Andrew: Let's get started, we have a full quorum
... and only one agenda item today, "Contacting Organizations with Inaccessible Websites"
Andrew: We have renamed this document after input from the group and WAI editors, edited it and would like to consider the requirements and the updates.
... what is inital feedback on requirements intro?
Alan: I haven't had a chance to review in detail
Andrew: Would everyone like a few nimutes to read this morning?
Andrew: OK, please take a few moments to read and comment.
Alan: It seems quite long.
Liam: Is there no guidance on tone? How aggressive or placatory the complaint should be?
Andrew: Keep that thought Liam and we will see where it may jump out as we go through the document.
Yeliz: I think it satisfies the requirements.
Andrew:What about the overall structure? We have added structure since we last looked at it. Do the headings make sense, have we missed any appropriate sections, if you skim through does it follow logically and give all you need?
Sylvie: Concerning the part about the samples, I think it would be useful to make each one an h4.
Liam: And there is content before the Introduction. Is it meant to provide a How to use this page sort of function?
... if so, make it clearer and stronger. "If you are encountering barriers, use this page."
... Was recently looking at a consumer rights web site with very direct language.
Liam: Consumer Direct.gov.uk, that gives examples of making a complaint.
Andrew: So, to your points, should we provide heading for the preface?
Liam: Not if it is short, it is already within an h1
... Where does the table of contents fall in the reading order? Oh it is before the preface so you might skip it...so yes, should likely have a heading.
Andrew: I will consider what heading level might be appropriate there. So that covers the big picture stuff, requirements and structure..let's look at it section by section.
Andrew: Any comments, sugestions about making intro sharper or clearer?
Yeliz: Yes it is good.
Andrew: Anna submitted some suggestions for tidying it up, thank you.
... the section called Approach contains some new structure and content. How you might approach a company...
Yeliz: I am concerned about the third one. We don't want people to get aggressive and publish their experince without first going through other complaint processes.
Liam: Yes, I agree.
Andrew: In that case, I may modify that.
... is this perhaps where the material about tone comes in.
... The question always arises about how much are you telling people about how to do something they already know, or how much you are reminding them to do something or how much you are suggesting a course they may not have considered or done before.
Liam: If the person is angry enough to search for "How to complain about inaccessible web sites," it may be wise to remind them not to be too aggressive.
Yeliz: It's all about getting a good outcome.
Andrew: Is the approach section the right place for that?
Liam: Yes and remind them to stay calm even if provoked, maintain the high moral ground.
Andrew: Any other comments?
Liam: It's good - short and simple.
Liam: Only make it more direct. Intead of "You should consider asking for a response," use "Ask for a response."
Alan: The reference and narrative around "Your computer" should also be more direct.
Andrew: We thought perhaps some, especially older people who did not set up their own computers and may not know all of that information, could be discouraged from writing because they did not have that piece of info,
... that's why it became optional.
... how do others feel?
Liam: That's right, it's better to have some knowledge about the inaccessibility of your website than none.
Andrew: Let's look at next section "How to Contact..."
Liam: Again, more direct language, remove "it is recommended"
Alan: And receommend them to keep a copy of the form content or print the form off.
Liam: The second sentence in "Feedback forms" is long and complicated. Simplify.
Alan" Suggest that if they see an automated reply upon form submission, not to assume it has been read, only that it has been received.
Liam: This seems to be geared to a high reading level, may be wise to lower it.
Andrew: Good, thanks
Alan: It may be worth suggesting that people keep a diary of what happened and when.
Andrew: What actions were taken, so that they can document the history.
Liam: And perhaps to contact their disability organization.
Andrew: The diary idea may go into the Approach section. Detail may go into appropriate sections.
... any other comment on this section?
... let's look at other contact sections. If no feedback form how else they may be able to find who to contact, accessibility pages, contact us, legal/disclaimer pages
Liam: You could search to find an address for the domain owner.
Andrew: I have done that in past, but not in quite a while
Liam: Many sites allow a WHOIS search.
Andrew: It may be a bit tricky for many.
