14:28:10 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #coga
14:28:15 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/08/12-coga-irc
14:28:15 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:28:16 <Zakim> Meeting: Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
14:29:45 <lisa> regrets+ Jan, EA
14:30:10 <lisa> agenda?
14:30:17 <lisa> clear agenda
14:30:47 <lisa> agenda+ actions and updates https://docs.google.com/document/d/15HtPkkYx1CIl6bAwP2nsSZKhqTVbqcuMDRz5RmtmvXg/edit#heading=h.ka7r1m4q5vkc
14:30:53 <lisa> agenda+
14:31:03 <lisa> agenda+ Csun https://www.w3.org/WAI/cc/wiki/Main_Page
14:31:15 <lisa> Agenda+ Calls this week
14:32:40 <lisa> agenda+  issue:  https://github.com/w3c/coga/issues/343 See summary at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k5rKcLzcOQTtNRckt06XSTp4k8GUSasORLHHg_9_MjM/edit
14:33:22 <lisa> agenda+ issue on dificalty https://github.com/w3c/coga/issues/326
14:34:02 <lisa> agenda+ issue on AT https://github.com/w3c/coga/issues/325  see ideas at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HM8osZPl5vcgR5Prgp8a3XMDpJgl0EEi7DvLCnnbhhY/edit#heading=h.nsyhuh1feas0
14:43:26 <lisa> RRSAgent, publish minutes
14:43:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/12-coga-minutes.html lisa
14:54:03 <lisa> q?
14:54:10 <lisa> clear q
14:54:15 <lisa> ack next
14:57:52 <JeanneEC> JeanneEC has joined #coga
14:58:32 <Rain> Rain has joined #coga
15:00:11 <lisa> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/coga/wiki/Scribe_list
15:02:12 <Jennie> Jennie has joined #COGA
15:02:23 <Jennie> present+
15:02:29 <julierawe> julierawe has joined #coga
15:02:31 <lisa> scribe+ becca
15:02:32 <julierawe> present+
15:02:36 <lisa> next item
15:02:53 <Becca_Monteleone> Becca_Monteleone has joined #coga
15:02:59 <Becca_Monteleone> present+
15:03:12 <Jennie> * Nice job on recruitment!
15:03:43 <Becca_Monteleone> Scribe: Becca_Monteleone
15:03:55 <lisa> thanks Becca
15:04:17 <tburtin> tburtin has joined #coga
15:04:34 <Jennie> q+
15:04:38 <Becca_Monteleone> Rain: 65 sign ups for research recruitment. Likely sufficient. Will probably start studies late next week. Set up to have data for TPAC
15:04:40 <lisa> ack next
15:04:40 <tburtin> present+
15:04:55 <kirkwood> wow
15:05:01 <Becca_Monteleone> Jennie: Should we close recruitment?
15:05:18 <Becca_Monteleone> Rain: Leave open until tomorrow per info that has already been shared
15:05:48 <Becca_Monteleone> John: What do you think led to great recruitment results?
15:05:51 <Justine> Justine has joined #coga
15:06:05 <tburtin> q+
15:06:37 <Becca_Monteleone> Rain: Not sure, may ask respondents. We worked to make sure that the text was very accessible. Had a lot of great feedback from COGA and think that made a difference
15:06:38 <lisa> ack next
15:07:02 <Becca_Monteleone> tburtin: Could share on neurodivergent discord channel if needed.
15:07:11 <Becca_Monteleone> Rain: responses are probably already sufficient now
15:07:48 <Becca_Monteleone> tburtin: suggest leaving open till 14th for 13th deadline
15:08:24 <tburtin> +q
15:08:33 <lisa> ack next
15:08:34 <Becca_Monteleone> Julie: conversations in AG about assertions. Will be having a conversation about AI after our concerns about authors v. assistive tech
15:09:16 <kirkwood> +1
15:10:43 <lisa> next item
15:10:51 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: Working on editor's drafts still in progress. Issue papers are close to ready. Want to do one last push for supported decision-making, but may not finish by august holiday.
15:11:51 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: If presenting on something related to AG or COGA work at CSUN, AG is collected a related panel wiki
15:12:06 <Becca_Monteleone> JeanneEC: possible related panels
15:12:26 <lisa> next item
15:12:57 <Becca_Monteleone> kirkwood: cannot log into wiki page
15:14:07 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: Will get correct wiki link from AG
15:14:16 <lisa> next item
15:15:14 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: Internationalization and Github editors calls this Thursday
15:15:20 <lisa> scedule : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AUpjNWQqVVjkO0g4bbTgISxY0-kp53RhSPbb4VOiDaw/edit?gid=0#gid=0
15:16:02 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: please complete attached to schedule supported decision-making call
15:16:13 <lisa> next item
15:16:20 <lisa> take up item 4
15:16:53 <lisa> We are using the term , [cognitive and learning disabilities] for many reasons, including as a phrase it covers the same group in different locations even when the sub terms means different things.
