Meeting minutes
<shadi> https://
Shadi: We are in Scratchpad
… Drafted the absrtract and introduction based on comments.
… started to draft one of the considerations.
… comments on the one Mike drafted.
… didn't describe the scope of the work.
… We can work on background section first.
<mgifford2> finished reading.
<wendyreid> +1
<kirkwood> finished
<Jason_K> +1
Laura +1
Shadi: any thoughts?
John: little difficult time with the terminology.
… policies are an outline of principles to follow.
… maybe conflating the terms?
Shadi: First sentence throuing you off?
john: yes.
… ensuring that we are outlining the principles rather than procedures.
Jason: maybe add word on-going.
<kirkwood> +1 to M Gifford
<kirkwood> yes
Mike: Starting with WCAG may be a wrong start not the goal.
Shadi: please continue reading.
<wendyreid> done
<Jason_K> done
Laura: done
<kirkwood> done
<mgifford2> done
Wendy: Understand the terminology. Need to make clear WCAG is one part of a prrogram. This doc is everrything outsite of WCAG.
… WCAG is the testable part but there is more.
Shadi: yes, this is not general guidance. Need to consider other parts of a11y.
Shadi: is it a wording issue Mike orr do we have a disconnect?
Mike: wording issue.
Shadi: We are not developing policies. But if you arre adpoting WCAG, here are some considerations.
… example considerations for bugs.
mike: understood but goal is not WCAG. Happy to hear other thoughts.
John: Thinking about framing. Previoulsy stated in docs as: Policy is compliant with WCAG, laws regs, etc.
… It has multiple layers.
Shadi: EU has WCAG and fundamental alterations.
… some judgement is involved.
<kirkwood> often framed: The policy is Compliance with WCAG Accessibility Requirements. For example– [company] will comply with all applicable Federal, state and local accessibility laws, statutes, regulations, and other digital accessibility requirements at a minimum WCAG 2.0 AA..
Luis: Don't see what the concern is.
… We are referencing WCAG. But this is beyond. Maybe say refer instead of reference.
Shadi: yes, these go beyond WCAG.
luis: it is supplemental to WCAG.
Shadi: are the beginning sentences clear enough?
Wendy: maybe add a bit more clarity.
… Some things go beyond WCAG.
Shadi: do we need to broden the scope?
Luis: Which part is expanding the scope?
Shadi: Maybe we are saying the same thing.
Mike: State clearly that this is about inclusive services. Make it about some thing that people can get excited about. Most people don't get excited about WCAG.
John: One wording change in first sentence. Maybe use the word "include".
<mgifford2> +1 to include
Shadi: could mean copy/paste.
… I will work on that.
Shadi: Going on to Bugs section.
Luis: I think it is good.
Wendy: concept of scope of responsibility could go here?
Shadi: Type of content could fit into a number of sections.
… my hope is to get the framing for this doc
… maybe have 2 or three considerations for examples for the AG.
… lots more work to do on the but won't get them all done in our timefame.
mike: if you can't have 0 bugs demonstrate progress over perfection.
jason: this is a good format. What do we want this doc to be for organizations? What is the end product?
<mgifford2> I have to jump off to prepare for a 1pm meeting. Sorry. Nice to see this coming along.
Shadi: s/sumpmentarty/supplementary/
Shadi: Could be a supplementary doc. There are many types of W#C docs it could be.
Jason: format we have here is good.
Shadi: what is the end prroduct is a good question but be need morre content.
John: someone from legal is usually at the table. Maybe we are missing something here?
… there is a difference between a specification and a policy.