15:56:24 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #silver-conf
15:56:24 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/06/16-silver-conf-irc
15:56:27 <janina> agenda?
15:56:39 <janina> Meeting: Silver Conformance Options Subgroup
15:56:47 <janina> Date 16 Jun 2022
15:56:51 <janina> Chair: Janina
15:56:55 <janina> rrsagent, make log public
15:57:00 <janina> Agenda+ Agenda Review & Administrative Items
15:57:00 <janina> agenda+ Adding an impact statement
15:57:00 <janina> agenda+ Tuesday Presentation Prep: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G9q082IFl4Rj4o07qMx8Y_5oFoDN7Lmx-5i3ViROpD8/
15:57:03 <janina> agenda+ Other Business
15:57:05 <janina> agenda+ Be Done
15:57:58 <janina>  rrsagent, make minutes
15:57:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/06/16-silver-conf-minutes.html janina
16:00:34 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #silver-conf
16:00:44 <jeanne> present+ shadi
16:01:45 <jeanne> present+
16:01:50 <maryjom> maryjom has joined #silver-conf
16:02:13 <maryjom> present+
16:02:24 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #silver-conf
16:04:05 <janina> present+
16:04:12 <janina> present+ Shadi
16:04:14 <maryjom> scribe+: maryjom
16:04:15 <GreggVan> present+
16:04:23 <maryjom> present+
16:04:31 <maryjom> zakim, take up next
16:04:31 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Agenda Review & Administrative Items -- taken up [from janina]
16:04:32 <jeanne> present- shadi
16:04:42 <jeanne> rrsagent, make minutes
16:04:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/06/16-silver-conf-minutes.html jeanne
16:06:28 <maryjom> janina: Announcement - we are presenting to AG WG call on Tuesday based on the document in our agenda.
16:07:04 <jeanne> Summary -> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G9q082IFl4Rj4o07qMx8Y_5oFoDN7Lmx-5i3ViROpD8/
16:07:11 <maryjom> zakim, take up next
16:07:11 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Adding an impact statement -- taken up [from janina]
16:07:18 <jeanne> Summary -> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G9q082IFl4Rj4o07qMx8Y_5oFoDN7Lmx-5i3ViROpD8/
16:07:32 <janina> q?
16:08:05 <maryjom> jeanne: I showed this document to the AG WG chairs and began exploring the uses of these use cases.
16:08:19 <janina> q+
16:08:30 <GreggVan> q+
16:08:34 <maryjom> jeanne: They suggested creating an impact statement to show what would happen if we do nothing about this situation.
16:08:50 <maryjom> jeanne: It can be used to evaluate whatever is proposed for conformance.
16:09:20 <maryjom> jeanne: This is an interesting idea that may make it more powerful when addressing solutions.
16:09:27 <jeanne> q+ shadi
16:10:42 <janina> ack ja
16:10:47 <janina> ack gr
16:10:48 <maryjom> janina: I think this is a worthy thing to think about and potentially do, especially in case-by-case analysis.
16:11:02 <Wilco> Wilco has joined #silver-conf
16:11:06 <Wilco> present+
16:11:30 <janina> q?
16:11:36 <maryjom> GreggVan: These are useful in thinking about how we want to structure the document, to address policy issues, and a way to bounce conformance model against.
16:12:08 <maryjom> GreggVan: Don't want to put full burden of conformance model analysis on this document, but it can be helpful in that work.
16:12:40 <janina> ack sh
16:12:42 <maryjom> GreggVan: The document has many uses
16:12:56 <ToddL> ToddL has joined #silver-conf
16:13:01 <ToddL> present+
16:13:10 <maryjom> shadi: What happens if we don't pursue this work. I think we can clarify this more in the problem statement.
16:13:17 <janina> regrets+ Azlan
16:13:28 <jeanne> qq+ to clarify that it is impact of each use case
16:13:53 <maryjom> shadi: We should take another pass to clarify some more and look at the structure. We are trying to break down this big problem space into smaller questions.
