Nacho: have comment
on concepts/wording - cognitive overhead and disorientation
better than information load
... and wrt lack of knowledge/reference to WAI - think about how can we diseminate WAI guidleines to academic field
Helle: maybe Wayne
talks about this sometimes, but not a topic that come up
... more about technical/design background and mangerial background
Nacho: in HCI and technical academic field it would be good to inform
Helle: these are targetted somewhat in EO - as discussed sometimes, maybe we need more material for people without a technical (academic) background to understand
Andrew: HCI seems to influence the usability field
Helle: also the information science field there is a lot going on
ACTION: keep Academia, HCI and Info Science people in mind in our audience considerations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/21-waiage-minutes.html#action01]
Helle: also library people - ofet involved in teaching older people - would be good to get them to read our material
Nacho: we should be mediating between academia and final users and designers
Andrew: any other actions at this stage?
Helle: at the end of
the project - how to diseminate widely
... eg librarians (write an article to a library journal?)
Andrew: did the bolding work to help scanning?
Helle: yes - but
highlight "web inexperience"
... try and get all he highlighted word to the begining
Andrew: looking at 'gap analysis' next
Nacho: general comment - will these requirements also be useful for people with disabilities?
Andrew: yes - agree
Helle: yes - even in Denmark where we get computers from social security, people can't aford to upgrade them as frequently
Helle: can you avoid starting the gaps with 'avoid' - for consistency
Nacho: restate in a more positive wording if possible
Andrew: what about 'conclusionss'?
Nacho: over;ap with usability - issue in Technosite - can emerge in quality of website
Nacho: usability lead to
accessibility, and accessibility lead to usability, mainly with
... a practical implication is that it will be useful if we highlight this topic to the industry and designers, to reach a broader market
Andrew: is the detail right now (cf detailed tables)?
Helle: would be good to retain a link to the more detailed WCAG 2.0 table (and the short explanation)
... also the categorisation is useful and easy to follow
... in the future, a table with more detail just for WCAG 2.0 would be useful
Andrew: should the links go to the TR or to the 'How to Meet' doc
All: link to the CR (TR) and then poeple can follow to more info (meeting / understanding)
William: can ATAG be moved up a level?
Helle: can the 'output' be highlight only in the heading
Andrew: other improvements?
Helle: qrt form fields and asterisk - should it mention colour?
Andrew: asterisk spefically mentioned
William: try rephrasing all recommendations in the positive if possible
William: be sure that we identify that many of these recommendations are not sufficient (some are)
Helle: Tables have "Recommendations identified in the Literature Review:" - could it be possible to indicate in this header that they come from others, not WAI?
next meeting: 3 September 2008