Meeting Minutes
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah, so, the especially if we engage with so at,
say at at at our prior, more simple, older tools would only have a author creating something. The tool.
uh, and there may be some opportunity for, further questions about what the author was contributing.: and then,
Actually, oh, Miriam isn't here because Miriam provided a really good example where an AI tool, it was actually an ongoing back and forth conversation where there was an opportunity not only at the time of authoring, but also at the time of the user using the tool so that there are the.
What finally ends up being authored.
ends up being very different from like it. It morphs throughout the the various stages of both the creation of the original content. But then the the interactions that the user has with that content.
Lisa Liskovoi: Yeah, that makes me think of how oftentimes the authored content. I think this is what you're saying. So let me just say and make sure that we're on the same page, but that, like the authored content, is kind of a live thing in itself, like there's not.
like, maybe in certain cases, you would you would author something, and then it would be you'd have the final document, or final whatever it may be, versus now, it continues to iterate?
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah, yeah, that's that's particular pattern. And you were talking about social media there. The pattern is that there is an interface authored. There's a possibility to add additional content. The the public or the not the original author adds the content, etc. So that would be that would differ from, say, a website where there is no possibility for change or interaction, like a static website, versus so the
all of these have implications for how how do we use the Authoring Act, or the the various forms of authoring to create accessible content, which is the or to yeah.
Or to make it accessible to someone who is using an alternative access system.
Lisa Liskovoi: Yeah. Okay.
So, do you feel that social media should not be its own category? Should it be folded into a different way of,
Jutta Treviranus: No, no, no, I think social media is a category, but I think the exercise of trying to exhaustively list all of the forms of authoring tools or all of the existing authoring tools is never complete because there's going to be
Lisa Liskovoi: Perfect. Okay.
Yes.
Jutta Treviranus: The new forms of interaction, new ways of creating content, further more complex ways in which the, the content that is authored is continuously changed or,.
acted upon.
Lisa Liskovoi: Yeah.
Yeah. And then we have, I guess. So one thing that I captured was the the user continued changes to the content. So we have the the author changes, and then we have.
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah, exactly. Right. Yeah, exactly.
Lisa Liskovoi: audience changes, I suppose.
Jutta Treviranus: And there's there's allowances or affordances for that that are provided by the original author or not, right? And and so that's one thing to take in into consideration.
Lisa Liskovoi: And one thing, Annette, I think this has come up in some of our conversations is if we're looking at something like.
Lisa Liskovoi: maybe a code repository, but it allows you for interaction in terms of comments and discussions. Do those comments and discussions also count as type of content?
Ned Zimmerman: Yeah, we were talking about, the adjacent, sort of threaded conversations that happen in a Google Doc, for example, in the context of review.
or in
side conversations that happen in other I mean
Other authoring interfaces where there might be, a chat thread that's not linked to a particular review comment or suggestion, but just
adjacent to the content, and how that's used by people and generative AI tools now, so
you might have an integrated chat with a generative AI tool, but those sorts of interfaces have already existed for conversations among human authors for some time, so
Yep.
Wayne D: One thing I have quite a bit of trouble with is working with groups of people and authoring a document.
Because, you know, they'll have one visual format that they're working on.
And rather than having some kind of soft template format that would allow me to see it in a form I could see.
I usually have to create a separate copy.
Um, and always be behind, because the lag I mean, I really think that an accessible authoring tool should allow.
Multiple views for
Multiple users, because, you know
Right now, I have a very hard time participating in group authoring.
And I think that that's a general problem for people with print disabilities.
Wendy Reid: Thank you for that.
Uh, just catching up on the conversation, but
Something that struck me, and what Ida was saying about social media tools, and then
Um, basically, what the breakout so the initial breakout that we did actually, it might be better if I share my screen, except that
Zoom hates the size of my laptop screen and extends below the.
My doc is covering.
if I do this.
There we go. All right.
