14:37:56 RRSAgent has joined #maturity 14:38:00 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/05/03-maturity-irc 14:38:00 inviting RRSAgent 14:38:00 RRSAgent, make logs Public 14:38:01 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), Fazio 14:38:25 meeting: Maturity Model 14:38:33 chair: Fazio 14:38:37 present+ 14:39:28 Agenda+ Discuss any activities the Task Force might want during TPAC in September. Are there other W3C WG we want to have a joint meeting with? What agenda for those meetings? Note this is NOT about any breakout sessions we might want to hold on Wednesday of TPAC 14:39:55 Agenda +Review Susanna’s updates to Support Dimension https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-maturity/2023Apr/0013.html 14:43:57 Agenda+ Some of the design process questions seem to make sense for large organizations where process, templates and checklists are more formal parts of a large organization. Were there discussions of how these might be framed for small organizations? (e.g. not having a formal design review process, but we do have design reviews; is the way forward to become more formal even if the team has three members?) 14:44:37 Agenda+ Under 3.4.1.2 Development category of proof points, the examples of “Accessible developer implementation resources” seem more about information. Where might you consider software and hardware tools that help with accessible development, such as access to screen readers or switches? 14:45:17 Agenda + Continue discussion on TLDR https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-maturity/2023Apr/0007.htmland Use Case https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-maturity/2023Apr/0019.html Integration 14:45:37 Agenda + New business 14:59:46 bpoday has joined #maturity 15:01:38 Lionel has joined #Maturity 15:01:42 present+ 15:03:16 scribe: Lionel Wolberger 15:03:18 CharlesL has joined #maturity 15:03:24 scribe: Lionel 15:03:24 present+ 15:03:26 present+ 15:03:27 present+ 15:03:29 zakim, next item 15:03:29 agendum 1 -- Discuss any activities the Task Force might want during TPAC in September. Are there other W3C WG we want to have a joint meeting with? What agenda for those meetings? 15:03:29 present+ 15:03:32 ... Note this is NOT about any breakout sessions we might want to hold on Wednesday of TPAC -- taken up [from Fazio] 15:04:45 stacey has joined #maturity 15:04:51 Fazio: Who do we want to meet with at TPAC? 15:04:56 present+ 15:05:00 ... focus perhaps on groups outside of our typical sphere of influence 15:05:36 janina: Can be other WAI groups as well (as APA Chair, I want to be sure we request everything required) 15:08:16 nadine has joined #maturity 15:08:22 present+ 15:08:55 Fazio: A good example was last year when APA sat with Verifiable Credentials and DIDs 15:09:03 q? 15:09:22 jlkline has joined #maturity 15:09:32 present+ 15:11:20 q? 15:11:22 Lionel: Brainstorming, maybe we want to reach out to ISO, IETF, or even AGWG regarding the personnas 15:11:42 janina: This suggests we might want to meet with EO 15:12:07 Fazio: Makes me think, we would like to see how our less technical, more process oriented work will be greeted by other groups 15:13:39 Lionel: Choose a group that has GAFA-type companies 15:13:51 Fazio: Yes, we can make an effort to get in front of Apple, Google, etc. 15:15:50 zakim, next item 15:15:50 agendum 2 -- Review Susanna’s updates to Support Dimension https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-maturity/2023Apr/0013.html -- taken up [from Fazio] 15:18:48 queue+ 15:19:00 would someone be willing to screen share? It errors out/won't allow me to open 15:21:40 Jeff: I am concerned that the inclusion of physical accessibility is out of scope 15:21:45 ... we are focused on IT accessibility 15:22:52 Fazio: We hvae discussed that physical access is a pre-requisites to many aspects of IT accessibility 15:23:05 Lionel: +1 to Jeff 15:23:19 Fazio: I remind us, this is a maturity model, and the items are not required 15:23:47 Brian: This is overlapping with Personnel as well, as it involves the ERG 15:24:09 Jeff: The definition of 'Support' is a bit vague 15:24:16 ... in the current model 15:24:36 ... the definition could be seen as exiting the IT accessibility scope 15:26:00 stacey: Are we including work accommodations in the work place? 