Document URL = http://www.w3.org/WAI/participation
Judy: Participating in WAI - reviewing document. The pages have evolved with the site, and look better now. People might land at this place. As we talk about WCAG 2 this gives a way to participate and will increase transparency of the process. [Looking for missing elements or unclear elements regarding these goals.]
Doyle: Blind people seemed to have more problems reading it. Not access...
Alan: May be a little more orientation regarding the role,... [Uses authoring tools etc.]
Andrew: [for example] If you use authoring tools you might want to join ATWG... and such.
Judy: Lets hold this idea for now because it might be difficult, but maybe we should revisit this idea.
Shawn: It is a good idea but it might be difficult... maybe we could put something more welcoming at the top.
Judy: Depending on what you do, some of these groups might be more relevant.
ACTION: Participating changelog: consider putting something about roles, if you're role is X, then you might want to do Y. perhaps note for working groups. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/16-eo-minutes.html#action01]
wayne: "if you have a particular interest, these groups are meant to..."]
William: This is directed at specialists. Promotion is encouraged. [We might] want to harvest people who work in this but do not create websites. Keep in mind that our new audience is not in the [web] business. A change in the promoting [like] a sentence in the beginning, "You don't have to be an expert to help us."
Judy: Add some words like contribute to "media" and "bloggers". In promoting awareness add some bullets like "contact the media" or "write on a blog".
Judy: "help get this covered by different media outlets" or "write about this on your blog"
Doyle: Blogging is conversation, but a little different than the web accessibility. [less controlled]
Judy: Sometimes more dialoge helps. Do you think it too risky?
Doyle: No, but we may want [to encourage] using accessible blogs for example.
Shawn - Introduced some changes to the page that met with general approval.
Judy: In section "Reporting Inaccessible"... how does material work?
wayne: you need to do more to acknowledge the frustration before you send your comments. "Wait for your second thought."
Doyle: Some groups feel discouraged... Up until now you felt there was nothing you could do... now there is something to do...
Judy: The last h3 ... is implementing friendly enough? Can we think of another word?
Andrew: Encouraging Accessibility...
Judy: Add a reference to the Invited Expert policy. Maybe I can be welcoming.
Justin: This may appear to be too excluse...
Shawn: WG membership is for members and in some cases specialist.
Judy: "participation is open to ...from w3c members and in some cases to people w/ specific ("expertise"?) / to people from other organizations
shawn, "Participation is open to W3C member.. and in some cases specialists that are not part of memebr orgs"
Judy: May want to use this in the future.
Shawn: This was presented at South by Southwest for pointing people to right places.. For CSUN this will be a generic handout. Cover points anyone would want. One page starts with WAI resources; WCAG 2 information.
Judy: If this was a handout how would you react to it.
William: There are missing documents like.. "How people with disabilities use the web."
Andrew: Make it more topical
Shawn: It is primarily for presentations, but it should be more broad.
Judy: This is different because it is more topical and than it jumps to more specific.
Liam: This reads well. I would like to use it to explain WAI.
Andrew: Seconds the observation.
wayne: [Linearized Point of View] I read down; I get the nice overview of web accessibility; I get a row of little pictures (not sure what those are); then I immediately get "updates, see....", then I immediately get "wcag 2.0" and well it's kind of confusing.
slh: Yeah that's a new page.This is actually a physical handout, but the physical print sends people here, for updated info.
...but want to keep it just the same content.
Wayne: also, the "updates" makes it sound very time-dependent, less like a "forever" page; how about grouping it into one "forever" page and one more progressively updated page.
Andrew: ...and make it needs a table of content? I can't tell from the beginning that there's anything abt WCAG 2. ...just say "in this document you can find..." I also like the idea of separating it.
Andrew: Points out status of the draft may change soon.
Shawn - will add dates throughout.
Judy - Might insert something like, "as of date dd/mm/yyyy...."
Date: 30 March
Date April 6
Date April 13
Andrew: uncertain (will have been interstate all week with training)
judy no (in oslo at jtc1 swg-a)
Judy Stabilization draft is not a formal stage. This is for reviewing changes that were submitted. The public will see it as well. It is important that there is another draft. How does it all look together to prep for the next-last call working draft. There will be a following last call draft, but this will give another chance for next-last draft. In that context what themes do we want to communicate publicly... themes of messages...
Justin: Start preparing people now! ... get out in the community and discuss it now... The more public we are the better... WAI is not hiding anything...
Liam: Comment on how much we are listening. How many responded? Say how many. [Just count no detailed analysis]
William: Can we change the term Last Call.
Liam: As well as the consultative, this is authoritative. Be clear how important this is document is and how authoritative the final document will be.
Andrew: Make this as open as possible. How the process is going. Be encouraging.
Justin: Do not put every thing out in one document. Spread this out in pieces.