So
I had called this, top-level heading in, things to research, authoring tool types and functions, and I realized that all I did it for all we've done first is tool types, and just going, like.
in the current breakdown where we have, web content creation and editing tools, and I tried to provide examples for each, just so people understand.
what we're talking about.
But in thinking about it.
I do wonder if
Uh, just because of, the sheer variety of tools that there are out there.
Uh, if doing.
a further kind of, abstraction layer of, functions. And looking at, like
What different tool, different tool functions.
Um, because those cut across, right? just to give an example, like a rich text editor, just the concept of a rich text editor, that cuts across.
Social media tools, content management systems.
Uh, type, authoring, authoring application, word processing applications.
uh, email, you know, the, just the concept of, a rich text editor. That cuts across a huge swath of,.
types of tools.
We then have obviously, image.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Noticed that LaTeX is missing from that list of Authoring languages. Probably so many more.
Lisa Liskovoi, Hidde de Vries:👍
Wendy Reid: Image, upload and editing, editing interface.
Video upload and editing interface. Audio upload and editing interface.
And even if they appear in different ways.
they
There's kind of this cross cutting.
Set of, kind of, requirements or needs specific to those tool types, and it might help us narrow down, then try and
Based on just like the size of this list already, the complexity that we have.
I don't know if that resonates with anyone.
Lisa Liskovoi: Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense.
Ned Zimmerman: I saw Mike just noted in the chat that LaTeX is missing from the list, which is funny because we did talk about LaTeX at great length, but it didn't end up on there.
Wendy Reid: It's in a list higher up on the screen that we can.
Ned Zimmerman: Oh, is it? Okay.
Wendy Reid: I would. Yeah, but also.
Ned Zimmerman: Oh, yeah, it's under technical and academic publishing, LaTeX, MathML, MML, et cetera.
Wayne D: One of the reasons LaTeX is important is because people tend to write their PhD dissertation in LaTeX. They learn LaTeX when they're writing their PhD dissertation.
And, you know, they're not gonna learn something different.
Jutta Treviranus: VR, XR, 3D CAD etc.
Lisa Liskovoi: Uh, for image editing, I'm just wondering if we want to differentiate between, image editing, like editing a photograph on social media or Photoshop or something, versus creating.
more like.
informative visualizations and graphics. I don't know if that's just.
my bias, and so I'm thinking it's worth getting into that kind of detail, or if we want to stay a little more high level here.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Voice Authoring will be a thing. So much now is audio or video. AI is accelerating that.
Lisa Liskovoi: I'm thinking like flow diagrams or
charts.
Hidde de Vries: It doesn't make sense to me to distinguish between those, because it's like taking an image and maybe optimizing it, or making it better for your use case versus.
Doing something new.
Lisa Liskovoi: Another thing that's coming to mind under functions is the the collaboration piece that Wayne was talking about. So do we consider.
collaboration a different different type of function than editing. And then there's, of course, different types of collaboration there's the comments that Ned mentioned. There's also again, I'm thinking in something like figma where you might.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Also, are we going to talk TPAC at some point? Some of us will be there I think.
Ned Zimmerman:👍
Lisa Liskovoi: do a kind of visual virtual brainstorming session. And that's a very different type of collaboration than leaving comments.
Wendy Reid: Replying to "Also, are we going to talk TPAC at some point? Som...":
Yes!
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Diff version control.
Jutta Treviranus: annotations, free form linked comments
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Collaboration by PR/MR.
Jutta Treviranus: forms
Wendy Reid: I'm just following along in the chat.
Yeah, I think like taking I guess like the bird's eye view.
Because the other part of all of this, too, I think is
There's like each of these functions has there's like a spectrum in the sense of like you could like just we'll just use rich text because it's easy.
Incredibly rich text editing interfaces.
Microsoft Word, right? You can do there's hundreds of features.
And that's I guess, one end of the spectrum. And the other end of the spectrum is.
you know.
Uh, the comment field on a
on a, website that maybe lets you, at best, bold and add images?
