13:39:58 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:40:02 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wcag2ict-irc
13:40:02 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:40:03 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:40:08 <maryjom> zakim, clear agenda
13:40:08 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:40:14 <maryjom> chair: Mary Jo Mueller
13:40:30 <maryjom> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:40:30 <Zakim> ok, maryjom
13:41:06 <maryjom> Agenda+ Announcements
13:41:16 <maryjom> Agenda+ Reminder of process for public comments
13:41:28 <maryjom> Agenda+ Public comments
13:41:45 <maryjom> Agenda+ Other open issues
14:01:47 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:02:31 <Olivia> Olivia has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:41 <maryjom> regrets: Daniel, Fernanda, Mitchell
14:03:51 <Olivia> present+
14:03:51 <PhilDay> PhilDay has joined #wcag2ict
14:04:00 <maryjom> regrets: Fernanda, Mitchell
14:04:39 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
14:04:41 <Chuck> Chuck has joined #wcag2ict
14:04:44 <Olivia> scribe+ olivia
14:04:46 <PhilDay> present+
14:04:47 <Devanshu> Devanshu has joined #wcag2ict
14:04:53 <loicmn> present+
14:04:58 <Devanshu> present+
14:04:59 <maryjom> present+
14:05:01 <Olivia> zakim, next item
14:05:01 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:05:03 <bruce_bailey> present+
14:05:43 <Olivia> maryjom: We've published, now waiting for issues. Mitch has been doing a detailed review.
14:06:05 <bruce_bailey> much appreciation to Mitch
14:06:11 <Bryan_Trogdon> Bryan_Trogdon has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:06:24 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Work-for-the-week#11-july
14:06:52 <Olivia> maryjom: He did a # of pull request, all editorial in nature. They are in the work for the week.
14:07:35 <Olivia> maryjom: He also opened a number of issues, keeping all to a specific topic.
14:08:00 <Olivia> maryjom: Got one public comment, and 3 from AGWG.
14:08:18 <Olivia> zakim, next item
14:08:18 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Reminder of process for public comments -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:09:04 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Process-for-addressing-public-comments
14:10:10 <Olivia> maryjom: A public comment process has been created. I triage issues and tag nature and make an initial response, then bring to task force for final answer.
14:10:35 <maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o6ruxbOKxAU6aWWz9Ac7P8DMi7lrIwXCy5DgvRzQZA4/edit?usp=sharing
14:11:36 <Olivia> maryjom: I created a Google doc for handling the public comments. I made a heading for every issue number to make it easy to link to.
14:11:42 <maryjom> q?
14:12:03 <Olivia> zakim, next item
14:12:03 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Public comments -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:12:11 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Public+Comment%22
14:14:20 <bruce_bailey> q+
14:14:51 <Olivia> maryjom: Steve saying "page title was unclear." Yesterday John engaged some reasons why not always a desired thing. Question whether we should be more clear or give information in a note.
14:15:36 <maryjom> ack bruce
14:17:28 <PhilDay> Content from current editor's draft:
14:17:29 <PhilDay> Applying SC 2.4.2 Page Titled to Non-Web Documents and Software
14:17:29 <PhilDay> This applies directly as written, and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.2 replacing “Web pages” with “non-web documents or software”.
14:17:29 <PhilDay> With this substitution, it would read:
14:17:29 <PhilDay> 2.4.2 Page Titled: [Non-web documents or software] have titles that describe topic or purpose.
14:17:31 <PhilDay> NOTE 1
14:17:31 <PhilDay> As described in the WCAG intent, the name of a non-web software application or non-web document (e.g. document, media file, etc.) is a sufficient title if it describes the topic or purpose.
14:17:31 <PhilDay> NOTE 2
14:17:32 <PhilDay> See also the Comments on Closed Functionality.
14:18:14 <Olivia> maryjom: Do we incorporate some of that into our document? John's note quotes the EN.
14:18:41 <PhilDay> +1 to using EN note
14:18:50 <loicmn> q+
14:18:55 <maryjom> ack loicmn
14:19:47 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
14:20:10 <Olivia> loicmn: Need to reexplain that page title refers to the whole software. Not sure if we need in WCAG2ICT. Have extra need to explain in better way.
14:20:38 <Sam> present+
14:20:41 <maryjom> q?
14:20:42 <bruce_bailey> q+
14:20:45 <maryjom> ack bruce_bailey
14:20:45 <Olivia> maryjom: We have been pointing out where problematic, if we feel EN covers well enough...
14:21:21 <Olivia> bruce_bailey: I like the EN note, I prefer to copy/paste in. But maybe going too far.
