<PeterKorn> Alas I can't scribe; only here for < 30 min.

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask about 30 minute cut off for surveys

<Francis_Storr> scribe: Francis_Storr

July 5th participation

<Chuck> -1

<Fazio> -1

<joweismantel> -1

<Lauriat> -1

<janina> +1

<iankersey> +1

<Makoto> +1

<Rachael> -1

<ShawnT> +1

<PeterKorn> -1

+1

<bruce_bailey> -1

<kirkwood> -1

<JakeAbma> +1

<Peter_Bossley> -1

<MelanieP> +1

<jeanne> -1

<Chuck> I count 7 yes, 10 no's

<jeanne> preesnt+

WCAG 2.2 implementations

ac: we will decide about the 5th july meeting fairly soon and look at possible agenda items
... hopefully entering into CR fairly soon. Once we do, we'll need some implementations and then test them.
... for each success criteria, we need at least two passing examples.

RM: we have a couple of AAA conforming external sites. If anyone has a AA conforming site for the new criteria and wants to suggest them, please let us know.

<alastairc> q/

ac: if you know of any suitable sites, please email the chairs or the chairs individually.

WCAG 3 tentative use cases from conformance options

<janina> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G9q082IFl4Rj4o07qMx8Y_5oFoDN7Lmx-5i3ViROpD8/

JS: sharing a Summary Of Use Cases For WCAG 3.0 Conformance
... this is a work in progress. The use cases that we're working with might be useful for other subgroups, so we're breaking them out in this summary document.
... it's intended this document is a summary and a pointer to other information. It's a starting point and might be additional use cases.
... we're looking at 11 situations and approximately 20 example scenarios.
... We think these are situations that WCAG needs to comprehend and provide solutions to.
... looking to provide guidance to policy makers and regulators to create smarter regulations.
... the use cases have been split out from how to handle them into 2 github repos.
... hoping to have some proposals ready for TPAC.
... going to be working on an impact statement - what would be the impact of someone not implementing the use cases.

BB: is there anything in the document that's specific to WCAG 3?

JS: I think what makes some of these things WCAG 3 specific is that they address certain items in different ways. I don't want to be too specific on this at the moment.

ac: is it fair to say these have come from our experience with WCAG 2?

JS: very much so, yes.

<bruce_bailey> i agree use these use case are extremely valueable

<PeterKorn> Gregg said what I wanted to say

GV: there are some things that are challenges in 2 and we're looking to improve them.

JS: Situation 1: "all software has bugs". Any site of any complexity or size will always have content that's being added at a rapid rate and there's likely to be problems.
... we expect that a site is a work in progress. Examples are a site with many content authors and content being generated automatically.
... Situation 2: where large volumes of content are accumulated quickly
... Situation 3: large volumes of content that needs to be accessible. Examples are a company buying a large corpus of inaccessible content, and a lot of archival content (e.g. images in the library of congress).

JB: I want to note that she's worked with the task force on this. I want to raise that I'm still concerned that content might be taken out of context of the document. I'm going to encourage the WG to be very careful about the use case statements so they can't be taken out of context.
... Situation 2, taken out of context, would be a judgement statement and could be used by someone not wanting to work on accessibility as a reason not to.

<JF> +1 to Judy

<laura> +100 to judy

JB: I have great respect for the people doing this work but want to make people aware of my concern.

<Rachael> +1 to revising to address those concerns

<Makoto> +1 to Judy

<jeanne> +1

<kirkwood> +1 to the concern

JS: thanks. This is work in progress and we'll wordsmith this as best we can. We're not after excuses, we're after more conformance.
... Situation 4: when the content owner doesn't own or control the content. Examples are a site that allows users to create their own sites, and a portal that aggregates content from other sources.
... Situation 5: when content providers have dependences on other services. Examples are a site using a payment service, embedding social media channels, and relying on content management systems.
... Situation 6: when current limitations don't provide the same level of conformance for live content. An example is lower-quality captions for live content.
... Situation 7: when current technology limitations make some types of content not possible to fully conform. Examples are new technology with limited support for accessibility, sensory experiences cannot be easily translated, and lack of support by assistive technology.
... Situation 8: when content is rarely used, if ever. examples: outdated content that is archival and rarely used, current content that is rarely used by anyone and just posted because we can.
... Situation 9: when content is experimental for all users, including people with disabilities. Examples: product demo with limited functionality, on-going research and development of accessibility features, prioritizing speed to market over product stability.
... Situation 10: all accessibility requirements many not always be applicable to all content. Examples: content provided to a limited group of users only, content accessed by known set of user technologies.
... Situation 11: when small businesses may lack capacity and capability. Examples are small business has limited expertise, and small business has limited resources.

