►
From YouTube: CHAOSS DEI Working Group Meeting April 12 2023
Description
Minutes from this meeting can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MzDk84BL7FfHDxbFxJz39M72V2Hfc5Y6oCPhOl6woxo/edit#heading=h.n3rh3l1y6dv7
B
B
B
So
welcome
to
the
Dei
working
group
for
chaos.
This
is
the
meeting
where
we
talk
about
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion,
metrics
and
other
topics
related
to
that
in
the
cast
project
for
anybody,
who's,
new
or
who's.
Watching
this
who
hasn't
attended
any
chaos
meetings
and
also
just
a
reminder
that
all
of
the
chaos
meetings
are
under
the
chaos
code
of
conduct.
So
just
keep
that
in
mind,
as
you
interact
with
us
here.
B
B
Of
the
meetings
where
we
want
to
give
others
the
opportunity
to
facilitate
a
meeting
if
you're
new
to
the
cast,
Community
or
or
you're
you've
been
here
for
a
while
and
you've
just
never
facilitated
anything
and
you'd
like
to
that's.
This
is
the
place
to
do
it,
because
we
can
certainly
help
you
with
doing
that.
So,
if
anybody
wants
to
do,
it
looks
like
Sean
has
already
put
his
name
in
or
Matt
put
Sean's
name
in.
B
A
B
A
B
B
B
B
Thank
you
Kevin
for
doing
that,
and
the
next
item
is
also
an
action
item
for
Elizabeth.
That
Elizabeth
did
not
do
so
so
I'm.
So
sorry,
I
will
definitely
work
on
this
and
have
this
ready
for
next
meeting.
I
just
ran
out
of
time.
So
apologies-
and
this
was
about
the
event
location,
metric
and
trying
to
see
if
we
should
lump
that
into
the
event
location,
inclusivity
metric,
which
I
think
we
might
be
doing
so.
A
And
project
burnout,
for
example,
were
ones
I,
think
those
are
the
ones
that
were
kind
of
in
the
original
bronze
and
the
suggestion
was
to
move
them
down.
So
we've
done
that.
So
as
a
result,
it
has
required
the
creation
of
two
new
metrics,
so
communication,
transparency
and
project
access
and
those
are
both
here.
They
are
not
done,
but
I
think
they're
coming
on
for
a
while.
A
And
we
can
start
with
project
access
and
I
think
the
the
one
kind
of
balance
in
this
metric
is,
we
talked
about
it
and
then,
as
Kevin
and
I
were
going
through,
it
was
Project
access
versus
project
accessibility
and
it
was
really
towards
the
former
towards
project
access.
So
just
just
to
kind
of
keep
that
clear
for
everybody.
So
if
you're
feeling
a
sense
of
questions
about
accessibility,
we're
trying
to
kind
of
stay
away
from
that
with
respect
to
this
metric,
sorry.
E
A
B
E
What's
your
definition
of
accessibility
when
you're
when
you're
talking
about
that
because
as
as
we've
as
we've
already
kind
of
talked
about
project
access,
is
inclusive
of
accessibility,
but
accessibility,
also
kind
of
means.
Some
of
these
very
specific
things,
like
color
blindness,
you
know
it
means
you
know
different.
E
Something
yeah
screen,
readers
translations,
things
of
that
nature,
and
and
so
they
those
are
kind
of
it's
a
it's.
It's
the
next
step
from
from
Project
access
right,
so
project
access.
You
know,
first,
talks
about
you
know
the
the
availability
and
access
to
it
and
then,
when
we
get
to
accessibility,
we're
really
more
talking
about
access
and
Equity
right
together.
D
B
Accessibility
with
regard
to
visual
impairment,
hearing
impairment,
mobility
issues
like
whatever,
whatever
we
think
and
I
think
closed
caption
is
a
good
one.
I
think
that
even
just
saying
have
you
done
a
website
audit
for
accessibility
because
there's
many
tools,
you
know
that
can
just
run
an
audit,
so
have
you
at
least
done
that
part?