Like, those are kind of your two interfaces. Audio editing, it can be something as simple as clipping to, you know, checking, fixing the levels.
splitting tracks, you know, all of those kinds of things. I think similarly with video.
Image images, diagrams.
But, the
The overarching concept is shared.
Hidde de Vries: Do you think that's the case for most?
of these that there will be like a simple version versus.
a complex one. You've given some examples, I think, for many of them. Maybe that's that distinction that exists.
I wonder how we could tackle that.
Wendy Reid: I mean, I think
Even.
Even the most complex.
Version of something and it's simple and it's simplest version. They still will share a lot of.
requirements and functions. We'll just use rich text as easiest.
I need to know
I need to be able to accessibly be able to.
Use whatever features are available, so know that they're present and that I can interact with them. Know when they're applied.
and that they are applied in an accessible fashion. So if it's just, you know, the simple version is that I'm able to bold the text. The bold button is, you know, interactive.
And when the text is bolded in my editor, I know that it's bolded. I'm told that it's bolded.
And the output of that is that the text is marked up as being bolded.
same principle for, the most extreme version, where I can, insert tables of contents or whatever, that it's an accessible table of content, that I know it's a table of content, that I can interact with all of the parts.
Turning the list over in my head.
Wayne D: Is template kind of driven authoring a whole category of its own?
Wendy Reid: I think it could be a function of tools.
I think the thing to, consider with these, any of these is,
You know, when we think about what a function is, like
These are all interconnected, but also
You know, how much does something need to stand out as a feature for it to be, or as a function to like be a function, I guess.
Ned Zimmerman: Would we want to consider something like a translation?
function as part of this. I'm just
this came into my mind when we were talking about social media earlier, because I a lot of social platforms now have the sort of built-in capability to translate text into another language, or I know, I think I've heard that.
meta apps can actually auto dub video into a different language now, although I don't know what the details of that are, but there's certainly accessibility considerations of those sorts of features. I just, I don't know if that quite fits into what were the other.
Things we're talking about here.
Hidde de Vries: Yeah, this is among other platforms as well. I know YouTube and Reddit both do automated translation.
often wrongly. At a conference I was at yesterday, someone talked about how wrong it was. If you're a native speaker of another language than English, but you also understand English, it's weird to have.
things auto translated, etc. But that's an interesting category, I think, where like translation happens on your behalf. You may not be authoring translation, but it gets authored for you by AI.
Wendy Reid: Is AI a function or is it built into some of these?
Hello to our visitor.
Hidde de Vries: That's a good question.
Wendy Reid: I'll start expansive.
Lisa Liskovoi: Would translation be considered a type of content transformation or is that limited to format?
Wendy Reid: Good question about translation, Lisa.
I can see it kind of being
Both.
I do wonder, because like for instance, I think it would be purely transformation.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): How do we make this easy enough that it will be understandable by non-technical people, something that is politically tangible to push for (as it will save $$ and improve results)?
Catching all of the possibilities won’t change the incentives that organizations need to start demanding this from their authoring tools.
Wendy Reid: If it was static.
Like, if you did a translation, and you couldn't do anything with it after that, you know, you got the subtitles, or you got the new audio.
But I think a lot of, a lot of interfaces I've run into, it's all editable, right? You can, you can go in and correct things, you can, you can, it's interactive, and so it has its own kind of interface.
in a tool.
Ned Zimmerman: Yeah, I was just thinking about the translation piece, because
I can see
Yeah, I can see situations where, as an example, there's a content management system that I work with sometimes that has the capability to use a, hook up a translation service to a text editing interface, like a WYSIWYG interface, and translate the content there.
And
So, in theory, it wouldn't change the accessibility information of the content, but I could see also a situation where if markup is being set to a translation service, sent to a translation service, and is somehow.
altered when it comes back, that would break the ATAG requirements around transformation.
Um, so
I guess in my mind, it sort of depends on if
The translation tool has that kind of fidelity to leave the markup accessible and unaltered while translating the text.
that the markup is applied to.
And Mike has a good discussion point in the comments.
