13:27:14 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #coga
13:27:14 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/03/31-coga-irc
13:27:16 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:27:16 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #coga
13:27:18 <trackbot> Meeting: Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
13:27:18 <trackbot> Date: 31 March 2022
13:27:37 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #coga
13:27:52 <lisa> Regrets: EA, Albert, Kris Anne
13:28:49 <lisa> Agenda+ Updates and Actions. See https://docs.google.com/document/d/15HtPkkYx1CIl6bAwP2nsSZKhqTVbqcuMDRz5RmtmvXg/edit#
13:29:30 <lisa> Agenda+  Update on WCAG 3 and testing
13:29:45 <lisa> Agenda+ Gaudenship draft https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oNrl_kghy8J1Pab-L1a_XNZr4YsIMrbEgYuttOCvtFo/edit#
13:42:27 <Le> Le has joined #coga
13:49:30 <Fazio> Fazio has joined #coga
13:57:31 <Jennie> Jennie has joined #coga
13:57:36 <Jennie> present+
13:57:52 <lisa> present+
13:58:01 <Jennie> scribe: Jennie
13:58:49 <JohnRochford> JohnRochford has joined #coga
13:59:34 <JustineP> JustineP has joined #coga
13:59:47 <Rain> Rain has joined #coga
14:00:02 <JustineP> present+
14:00:22 <Rain> present+
14:00:30 <Le> present+
14:00:31 <Fazio> present+
14:01:11 <lisa> zakem, next item
14:01:13 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #coga
14:01:16 <Roy> Roy has joined #coga
14:01:18 <Le> David, could you please drop the the link for that study you were talking about? I'd love to take a look.
14:01:20 <julierawe> present+
14:01:29 <lisa> zakem, next item
14:01:38 <lisa> zakim, next item
14:01:38 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Updates and Actions. See https://docs.google.com/document/d/15HtPkkYx1CIl6bAwP2nsSZKhqTVbqcuMDRz5RmtmvXg/edit# -- taken up [from lisa]
14:02:08 <ShawnT> present+
14:02:10 <Jennie> Lisa: EO document
14:02:18 <Rashmi> Rashmi has joined #coga
14:02:19 <Jennie> ...It is looking good. We still have to work on it a bit more.
14:02:29 <Rashmi> present+
14:02:30 <Jennie> ...Julie - do you want to organize a meeting for next week?
14:02:50 <Rain> q+
14:02:58 <Jennie> Julie: Yes, I will send around another survey. I will send a calendar invite once we agree on a time.
14:03:00 <Rain> ack Rain
14:03:11 <lisa> ack next
14:03:12 <Jennie> Rain: We have an issue now around the personas
14:03:13 <Rain> Issue regarding EO personas: https://github.com/w3c/wai-people-use-web/issues/226
14:03:14 <david-swallow> david-swallow has joined #coga
14:03:28 <david-swallow> present+
14:03:31 <Jennie> Rain: They had asked that we publish it as a formal issue on github so they can track it
14:03:36 <Jennie> ...Lisa, I tagged you on it
14:03:43 <Jennie> ...It is also on our timeline document as well
14:03:56 <Jennie> ...Please feel free to add to the issue if you would like to
14:04:10 <Jennie> Lisa: We still have the document that Julie's taking the lead with
14:04:18 <Jennie> ...and we have these other comments. That's fantastic.
14:04:26 <Jennie> ...The other 2 items are at good places.
14:04:53 <Jennie> ...David F has been doing work on the mental health - it would be great if you could put it somewhere
14:04:59 <Jennie> David F: Can someone email me the link?
14:05:10 <Jennie> Lisa: I will put it on my to-do list.
14:05:16 <Jennie> ...Jennie will give a review later.
14:05:46 <Jennie> Julie: The Google form was shared last week with the COGA team.
14:05:48 <Fazio> Schizophrenia and internet use paper: https://europepmc.org/article/MED/21169176
14:06:02 <Jennie> ...There are now 2 ways to submit examples: use the Google form, or use the Google doc
14:06:11 <Jennie> ...Any example submitted will be debated by the team
14:06:17 <Jennie> ...Clear language examples
14:06:31 <Jennie> ...Anywhere you submit an example is locked down (non-public) so you can submit live examples
14:06:46 <Jennie> ...If we decide to include any example in a draft we share with the public we will anonymize it
14:06:59 <Jennie> Lisa: Link for the Google form for Clear Language?