You
know
things
like
that.
I
think
would
be
great
to
add.
E
Well,
I
think
some
of
those
things
are
already
included
in
Project
access.
It's
just
really
a
matter
of
how
far
how
focused
we
want
to
be
in
in
measurement
right.
So
the
because
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
that
that
fits
into
that
that
accessibility
category.
So,
if
we're,
if
we're
asking,
if
we're
kind
of
asking
them
in
different
badging
stages,
right
bronze
to
silver
to
gold,
then
it
then
it
would
make
sense
to
maybe
have
different
levels
of
accessibility
at
those
badging
levels,
and
that's
that's
what
I
was
trying
to
get
at
prior.
E
B
Yeah
and
I
Know
It's
tricky,
because
if
we
did
have
a
separate
project,
accessibility
metric
to
fit
it
into
the
dei.md
means
we
would
have
to
maybe
split
it
up
into
like
different
things.
If
we
wanted
to
have
that
as
a
part
of
every
level,
so
I
don't
know
how
that
would
work
and
I
totally
understand
what
you're
saying
Kevin
yeah.
E
They're
at
the
bronze
level,
I
do
question:
if,
if
we
did
go
and
I'm
sorry
I'm,
not
letting
other
people
talk.
If,
if
we
do
go
all
in
on
accessibility,
I
think
we
would
have
problems
at
the
bronze
level,
because
most
projects
are
not
I.
Don't
know
that
they're
gonna
they're
not
gonna
check
all
those
boxes
on
accessibility,
so
X
access
is
that
base.
Is
that
base
level
that
that
can
get
people
thinking
about
accessibility,.
B
A
A
Things
associated
with
accessibility
at
the
same
time,
I,
don't
necessarily
have
a
problem
of
including
things
like
this
in
in
the
implementation.
So
are
they
closed
caption?
Have
you
done
a
website
audit
for
accessibility?
Whatever
some
more
have
you
considered
color
blindness,
because
in
the
bronze
badging
we're
not
asking
people
to
to
necessarily
do
all
of
these
things,
we're
asking
them
to
reflect
on
the
things
that
they
have
done
and
share
that
with
their
community
members.
A
So
it
is
quite
possible
that
somebody
is
not
currently
providing
closed
captioning
and
they
would
just
report
that,
but
they
are
doing
a
lot
of
these
other
things,
they're
being
globally,
attentive,
they're
thinking
about
like
Global
mentorship
or
whatever
it
might
be
on
this
list.
You
know
we're
doing
a
lot
of
these
things,
but
we're
not
doing
all,
and
so
I
I
think
it's
okay
to
include
them
here,
I,
don't
see
and
if
somebody's
doing
it
great
and
you'd
like
to
be
recognized
and
that
might
help
GitHub
as
well.
A
B
I
I
saw
this
talk
when
I
was
out
at
a
scale.
This
woman
did
a
talk
on
accessibility
and
I,
just
learned
so
much
and
there's
so
much
that
folks
can
do
and
I
didn't
even
know
so
I
mean
maybe
I
can
share
this
or
I
don't
know.
Maybe
we
can
think
about
it
a
little
bit
more
but
I
know
we
also
want
to
just
ship
it
and
so
I
don't
want
to
discuss
it
further.
You.
B
E
And
I
and
I
and
I
do
still
think
there
was.
There
would
be
value
in
creating
a
accessibility
metric
that
does
focus
on
on
those
specific
things,
possibly
two
one
that
one
that
focuses
on
accessibility
built
into
the
artifact
and
one
that
would
focus
on
accessibility
around
the
work
that
a
project
does.
A
So
my
own,
the
thing
that
I
think,
if
we
do
that,
Kevin
that
we
would
want
to
sort
out
is
the
potential
of
like
the
confound
that
would
be
created
by
having
project
access
and
project
accessibility
for
people
like
maybe
rename
this
one
to
something
else,
with
an
anticipation
that
we're
going
to
create
a
project.
