See also: IRC log
<shawn> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007JulSep/0092.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007JulSep/0096.html
<scribe> scribe: Shadi
slh: who had a look at the documents for reading?
sd: quick reference, and sent comments
wd: quick reference briefly, WAI-ARIA more closely
ac: WAI-ARIA overwhelmed me
ac: intimidating, lots of content
slh: other first reactions?
hs: agree with ac, lots of stuff
there
... especially for recurring users
... maybe have a cover page for first-time users?
wd: is the form functional? for
example, selected scripting and it gave me everything
... wasn't very helpful, gave me too much
slh: most said this was long,
where can we cut it down?
... issue with cover page is that some people may be directly
pointed to this part
hs: can select to hide introduction, not sure if people will find it
<Sylvie> no
slh: who found that?
... what if it was right beside the introduction?
[agreement]
jt: after i've read it, just hide
saz: not convinced that cover
page wouldn't work, we can point there pretty clearly
... like on the tools list. but either options work for me
slh: what are the pros and cons of having a separate cover page vs having the show/hide option?
ds: separate page makes it more
readable to me, long text is opposite to a *quick*
reference
... but something immediately clear that it can be customized
works
slh: do we need both show/hide and cover page?
wd: no, its too much
[agreement]
<scribe> ACTION: suggest the show/hide option around the heading of the introduction [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/21-eo-minutes.html#action01]
slh: any information that is not necessary?
sd: first sentence should come later
<Harvey> Am unable to join by phone What is the proper phone number?
slh: note that this will not stay there
[agreement with sd]
lmg: better to tell people what this resource is before pointing them to a different one
slh: any reasons not to switch the first & second paragraphs?
wd: not sure if it should be a paragraph
<scribe> ACTION: suggest to switch first and second introduction paragraphs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/21-eo-minutes.html#action02]
jt: not sure why that last paragraph is there, sounds more like a disclaimer
hs: is more supplementary information, not for the user
slh: not user-centric?
[agreement]
jt: don't think rewording will help, it shouldn't be up there
wd: it should go
slh: important to know that techniques are not exhaustive, there are other ways to meet the success criteria
wd: see people not able to understand these terms, rely on me to explain it
lmg: can shorten several parts,
much of the information is additional and not often
needed
... for example sufficient techniques
... vs adivsory techniques
saz: maybe additional information page?
slh: will be such a page
wd: in my mind, "informative" is unecessary and i often ignore it
slh: how does that term for people not heavily involved with standards?
jt: doesn't tell me anything
wd: should drop it
lmg: informative ... not required for conformance -maybe not something useful to say to everyone
<shawn> saz: usual developer not care normative, or informative
<Liam> Suggested minimum: This Quick Reference is based on the 17 May 2007 WCAG 2.0 draft. Anyone can submit new techniques to the Working Group at any time. For additional information on WCAG 2.0 and its supporting documents see Overview of WCAG 2.0 Documents.
saz: usual developer not care normative, or informative
<scribe> ACTION: suggest to only include the absolute minimum in the introduction, and move other information else where [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/21-eo-minutes.html#action03]
slh: what is the benefit of the
scripting version?
... see difference to without scripts
jt: recurring submissions seems tedious
lmg: changes after submissions are not clear
slh: do people like the scripting?
wd: doesn't really help
jt: doesn't help me at all
hs: relatively new paradigm of interface, not sure if people are already used to it
ac: it is meant for experienced
users, they can learn how to use this document
... customization is important
slh: customization will be kept, the javascript is the question
wd: scripting gets into the way
of people who can't use scripting
... but not in this case
slh: everyone gets the button regardless if scripting or not
lmg: are we talking about the customization function or the submit button?
slh: do people like the function of selecting a checkbox and having things showing/hiding without submitting?