14:07:07 <julierawe> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1SLEcmo40iiExe9eWiV424XW4kn7BH2aQ0ZtlvjaxRus/edit
14:07:22 <Jennie> ...They don't have headings indicating which are for the community group or the task force
14:07:37 <Jennie> ...We have also asked if everyone can submit 2 examples - that is really helpful for us
14:07:49 <Jennie> ...They can be good examples, bad examples, or those that need discussion
14:08:10 <Rashmi> q+
14:08:19 <Jennie> Julie: Thank you for pointing out that the Google form - I adjusted the title so it is clearer. The one above is the task force one
14:08:25 <Jennie> q?
14:08:49 <Jennie> Le: Everything is fine with my tasks
14:09:08 <Jennie> Lisa: There was another item sent to the list - our work statement
14:09:17 <JohnRochford> present+
14:09:23 <Jennie> ...We reviewed the work statement, it went both to APA and to the AG working group
14:09:27 <Jennie> ...They both approved it
14:09:35 <Jennie> ...It is now online as the new work statement of what we are doing
14:09:41 <Jennie> ...Thank you Roy for putting that up!
14:09:46 <Jennie> ...Now we want to work on it, achieve it
14:09:52 <Jennie> ...Well done everyone!
14:10:15 <stevelee> stevelee has joined #coga
14:10:21 <Roy> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/work-statement
14:10:21 <lisa> zakim, next item
14:10:21 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, lisa
14:10:27 <lisa> ack next
14:10:48 <Jennie> Rashmi: I have made some changes in the Clear document example - should I share that form?
14:11:01 <Jennie> Lisa: We have a task force meeting afterwards, so I have not put it on the agenda today
14:11:09 <Jennie> ...If we have time at the end of the meeting, we can review it then
14:11:10 <lisa> zakim, next item
14:11:10 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Update on WCAG 3 and testing -- taken up [from lisa]
14:11:12 <Jennie> ...I am using it
14:11:51 <Jennie> Lisa: We will move to the next item until Rachael joins
14:11:54 <Rain> scribe: Rain
14:12:07 <Rain> zakim, take up item 3
14:12:07 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Gaudenship draft https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oNrl_kghy8J1Pab-L1a_XNZr4YsIMrbEgYuttOCvtFo/edit# -- taken up [from lisa]
14:13:10 <Rain> Jennie: sharing guardianship draft doc
14:13:26 <lisa> q?
14:13:38 <Rain> ... took all suggestions and starting to go through to incorporate them. When two conflicted, we merged the concepts together
14:13:49 <Rain> ... example, took both problem statements to ensure that we had both concepts included
14:14:05 <Rain> ... now a couple things left to resolve. Will go through those after reviewing the structure
14:14:44 <Jennie> Guardianship document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oNrl_kghy8J1Pab-L1a_XNZr4YsIMrbEgYuttOCvtFo/edit#heading=h.5udnukkm2ygf
14:15:01 <Rain> Jennie: structure review, start with the Goal
14:15:42 <Rain> ... changed the document to reflect the goals of the document
14:15:45 <Rachael> present+
14:15:56 <Rain> ... people in a person's life may also require cognitive support
14:16:29 <Rain> ... spoke through different types of requests for people who are in the community groups
14:16:37 <Rain> Jennie: first unresolved comment
14:16:47 <Rain> ... vulnerability is a consideration
14:17:01 <Rain> ... if a person is vulnerable in any way,
14:17:19 <Rain> ... want to verify that having two examples of vulnerability are helpful
14:17:41 <Fazio> +1
14:17:42 <Rain> ... example 1: robo calls and phishing attacks targeting adults with cognitive challenges
14:17:49 <ShawnT> +1
14:17:51 <Rain> ... would like to remove "other"
14:17:52 <Le> +1
14:18:07 <lisa> +1
14:18:16 <Rain> ... general agreement in the chat, so removing the word "other"
14:18:31 <Rain> Julie: see two examples in the paragraph, so want to suggest considering turning them into bullet points for easier skimming
14:18:37 <Rain> Jennie: doing that not
14:19:08 <Rain> Jennie: second suggestion, in online interactions, when identity is available through publications people they might encounter who are not part of their daily interactions may become aware of them
14:19:17 <Rain> ... so individuals who participate may become a target
14:19:20 <Rain> ... any concerns?
