14:01:12 RRSAgent has joined #pcg-a11y 14:01:12 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/08/18-pcg-a11y-irc 14:01:24 rrsagent, bookmark 14:01:24 See https://www.w3.org/2022/08/18-pcg-a11y-irc#T14-01-24 14:01:43 present+ 14:01:47 CharlesL has joined #pcg-a11y 14:01:59 Naomi has joined #pcg-a11y 14:02:45 JF has joined #pcg-a11y 14:03:50 GeorgeK_ has joined #pcg-a11y 14:03:57 present+ 14:04:10 zakim, who is here? 14:04:10 Present: gpellegrino, CharlesL 14:04:12 On IRC I see GeorgeK_, JF, Naomi, CharlesL, RRSAgent, gpellegrino, Zakim, GeorgeK, tzviya 14:04:13 present+ 14:04:15 Present+ 14:04:26 Date 18 August 2022 14:04:31 Chair: Georgek 14:04:45 agenda? 14:05:07 present+ 14:05:11 rrsagent, bookmark 14:05:11 See https://www.w3.org/2022/08/18-pcg-a11y-irc#T14-05-11 14:05:17 present- tzviya 14:05:26 rrsagent, make log public 14:05:59 scribe: JF 14:06:37 Topic: Accessibility Summary is SHOULD not MUST 14:06:45 GK: decision was made last week\ 14:07:38 GK: Matt noted the official definition of the a11y-summary. Is consistent, but highlights subtleties and nuance 14:08:37 GK: Are we in agreement that this is one of our guiding principles for writing guidelines? 14:08:41 (No comments) 14:08:51 GK: will move forward with that assumptiong 14:09:06 the way we describe conformance has changed 14:09:20 it is now quite human readable - that helps us a lot 14:09:46 q+ 14:10:06 now if the conformance statement is displayed to user, we don't need to put that conformance summary into the accessibility summary 14:10:31 Terence has joined #pcg-a11y 14:10:38 Naomi: it is hard to make a definitive statement 14:11:26 but in scenarios where there is little input from publishers... make a note "we are striving to..." - but publishers cannot make definitive statements 14:12:07 GK: agree with this. In terms of guidance from a11y summary - if it provides nuance... 14:12:25 whatever term you want to use: "we believe..." or "we strive to..." 14:12:42 Naomi: issue around number of languages authors invent 14:12:53 GK: Make sure we capture that in examples 14:13:00 and other verbage we create 14:13:07 q+ 14:13:17 Naomi: suggestion or recommendation 14:13:22 Gregoriao 14:13:25 Ack g 14:13:43 Gregorio: this looks good - we should avoid duplication of data 14:14:02 if this is intended to display on the interface, we should not re-write this 14:14:28 Ack C 14:15:11 CharlesL: Agree with gregorio. Also notes that Matt pointed out that we should NOT provide ally statements in multiple languagges 14:15:21 ONLy have the one langauge 14:15:34 CharlesL: may want to look at that more\ 14:15:46 GK: In there now, and one of the things we want to retain 14:16:16 q+ 14:16:45 GK: a11y summary is only language of published content 14:17:15 GK: want to reference user-experience guide, with an expectation that the a11y metadata will be available to the end user 14:17:30 and that we do not "double up" the data 14:18:19 CL: agree. the older version of the spec ... URL. But it was not that readable, so we added it to the summary 14:18:44 but now that it is human readable, we can output that, and do not need to repeat in the summary 14:19:01 GK: we also need to revisit user experience guide 14:19:42 all things there related to conformance and the URL approach... we need to go back and address that. (i.e. there is not language changed needed) 14:21:03 ACTION: revisit user experience guide to align with recent changes to Accessibility 1.1 Spec - assign to Community Group 14:21:18 CL: make it an agenda item for next meeting 14:21:42 GK: IN the outline there are some principles identified 14:21:56 pointer to definition in Schema.org (guiding principle) 14:22:38 re-statement of things we expect to have been already expressed, not necessary to repeat in Summary 14:23:24 GK: example - if somebody has metadata "No accessibility hazards" the UX guide suggests that it be presented as No accessibility hazards 14:23:49 if accessibility mode 'textual' is present, it is announced as 'screen reader abled' [sic] 14:23:56 so no need to repeat in summary 14:24:02 q+ 14:24:24 so those are the principles - all the current stuff and then we look at what else is needed 14:24:50 Keep the things that remain valuable, remove the rest. Also the high-level considerations 14:25:09 Ack c 14:25:16 Ack g 14:25:58 GP: simpler if we call this "Accessibility Note" (conceptual) - the goal is to add human-readable information that augments the metadata 14:28:34 GK: in github repro now - the title is "Accessibility Summary guideline for ePub..." 14:28:55 and it is accessibility summary in Schema - it gets translated when it goes to Onix 14:29:03 Q: is it still call ed that there? 