Meeting minutes
breakout groups
<Jaunita_George> https://
There were 2 areas of consensus
Jaunita: We can start the breakout groups at 12:08
Jaunita: each group can meet and discuss those areas of consensus
Jaunita: Breakout 1 will be those folks who believe protocols should be used to add points.
Jaunita: Breakout 2 will be for those who believe that protocols should be used to create testable guidance for
Jaunita: WCAG 3
Jaunita: Does anyone object?
Rachael: I've named the rooms Protocols add points & Testable guidance
<Rachael> protocols add points and testable guidance
Jaunita: Team names might be good, along with the definition
<ShawnT> Can we bounce from one room to another
We only have me, Michael and Sheri on Testable guidance
[breakout rooms end]
Jaunita: we're all back in the main room. We're going to go back to IRC
Jaunita: We're doing a report out from both teams. Team 1 or 2 first? Team 1 being the 'add points'
Jennifer: This was a great opportunity.
Jennifer: I thought about this differently before.
Jennifer: We talked about a minimum of those objective criteria and a percentage being subjective -- using protocols to do the subjective -- would help you get to the minimum, would be great.
Jennifer: I'd like the opportunity to continue the converation
JF: Talking about he difference between must and should was an "ah ha" moment.
JF: Should is what we'd like them to do.
JF: Jennifer had talked about a conversation with a designer that 'that's just a should, so we don't have to do that'
Le: Incentivizing the "shoulds" versus the "musts" is important
Le: so much of COGA stuff is subjective. it allows us to have a value add for that. Vital
Jaunita: I want to keep us moving. Team 1. Do we have a team name to use in the future?
Le: Points for protocol?
Jaunita: I think that's a great name. Anyone else from team 1?
<ShawnT> +1
<Jaunita_George> Draft resolution: Team 1's name is Points for Protocol
<JF> +1
<Jaunita_George> +1
<jeanne> +1
<Le> +1
<JenniferS> +1
<SuzanneTaylor> +1
0 sounds fine, but I don't have enough info to have a solid opinion :)
RESOLUTION: Team 1's name is Points for Protocol
Jaunita: Did you have a working document to paste into IRC?
<ShawnT> no
Jaunita: In future work, if you could collect those thoughts that would be great.
JF: I think it should go into the github wiki
Jaunita: Put your team name with the wiki so we can separate the 2 teams
Jaunita: Team 2, Rachael?
Rachael: We were talking about a situation where the outcomes aren't measured.
<jeanne> https://
Rachael: We talked about Plan language and what that might look like, and started the conversation.
Rachael: Like group 1, we would benefit from continuing conversation to come up with detailed points
<ShawnT> [Home ยท w3c/silver Wiki](https://
Rachael: Would Evaluating procedures make sense?
<jeanne> +1
<Jaunita_George> Draft resolution: Team 2's name is Evaluating Procedures
<Jaunita_George> +1
<Rachael> +1
0
<jeanne> +1
<SuzanneTaylor> 0
<JF> 0
<JenniferS> +1
RESOLUTION: Team 2's name is Evaluating Procedures
Jaunita: Earlier we discussed recording our notes. For team 2, I think we can use the google doc and link to the wiki
Jaunita: How did this work for folks?
<JenniferS> Working for me
JG: Is everyone ok with this procedure for working with the breakout, the reporting, and resolutions
<Jaunita_George> ack
JF: We have two different proposals coming up, and they both have value. We need to bring it together and what will we call the alternative proposal?
<ShawnT> +1
RMB: We will be bringing both proposals to the larger group so that they can approve a direction.
<Jaunita_George> Draft resolution: Continue breakout groups to further both teams' work
<SuzanneTaylor> +1
<ShawnT> +1
<Le> +1
<Jaunita_George> +1
<JenniferS> +1
<mbgower> +1
JSp: +1
RESOLUTION: Continue breakout groups to further both teams' work
<JF> +.5 - concern that we time box this
<mbgower> I also will only be attending the later calls
JG: We will timebox it and come back at 12:35
JF: How many meetings before we stop having breakout rooms?
JG: Until we have 2 proposals
JF: I mean how many weeks
<JenniferS> A+
MC: I don't want to be locked into a target, we can target a moonth and adjust as we get close
<JF> +1 to Jen's suggestiong
JSt: I think Sheri asked if we have to stay on the same teams. I think we can go back and forth. I think we need two mornings to go with the two noons.
MC: I don't agree with moving between teams. The idea was for a group to mature each idea and not have people advocating for a different view holding up progress
<mbgower> I agree I'm leery of splitting this up too, especially because I think we want to stitch them together.
<mbgower> thanks!
JG: We can continue this next week.