<Zakim> Sylvie, you wanted to comment on scripts
sd: depends on the users,
designers and developers may like it
... but people with disabilities may be disturbed by it
... maybe people will not understand why the page suddenly
changes
... or why the button suddenly appears
... the text "save setting options" is not clear to me
saz: like the overall function,
the target audience is designers and developers (even if with
disabilities)
... can improve a lot of the usability but the function
helps
<Henny_> queue/ henny
jt: not aparent that my actions had any effects, don't know what changed
lmg: script can either submit the page which would cause a reload, or to show/hide which gives no clues on the changes
hs: if one gets a message notification it may help
slh: issue if a lot of things are unselected, then anchors don't work well
saz: how did the usability tests with designers/developers work?
slh: can't remember
wd: really can't detect the differences when changes are made
jt: correlation between SC 1.1.1 and CSS may not be clear to everyone
saz: not the scripting issue
slh: relates to wd's observation
<scribe> ACTION: raise bug that when CSS is not selected, still get CSS advisory techniques [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/21-eo-minutes.html#action04]
wd: push out everything on you in case you might miss something but in turn it hides what you need to find
<Wayne> A person with blindness or low vision has no programatic way to find the essential search items.
<shawn> saz: focusing on CSS, versus evaluating a page that includes CSS
<shawn> saz: perhaps additional options for different use case
lmg: having thoughts about
turning on/off
... the semantics don't seem to work
... turning sections on/off is not consistent, for example
can't turn off the TOC
... can turn off A, AA, and AAA -don't see why this is
useful
jb: rationale was so that one could see the most basic requirements -the guidelines
lmg: why are techniques and failures together?
slh: because WG thinks that it is important
lmg: what if someone wants to see the failures alone?
slh: relates back to wd's point, need to rediscuss
lmg: should automatically save settings
slh: what happens when you go away and come back later?
saz: can be notified that settings are preset
<Zakim> judy, you wanted to say that the setting changes should be an option, because i might want to do something different the next time i use it.
saz: i hear cookies and privacy concerns...
lmg: have an issue with the
labeling -in forms mode screen reader users often tend to miss
headers
... prefer to have slightly longer labels like "show CSS"
etc
... add verbs like "show" to have a better construction
... take out the labels on the fieldsets
sd: notes will be missed unless read line-by-line
<scribe> ACTION: in the customizing section, add a disabled checkbox with the HTML that is always selected (as opposed to the note) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/21-eo-minutes.html#action05]
lmg: suggest to remove the
notification in the red brackets
... suggest to notify through the heading and the title
slh: issue is how to communicate once a customization is made
saz: understood lmg saying take out legends for the fieldsets but therefore have more elaborate labels for the individual controls
slh: who realized that at the bottom were conformance requirements?
[1 yes, 2 no]
lmg: kind of a prize for the ones
who read all the way to the end
... it's there just in case you may need it
jt: doesn't fit with the quick reference
sd: maybe a page navigation (like on the other WAI pages) listing the <h2>s
lmg: move the table of contents as a page navigation?
sd: no, TOC is too long, a brief overview
slh: very busy time of the year
in boston
... if you are planning to stay at the conference hotel, please
make your reservations soon
... preferably today
jb: i'm stepping down from my
role as EOWG chair to focus on other WAI work
... especially on WAI-AGE and other standard harmonization
work
... slh will be the new chair
... the work in this group is really important to me, think it
is vital
... will continue to participate, but no longer as chair
... it was an honor to chair the group, hoping you will
continue to support Shawn
... really important work being used by people all around the
world
ds: big hug, will miss you being
around all the time
... your heart had been in this
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128 of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/information/informative/ Found Scribe: Shadi Inferring ScribeNick: shadi Default Present: Shadi, Shawn, +020851aaaa, Henny, doyle, Sylvie, Wayne_Dick, Alan, Justin, Liam_McGee, Judy, Bingham Present: Shadi Shawn +020851aaaa Henny doyle Sylvie Wayne_Dick Alan Justin Liam_McGee Judy Bingham Regrets: Andrew Jack WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007JulSep/0096.html Got date from IRC log name: 21 Sep 2007 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/09/21-eo-minutes.html WARNING: No person found for ACTION item: in the customizing section, add a disabled checkbox with the html that is always selected (as opposed to the note) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/09/21-eo-minutes.html#action05] People with action items: raise suggest[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]