Wendy Reid: How do we make this easy enough? So it'll be understandable by non-technical people.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): I just worry we're making this too big, and it's ultimately, if we accomplished if
Even if we didn't expand
the scope of ATAG, but made the made it more politically
important to implement. we've got to see people starting down the road, and they're not most governments, most organizations are not even aware that they can affect the authoring tools.
um, that that would have any potential impact. we should be able to see this in contracts yeah, but they you know, authoring authors are always overlooked, and and the impacts of authors is always overlooked.
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah, I think just last time we arrived at a definition of authoring tools as any tool used to create or edit content, which
Yeah, because I think
the yeah, capturing all of these complex possibilities for how content is created or edited is
probably going to it's useful for us, but it may not be useful in terms of creating the standard or the guidelines.
Hidde de Vries: Yeah, I think it makes sense to me that we can reduce all of that complexity that's relevant for us into a definition like that, like others.
an interface for creating modifying content. it's probably the same for the advantages.
to accessibility at large of authoring tools like they can accelerate accessibility efforts.
That's also something you can say like very generically. And then for all of these hundreds of different types of tools, it will be slightly different how it works. But I think it's both for the definition and for like the effect of ATAG on the world.
There is something very generic to be said as well that will work.
Wendy Reid: I mean, I think, Mike, your question kind of goes to
goals, right? What are the goals for the document? This is and maybe this is, like I kind of like to take the expansive view of, yes, this feels like a lot right now, but if let's get all of it down, and then we can, like.
whittle it down when we're actually trying to, piece it together. It's hard right now, too, because, like.
where
We're kind of thinking of things on their own. We're not trying to put them into guidelines or put them into requirements.
So it is
If a random person off the street were to look at this document, they'd be what is happening? What is going on? And that's okay for us for now. It won't be okay in the future.
But I think maybe we can spend a couple of minutes on this.
What are our goals?
Or.
The next version. And I like to do this in a sense of like.
you know, let's not think about ATAG 2.
Um, what it just, if we wipe the slate clean, what are our goals for this document?
And obviously there's always like the baggage of the past and there will be expectations of some pulling forward.
Umm, but you know what? What might our goals be?
Uh, for this document.
In a new version.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): adoptability
Lisa Liskovoi: I think having these detailed lists are useful to check that any definitions we decide on cover all of these cases, the lists themselves don’t need to be included
Wendy Reid, Ned Zimmerman:💯
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Yeah, I mean, I put in adoptability because it's, I mean, partly it's just trying to say, if you look at specific content management systems or specific authoring tools to say, how would you apply this? How do you make sure that this is something that can be.
How would you evaluate that this criteria is something that is testable and clearly understandable in terms of what that would mean? How would you evaluate whether or not this element complies or not?
Wendy Reid: Recognition of
All right. Authoring landscape.
and flexibility for the future.
I mean, as much as possible, we can't predict the future, but if we can create things that accommodate different tools.
And to whom?
permutations of tools, I guess.
Any other calls?
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Why not Wendy, why is predicting the future always out of scope? 🙂
Wendy Reid: Mike, if you can predict the future, then,
Let me know. You know, got some secrets, you know.
Share with the class.
Hidde de Vries: We could all get rich quickly.
Wendy Reid: Yeah.
What lotto numbers should I be pulling this week?
All right. Keep it in mind. They're not going to —.
push on this too much.
Just because we have just about just over 20 minutes left, I'm going to pivot to our other topic of the day.
which is oh, my gosh!
Google's insistence on
This is the most evil button in the world, is this upgrade button that looks exactly like the update button.
For software. I clicked it, 4 times.
Uh, so,
I wanted to talk a little bit about TPAC. So, it is approaching, probably just, I think, about 6 weeks away.
We are meeting over two days, the Thursday and the Friday. We're meeting on the afternoon of the Thursday, and I thought it was the afternoon of the Friday as well, but it turns out it's the whole day on Friday.
So we got lots of time, which is great.