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask about posting timelines (Beta use-case)

ac: if people think of other situations that aren't covered here or in WCAG 2, contact the conformance options subgroup.

JF: I recognize this is still work in progress. First question is: has there been any discussion as to where a notice would be added to a digital asset? Second question: have you got a definition of what the small in small business is? When does it become a medium one, etc?

JS: we're not proposing answers at this point.
... we're breaking this out so that not everything is in the standards specification.
... we're particularly looking at legislators. I'm not sure if the W3C should be defining some of these things, for example: what "small" is.

<Judy> [jb: does not believe it is the job of W3C to define small business, and notes that W3C is an international body, and that the definition of small businesses would invariably vary across different nations.]

JS: we can say to regulators "you can do better than that" and give them some examples.

MG: thanks a lot for this presentation. Except for situation 1, all of these fail. My assumption is that this is intended to motivate groups who are saying "we can't conform, so why put any effort in".
... the second thing is that reporting is a wild west and hasn't been part of WCAG before. I think we need to be really cautious about how we handle this.

<laura> +1 to mike. All these use cases all fail. We need to be VERY careful.

MG: I kind of think that maturity models, reporting guides, etc. are out of scope. Thank you for this work.

<Zakim> mbgower_, you wanted to say that motivation seems to be an unspoken concern. Is that true? I also have general comments on conformance.

ac: to be clear, none of this is guaranteed to go into WCAG 3, but we're currently using them to work on it.

<Zakim> bruce_bailey, you wanted to ask where is good place to share recent guidance from DOJ and ED ?

<bruce_bailey> regulators like U.S. Access Board cite to WCAG 2.0/2.1 AA -- same with litigation -- but what about prospective web a11y guidance ?

BB: Regulators like the access board, we cite a specific version of WCAG. I think there's also a gap in the US where guidance is aligned with WCAG but not at the same level of granularity as Section 508.

<bruce_bailey> March DOJ web guidance: https://beta.ada.gov/resources/web-guidance/

BB: will post some relevant links.

<ShawnT> Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/05a11

<bruce_bailey> May ED OCR guidance: https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/education-department-hosts-virtual-summit-today-announces-new-efforts-and-resources-supporting-mental-health-and-students-disabilities

<bruce_bailey> https://adata.org/ocr-videos

<Zakim> SuzanneTaylor, you wanted to suggest using a different example for use case 10 (rather than higher ed)

JS: we would be very grateful for input.

<Rachael> +1 ro Suzanne's point

ST: Situation 10: I wouldn't mention higher education

<JF_> Huge +1 to Suzanne

<laura> +1 to Suzanne

JS: we'll happily take that under advisement. Thank you.

GV: we all agree in the group that these are issues. If these get you thinking, come join the group.
... one of the problems we have is that we've come up with a technical standard and countries apply it differently.
... we have a standard technical document. What if we also had a separate standard policy document? I don't know if we could do that, but what if there was a note?

<shadi> +10 to GreggV

GV: the second purpose of this document is that it can talk about is what is a way to prioritize the remediation. What advice do we have for that?
... you can have an example that says "by the way, this is really super critical".

<Zakim> Chuck, you wanted to say we need to change scribe

<bruce_bailey> scribe: bruce_bailey

Judy Brewer: to gregg V's first point wrt policy document -- that is very limited space for W3C...

scribe: however that does not mean we could not capture these issues, similar to previous discussions...
... considerations for uptake of wcag in policy context might be the sort of working title, but needs formal scoping...
... similar to recent charter and discussion for WCAG2ICT

<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to respond to Judy

scribe: need to be careful not to exclude channel for feed back.

Shadi: How do you suggest best way to build guardrails? Like the way JB phrased, if you are to take up wcag....
... here are some of the technical things to consider.

JB: I want to think/discuss with a few folks -- but it is possible that the framing use in this document is the best vehicle...

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to invite other groups look at, use, or add to these use casees

JB: including edits made live in the Google document during this call was good improvement.

Jeanne Spellman: Any groups working on Conformance issues in WCAG3 is very invited to contribute!

WCAG 3 Categorization exercise

AlastairC: Yes, want this to be useful to other contexts.
... Shifting to categorization exercises...

@JS thanks for edit !

<alastairc> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tXIaJxQCyuOTkvLcJR5QgTN13h6dIgtUlE7H9CUCvew/edit#gid=0

AC: I am not sure how well described dis this document...