14:21:53 <Olivia> maryjom: we need to assign someone to this issue and develop a draft answer in the doc
14:22:07 <PhilDay> I'm out for 2 weeks so don't want to be a road block on any issues
14:22:11 <Olivia> bruce_bailey: Happy to do it
14:22:40 <Olivia> zakim, next item
14:22:40 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Other open issues -- taken up [from maryjom]
14:22:47 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+-label%3Aeditorial+-label%3A%22Public+Comment%22+-label%3A%22Project+task%22
14:24:13 <Olivia> maryjom: Mitch had a # of things, most have some bit of substantive change to them.
14:24:19 <Olivia> maryjom: Start with quick decisions.
14:25:36 <maryjom> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#platform-software
14:26:09 <Olivia> maryjom: "Why aren't we using platform software EN definition?" question.
14:26:39 <Olivia> maryjom: ISO standard reference added
14:26:48 <Sam> +1
14:27:17 <maryjom> Poll: Is everyone OK with the description how we derived "platform software" from two ISO standards?
14:27:18 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:27:20 <PhilDay> +1
14:27:20 <Bryan_Trogdon> +1
14:27:22 <loicmn> +1
14:27:23 <Olivia> +1
14:27:27 <Sam> +1
14:27:37 <PhilDay> q
14:27:41 <PhilDay> q+
14:27:54 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
14:28:16 <Olivia> philday: I agree with what you have done, but should we also reference EN and S508? Or is that too much?
14:28:44 <Olivia> maryjom: I was thinking of having that in the answer.
14:29:01 <Olivia> PhilDay: that's sufficient
14:31:27 <maryjom> Current draft answer: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/395#issuecomment-2187366164
14:31:49 <maryjom> s/draft answer/draft answer to issue 395/
14:32:06 <Olivia> maryjom: Live changed answer to reflect present
14:32:11 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:32:12 <Olivia> +1 to update
14:32:15 <loicmn> +1
14:32:16 <PhilDay> Minor typo on 2nd para
14:32:22 <PhilDay> When the WCAG2ICT Task Force worked on this, we took into account the definitions found in the EN 301 549 (which used ISO 9241-171 and removed the examples),
14:32:55 <PhilDay> When the WCAG2ICT Task Force worked on this, we took into account the definitions found in the EN 301 549 (which used ISO 9241-171 and removed the examples),
14:33:04 <PhilDay> +1 to using answer
14:33:29 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Answer Issue 395 as proposed in the comment linked above.
14:33:32 <PhilDay> +1
14:33:33 <loicmn> +1
14:33:41 <Devanshu> +1
14:33:42 <Sam> +1
14:33:43 <Olivia> +1
14:34:12 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Answer Issue 395 as proposed in the comment linked above.
14:34:51 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 416 - The note should be removed for 'satisfies a success criterion'
14:36:04 <loicmn> +1 to remove the note
14:36:06 <Olivia> maryjom: On the note of 'satisfies a success criterion,' we have a lot of uses. He proposes we remove it.
14:36:30 <Olivia> q+
14:36:33 <maryjom> Poll: Remove the note on "satisfies a success criterion" per issue 416
14:36:41 <loicmn> +1
14:36:43 <PhilDay> +1
14:36:43 <Devanshu> +1
14:36:47 <Bryan_Trogdon> +1
14:36:49 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:36:54 <Olivia> ack Olivia
14:37:05 <Olivia> +1
14:37:21 <Sam> +1
14:37:28 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Remove the note on "satisfies a success criterion" per issue 416.
14:38:17 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 418 - Consider editing or removing the note for 'set of web pages'
14:38:23 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/418
14:39:16 <Olivia> maryjom: On the definition of 'set of web pages,' Mitch offered a few different proposals. Would you prefer to survey? Or can we look at now?
14:39:35 <Olivia> PhilDay: Poll options
14:40:39 <maryjom> POLL: For changing the note in "set of web pages" which do you prefer from Issue 418's proposals? 1) Proposal 1, 2) Proposal 2, 3) Proposal 3, or 4) Something else?
14:40:52 <loicmn> 2, then 3, then 1 (I can accept either)
14:41:02 <Bryan_Trogdon> 3
14:41:03 <PhilDay> 1, then 3, then 2
14:41:05 <Olivia> 1 then 2
14:41:33 <bruce_bailey> 3 then 1 , not 2
14:41:50 <Sam> 1
14:41:55 <bruce_bailey> i think we should have SOME note.
14:41:55 <PhilDay> 5, then 6 and 7!
14:42:28 <Chuck> q+ to speak to analysis of vote
14:42:40 <maryjom> ack Chuck
14:42:40 <Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to speak to analysis of vote
14:42:54 <Olivia> Chuck: 1 has a slight edge, then closely by 3
14:42:57 <PhilDay> I also prefer the inclusion of a note to explain - but could accept others
14:43:11 <Olivia> maryjom: So we do want a note
14:43:42 <Olivia> maryjom: It has been a pain making sure that the list of SCs that have that replacements is up to date for every itteration of WCAG.