14:29:04 Yes 14:29:19 GK: so works there too - no need to change title 14:29:44 GP: the proposal was to only use that "name" as internal shorthand for this group/discussion 14:29:53 concern that "Summary" is misleading 14:30:49 JF: Understand the unfortunate concern - is this "fully baked" 14:30:59 GK: yes, took years to get into Schema.org 14:31:09 In abstract we could emphasize this is an augmentation 14:32:40 JF: echoes back understanding - suggests we DO speak to this in the abstract 14:33:25 vincent has joined #pcg-a11y 14:34:14 GK: write in the 'template' that this is augmentation data 14:34:23 JF: sounds reasonable to me, but others? 14:34:49 Naomi: may be redundant and possibly overwhelming 14:35:30 but this may not JUST be augmentation, it may also include 'new' stuff that lacks definition @ Schema today 14:35:56 q+ 14:36:05 so that new stuff would need to be exposed somewhere (lacks controled vocab) - then this would be the right place too 14:36:10 GK: absolutely! 14:36:21 Ack C 14:37:03 CL: not sure if we want to provide examples. have seen publishers who have added additional items to their ePub that went above and beyond 14:37:27 example: publisher had morse code, and added audio clip of the dots and dashes (above and beyond) 14:37:40 q+ 14:38:00 Naomi: working on crossword... there is a file format that can be downloaded into multiple crossword apps 14:38:13 (.puz) file extension 14:38:43 so making that file format available, and noting such in Accessibility Summary would be great 14:41:35 discussion around accessibility versus usability - do we want to expand the Accessibility Summary to capture 'usability' isses 14:41:44 Naomi: there is a gray line there 14:42:03 GK: we've discussed this in the past. ePub by its very nature is more accessible than other formats 14:42:44 not sure if everyone is aware that ePub *IS* more accessible than, say, PDF, so making these statements are beneficial 14:42:58 q? 14:42:59 i.e. transformability (font resize and reflow) benefits all 14:43:07 Ack G 14:43:23 q+ 14:43:34 GP: have concerns, but may want to defer to next call - example in file may be an issue 14:44:02 having examples that could be "copied and psted" may not be a good idea 14:44:05 q+ 14:44:44 VL: re no capability for multiple languages has been dropped - there may be a need if a book features multiple languages 14:45:11 CL: it would be difficult to tag that properly - there is usually a "primary language" even in multi-lang books 14:45:43 so publishers may 'reprint' if there is a need for books targeted to multiple languages 14:45:53 Q: to ask about multi-language 14:46:16 Namoi: notes that OPF file does not support multiple languages 14:46:48 may also be onerous on retailers - so decided that it is not ideal, but use-cases seem very small 14:47:53 q+ 14:48:08 Ack V 14:48:22 ack n 14:48:24 ack g 14:48:54 GP: believes this problem with languages has already been resolved 14:49:24 GK: need to wrap this up now. Believes Avneesh plans on a call for next week. 14:49:55 But George and Charles will not be there. Suggests that this discussion wait until they return 14:50:19 GK: but would like to update the existing repro with what we agreed to here, and get the PR out for review 14:50:37 will mainly 'remove' things that are inappropriate, and then add some new draft text for review 14:50:54 +1 to Georges proposal 14:51:31 GK: next call to discuss this will be in 2 weeks (Sept.1) 14:52:56 zakim, end this meeting 14:52:56 As of this point the attendees have been gpellegrino, CharlesL, GeorgeK_, JF, Naomi 14:52:58 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 14:52:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/08/18-pcg-a11y-minutes.html Zakim 14:53:01 I am happy to have been of service, JF; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 14:53:05 Zakim has left #pcg-a11y 14:53:40 rrsagent, please part 14:53:40 I see 1 open action item saved in https://www.w3.org/2022/08/18-pcg-a11y-actions.rdf : 14:53:40 ACTION: revisit user experience guide to align with recent changes to Accessibility 1.1 Spec - assign to Community Group [1] 14:53:40 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2022/08/18-pcg-a11y-irc#T14-21-03