14:19:49 <Rain> Lisa: need to clarify language, and in W3C, person's identity is available in publications
14:20:18 <Rain> Jennie: we've been using the word publications to include W3C, so adding official notes, meeting minutes, use case publications
14:20:33 <Rain> ... enough to give the idea without listing every kind of publication
14:21:40 <Rain> Jennie: if a person is not savvy about publishing their name, then what can happen is that they may not be aware that someone can search the internet and find their address
14:21:56 <Rain> Le: yes, we ran into that a couple of years ago, where states started publishing tax reports
14:22:05 <Rain> ... so if someone owns a home, you can get their address from their name
14:22:20 <lisa> Q?
14:22:51 <Rain> Lisa: how about "this can be important if the person's address is findable on the internet"
14:23:06 <Rain> ... was not the point I was making
14:23:20 <Rain> ... discussing challenges, and what people do for security, what they do isn't secure
14:23:28 <Rain> ... have to make very sure that that doesn't happen
14:24:16 <stevelee> stevelee has joined #coga
14:24:19 <Rain> ... example of a potential issue, that now people know that someone writes their password and puts them next to their desk
14:24:41 <lisa> I like how it looks now
14:24:56 <Rain> Jennie: what we may need to clarify that individuals may not be aware that people are reading the minutes, so what they share can impact their safety
14:25:08 <Rain> ... may need to qualify how we write it be specific to cognitive
14:25:35 <Rain> ... could we qualify "related to disability" to sharing use case and address being findable to highlight the difference for people with cognitive disabilities doing these tasks
14:25:53 <Rain> Lisa: not sure we need to spell it out, because disability information is sensitive no matter what kind of disability it is
14:26:10 <Rain> ... I think this says enough
14:26:22 <Rain> Jennie: okay, then going to accept the suggestion that we have and that will resolve the issue
14:26:43 <Rain> Jennie: suggestion from Michael Cooper, note that this applies to participants in non public groups but where the content is public
14:26:57 <Rain> ... W3C may at its discretion grant member access to confidential information
14:27:39 <Rain> MichaelC: I'm not sure this applies in this situation
14:28:11 <Rain> Jennie: one of John Kirkwood's concerns was where one person in a corporation grants ability to participate to others in their corporation who are not part of the group itself
14:29:19 <Rain> MichaelC: refers to member confidential groups. None of the WAI groups are member confidential
14:29:29 <Rain> ... for all groups we are talking about, not sure this is relevant
14:29:43 <Rain> ... more complex if we are also trying to talk about member confidentiality
14:30:24 <Rain> Jennie: challenge we were having is how to scope the document. Not just relevant to COGA, but to any W3C group
14:30:48 <Rain> ... went through remainder of comments, and broke out the suggestions into Recommendations headings, with proposed
14:31:04 <Rain> ... pieces that apply to before you become a member, ways to help people participate, and support person or organization option
14:31:10 <MichaelC> q+ to talk procedure and tooling
14:31:45 <lisa> ack next
14:31:46 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to talk procedure and tooling
14:32:02 <Rain> MichaelC: do we need some kind of proceedure or tooling?
14:32:17 <Rain> ... what do we need official tools for, and what can we do by improving procedures?
14:32:25 <Rain> ... member representative has precedent
14:32:39 <Rain> ... there is enough content and questions now to bring to the legal team, so suggest doing that now
14:32:56 <Rain> Lisa: do you feel would be interesting for them to look at as is, and then finish in the next 3 weeks?
14:33:10 <Rain> MichaelC: yes, think would be good to have them look at it as is so that they can respond to them now
14:34:18 <Rain> Jennie: feeling secure about the level of security of the document, fine to share now
14:34:36 <Rain> lisa: resolution is to allow W3C parties outside COGA to review
14:34:39 <Rain> ... and add comments
14:34:43 <lisa> reolution, to alow other w3c parties outside coga to review and add comments?
14:34:46 <lisa> +1
14:34:49 <Rain> +1
14:34:53 <Jennie> +1
14:34:55 <Rachael> +1
14:34:55 <Rashmi> +1
14:34:58 <julierawe> +1
14:34:59 <Le> +1
14:35:08 <ShawnT> +1
14:35:16 <Rain> lisa: if agree, +1, if want to talk about more, 0, if against this, -1
14:35:24 <david-swallow> +1
14:35:36 <MichaelC> q+
14:35:48 <MichaelC> ack me
14:35:55 <lisa> ack next
14:35:55 <Rain> MichaelC: putting on to do list to schedule a meeting with legal team
14:36:07 <Rain> ... think Jennie or John K to present, and will invite Lisa and Rain (off list)
14:36:15 <Rain> scribe: Jennie
14:36:17 <lisa> zakim, next item
14:36:17 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Update on WCAG 3 and testing -- taken up [from lisa]
14:36:40 <Jennie> Rachael: There are a lot of ways we refer to this
14:36:49 <Rachael> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PsPVWTEjDwZUfevlvywI6NeepAxkveU8_SxYuCVAY80/edit#slide=id.g120a12cbea9_0_0
14:37:13 <Jennie> Rachael: We will try the exercise with the plain language group in the hour following this call
14:37:24 <kirkwood> sorry late work meeting just got in.