... we went on and suggested referencing public companies register and the phone book. Could add WHOIS suggestion there.
Shadi: Rather than WHOIS, could ask your own ISP if they can tell you who the website is registered to.
Liam: They will tell you no.
Andrew: The last paragraph in this section indicates that there is a wide range of response possible and suggests how to take further action.
Liam: Yes and that you may get varied responses from different people in same company.
Andrew: Yes, any other comments? does this make sense?
... because the overall section called "How to..." maybe this should be more pointed in naming type of contact being initiated, "Correspondence, etc"
Andrew: The final suggestion prompts the consumer to make copies and I will consider putting the form printing here, but perhaps it is best for it to stays in the general forms discussion.
Liam: Add here the bit about take screen grabs here if you can.
Yeliz: This section has a very different purpose than the previous two, should it be in another part?
Andrew: Consider moving this into the opening paragraph of this section?
Yeliz: Yes, because this sub section has a different goal.
Andrew: Moving on to "What to Report"
SharronThis section was very clear.
Yeliz: A comment on the example that mentions BBC by name, is that a good practice?
Andrew: Because we suggested in "What Is" to mention functional sites and we knew that BBC had done it. But I was hesitant and wonder what others think?
Alan: Perhaps we don't need any name at all, just "on many sites"
Shadi: I strongly support that. Unless there is a strong reason to do so, should avoid naming.
Alan: Might it help to place some identifying text at the beginning of each bullet point?
Liam: That could make it look more like definitive rather than example list
... would help to space the list a bit.
Liam: It is a good list of examples.
Yeliz: I like them too and provides a way to help people begin to describe their problems.
Liam: If we suggest screen shots, can we link to how to
Alan: May be quite useful to provide a bit about how to gather evidence for many who may not be aware of how to do so.
Liam: Could function as kind of glossary.
Alan: May not know it can be done and would give them resources about screenshots, browsers, OS...things that are not always evident to people.
Shadi: I am not opposing it, but think about what is our role? Are we going to have a computer crash course?
Liam: We are just trying to get them to complain?
Andrew: Let's add to the wish list perhaps how to gather evidence?
Shadi: We do have another wishlist deliverable on how to configure your system for maximum accessibility. It makes sense to show how to take a screen shot, but if we go down that road, where do we stop?
Andrew: Something to keep in mind but perhaps not appropriate for this document.
... comments on what is the problem?
... Let's look at next section, which was shortened and now includes examples that people can adapt to their situation. As edited, is it still adequate?
Yeliz: I agree, but have a comment about the first item. You are using a particular version, and that is important information.
Andrew: Are we comfortable with opening paragraph?
Liam: Yes, I think so, they will write back if they need it.
Andrew: Next section, Followup, how are we going there?
Liam: People can also write to the industry association of the company they are complaining about.
Andrew: We have suggested that people wait up to four weeks for a response...reasonable?
Liam: Extreme of reasonableness, isn't it?
Andrew: Got a response in two days from UK org, very impressed.
SharronIn Texas there is an IT oversight agency for all other state departments. Is there a general way to refer to something like that?
Andrew: Perhaps in the indirect response section.
... next section perhaps among the contacting disability info, petition, etc could add the IT oversight contact. Otherwise, does this seem like a good collection of further actions?
... and note that there is the caveat to remind consumers to check if the company may have done repairs and not told you.
Yeliz: Perhaps that should go first rather than last.
Andrew: Yep, good idea, thank you.
... next section. Two approaches...first a template and second examples of how the complaint might actually be written. Keeping in mind Sylvie your suggestion to add heading levels to the examples.
... is this a good sequence, does it make sense, too heavy, any comments?
SharronYes, it sseems clear to me
Andrew: What about the two examples?
Alan: Need to indicate beginning and end of each example.
Andrew: Tried to make them more realistic and picked on the Before and After site, maybe that fact should be included in the section introduction.
Yeliz:Remind people to keep a copy of correspondance
Andrew: Finally, there is a resource list..is it adequate?
Yeliz: Yes, I think the list is good.
Sharron:