Rachael: Ask today is for everyone to take one
... We have about 35 done, 30+ still to go...
... put your name in, request permission, work while call is open
... We find benefits with doing this exercise, worth spending time on call today.

AC: Please sign in, look for items which are not drafted.

<Rachael> Blank in Drafted and Name column

JS: Anything blank in drafted column are open.

<garrison> Going to have to drop.

Racheael: We have templates for each.
... we will be working on docs while we talke

GV: link brings up confusing template? Can blank be a no and then a link?

AC: Makoto will run through an example he did.

GV: Seems like one needs to know 2.x and 3.x structure?

AC: Yes on 2.x SC, but example should demonstrate how one can work on 3x mapping

JF: Seems premature with testing types -- since four types are not set

AC: For today, would prefer to move forward.
... Categorize by testing types -- see if it works.
... Need updated link to testing type?
... Any one having trouble signing in?

<Chuck> This link brought me to the slide deck that explained types, is this what you are looking for? https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1b5xHQWBzoYdKp7BfPgIUBCpz-yaDOx_kSq_HlQxcFh0/edit#slide=id.g115ec01aa81_0_33

AC: Speak up if problem

<ShawnT> I'll pick after the demo

<JF> @Chuck - yep: a "proposal" but never discussed nor agreed to

<ShawnT> I wanted to see the the work before putting my name on anything

Makoto: 1st step, put your name in name/group

<alastairc> JF - I think we discussed it a few times, perhaps you weren't here at the time?

Makoto: my example is row 22 1.4.5 images of text
... opens google doc file name 1.4.5 Images of Text...
... first i copied WCAG 2.x SC name at top..
... next step is further down in template, copy paste from understanding document into best place in template
... intent , benefits , other context should be easy to borrow from Understanding
... can also copy functional needs list into template to list functional needs addressed by SC
... be broad to capture as many as possible, including number
... i also copy sub category names , for anyone working on this after me
... there is also a link to function needs , which for now is link back to functional google doc "Main Functional Needs = Main User Needs - Main Outomes"
... I can copy past those into functional needs in template as well
... at this point template is fairly well filled out with current Understanding material.s

Next step is Units -- which is new for WCAG3

scribe: again, heading is a link to reference document

Next is Test Types -- again new concept for WCAG3 and heading links to work in progress definitions

After that is Sub-guidelines -- trying to breaking down what is needed to meet broader guideline

scribe: Example with I am using, 1.2.5 Audio Description (Prerecorded) breaks down pretty straight forward.

[scribe missed transition from 1.4.5 to 1.2.5]

Makoto: Scrolling through, I can see all the similar categories from template with this Guideline as I just walked through with 1.4.5
... 1.2.5 is interesting because it included extended audio description,
... because Sub-Guideline includes AAA , we can include more detail.

AC: It can be use to ask if 3.x is addressing multiple levels as we have with 1.2.5...
... simple alt component level test is just asking if there is alt text
... but is alt text a text equivalent ? -- so that is a component level assessment.

Rachael: another example of categorization is functional needs

GV: So if see different functional needs, so are those different guidelines?

AC: If you are doing the same thing -- ex alt text -- that is not different functional needs, so just once.

Rachael: Context is more where solution, say not see versus not hear, but same 2x SC , those should be broken out

AC: At top is naming 2x SC id

<jeanne> Google drive folder with all the Google docs that have been done https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1t9H47G5gIUUSONx-Aly3UGCfQ7G0NI_V

Spellman: analog is outcome , different functional needs , not really sub success criteria -- but not Guideline of 2x
... cross ref from spread sheet

<alastairc> Guidelines > Outcomes > Methods

GV: In 2.x we have Guidelines then SC

<Rachael> WCAG 3: Guidelines, Outcomes, Methods

JS: Outcomes and Methods testable
... methods may be technology specific

AC: for this exercise please do not stress

<janina> If we're lucky, they may be in a db!\

<Zakim> mbgower_, you wanted to say that something I think would be super useful is for people to put in google comments about where they found a row/process useful or problematic

AC: links should be baked into template

<Chuck> Functional Needs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16ZeCqTRTY0lmWvp1Xv_wO0iH1OzyECBa1UXQ_UeocjQ/edit#heading=h.dgihflco3pzd

<Chuck> User Needs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16ZeCqTRTY0lmWvp1Xv_wO0iH1OzyECBa1UXQ_UeocjQ/edit#heading=h.1t50noaffchk

MikeGower: suggest using comment feature of google doc...