14:37:24 <Jennie> ...We are talking about not just how to test, but how we will apply those tests
14:37:33 <Jennie> ...Last week, the AG did an exercise
14:37:53 <Jennie> ...We broke down existing success criteria and applied this process to see if this is a useful way to think about it
14:37:57 <Jennie> ...It is exploratory
14:38:05 <Jennie> ...It helps with the work on WCAG 3
14:38:15 <Jennie> ...There are different categorizations
14:38:24 <Jennie> ...Please add questions into the Queue if you have questions
14:38:30 <Jennie> ...1st, the smallest unit
14:38:36 <Jennie> ...We don't have final terms for these
14:38:54 <Jennie> ...this could be an interactive component, a paragraph, a dropdown...
14:38:58 <Jennie> ...2nd: the view
14:39:04 <Jennie> ...In WCAG 2 that is the page
14:39:18 <Jennie> ...In single page applications, all the states that can change - page is not currently sufficient
14:39:26 <Jennie> ...3rd: user process
14:39:33 <Jennie> ...(reads draft definition)
14:39:49 <Jennie> ...The process to go from point a to point b when completing a task
14:39:55 <Jennie> 4th: the aggregate of all those things
14:40:04 <Jennie> ...The Wholistic thing we can test
14:40:11 <Jennie> ...We test in WCAG 2 these things implicitly
14:40:17 <Jennie> ...Talking about them clearly has been helpful
14:40:19 <Jennie> ....Questions?
14:40:35 <Jennie> ...Next: 4 types of tests
14:40:41 <Jennie> ...1: fully objective test
14:40:48 <Jennie> ...Measures against a constant, like color contrast
14:40:52 <Jennie> ...Totally objective
14:40:58 <Jennie> ...Or, does something exist or not
14:41:02 <Jennie> ...Easy to make machine testable
14:41:04 <lisa> maybe the task is important layer
14:41:09 <Jennie> ...WCAG says "it must be there"
14:41:20 <Jennie> ...The tests are objective, repeatable, easy to state
14:41:29 <Jennie> ...WCAG 2 tried to make tests like this as much as possible
14:41:48 <Jennie> ...2: Condition (subjective) test
14:41:53 <Jennie> ...Measures against conditions
14:42:02 <Jennie> ...We say 8 of 10 experts would agree
14:42:08 <Jennie> ...Less objective than test 1
14:42:15 <Jennie> ...Text alternatives is an example
14:42:33 <Jennie> ...You need both the constant test (alt text is present)
14:42:42 <Jennie> ...And the condition test (quality of the alt text)
14:42:48 <Jennie> ...Another example is meaningful sequent
14:42:54 <Jennie> ...You have to evaluate the quality
14:43:14 <Jennie> ...Now we are talking about aditionally more subjective
14:43:31 <Jennie> ...3: Test case - measures against an internal baseline set by the developing organization
14:43:44 <Jennie> ...WCAG defines the types of conditions and the failures, but not the specifics
14:43:58 <Jennie> ...Tests would pass if the (reads from slide 5)
14:44:27 <Jennie> ...Example: wouldn't say what reading level would be required, but might dictate that the organization sets a reading level
14:44:49 <Jennie> ...This concept hopefully lets us expand the types of tests, and incorporate more of the COGA type of tests
14:44:56 <Jennie> Lisa: Does this include/can this include user tests?
14:45:03 <Jennie> Rachael: The next one does.