15:16:53 <lisa> However, some people still think it is education related or does not include the groups we have clearly said it includes.
15:16:53 <lisa> Any fix suggestions?
15:17:37 <lisa> comunity responces https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k5rKcLzcOQTtNRckt06XSTp4k8GUSasORLHHg_9_MjM/edit
15:20:24 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: some challenges - meaning of terms changes dependent on geographic location (e.g. learning disability); assumptions about who is included in a term and who isn't (e.g. neurodiversity).
15:21:20 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: one option to move toward "cognitive accessibility" rather than a specific user group
15:21:23 <lisa> with cognitive and (specific) learning challenges and disabilities
15:21:25 <kirkwood> +1 to cognitive accessibility!
15:21:49 <julierawe> I love love love love this suggestion to switch to "cognitive accessibility" rather than list several user groups--very helpful to have a short "umbrella" phrase
15:22:14 <kirkwood> against LD
15:22:43 <julierawe> q+
15:22:43 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: retaining the word "disability" has legal weight because of anti-discrimination legislation
15:22:56 <Becca_Monteleone> +1 to cognitive accessibility
15:22:57 <kirkwood> +1 to cognitive accessibillity
15:23:06 <Jennie> +1 to cognitive accessibility
15:23:07 <Justine> +1 to cognitive accessibility
15:23:09 <Rain> +1 to cognitive accessibility as well
15:23:09 <tburtin> +1 to cognitive accessibillity
15:23:18 <lisa> ack next
15:23:49 <Becca_Monteleone> julierawe: support a short phrase and then where needed we can have a bulleted list of example user groups - to include disability
15:24:15 <Becca_Monteleone> q+
15:24:41 <Becca_Monteleone> kirkwood: people have already taken up the language of cognitive accessibility
15:24:46 <lisa> ack next
15:24:48 <julierawe> +1 to Kirkwood's comment that people are already thinking COGA is short for cognitive accessibility
15:25:23 <julierawe> +1 to Becca on how the phrase shifts away from limitations
15:25:46 <Becca_Monteleone> Becca: cognitive accessibility also shifts away from functional limitation language
15:26:58 <julierawe> q+
15:27:22 <Rain> q+
15:27:30 <kirkwood> LD is edu space
15:28:28 <lisa> ack next
15:28:31 <julierawe> https://www.w3.org/WAI/people-use-web/abilities-barriers/cognitive/
15:29:34 <Becca_Monteleone> julierawe: EO has a definition for cognitive and learning disability - we'd need to ensure continuity across w3c
15:29:59 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: will need to disseminate new phrase across w3c
15:30:12 <lisa> ack next
15:30:19 <kirkwood> cognitive impairment “impairment “ memory, attention, problem-solving, and decision-making”
15:30:20 <kirkwood> becomes a disability “ more difficult for someone to complet life activities or interact with the world around them”
15:32:03 <kirkwood> q+
15:32:08 <Becca_Monteleone> Rain: like cognitive accessibility with a clarifying longer phrase. would be hesitant to remove diagnostic language because it may weaken the ability to implement the document where it is most needed. E.g. the word "disability" is needed to justify accommodations
15:33:03 <Jennie> +1 to Rain - supports the rationale for laws, supports accommodation requests, etc.
15:33:06 <tburtin> +1 Rain
15:33:09 <lisa> ack next
15:33:18 <Becca_Monteleone> +1 to more "vague" language like universal design as being insufficient. We don't want to lose our target user groups who have already been marginalized in accessibility initiatives.
15:34:01 <julierawe> q+
15:34:27 <lisa> Making content  for cognitive accessibility (including people with cognitive and (specific) learning challenges and disabilities)
15:34:39 <Becca_Monteleone> kirkwood: including LD has pushed things more into the education space, making it harder to get into the political/legal space, which cognitive disability does more.
15:35:08 <Jennie> q+
15:35:27 <lisa> q+
15:35:33 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: two issues: the title and the phrase that we use in paragraphs.
