W3C

– DRAFT –
(MEETING TITLE)

09 October 2024

Attendees

Present
AngelaBarker, CharlesL, Dr_Keith, Dr_Keith8, Fazio, IrfanA, janina, jkline, JXZ, Mark_Miller, NehaJ, NehaJ3, Sheri_B-H, SusiPallero
Regrets
Angela, Stacy
Chair
Fazio
Scribe
Sheri_B-H

Meeting minutes

<gb> /issues/17 -> #17

<gb> /issues/52 -> #52

<gb> /issues/46 -> #46

New Business

TPAC Debrief

<janina> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2024

Janina: good meeting, avoiding potential conflicts

<NehaJ3> I think Dr. Keith and I are in differernt room

janina: details are in the wiki link

janina: thanks to Charles for telling the Benetech story

<SusiPallero> present

jkline: did anything during the meeting constrain the scope or slow us down

janina: we have a good path forward, nothing will slow us down

Publication Next Steps

<NehaJ3> Can someone share the link with us?

<Dr_Keith8> Hello. Neha and I cannot find the wiki link. can someone paste the meeting URL porfavor?

we can't paste it then it becomes public

<CharlesL> Here is the Benetech endorcement I gave at TPAC on the Maturity Model.

<CharlesL> Benetech Endorsement of W3C’s Accessibility Maturity Model

<CharlesL> During the Vancouver TPAC breakout session, Benetech learned about the Accessibility Maturity Model that the APA was developing. We decided not only to join the task force to help develop this model but also to use it to evaluate every department at Benetech, determining our accessibility maturity as a nonprofit company. Last year, one of our OKRs (Objective Key Results) was to implement the Accessibility Maturity Model and set realist

<CharlesL> ic future goals to improve our overall maturity in each department and as a company. Benetech is also exploring a consulting service that leverages the Accessibility Maturity Model to help other organizations in the education ecosystem improve their accessibility maturity.

janina: two issues - clear the rest of git hub, and start with messaging

janina: we could create a repository for files and then have Shaun review them

Sheri_B-H: Sheri volunteered to handle messaging based on what we did with the original publication

<gb> /issues/17 -> #17

#17 The application of the model to decentralized organizations could be clarified, as could the nature and roles of the valid outputs of applying the model in an evaluation.

David: to check email invite for links to the meeting

janina: check the communications page for the correct link

Fazio: read the issue out loud

Sheri_B-H: Should we add a use case

jkline: this is a pretty old ticket, a lot of stuff has changed since then. Thinks it is a slippery slope to add guidance on how to roll things up.

janina: agrees with jkline, there are too many variations on how an organization could decide how to handle this

Sheri_B-H: do we want to add a couple of use cases?

janina: that might help solve this problem

Dr_Keith8: keep the use cases general, one or two. could be helpful

Sheri_B-H: team reviewed existing use cases independently

Sheri_B-H: Existing use cases are in 4.2.1 to 4.2.8, just add two more there

<Fazio> xThe Task Force has agreed to add additional use cases in an appendix to provide examples. We do not believe we should instruct users on how to apply the model in this circumstance

Mark_Miller: add to the beginning "Consistent with ISO-9000 and other standards, ..."

Mark_Miller offered to help Dr_Keith8

Dr_Keith8 said two week ETA

zakim close this item

<gb> /issues/46 -> #46

#46 Requirements in section 3.4 could be clarified.

Fazio: read ticket out loud

<CharlesL> w3c/maturity-model#46

<gb> Issue 46 Requirements in section 3.4 could be clarified. (by jasonjgw)

Sheri_B-H: It was never our intention to define success, it was only our intent to define whether something was done, not done well

Jkline: Disagrees with the commenter

jkline: there is a proofpoint in every dimension about setting goals

<Fazio> Dimension Goals and Metrics

<Fazio> Dimension-related goals are established, metrics are defined, and progress is tracked

Fazio: will point commenter to the fact that we added a Dimension Goals and Metrics section after the ticket was logged

#52 Section 2 (and elsewhere, if necessary): broaden the range of standards relevant to the maturity model.

<gb> /issues/52 -> #52

w3c/maturity-model#52

<gb> Issue 52 Section 2 (and elsewhere, if necessary): broaden the range of standards relevant to the maturity model. (by jasonjgw)

Fazio: commented on 8/28

janina: person who filed issue will get a notification when we close it, if they don't like the answer they can reopen

Fazio: will close issue

jkline: we need to determine what we are doing with the assessment tool. Sheri_B-H mentioned this at TPAC

jkline: should we open an issue?

janina: it's an agenda item, it will be a priority after we publish

Fazio: We did leave the assessment issues to the end, intentionally.

janina: It isn't forgotten

Fazio: Finish the narrative, then work on the tool

jkline: need instructions for assessment tool also

janina: we can set expectations for this publication in the messaging

to jkline's point, it would help to have some instructions for the Excel on how to implement the specification

oops, that was CharlesL

CharlesL: the sheet has changed, instructions could go on the cover sheet

jkline: volunteered to start writing it

jkline: can draft instructions and send it to CharlesL to update the spreadsheet

CharlesL: most recent version is sitting in a PR

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 237 (Fri Oct 4 02:31:45 2024 UTC).

Diagnostics

Maybe present: David

All speakers: CharlesL, David, Dr_Keith8, Fazio, Janina, jkline, Mark_Miller, Sheri_B-H

Active on IRC: CharlesL, Dr_Keith8, Fazio, IrfanA, janina, jkline, Mark_Miller, NehaJ3, Sheri_B-H, SusiPallero