definition of what accomplishing
… should do if can define
… not confident about timeline, could try
… database with methods, outcomes, tagged
… by technology, could be authoring method, design method, tool method
… propose requiring methods to apply to 1 audience, 1 technology, would help be crisp

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to ask a clarifying question on the question at hand

Lauriat: Are we trying to answer or come up with more questions

jeanne: Additional core questions
… capturing solutions, too, but looking for issues

Wilco: Are there parts we should be including?
… useful and relevant things

<jeanne> +1 to splitting it up

janina: Good to pull out good examples, more than informative guidance
… what need to add normative guidance
… accessible out of box

Lauriat: Reframe Q1, add part, now suggests either UA or author or tool
… e.g., page language, content language
… Chrome detecting language, expose to AT, authors don't have to do it
… solutions through AT or UA and no defining line, lies with one
… works correctly is what matters, method is shared

<Zakim> Lauriat, you wanted to propose reframing question 1 slightly

Lauriat: reframe so it's not "or"

MichaelC: Division of responsibilities, hard for 1 doc to cover all, could have method groups
… be sure one method is followed, or all methods, some model which to follow/not follow based on role/what's needed

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to suggest we add Should it be topic based and tied to user needs?

jeanne: Approach topic-based, tied to user needs?
… start from user needs, look at UA and AT and see ATAG and UAAG, see what applies

Lauriat: Yes, guidance composition starts with users needs, use as source materials

jeanne: Yes, relevant guidance, esp in ATAG, 13 ATAG SCs tied to WCAG 2, very close, UAAG not as close
… still lots that's related
… look at methods for ATAG and UAAG for WCAG 3, also skim source documents for other issues, red flags
… for next meeting