15:26:18 Fazio: This support needs to go into everything, and the amount of support hat you provide depends on how mature you are 15:26:28 ... we are saying, the most mature type of organization can do this. 15:27:08 Jeff: +1 to Brian's thought, that these should go into Personnel 15:27:24 ... I thought 'support' was when somebody with a disability came to a website and it is not accessible 15:27:34 ... or a PWD who is having problems with a screen reader 15:27:43 ... that is the kind of Support this was intended for 15:27:49 Fazio: I agree and disagree 15:28:03 ... We want to refer to both internal and external support 15:28:09 ... there is a section called Customer Support 15:28:17 Jeff: That is her proposal, correct? 15:29:30 q+ 15:31:12 For support items that are out of scope for this model, potentially we could include suggestions for where a company could go farther for disability inclusion in the workplace that they could explore/resources? 15:32:57 Jeff: This is a very big change in one go. 15:33:25 q- 15:33:43 q- jf 15:33:46 ack jf 15:33:55 ack jk 15:34:03 ack jlk 15:34:03 CharlesL1 has joined #maturity 15:39:37 Lionel: How shall we work best as a Task Force to edit these lines? 15:40:26 Jeff: We should think about whether a line should be here or not, before we edit it 15:41:11 janina: Built environment might be able to stay if it is part of intranet support, the ability to request accomodations from an internal support team 15:41:30 ... but I agree with Jeff we have to keep out pure built environment things, in an extreme sense 15:42:26 jlkline has joined #maturity 15:42:32 present+ 15:42:36 queue+ 15:44:18 CloudFlare Employee Accessibility: https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-flarability-cloudflares-accessibility-employee-resource-group/ 15:46:13 Jeff: Can we collaborate in a Google sheet? 15:46:26 Lionel: We may want a Google Doc, it can support wider collaboration and more comments 15:46:33 Fazio: Yes, that might work 15:48:03 Fazio: I will create a Google Doc for the section that we are group editing 15:48:16 Jeff: I note that changing format to a Google Doc might confuse things 15:49:14 CharlesL1: Suggest we have the original author attend the meeting to share what she was thinking 15:49:17 Fazio: I will invite 15:49:27 zakim, next item 15:49:27 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Lionel 15:49:30 q? 15:49:34 ack jlkline 15:49:36 zakim, next item 15:49:36 agendum 3 -- Some of the design process questions seem to make sense for large organizations where process, templates and checklists are more formal parts of a large organization. 15:49:40 ... Were there discussions of how these might be framed for small organizations? (e.g. not having a formal design review process, but we do have design reviews; is the way forward 15:49:40 ... to become more formal even if the team has three members?) -- taken up [from Fazio] 15:50:01 ack jlk 15:50:24 Some of the design process questions seem to make sense for large organizations where process, templates and checklists are more formal parts of a large organization. Where there discussions of how these might be framed for small organizations? (e.g. we do not have a formal design review process, but we do have design reviews; is the way forward to become more formal even if the team has three members?) 15:52:23 Fazio: The intent of the maturity model is to formalize processes and continually improve them 15:52:36 ... while an individual item may not make sense at a particular time 15:52:46 ... due to revenue, personnel, technology, or other limitation 15:53:07 ... as long as you are using the MM you are aware of your status, where you are, and where you should be going 15:53:29 Jeff: +1 to Fazio 15:53:32 Under 3.4.1.2 Development category of proof points, the examples of “Accessible developer implementation resources” seem more about information. Where might you consider software and hardware tools that help with accessible development, such as access to screen readers or switches? 15:53:42 zakim, next item 15:53:42 agendum 4 -- Under 3.4.1.2 Development category of proof points, the examples of “Accessible developer implementation resources” seem more about information. Where might you 15:53:45 ... consider software and hardware tools that help with accessible development, such as access to screen readers or switches? -- taken up [from Fazio] 15:57:54 rrsagent, make minutes 15:57:55 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/05/03-maturity-minutes.html Lionel