EOWG - 31 Oct 2008


  1. Update from Before-After Demo (BAD)
  2. Debrief from 23-24 October face-to-face meeting


Doyle, Andrew, Shadi, Yeliz, Jack, Sharron, Alan
Wayne, Helle, Shawn


BAD (Before-After Demo) edits from WAI-AGE project

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Overview.html

Shadi: Ok lets get started. Small group. Let's take it from there. Short meeting today. Go to agenda page and refresh.
... Two agenda items for today. Remind people about that work. To debrief for people not there.
... Link from the agenda page, the updates from the before and after demo. The changelog after the demo. We introduced that not long ago the before and after demo. Want some background on the before and after demo.
... The WAI-AGE task force looked at what needs to be changed. At the same time we re-started the demo task-force. We revived that group and have some new people on board now. I want to bring in the changes today.
... For EO to make further comments on this. The link at the changelog, this will be updated in the course of the WAI Age project.
... Three primary categories. Requirements for older users. From the literature review for WAI Age for older people on the Web, since many are addressed by WCAG 2.0 better than WCAG 1.0. Demonstrates how web accessibility addresses all the users with age related functional changes. The first link is suggested enhancements for the demo

<andrew> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-age/2008OctDec/0025.html

Shadi: ok so that takes you to an email. Those are users requirements we identified in the literature review we want to demonstrate on the demo.
... for example, bread crumbs.

Andrew: if you look at the literature about implementing we don't want to do everything. But some select requirements.

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/waiage

Shadi: currently implemented findings on the demo. A full mapping of the user requirements on the demo. Don't be surprised some say no. Not explicitly demonstrated in the review. But doesn't mean it doesn't comply. For example script like san serif.
... that is the first set of changes. We are going to be doing to implement.
... Any feedback please send that to us. If you are really missing something to be demonstrated in the demo. Please let us know.
... ok the second set of changes we are doing. To update the demo to WACG 2.0. We don't anticipate many changes. We don't see doing a lot more.
... It gets more tricky about the reports of the demo. The actual updating from WCAG 1 to 2 is one of the things we are working on.
... there is a third step we are doing. A couple of improvements we want to do. Some open items in the changelog. Cleaning up, and a lot of minor changes and minor improvements we want to do.
... For example, so-called in between pages. Those will be so called graphic/item based reports. They generate small icons where the error is. We see the before and the after but not what changes unless we go into the source code. We want to identify the errors right where they are, rather than separately in an evaluation report.
... Finally we are working on improving the navigation throughout the site. It proves to be difficult, we have the demo pages. They are different but we want to have site wide navigation to be complete. We want to find.
... That is the update that came in from WAI-AGE task force, and we'll be implementing in the next few months or so. We'll bring back to EO to look at later.
... now is the time to speak up on the call.

Andrew: that pretty much is the plan. We are hoping to be ready early in the new year.

Shadi: Are there any questions on the before and after. Comments or wishes? Time to put in the wishes.
... so this section of the changelog called WAI updates. You can always come back to that about the task force.
... As the changes progress, we'll update the EOWG, and the WAI-AGE task force.

Debrief from October face to face

Meeting details:

Shadi: the second link from today's agenda takes you to the face to face meeting. The minutes are still draft minutes but pretty good. Make sure to read through the minutes. You can see from the agenda page all the documents we went through, the requirement documents. I'll give you a small summary.
... Involving users in web accessibility evaluation. When you read through it is more about involving users in general. We want to take it out of the evaluation suite. We want to make it stand alone, change a focus from evaluation only and making it more general with evaluation as one. Involve users throughout the development process.

Involving Users

"Involving users" discussion - http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-eo-minutes.html#item01

Shadi: we spend quite a bit of time on requirements. We went through the document itself changing what needs to be done structurally. We have a good plan of how this will evolve. The changes will be in the changelog. Andrew will do that. We'll bring into EO over the next few weeks.

Andrew: that is about right. Broadening the coverage, rather just about the eval.

Sharron: is the intent to move away from emphasis on guidelines and more to user experience?

Shadi: yes and no. Conformance is the intent. But you can still conform by a user centered process.

Sharron: absolutely. One over the other, or the purpose is, what if in you are in a situation where the user experience contradicts the guidelines. Maybe speculation.

Andrew: discussed a little bit in the existing document. Not just taking one user for investigation.

Shadi: what we previously discussed is that conformance is one thing, but have users go beyond the conformance evaluation. Then you have comprehensive evaluation. Benefit by involving users. A web page the functional requirements are fine before the scripts involving the users and the pros and cons.

Responding to inaccessible websites

"Responding" discussion - http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-eo-minutes.html#item015

Shadi: certainly a very exciting piece of work we are looking forward to. Any comments? Moving on after the lunch. Responding to people with inaccessible web sites. That narrows the scope. We used to have a document about promoting web accessibility. We take a piece out of that. A user comes to an inaccessible web site. Apart from a complaint to web accessibility organizations. Some guidance about how to raise their voice. How to articulate this - something to empower the users. Alert organization about they have inaccessible web sites.

Yeliz: targeting the users? Actually for user if they have problems. Focusing on users?

Shadi: absolutely. We have a set of documents for industry and developers. This promotes user empowerment. A start on that.