14:45:44 <Jennie> ...4: Protocols: this is where user testing would most likely fall
14:45:51 <Jennie> ...It would test whether a process was done
14:46:00 <Jennie> ...There was a lot of talk about the quality of the results
14:46:19 <Jennie> ...Most likely WCAG would have people state the date completed, the protocol
14:46:21 <Le> q+
14:46:32 <Jennie> ...(reads from slide 6)
14:46:58 <Jennie> ...Pieces of plain language would be in other tests, but the full review would be here
14:47:06 <Jennie> ...(now reviewing slide 7)
14:47:23 <lisa> q+
14:47:24 <Jennie> ...None of this has yet been determined
14:47:24 <julierawe> q+
14:47:27 <lisa> ack next
14:47:40 <Jennie> Le: The test case: the idea is the customer saying this is my audience
14:47:51 <Jennie> ...My goal is to have plain language for a certain grade level specific to my audience
14:47:53 <kirkwood> present+
14:48:03 <Jennie> ...once they state their audience and their goal, then they have to follow it
14:48:06 <Jennie> Rachael: exactly
14:48:19 <Jennie> Le: The protocol - you need to have things in place, like user testing
14:48:20 <lisa> ack next
14:48:20 <Rachael> ack le
14:48:23 <Jennie> Rachael: exactly
14:48:31 <Jennie> Lisa: On the units
14:48:45 <Jennie> ...There is user process, and aggregate - none of them are actually a task with a goal
14:48:51 <Jennie> ...I think that should be specified in one of them
14:48:58 <Jennie> ...I think task is really important
14:49:11 <Jennie> ...Rather than the flow of clicking through the process doable
14:49:26 <Jennie> ...Did I understand the information - if my task was to understand what I needed to do before my procedure
14:49:35 <Jennie> ...I wasn't sure that aggregate or user process
14:49:49 <Jennie> Rachael: User process is intended to be that. I will take that back to the group to make clearer
14:50:03 <Jennie> Lisa: Task completion may be "I now understand something that I need to do"
14:50:27 <Jennie> ...That might involve search, reading the information at the end...that knowledge is really important, that it is clear
14:50:31 <Jennie> ...That has to be tested for
14:50:37 <Jennie> ...These look lovely
14:50:50 <Jennie> ...Most interesting - thanks so much for all the effort into these building blocks
14:50:54 <Jennie> ...The protocol testing group
14:51:06 <Jennie> ...We have to make sure that the protocols and the test case ones
14:51:14 <Jennie> ...Shouldn't be: you can do whatever you like
14:51:22 <Jennie> ...You need to test it with the range of disabilities that are appropriate
14:51:33 <Jennie> ...I would really want to review and comment on that protocol and test case
14:51:43 <Jennie> ...as well as the subjective tests.
14:52:11 <Jennie> ...I would love to see that well defined
14:52:15 <Jennie> ...so we know what is included
14:52:32 <Jennie> ...So we can test against the testing protocol
14:52:36 <Jennie> ...and know that we have done it
14:52:54 <Jennie> Rachael: We are at the beginning of this, so I appreciate the chance to go over this with you
14:53:04 <Jennie> ...The protocol currently meets on Fridays, but they are looking for a new time
14:53:20 <Jennie> ...They are very much at the beginning of figuring out how to ensure the quality is there
14:53:32 <Jennie> ...They will also bring those to AG if you cannot make the protocol group
14:53:43 <Jennie> ...The protocols group are working on that problem
14:53:51 <Jennie> Lisa: It will depend which day for me
14:53:51 <julierawe> I'm still on the queue
14:53:58 <Jennie> q?
14:54:00 <lisa> q?
14:54:24 <lisa> ack next
14:54:24 <Jennie> Lisa: Please let us know when these meetings for review are up on AG schedule
14:54:33 <Jennie> Julie: The test case is a really interesting idea
14:54:37 <Jennie> ...It may solve some problems
14:54:48 <Jennie> ...But I am wondering: if an organization can set its condition
14:54:58 <Jennie> ...If they say we are setting our reading level for college graduates
14:55:07 <Jennie> ...How can we encourage organizations to be more inclusive?
14:55:22 <Jennie> ...Is there work to have WCAG 3 reward groups that are more inclusive?
14:55:26 <Jennie> Rachael: That is a great question
14:55:35 <Jennie> ...We have had conversations around different ways to score, however
14:55:45 <Jennie> ...The trend right now in our conversations is to put that off for the time being
14:55:52 <Jennie> ...We recognize that we need to solve the problem
14:56:02 <Jennie> ...But we need to clarify what we are talking about - scoping the basics
14:56:21 <Jennie> ...One way would be saying "yes, if you do this condition, here is guidance on what it should be if you are doing x
14:56:34 <Jennie> ...A school should be doing a grade 6, not college level
14:56:45 <Jennie> ...Or we can add points, but we just don't know yet how it will fit together
14:56:53 <Jennie> ...But it is still on the schedule
14:57:06 <Jennie> Lisa: Is it better to run over a little bit, or pick this up again next week?