Accessibility,
metric
and.
E
Right,
so
software
accessibility
could
look
at
the
accessibility,
that's
built
into
the
software
artifact,
and
then
there
could
be
a
different
accessibility.
That's
not
project
that
would
focus
on
the
accessibility
of
the
work,
that's
being
done
on
GitHub,
repos
and
in
collaboration
or
on
the
collaborative
platforms.
E
But
I
don't
think
those
have
to
be
created
before
this
metric
gets
published
and
and
I
and
I
do
agree
that
this
that
list
of
things
that
that
are
there
I
think
those
are
all
applicable.
So
so
we
can,
we
can
definitely
include
some
traditional
accessibility
kind
of
those
Nielsen
Norman
things
in
that
list.
B
E
So
there
actually
are,
there
are
IEEE
standards
and
other
standards,
bodies
that
that
do
accessibility
and
the
the
the
one
that
I
had
just
kind
of
mentioned
earlier
was
the
Nielsen
Norman
stuff
they
kind
of
they
kind
of
own
accessibility.
So
we
could
actually
point
to
Wilson
Norman
for
that
all
right,
I
say
own,
but
they
they
do
a
lot
of
accessibility,
research
and
they
were
the
kind
of
the
first
researchers
to
or
one
of
the
first
groups
of
researchers
to
kind
of
look
at
it.
B
Yeah
I
think
that
the
the
organizations
that
this
person
who
gave
his
talk
referred
to
or
the
international
web
accessibility
laws
and
guidelines
and
then
there's
wcag
and
they
have
different
levels
of
like
how
well
you're
doing
with
accessibility
in
your
software
and
your
your
ux
and
stuff
like
that.
So.
B
E
So
I
will
say
a
lot
of
the
a
lot
of
those
standards
are,
oh
sorry,
go
ahead,
I
was
going
to
say,
I
will
say
a
lot
of
those
standards
are
kind
of
artifact
or
software
Centric
so
and-
and
we
do
kind
of
have-
we
do
kind
of
have
accessibility
on
those
two
different
levels
where
we
are
talking
about
accessibility
built
into
the
software
artifacts,
but
this
the
project
access.
This
document
is
really
more
about
accessibility
around
the
the
project
itself.
Right,
the
the
work
of
the
project
and.
E
A
D
A
B
A
So
this
is
our
first
draft
on
communication,
transparency,
and
here
you
go
so
Kevin
I
I,
just
just
so.
You
know
like
a
lot
of
like
this
kind
of
stuff.
You
know
that
I'm
highlighting
here
is
just
this
node,
that's
moved
up.
I
just
put
it
into
the
text.
Kind
of
stuff
I
had
tried
to
to
like
write
it
like
here's.
What
doing
can
how
it
can
help
you
kind
of
thing,
so
that
was
kind
of
the
angles
that
I
was
trying
to
take
there.
A
A
So
at
least
that's
how
I
read
it
and
I
I
liked
it,
because
it
actually
made
me
reflect
even
in
the
in
our
chaos
project
of
just
about.
Oh
there's,
things
like
perhaps
even
the
number
of
channels
which
can
I
go
back
and
forth,
because
that
can
be
a
challenge
because
you
do
have
to
have
some
channels
that
are
like
globally
distributed,
which
helps
include
other
people
globally,
but
that
also
increases
the
number
of
channels
just
because
you're
having
them.
A
So
it's
a
funny
balance
right,
I
mean
there's
no
perfect
perfect
thing
here
on
on
transparency,
so
I
think
it's
just
really.
How
are
you
as
an
organization
making
an
effort
to
to
make
sure
that
the
communication
that
you
have
wherever
it
may
be
is
is
transparent
for
all
and
through
that
transparency?
That
can
help
with
inclusivity
in
the
project
to
include
people
and
give
them
an
opportunity
to
understand.
