May 5, 2015 UXC Meeting Page

From IDESG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search



  • Mary Hodder
  • Jim Zok
  • Ann Racuya-Robbins
  • Noreen Whysel
  • Suzanne Lightman
  • Ellen Nadeau
  • Paul Knight
  • Jamie Clark
  • Linda Braun, Global Inventures

Meeting Notes • Recording Minutes
̶ Recording Policy link ( ̶ Linda to send a copy of the WebEx recording to Mary Hodder and Ann Racuya-Robbins. ̶ No prior minutes were posted for approval. • Current Work and Activities Discussion
̶ Election - UXC agreed to extended nomination by one week. Noreen would like to run for vice chair. We don’t have anyone for the secretary slot. UXC decided to keep the slot empty since Linda is taking notes. The election will start at May 5 and run through May 12. Linda will send out the Survey Monkey link right after the meeting. – SME Request - Suzanne sent out the following two paragraphs on the request for FMO support:

      Compile List of Available UX Guidance and Requirements Available
The UX Committee would like the FMO to undertake a survey of currently existing UX guidance, including standards, government requirements and non-profit organizations’ guidance that can be used to support the self-assessment of parties against the suggested UX requirements. This guidance can be sector-specific. The FMO could start with a review of the listing of guidance and resources that the
UX Committee has started in the Wiki at the notes that the UX
Committee put in its initial submission of requirements.

Team discussed the SME request in light of the fact that the FMO feedback/comments (sent on April 27) were not asking for any specific feedback or response from UXC; it was just a heads up for now and the FMO would be responding along those lines. Mary asked about the questions the FMO asked in their report and asked if the UXC should map specific resources to requirements. It would be helpful to have more specific links. We discussed this before and being too descriptive is self-defeating at this phase. Could some items be positioned as best practices vs. requirements? We had the discussion around “shall” vs. “should.” Calling this “best practices” might be a good suggestion vs. calling them requirements; bundle them with the other requirements. That would be appropriate in a number of cases, but it is up to UXC to frame these. It might be difficult for companies to comply because of legal liabilities. Does “shall” vs. “should” still carry weight in the harmonization process? There is a block of text in some of the requirements (supporting information) that contains “shall” vs. “should.” Suggestion was that UXC could handle this with some formatting. “Shall” is a requirement; “should” is a recommendation. FMO tried to use before. There are a number of committee requirements that should consider following this format. Suggestion was made that UXC should clean up “shall” vs. “should” first before going ahead with the SME request.

̶ Timeline: All requirements to be presented at June 25 (plenary approval of an initial set of requirements ready to be published to the public). Requirements to be published two weeks before plenary.

̶ Mary suggests it will still be helpful to put in the UXC SME request to the FMO, even if addressed at a later time. UXC will move forward.

̶ FMO will get requirements feedback to UXC Friday. How will the UXC give comments back to FMO if they don’t understand something? No formal process in place, but they will accept all comments.

• Action items (carried over from previous meetings).
1. ARR: recommend UXC have someone knowledgeable from a design and development perspective give us background on how we might integrate into the requirements. Will find.
2. Mary received subject matter expert help draft. Discuss?
3. Mary to write up proposal for review of terms.
4. Ellen suggests possible standard for SCC to review. This was in a response to ARR request. Wait until she is on the call to discuss.

Meeting adjourned at 12:52p.m., EDT. Next meeting scheduled for May 12, 2015.