I've put together, like
a rough
skeleton of an agenda, so everything is com Basically, all I've put in so far is
Uh, the break times?
And, and lunches, and, my usual kind of, what I start with and what I finish with. But otherwise, everything else is up for
grabs in terms of topics.
Um, and things we can do. So
We have a day and a half to fill with.
Different topics.
and different things that we want to discuss.
While we're kind of past the point where we can ask for, formal joint meetings, if there's anyone
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Drat.. I will be in Barcelona on Thursday/Friday. MozFest calls. I will see some folks Monday/Tuesday in Dublin though.
Wendy Reid: We might want to, like
invite, or see if they can join us, even for an hour, let me know, and I can send out invitations.
But what are some ideas for our agenda? Hida?
Hidde de Vries: I thought maybe accessibility guidelines working group could meet up with them potentially.
Wendy Reid: Replying to "Drat.. I will be in Barcelona on Thursday/Friday....":
Oh no!
Hidde de Vries: I thought I saw it in the color, but I think we don't have that yet.
Wendy Reid: Yeah, I don't think we set up I mean, it was hard to say at the time whether we would be in a place that
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Replying to "Drat.. I will be in Barcelona on Thursday/Friday....":
Can’t be everywhere 🙁
Wendy Reid: I still don't even know, the, call for the charter has not gone out yet, so it's even still up in the air if we'll be a CG or a working group at TPAC, so
Hidde de Vries: Yeah.
Wendy Reid: But we can invite and see if, maybe it won't be a formal meeting, but if members of AGWAG want to come join us for a little bit.
Wendy Reid: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QFvbnM_HXhcWeV48g11yrTKqQfK6HkWpqvzAUsgx1UM/edit?usp=sharing
Jutta Treviranus: Um, I wonder whether it would be useful to have any group that's currently discussing AI within W3C?
Wendy Reid: Yes.
I think it's the HIDA Keep Me Honest Web and AI Interest Group.
Jutta Treviranus: Is it an interest group?
Hidde de Vries: Yeah. Interest proof. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The IG.
Wendy Reid: Yeah.
Jutta Treviranus: Also, Dino Zippa will be there, and I know that the collaboration with ASC will be one of the topics.
Wendy Reid: That's a topic we want to have on the agenda.
Jutta Treviranus: I guess so, yeah.
Wendy Reid: Okay.
Are we gonna
Jutta Treviranus: And not
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Hidde and I are both in the Web Sustainability Interest Group. There is some overlap with accessibility there.
Ned Zimmerman:❤️
Jutta Treviranus: in some afternoon. So oops.
Wendy Reid: Yeah.
Jutta Treviranus: So that Canada can purchase it, yeah.
Wendy Reid: That was my other question, is if I know if Dino's there in person, that's great, but if there's people joining from Canada.
Um, we probably want to schedule that for
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah, there will be three of us relevant.
Wendy Reid: like an afternoon.
Jutta Treviranus: Joining from Canada.
Wendy Reid: All right.
Jutta Treviranus: As well as the ASC committee.
Wendy Reid: We'll put it here for now.
At TPAC, too, we can have, more dedicated sessions, so something else I can do is break out some of the topics that we've been discussing, broadly, and then say, we're gonna do an hour on definitions, or an hour on use cases.
But if there's, like
I will say TPAC is a great chance sometimes to get into, some of the, meatier, hard topics because you're there and you can see each other and.
It's a little bit more
I don't know, there's something about it.
Jutta Treviranus: I wonder whether the, this thought of not simply moving from ATAG 2.0, but, visioning what a
reimagining of the, what we
our larger goals.
And then the influence of AI or how does AI change the landscape?
Wendy Reid: I wonder if, I know, he's not here, so I don't wanna
Put them on the spot.
But,
There's some people doing research, so maybe
A research, recap of what we have so far, because by then we probably should have some stuff done.
Let me switch these around.
Um, I guess actually a quick question.: how many people are going to be there in person versus remote?
I haven't checked the registration, so
Hidde de Vries: I'll be in for some, but with some.