A
E
A
A
A
E
E
I
actually,
I
actually
had
I
started
with
that
I
changed
it
to
rules
of
the
community,
but
I,
but
I
actually
aligned
with
project
governance
is
what
I
had
initially
said.
So
the
idea
being
there
that,
for
example,
the
in
chaos,
the
board
meetings
are
not.
You
know,
we
don't
record
those,
we
don't
show
those
board
meetings
and
that's
kind
of
per
the
per
the
way
the
the
project
is
designed
right.
So.
E
Necessarily
it's
not
necessarily
A
transparency
issue.
It's
the
that
level
of
transparency
has
been
chosen
for
that
particular
right
level
of
governance
and
the
the
same
can
be
said
for
like
a
code
of
conduct
discussion,
we
may
not
want
to
have
that
right
be
transparent,
so
we
do
I
think
we
do
need
to
have
some
some
way
of
allowing
for
the
different
levels
of
transparency,
so
that
the
question
then
becomes
we're
not
just
measuring
the
levels
of
transparency
in
the
project,
but
we're
also
measuring
whether
that
level
of
transparency
matches
with
project
governance.
Oh.
A
Okay,
that
makes
more
sense
when
I
was
that
governance
makes
more
sense
to
me.
So,
okay,
so
maybe
just
as
you're
reading
that
if
we
could
just
take
like
five
or
ten
minutes
to
have
people,
give
this
a
read
and
just
see
how
it
resonates
with
you.
That
would
be
really
good.
Can
we
take
back
or
10
minutes,
make
it
and
share
it
here
in
the
chat
as
well?
Oops.
D
D
D
D
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
A
A
Just
kind
of
keep
going
to
things
like
surveys,
so
we
we
do
sometimes
offer
like
sample
survey
questions.
You
know
like
not
an
entirely
developed
survey,
but
you
know
just
like
I
feel
like
to
community
members.
I
feel
that
communication
is
transparent
to
me
and
decision
making
within
the
project
is
clear.
I,
don't
know
something
like
that.
D
D
A
B
D
A
B
A
Quick
I,
just
I
put
it
in
here,
I,
don't
know.
This
is
necessarily
the
appropriate
place
to
talk
about
the
readme,
but
I
was
just
trying
to
circulate
this
thing.
I
had
kind
of
shared
some
potential
changes
to
the
readme
I'm,
just
trying
to
make
sure
all
people
see
it.
This
is
kind
of
the
after
the
code
of
conduct,
thing
I'm
thinking
about
readme's.
Now
in
the
repositories.
A
Well,
this
is
I.
This
is
nothing
to
be
changed,
yet
this
is
just
a
proposal
of
a
new
structure
and
like
of
course
like
when
I'm
putting
it
together
like
this,
would
be
the
read
me
at
least
I.
Think
for
the
working
groups
like
I,
don't
this
doesn't
fit
every
readme
and
I,
don't
think
kind
of
like
code
of
conduct
that
we
can
have
a
standard
thing
that
everybody
points
to
so
I'm,
not
okay.
A
So
it
was
really
just
meant
to
simplify
a
lot
of
things.
Is
the
intention
here
so
a
brief
overview,
so
a
link
to
the
agenda
in
the
minutes,
a
brief
overview
of
the
working
group,
the
focus
areas.
This
may
get
some
feedback,
but
the
focus
area
is
just
simply
pointing
to
the
spreadsheet
as
opposed
to
keeping
a
table
in
the
readme.
That
would
seem
to
get
out
of
sync
really
fast.
C
A
For
yeah
I
mean
I
think
the
template
doesn't
have
to
be
like
absolutely
strict
like
if
there's
a
little
bit
of
a
something
that
isn't
applicable,
then
that's
okay
to
leave
it
out,
but
a
lot
of
it
was
just
kind
of
like
doing
this
kind
of
stuff
like
yeah,
somewhere
else
where
we
have,
because
we
obviously
right
all
the
time.
Yeah.