15:35:38 <kirkwood> cognitive impairments may or may not be a disability
15:36:29 <kirkwood> +1 to list after
15:36:51 <Rain> +1 I love Julie's suggestion as it gives us a lot of flexibility to cover needs
15:36:57 <kirkwood> & keep it simple COGA  “cognitive accessibility”
15:37:02 <Becca_Monteleone> julierawe: could list user groups - "removing barriers to cognitive accessibility means removing barriers for people with [bulleted list, glossary entry, etc]" could then retain diagnostic language without long phrase in paragraphs
15:37:53 <Rain> +1
15:37:54 <Becca_Monteleone> Jennie: in future conversation, think of business requirements for our architecture. The need we address we the title; the need we address with the first paragraph, etc.
15:37:57 <julierawe> +1 to Jennie idea
15:38:03 <kirkwood> +1
15:38:14 <JeanneEC> +1
15:38:30 <lisa> ack next
15:38:34 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: could add note in editors draft
15:38:36 <lisa> ack next
15:38:36 <JeanneEC> present+
15:38:36 <julierawe> q-
15:38:42 <lisa> ack next
15:39:45 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: propose that we go through document and replace "people with cog and LD" with "cognitive accessibility" where possible. Link in glossary.
15:39:52 <kirkwood> people with cognitive impairments?
15:40:14 <LenB> LenB has joined #coga
15:40:20 <LenB> present+
15:40:24 <julierawe> q+
15:40:44 <Rain> present+
15:40:49 <lisa> ack next
15:41:40 <kirkwood> I’d like to propose the title “Cognitive Accessibility”
15:42:45 <lisa> replave long phrase in the document with Cognitive Accessibility not the title
15:43:02 <Jennie> q+
15:43:50 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: would still include all the places where we define who we are including - diagnostic and disability language would be retained in glossary, introduction, etc.
15:43:52 <kirkwood> +1
15:44:00 <lisa> ack next
15:45:15 <Becca_Monteleone> Jennie: recommend changing proposal to not change the first few sections (Section 1: Summary, Section 2: Introduction)
15:46:53 <julierawe> q+
15:47:13 <lisa> ack next
15:47:15 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: "cognitive accessibility" wouldn't work in user stories anyway. Would be easier to implement in design guide
15:47:35 <kirkwood> users with cognitive impairments, i’ve used in legal docs
15:48:50 <Becca_Monteleone> julierawe: How we adjust those first few sections would also influence if we change the title (e.g. Section 2.2 is currently Background About People with Cognitive and Learning Disabilities)
15:50:44 <julierawe> q+
15:51:01 <Becca_Monteleone> kirkwood: legal approach has been to use "cognitive impairment" that becomes "disability" when it impedes life activities. We should be careful of using legal language, societal language, etc.
15:51:27 <kirkwood> agree
15:51:51 <Jennie> q?
15:51:54 <lisa> stonger langwage is importanrt
15:52:00 <lisa> ack next
15:52:56 <kirkwood> +1
15:53:42 <Becca_Monteleone> julierawe: tension between wanting to meet legal requirements and wanting to focus on strengths-based approaches. If we can get the approach right, "cognitive accessibility" has a positive connotation - though we need to make sure that address the deficits because that is where the legal protections are
15:53:55 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: probably should also include "inclusion"
15:55:23 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: proposal - finding examples in the document where we would want to convert "people with cognitive and learning disabilities" to "cognitive accessibility" and places where we wouldn't.
15:56:00 <julierawe> Possible new title: "Removing barriers to cognitive accessibility"
15:56:11 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: we need another phrase for the title (maybe what we already have) and a long phrase for "cognitive and learning disabilities" that includes specific LDs and mental health.
15:56:35 <Becca_Monteleone> Lisa: we probably need a number of phrases that we will use in different places.
15:56:50 <julierawe> +1
15:57:43 <julierawe> q+
15:57:52 <kirkwood> why not right in beginning?
15:58:09 <lisa> cognitive accessibility used in the design guide were it makes sences and other simlare topic
15:59:13 <kirkwood> +1
15:59:15 <Becca_Monteleone> +1
15:59:19 <lisa> ack next
15:59:59 <Becca_Monteleone> julierawe: I think we can consider alternative ways to do the top of the document. For example, 2.2 could be "disabilities covered in this document"
16:00:08 <julierawe> +1
16:00:12 <kirkwood> +1
16:00:17 <Rain> +1
16:01:49 <lisa> RRSAgent, publish minutes
16:01:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/08/12-coga-minutes.html lisa
16:48:57 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #COGA
17:37:29 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #COGA
19:38:51 <kirkwood> kirkwood has joined #COGA