16:14:23 <maryjom> shadi: There have not been similar statements from other groups, but we need to better understand what the chairs want.
16:14:23 <janina> ack je
16:14:23 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to react to shadi to clarify that it is impact of each use case
16:14:45 <maryjom> jeanne: What they are asking for is an impact statement for each use case, not for the whole document.
16:15:20 <maryjom> janina: Yes, we think it's a good idea and will work on that as part of the development of this document.
16:15:27 <maryjom> zakim, next item
16:15:27 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Tuesday Presentation Prep: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G9q082IFl4Rj4o07qMx8Y_5oFoDN7Lmx-5i3ViROpD8/ -- taken up [from janina]
16:16:08 <maryjom> jeanne: Walking us through the document...
16:17:30 <maryjom> janina: If we have multiple speakers presenting this, we'd have to practice transitions.
16:18:52 <maryjom> jeanne: Integrated comments from last week and added links. There is a PR approved to the main document so we have a URL, but URLs are not working.
16:19:18 <maryjom> jeanne: Michael Cooper has been notified. Gave him what the URLs should be.
16:19:52 <maryjom> jeanne: Provided alternate URL links in case the links with anchors are still not working.
16:20:33 <maryjom> jeanne: In the main branch of GitHub IO links aren't working, but in the branch they are.
16:20:41 <GreggVan> q+
16:20:47 <janina> ack gr
16:20:55 <maryjom> janina: I'll talk to Michael Cooper about fixing the links
16:21:13 <janina> q+
16:21:26 <maryjom> GreggVan: Have problems providing links to the main document since there are many concerns with the content.
16:22:08 <maryjom> janina: We have agreed that this is a work in progress and will advertise it as such.
16:22:45 <maryjom> janina: We're putting up the summary document. The summary has links, to the details but we will say those details are preliminary
16:23:21 <maryjom> GreggVan: Want to have a warning in the detailed document that there are members with strong objections to the content in it.
16:23:41 <maryjom> jeanne: We can put a disclaimer at the top.
16:23:53 <maryjom> GreggVan: I will author a disclaimer to put in there.
16:25:04 <maryjom> shadi: This is a work in progress and we have been discussing Gregg's comments but have not had time to address them. There are multiple opinions.
16:25:06 <jeanne> q+
16:25:19 <janina> q?
16:25:46 <maryjom> GreggVan: We should have 2 documents. One with use cases and one with ideas of how to deal with them.
16:25:57 <janina> ack ja
16:26:19 <DarrylLehmann> DarrylLehmann has joined #silver-conf
16:26:39 <maryjom> GreggVan: If you remove the dispositions you can get acceptance of the document. What we should do about them is another thing and should be separate.
16:27:00 <maryjom> jeanne: Propose to make another version that removes the recommendations.
16:27:26 <janina> q?
16:27:31 <maryjom> janina: There is general agreement from the group to do that.
16:27:38 <janina> ack jea
16:28:22 <maryjom> janina: Who will present it to the group?
16:28:56 <maryjom> janina: I will take it on and will be ready to stay within the time limit. How much time do we have?
16:29:14 <maryjom> jeanne: We are on top of the agenda.
16:29:36 <jeanne> q+ to say 30 minutes
16:30:20 <maryjom> Wilco: Implementation of 2.2 is the first topic for the AG WG meeting, but probably not a long agenda item.
16:30:24 <maryjom> je
16:30:27 <jeanne> ack jean
16:30:27 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say 30 minutes
16:30:28 <maryjom> s/je//
16:30:42 <janina> ack je
16:30:46 <maryjom> jeanne: It's 30 minutes total, including questions/discussion time.
16:31:13 <maryjom> Wilco: Will reach out to the chairs to confirm.
16:31:42 <maryjom> janina: We are down to summary and cases - anything we need to revise at this point?
16:31:58 <janina> q?
16:33:14 <maryjom> jeanne: I only made some editorial changes. We've already introduced the use cases before. We should emphasize how these can be used.
16:33:57 <maryjom> jeanne: We also welcome them adding use cases and the document can be used as a central use case repository.