14:44:05 <PhilDay> Alternative: Proposal 1b
14:44:05 <PhilDay> Note
14:44:05 <PhilDay> For success criteria that use the term “set of web pages”, "set of web pages" is replaced by "set of non-web documents" and "set of software programs" when applying this to non-web technologies.
14:44:15 <PhilDay> q+
14:44:21 <maryjom> ack PhilDay
14:45:02 <Olivia> PhilDay: Modify 1 taking out references
14:45:50 <maryjom> POLL: For changing the note in "set of web pages" which do you prefer from Issue 418's proposals? 1) Proposal 1, 2) Proposal 2, 3) Proposal 3, or 4) Proposal 4 (Phil's edit in IRC above)
14:46:05 <bruce_bailey> 4
14:46:08 <Olivia> 4
14:46:09 <Sam> 4
14:46:10 <Bryan_Trogdon> 4
14:46:27 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
14:46:32 <loicmn> present+
14:46:41 <PhilDay> 4
14:46:43 <bruce_bailey> q+ to note happy to have dropped "simply"
14:46:55 <Bryan_Trogdon> present+
14:46:59 <PhilDay> Proposal 1c
14:46:59 <PhilDay> For success criteria that use the term “set of web pages”, the term is replaced by "set of non-web documents" and "set of software programs" when applying this to non-web technologies.
14:47:24 <loicmn> +1 to 1c
14:47:31 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:48:04 <Olivia> maryjom: +1
14:48:06 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Use proposal 1c above to replace the note in the definition of "set of web pages".
14:48:10 <PhilDay> +1
14:48:10 <loicmn> +1
14:48:13 <Bryan_Trogdon> +1
14:48:15 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:48:16 <Sam> +1
14:48:31 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Use proposal 1c above to replace the note in the definition of "set of web pages".
14:48:49 <bruce_bailey> ack me
14:48:49 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to note happy to have dropped "simply"
14:49:01 <bruce_bailey> to note happy to have dropped "simply"
14:49:58 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 423 - Definition of 'perimeter' should be removed
14:50:04 <maryjom> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/423
14:52:06 <Olivia> maryjom: 'Perimeter' is only used in AAA criteria. Thought is to remove from definitions and instead add to list of definitions only mentioned in AAA criteria.
14:52:28 <Sam> wcag 2.3?
14:52:36 <Sam> q+
14:53:09 <Olivia> Sam: This one is no longer a AA?
14:53:54 <Olivia> maryjom: Towards end of 2.2 this was moved. We were anticipating it, but now can move out. We don't have AAA.
14:54:29 <maryjom> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Remove guidance on the definition of "perimeter" and add that term to the section listing Level AAA terms.
14:54:37 <PhilDay> +1
14:54:38 <loicmn> +1
14:54:39 <Olivia> +1
14:54:40 <Bryan_Trogdon> +1
14:54:48 <bruce_bailey> +1
14:54:56 <maryjom> RESOLUTION: Remove guidance on the definition of "perimeter" and add that term to the section listing Level AAA terms.
14:55:00 <Sam> +1
14:55:19 <Olivia> maryjom: Quick issues done. Back to out list.
14:55:40 <bruce_bailey> q+ for quick off topic question
14:55:50 <Olivia> maryjom: Would like to assign out issues
14:55:51 <maryjom> ack sam
14:56:09 <maryjom> ack bruce_bailey
14:56:09 <Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to discuss quick off topic question
14:57:27 <Olivia> maryjom: I don't think any are lengthy. We will need some verbiage proposals.
14:57:49 <maryjom> TOPIC: Issue 436 - Definition of 'large scale'
14:58:58 <Olivia> maryjom: Need some replacements and might need to add note that CSS pixels is applied as shown in our guidance for that term.
14:59:11 <Olivia> maryjom: Can make changes in Google doc or PR.
15:00:13 <Olivia> maryjom: I want folks to take look at list of issues and take one. Can we have proposals ready for next week or skip a week for more proposals. Around 15 issues to work on.
15:00:31 <Sam> ok with meeting next week
15:01:01 <Olivia> maryjom: will meet next week
15:01:02 <loicmn> I can meet next week... but I currently cannot take any issue. Sorry
15:01:03 <bruce_bailey> +1 to meeting next week
15:01:24 <loicmn> loicmn has left #wcag2ict
15:01:24 <Olivia> rrsagent, make minutes
15:01:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wcag2ict-minutes.html Olivia
15:01:44 <Olivia> zakim, bye
15:01:44 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been Olivia, PhilDay, loicmn, Devanshu, maryjom, bruce_bailey, Sam, Bryan_Trogdon
15:01:44 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
15:01:44 <maryjom> zakim, end meeting
15:02:04 <maryjom> rrsagent, bye
15:02:04 <RRSAgent> I see no action items