A bunch of overlaps, quite a lot of overlap.
Wendy Reid: Yeah, I know those last two days are
Which I can probably check.
Jutta Treviranus: There will be three of us from IDRC and one possibility remote. I mean, one possibility in person, but yet to be determined.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Hidde, you are involved in so many great projects.
Israel Cefrin:👍
Jutta Treviranus: So if we could load the morning of the Friday with things that are maybe a little easier to relay to people that can't get up at.
Wendy Reid: Oh, Miriam will be there. Yeah.
Jutta Treviranus: 2:00 AM or whatever.
Wendy Reid: Yeah, that's always the, the fun part of managing the
Which makes it so I think I want to move this later in the day.
Jutta Treviranus: So more of the presentation rather than the — yeah, right, than the discussion. Yeah.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): There isn't a procurement group within the W3C, is there?
Hidde de Vries: Not that I know of.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): Because so much of this is about changing policies and procurements for big organizations.
Wendy Reid: Only thing I can think of is,
Arm?
Maybe.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): No, we're not.
I mean, maybe.
Yes, it's a roll.
Wendy Reid: The, accessibility roles and
Jennifer Chadwick will be there, so maybe we can ask her to
to pop in.
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): I'm I'm on the committee, too. So on.
But we haven't talked about procurement.
Wendy Reid: Maybe it's worth a discussion because it is a role, right?
Mike Gifford (CivicActions): True, absolutely.
I'll bring it up.
Hidde de Vries: I guess it could be a topic for us, for ourselves as well, to discuss within our group, how do we
Jutta Treviranus: This is the clip.
Wendy Reid: Yeah.
Hidde de Vries: How do we make this next version work well for people who need to do procurement?
What what can we do to do that?
Jutta Treviranus: This is a complete tangent, but one of the things that I in looking at the current board vote that's happening, there's absolutely no comment on accessibility, and I wonder if at TPAC there's an opportunity to ask.
Wendy Reid:
Jutta Treviranus: that any board nominees comment on something, given that WAI has such an important position within W3C.
Wendy Reid: I think the board vote closes before TPAC. They announced the results at TPAC.
Jutta Treviranus: To help guide the boat.
Yeah, I know it does.
Hidde de Vries: Yeah.
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah. Yeah, but in looking at their positions, no one's commented at all on anything even related to accessibility, and which seems a little
Hidde de Vries: Yeah.
Jutta Treviranus: I mean, WAI is part of W3C, it's an important part. It's not like we're asking for comment on a topic, you know, it is integral to W3C.
Wendy Reid: I would say, Jutta, are you an AC rep, technically?
Jutta Treviranus: Um, by proxy, no, not
Wendy Reid: I mean, even if you're the alternate, it's fine, but I would say, they're collecting questions,
I'm not going to be able to find the link easily.
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah, we can, we can
Hidde de Vries: Yeah, I think next week we are organizing the
Wendy Reid: Member meetings?
Hidde de Vries: one member meeting, and there'll be time for a discussion of.
Jutta Treviranus: Okay, great. Thank you. Sorry for that tangent.
Hidde de Vries: Questions?
Wendy Reid: No, it's a good question.
I'm just trying to find there we go. I was the Q&A Wiki, where is it?
It is, so I'll share the link in the chat. If you, and this is true, I think anyone who.
Wendy Reid: https://www.w3.org/wiki/AdvisoryCommittee/2026-bod-candidates-questions
Wendy Reid: Is a member. Member is a really hard word because.
I can't remember if invited experts count as members.
You should be able to submit questions there.
And the I know the board candidates are looking at the questions. You can always send it to the list as well, just like a backup, but
It's worth asking because whey is a huge pillar.
W3C.
Hidde de Vries: Yeah, and if you can edit the wiki, you can put your question there.
Wendy Reid: And if you can't formulate the question, and I probably might be able to, I've spent a lot of hours in that wiki in my time.
Jutta Treviranus: Thanks.