<Chuck> Units: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1b5xHQWBzoYdKp7BfPgIUBCpz-yaDOx_kSq_HlQxcFh0/edit#slide=id.g115ec01aa81_0_21

<Chuck> Test Types: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1b5xHQWBzoYdKp7BfPgIUBCpz-yaDOx_kSq_HlQxcFh0/edit#slide=id.g115ec01aa81_0_33

MikeGower: share your impressions of utility to rows and columns, meta comments, capture what is working and what is confusing or hard...
... suggest mapping terms at top of template because it will be helpful for someone getting started.

JS: That is copy/paste exercise for 70 documents.

MG: Okay, just put that into master template if that is a thing.

JS: All these documents are in google drive and numbered

<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to say where people can find examples that are done

AC: Any changes, we will increment numbering with 0.1 etc
... This is the purpose of the meeting.

<jeanne> Google drive folder with Migration documents https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1t9H47G5gIUUSONx-Aly3UGCfQ7G0NI_V

<Chuck> scribing need not occur during this team exercise

AC: Audio will be left open.

Makoto: My understanding is that this is 2x oriented...
... but if gap or suggestions for SC -- make comment in these documents

<Chuck> Thank you Makoto!

<Zakim> Rachael, you wanted to state that reading the understanding document is very helpful

Rachael: Please use current Understanding documents -- they make it easy on yourself

MG: You may need to refresh after granted permission.

AC: any other questions?
... feel free to drop off Zoom to do the work

<maryjom> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Knm5fOmR93bxnI5g_ZlxBgD-CaM-Z-JemZq2u2-zKn4/edit#

MaryJo: Still seems ambiguous when to write up or break into subcategories

JSpellman: That is part point of this exercise.

Rachael: Breakpoint for me has been when I need another column in spreadsheet, seems to be good rule of thumb.

AC: I was struggling with Status Messages...
... had trouble assigning component or unit -- but picked component because it is elements not in your current focus

MaryJo: Key concept seemed to be user process and programmatically determinable, so component seems as granular as I could get.

AC: It can also be helpful to think about test types, which let get traction on units.

<Zakim> mbgower_, you wanted to say I get caught up in Functional Need granularity. It could use links to definitions, etc

<Chuck> LOL

MG: As before and now, I tend to get stuck with functional needs.
... not link at bottom level...

<maryjom> +1 to Mike's point. I often don't understand some of those user needs - all of which are not defined.

<Rachael> I recommend going to the numbered level of functional needs.

MG: how granular are we suppose to be? But also we do not have definitions, so it seems to much to individual discretion.

Rachael: probably next step after these is to come back to functional needs and see how they are tracking to outcomes...
... which is point of this exercise.

AC: It is ok if people are being very granular, because it will be easier to trim back after that, as compared to not having detail early.
... say now if you want chairs to hold on please

<Rachael> Please finish at least one this week. We really need to get through this exercise.

AC: Everyone on call pick one please.

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/a huge gap/a gap/
Succeeded: s/ro/to/
Succeeded: s/ Anyone interested in WCAG3/ Any groups working on Conformance issues in WCAG3/
Succeeded: s/Recommend for now/It is ok if people are/
Default Present: Chuck, ShawnT, janina, joweismantel, bruce_bailey, iankersey, Lauriat, PeterKorn, Rachael, Peter_Bossley, Francis_Storr, alastairc, shadi, JakeAbma, Fazio, Makoto, kirkwood, MelanieP, Wilco, maryjom, mbgower_, sarahhorton, Laura_Carlson, Nicaise, JF, Katie_Haritos-Shea, garrison, SuzanneTaylor, Jen_G, GreggVan
Present: Chuck, ShawnT, janina, joweismantel, bruce_bailey, iankersey, Lauriat, PeterKorn, Rachael, Peter_Bossley, Francis_Storr, alastairc, shadi, JakeAbma, Fazio, Makoto, kirkwood, MelanieP, Wilco, maryjom, mbgower_, sarahhorton, Laura_Carlson, Nicaise, JF, Katie_Haritos-Shea, garrison, SuzanneTaylor, Jen_G, GreggVan
Regrets: Azlan, ToddL
Found Scribe: Francis_Storr
Inferring ScribeNick: Francis_Storr
Found Scribe: bruce_bailey
Inferring ScribeNick: bruce_bailey
Scribes: Francis_Storr, bruce_bailey
ScribeNicks: Francis_Storr, bruce_bailey

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)