14:57:15 <Jennie> Rachael: That is the bulk of what I wanted to do with the main group
14:57:28 <Jennie> ...There are 2 other concepts we are talking about right now
14:57:33 <Jennie> ...Functional needs
14:57:33 <Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16ZeCqTRTY0lmWvp1Xv_wO0iH1OzyECBa1UXQ_UeocjQ/edit#heading=h.job6i2kq6fgh
14:57:44 <Jennie> ...And user needs (which is new and exploratory)
14:57:50 <Jennie> ...We don't need to discuss those now
14:58:31 <Jennie> Lisa: The plain language subgroup is meeting after this. We will take a 5 minute break
14:58:34 <Jennie> ...And continue with examples
14:58:48 <Jennie> ...Anyone going to be involved in any of the WCAG 3 subgroups - I recommend you attend
14:59:10 <Jennie> ...It will be about how you add pieces into WCAG 3
14:59:33 <Rain> zakim, make minutes
14:59:33 <Zakim> I don't understand 'make minutes', Rain
14:59:38 <Rain> RRSAgent: make minutes
14:59:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/31-coga-minutes.html Rain
15:00:18 <ShawnT> https://github.com/w3c/silver/wiki/Protocols
15:04:19 <lisa> topic: Easy to understand language examples
15:04:41 <lisa> RRSAgent: make minutes
15:04:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/31-coga-minutes.html lisa
15:05:38 <lisa> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PsPVWTEjDwZUfevlvywI6NeepAxkveU8_SxYuCVAY80/edit#slide=id.g115ec01aa81_0_51
15:09:36 <JohnRochford> +1 to not just about hearing
15:09:53 <stevelee> Hey shawn, I'm happy to chat when you. I finally got my new PC setup just so.
15:09:56 <Jan_> Jan_ has joined #coga
15:10:03 <Jan_> present+ Jan
15:10:41 <lisa> https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/
15:10:58 <lisa> https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#objective-3-use-clear-and-understandable-content
15:11:43 <Rachael> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16ZeCqTRTY0lmWvp1Xv_wO0iH1OzyECBa1UXQ_UeocjQ/edit#heading=h.job6i2kq6fgh
15:15:48 <Rain> +1 I'm okay with taking writing out, as well
15:15:57 <ShawnT> +1
15:19:03 <ShawnT> could it be to recognize languages (English vs Spanish)?
15:22:25 <lisa> q+
15:25:09 <lisa> ack next
15:26:05 <JohnRochford> +1 to Jennie's point about reading with AAC devices.
15:27:37 <Rachael> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PsPVWTEjDwZUfevlvywI6NeepAxkveU8_SxYuCVAY80/edit#slide=id.g120a12cbea9_0_34
15:32:23 <lisa> we are adding to the speeker notes, comunication disorder, mental health
15:33:15 <Rain> Receptive communication
15:35:16 <lisa> q?
15:40:53 <Rain> Overall structure of the document, clear and understandable
15:41:53 <Rain> q+
15:42:49 <Rain> ack Rain
15:45:52 <ShawnT> q+ to talk about expectations
15:46:11 <ShawnT> q-
15:46:52 <lisa> rain I cant understand with an echo
15:49:02 <kirkwood> present+
15:55:13 <JohnRochford> q+
15:55:31 <lisa> ack j
15:56:02 <Jennie> *Have to drop - have a good week!
15:58:21 <MichaelC_> MichaelC_ has joined #coga
16:01:53 <Rain> I have to drop off!
16:01:53 <ShawnT> I have to leave
16:02:24 <Jan_> My apologies - I had to drop for another call.
16:02:48 <julierawe> q+
16:03:03 <Rain> I have to leave, but thank you all! See you in May!
16:08:27 <kirkwood> sorry was pinged on the hour
16:11:53 <lisa> RRSAgent: make minutes
16:11:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/31-coga-minutes.html lisa
16:50:46 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #coga
17:05:51 <stevelee_> stevelee_ has joined #coga
18:02:11 <bkardell_> bkardell_ has joined #coga
18:28:16 <stevelee_> stevelee_ has joined #coga
18:34:23 <stevelee> stevelee has joined #coga
19:37:57 <ShawnT> ShawnT has joined #coga