Yeliz: creating a specific area that is for the users. If you want to complain this is what to do?

Shadi: good question!

Yeliz: if you put this in with other documents you can't find it.

Andrew: we can promote through disability and aging organization and they have a link directly to the site.

Yeliz: but where?

Andrew: you raise a good point. We need to bear in mind and have more discussion in EO.

Shadi: Andrew could you take an action.

Yeliz: there are not much resources to do for contact organizations. Easily lost among the other technical documents.
... the guidelines and other texts.

Shadi: being able to orient especially users to get what they need to is very important.

<andrew> ACTION: Andrew re "responding" - where should this sit within WAI so that end users can find it among the more technical information? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/31-eo-minutes.html#action01]

Yeliz: that is my point.

Shadi: other questions?

WCAG 2.0 transition

WCAG 2.0 transition - http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-eo-minutes.html#item03

shadi: ok we talked about the big picture about outreach materials. About WCAG 2.0 in preparation - coming along fairly nicely. We looked at the overview for WCAG. We talked about the transition from 1.0 to 2.0. For preparing for the next day.

WAI-AGE slide set

Ageing slide set - http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-eo-minutes.html#item01

Shadi: Friday morning. We talked about the slide sets for web accessibility and aging. The slides are supposed to be a usable set of slides about the WAI-AGE project and benefits of WCAG 2.0. Should be able to re-use without speaker notes. We took some of the slides Andrew presented at conferences.
... what is new and what needs to be changed. A good place to point people to about all the older users and web accessibility, as well as re-use.

WCAG 2.0 transition

Shadi: After that we went into the big picture. For WCAG 2.0 we had a brainstorm about what needs to be included. They may be in the minutes. Where priorities need to be. How would you work on this priorities. Which one first. The general answer transitioning developers is pretty important.

Andrew: And getting the balance right with people who know WCAG 1.0, and a whole lot of people picking up WCAG 2.0. What you need to do different if you think you know accessibility.

Shadi: transitioning is good but what about new people.

Transitioning discussion - http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-eo-minutes.html#item02

Sharron: from recommendations are you getting a lot of feedback about who uses. We did AIR programs. We put the judging form using WCAG 2. Andrew?

Andrew: Basically we are really saying at this stage WCAG 2 is mature and people should be taking up. More appropriate in techniques than WCAG 1. Some differences about scripting. Can you actually do WCAG 2 if you do WCAG 1. You don't make the claim outright.

Sharron: I am thinking about people who do for the first time. Almost like testimonials. I've used the guidelines and materials and it was a great experience. Needing to overcome fear. Take some of the candidate recommendation material and use that in the outreach materials. To give leaders of the usability design context.

Jack: I think that is great idea. More importantly other people are doing that. The important knowledge is possible to do.

Shadi: the first thing will happen WCAG2 leaves candidate and becomes recommendation. The web site shows what happens. We publish a recommendation we like to get testimonials.

Sharron: from Brian Hardy. That was glowing. Really powerful to hear somebody else's experience. It helps to know it works well.

Shadi: we often hear from designers about flexibility and design aspects. Shawn is thinking about this messaging and the promotion activity and I am confident that will be part of if.
... in the last part of the day we talked about transitioning strategies. This was an international perspective. The different ways WCAG 2 was referenced. The US states themselves. Some of the differences. Trying to help policy makers to move from WCAG 1 to WCAG2.
... that was the technical plenary face to face to meeting.

Sharron: I bet that was interesting discussion.

Shadi: quite some interesting aspects. How different states handle it separately.

Jack: could you talk about the highlights?

Shadi: One of the things, in some countries an automatic adoption. As soon WCAG 2 becomes operational. The latest state of the art, the de facto standard. Other countries have a process which initiated when WCAG 2 is launched a committee that recommends a transition. Other countries update their own policies and this has quite an impact.

Andrew: that is pretty much it. Talking about organizations that just reference WCAG 1 and are persuaded to reference WCAG2 and others that have done their own internal versions. Will need to update to reflect WCAG 2

Sharron: any expectation of what to do with that?

Shadi: not new on the front. Introducing about the updates. I am not sure what to repeat.

Sharron: is there any news about the tendency, the expect the access board to make significant changes and make double standards.

Shadi: there is not much influences. We hope that lessons are learned and we have a higher level of conformity here.
... this sums up the face to face meeting. Any questions or comments?

Shadi: that is pretty much for this teleconference for today. There is a lot of reading to do. Read the minutes and get yourself acquainted with the documents. They will come up sooner or later. If you have any comments, please send this to email list. A good time to send any thoughts or comments.

Sharron: I am done with my work with Loretta, and ready for more assignments.

Shadi: yes there is a quite a bit of work.

Sharron: if you need some editing help or research, feel free to assign me.

Shadi: I'll let Shawn know, and she will get back to you.
... there is a lot of homework.

Alan: the minutes are available for the face to face?

<andrew> Thursday minutes - http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-eo-minutes.html

<andrew> Friday minutes - http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-eo-minutes.html

Shadi: Thank you all very much. Next week Shawn will be back.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Andrew re "responding" - where should this sit within WAI so that end users can find it among the more technical information? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/31-eo-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/01/15 09:07:44 $