19 Aug 2005


See also: IRC log


Loughborough, Doyle_Saylor, Andrew, Judy, Justin_Thorp, Jack, Shawn, Shadi, Tanguy, Helle_Bjarno_(muted), Alan_(muted), Harvey_Bingham, Liam_(muted)
Ron_Armstrong, Steve_Faulkner, Pasquale_Popolizio, Barry_McMullin




<Andrew> Scribe: Andrew

<scribe> ScribeNick: Scribe

<shawn> :-)

<shawn> andrew, alan is often able to scribe for the first half of the meeting. shall we ask? otherwise, can get someone on backup for if you drop later. (also, we might have a short meeting today)

lest see how we go

<judy> rssagent & zakim usually get it pretty straight


Judy: runs through the Agenda

<shawn> Justin - changelogger for About RSS page

<shawn> Shawn - changelogger for user involvement page for evaluation

Outreach Updates

Andrew: getting very good responses to our web accessibility workshops in Australia

Draft requirements for user involvement page for evaluation resource suite

Background: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-eval-ut

Shawn: introduces the topic and summarises background

Shawwn: Eval suite mentions usability testing in passing only

Shawn: at f2f meeting in March 05 suggested a new page on this topic
... will form its own page within the newly separated pages forming the Eval Suite

<shawn> where it fits: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/

Shawn: fits in at w3.org/wai/eo/drafts/eval/
... see also - http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/eval-links.html
... lets discuss the page and ideas presented and agenda questions previoulsy posted

Judy: What are the key points to be made in this document?

Shawn: there is a resource quite withh several docs that address aspects of evaluation - this will be one of the docs
... sometimes user involvement does not happen - but is desirable, and we can give some guidance

<LiamM> Apologies for lateness -- don't seem to be able to get a connection to the phone bridge

Judy: we have several levels of evaluation - the final one inlcudes user involvement

<shawn> andrew: often times not approp to bring in users yet 'cause we know the technical problems are so bad

<judy> (from above: jb was saying that user review is part of a more comprehensive evaluation, not nec the final stage of evaluation)

Jack: helps to clarify what is in and what is out
... are we primarily talking about usability evaluation?

<shawn> Shawn: technically accessible? usable to PWD?

Shawn: can get useful info from user involvement without full-blown usability testing

Judy: usability testing would test tasks undertaken - our scope is realy about how well it works for certain groups with disabilities or using assistive technologies

Shawn: misconception is that usability testing is task oriented across a whole site
... need to point out that usability testing can be a few people looking at a few pages or separate functions

Andrew: supports the idea that a few users looking a few pages can yield a lot of information

Shawn: Jacob N talks about "discount usability" with limited time and resources

William: need to capture these ideas that we can have "simple" usability testing as well as full "task based" testing

Shawn: agrees that it is not clear to many people - we need to help people understand the range of what can be undertaken and still be useful

Andrew: propose add "help people undestand some of the usability issues experienced by PWD, some of whom may be using assistive technologies"
... propose adding "emphasise that usability testing is not a replacement for technical testing, but complements it"
... need to draw out potential issues of user skill leading to false positive and/or false negatives

Liam: we are finding tha people want to keep user testing costs doen - tend to inlcude a cscreen reader users, another vision impaired users, and a person with sight but with mobility issues


Shawn: this can become a serious book - we need to keep it simple
... keeping changelog notes

Alan: should make people not afraid to try - need to encourage them to give it a go and understand that they can get a lot from a little effort
... casual users of, say JAWS, will have difficulty where as regular users may find it easy

Liam: not everyone is an expert user

Alan: yes, not everyone has the same level of skill

Judy: need to stress the different levels of skill that could be inlcuded in the user 'pool'
... need to also talk about the need to inlvove users is to make sure that, say, sighted users don't make assumptions about how non-sighted users use e site and/or the technology

Helle: with the possibilities in JAWS, many users are not sure enough to complain because they may not have their settings correct

Andrew: and also need to ne carefull that they are good enough not to make too many mistakes

Shawn: some applications may require advanced AT knowledge; other may be targtting 'the masses' and hence medium and low skills user would be mnore appropriate

Liam: getting the owners and/or developers can laos be a very useful exercise

Andrew: concurs completely - it can be enlightening for them

<judy> liam: free beer and chocolate help the usability testing sessions...

Andrew: if assessing a technical or professional application - the user needs to have the professional knowlege appropriate to the task

Alan: some developers may just have to make do with what they can and may not have access to wide range of users

Tanguy: we should insist more on the benefits of getting users to do some testing
... should be more positive about the uses

Judy: ok - what about Audience?

All: seems fine

Judy: any comments on scope?

Shawn: what is the target size? one page or five or ??

see also the ITTATC page: http://www.ittatc.org/technical/access-ucd/ [moved to http://uiaccess.com/accessucd/ ]

About RSS

Background: http://www.w3.org/WAI/highlights/about-rss.html

<Justin> :-)

Jack(?): looking good and introduces the topic well

Helle: now I understand what we have been talking about - well done

Judy: after reading the page, I found the nav menu confusing

Liam: what about puting out own feed on the nav - to illustrate

Shawn: what is our goal? to make the feed available yo those in the know? or to encourage new users?

Andrew: what about "RSS news updates" as the nav item?

<shawn> [RSS] WAI Highlights

Harvey: I don't like the logo - want something more simple

Judy: which is the primary audience? I would say both

<Justin> brainstorming.....Subscribe to our New Feed....Syndicate our Feed

Andrew: another alternative "RSS news feed"

<shawn> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2005JulSep/0064.html

Shawn: Barry suggested having an RSS link near the "highlights" heading

Justin: I just look for the "RSS" button

Liam: what about putting the button after each date with each item?

Andrew: lets keep it simple - leave it where it is but make the link text clearer

Judy: lets finaliase Justin's doc now

Jack: does the job right now - go with it as it is
... also concur with the suggestion for nav - "RSS news updates" or similar as a call to action

Judy: thanks Justin for the re-write

Draft home page Highlights

Liam: lets reverse the business case tag?

Most: leave out the explanaition of the carrots & sticks

Judy: discussion of "101" for web accessibility intro

Andrew: what about "Web Accessibility Intro: the basics and beyond"

All: "101" is ok

Andrew: like #2 without bolding

Liam agrees - bold in all or none

Judy: no bolding

Face-to-face meeting planning update

Shawn: Germany in Oct - not enough participants
... Australia in Dec is still a possibility
... France at end of Feb 2006 is going ahead
... check EO home page for dates

Judy: please get back to Shawn if this affects your potential attendances

next meeting

Judy: next meeting is next week

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/2005/08/19-eo-minutes.html available now

<shawn> doesn't do past I think...

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
$Date: 2006/10/31 14:47:04 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Shwan/Shawn/
Succeeded: s/rbing/bring/
FAILED: s/csreen/screen/
Succeeded: s/laos/also/
Succeeded: s/Backround/Background/
Found Scribe: Andrew
Inferring ScribeNick: Scribe
Found ScribeNick: Scribe
Present: Loughborough Doyle_Saylor Andrew Judy Justin_Thorp Jack Shawn Shadi Tanguy Helle_Bjarno_(muted) Alan_(muted) Harvey_Bingham Liam_(muted)
Regrets: Ron_Armstrong Steve_Faulkner Pasquale_Popolizio Barry_McMullin
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2005JulSep/0093.html
Got date from IRC log name: 19 Aug 2005
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2005/08/19-eo-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.
[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]