16:34:47 <maryjom> janina: This is probably not complete, but complete enough for now and useful.
16:34:51 <janina> q?
16:35:01 <GreggVan> sorry   had to leave
16:35:30 <maryjom> jeanne: This will give us most of the summer to develop proposals to discuss at TPAC.
16:36:00 <maryjom> jeanne: Since Gregg had to leave, we can't go over his comments.
16:37:12 <maryjom> janina: At TPAC AG WG is meeting all days Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. APA is meeting Tuesday and Thursday.
16:38:04 <maryjom> jeanne: Technically we're covering WCAG 2.2 for 2 days and Silver for 2 days.
16:38:29 <maryjom> topic: Potential impact statements
16:39:23 <janina> q?
16:39:36 <maryjom> Wilco: The impact of not addressing these things are often the same thing. Either exceptions in regulations, or statements of partial conformance in accessibility statements.
16:41:56 <janina> q?
16:41:59 <maryjom> janina: Do companies use "partial conformance"?
16:42:29 <jeanne> WCAG 2.1 Partial Conformance -> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#conformance-partial
16:42:33 <jeanne> q+
16:42:36 <maryjom> maryjom: Yes, VPATs allow a partial conformance to show that work was done but there are known issues.
16:43:17 <janina> q?
16:43:20 <janina> ack jea
16:43:34 <maryjom> shadi: Also accessibility statements on websites also document known issues and whether or not there's full conformance with details.
16:43:57 <maryjom> jeanne: Reads WCAG's partial conformance information from link above.
16:46:29 <maryjom> jeanne: Most of the partial conformance has to do with 3rd party content, and also interesting it states "2 days for correction".
16:47:12 <janina> q?
16:47:18 <maryjom> shadi: We can state that there is this partial conformance in WCAG that could be improved on.
16:48:02 <maryjom> jeanne: We could do better than just allowing a statement that you don't conform or partially conform. It doesn't imply that you intend to fix anything.
16:48:41 <Wilco> q+
16:48:53 <maryjom> jeanne: For each of the use cases, there could be something that provides methods to make it better. To make the improvements over time.
16:49:25 <maryjom> shadi: There are areas where policy is actually fully exempting things like media. There could be a better approach.
16:49:50 <maryjom> Wilco: Is there a way to come up with the policy exceptions? Maybe we should create a list.
16:50:28 <maryjom> Wilco: Many of us are aware of these things and we could do better than blanket "undue burden" exceptions.
16:50:52 <maryjom> janina: There could be things that can be done to make it more responsive and "smarter" approach.
16:51:15 <maryjom> jeanne: There's also technical things we can require. We can require metadata.
16:52:12 <maryjom> janina: SAUER, Maturity model, COGA, etc. could be things that could be utilized to address some situations.
16:53:03 <maryjom> janina: Authors are having difficulty coming up to speed on all of these specs with their authoring requirements. It's solvable, but an issue right now.
16:53:49 <Wilco> https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32016L2102&from=EN#d1e807-1-1
16:53:52 <maryjom> janina: We should judiciously provide different avenues to address - through the requirements, guidance for regulators, etc.
16:55:03 <maryjom> maryjom: Canada actually excepts certain multimedia criteria altogether.
16:55:18 <maryjom> jeanne: I'm working on creating a document where we can list these.
16:55:27 <jeanne> DOcument for capturing policy -> https://docs.google.com/document/d/119Gv7cvKPP9TLjEtR1cD1yPyPvtX_lAdAeqfwv3NoOs/
16:56:08 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
16:56:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/06/16-silver-conf-minutes.html maryjom
17:10:33 <maryjom> zakim, bye
17:10:33 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been shadi, jeanne, maryjom, janina, GreggVan, Wilco, ToddL
17:10:33 <Zakim> Zakim has left #silver-conf
17:10:40 <maryjom> rrsagent, make minutes
17:10:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/06/16-silver-conf-minutes.html maryjom
17:23:52 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #silver-conf