Wendy Reid: Because it is an important pillar of the organization and it's worth discussing.
I know at least one candidate cares very deeply about it, even if he doesn't talk about Wei, and that's Abneesh, so
And Lainey, of course. Abneesh and Lainey are both very, very strong accessibility advocates.
Anything else for the agenda?
or topics you'd like to cover.
Also, even if there's just a few of us there in person, maybe we can get together for, a dinner or something. Unfortunately, we don't have a sponsor for these things, but we can
We can find somewhere nice in Dublin, a nice pub in Dublin and get together.
Jutta Treviranus: it's the SC42 plenary, the ISO AI plenary that week in Montreal, which is the problem that I have, so I'm a
Both a mirror committee member and.
Yeah, anyways.
part of us.
Wendy Reid: Oh my gosh. How did we manage to book our conference at the same time as the ISO plenary?
I guess one of the ISO plenaries because.
Jutta Treviranus: Yeah, yeah, it's the AI. Yeah.
Wendy Reid: There's a gajillion.
Yeah, thank you.
I wonder how many people will lose to that.
Uh, all right.
Why don't we
Wrap up a little bit early.
Couple minutes back.
Feel free to pop things into the document.
Probably the next thing I would really like to clean up the use cases into.
we have, right now we have, I think, what I would call, hyper-specific use cases, and we probably need to take them from hyper.
General,
And then start thinking about what to.
you know, based on those use cases, what gaps do we have in terms of knowledge? we've already started doing that with, the definitions and the platform, and, like.
authoring tool definitions and things like that, but, I think going diving back into the into the use cases will help.
figure out where our gaps are.
Jutta Treviranus: And I know we
Wendy Reid: So come prepared.
Jutta Treviranus: Um, just one comment. I know we can't predict the future, but there are some really interesting conversations about, rethinking of accessibility, and stepping back from.
some of the approaches that we've taken in the past in other forums, and I'm wondering whether I mean, not that they will necessarily predict the future, but it would be interesting to see, you know, what are the possibilities that don't exist at the moment? And some of it sort of harks back to.
a decoupling of interfaces from the actual.
product code tool, etc, and other things that were explored by sun microsystems and and in in the past. So they're not necessarily completely future. But they're.
re-looking at how do we approach accessibility? Is it a set of criteria that, are static and consistent and testable, or is it the opportunity to for adaptability and flexibility.
Anyways, it might be good to bring that into the conversation as well.
Wendy Reid: Yes.
That'd be a fun discussion to have.
Hidde de Vries: Potentially people from WebMCP could.
talk to that as well. That is a W3C technology that we've heard in relation with.
With that kind of thinking, will we have interfaces, or
our assistive technology is going to interface with webmcp type of things directly.
Wayne D: At some point, do we need to discuss the
intense anti-accessibility, anti-inclusion movement that's taken over my country.
Jutta Treviranus: Good question. I think that gets to Mike's worry about how do we make sure this is implemented.
Wendy Reid: I mean.
There's a
Certain things I don't think we'll ever be able to spec our way out of.
But
I also
I think, I don't know, it feels like something we both.
should keep in mind, but can't even, I think, hope to, we can't write a spec so good we overcome systemic ableism.
That would be cool.
Maybe it's like a stretch goal.
But realistically, if people don't want to do accessibility.
Aside from, legally forcing them to, there's no
There's no spec we can write.
Jutta Treviranus: Although there's strategies and tactics that avoid the friction.
Wayne D: Yeah, that's what I'm thinking of. And, you know, designing a system whereby it's easier to make accessible content than it is to make inaccessible content.
Wendy Reid:
Jutta Treviranus: Right.
And going further upstream in terms of that.
And up.
a.
Compliance at, yeah.
Certainly before the repair and repair.
Evaluation and repair.
Wendy Reid: All right,
I guess keep that in mind and we'll talk about it more next week.
Thanks, everyone. Have a great rest of your day. Have a good weekend. And we will talk again next week.
Ned Zimmerman: Thanks.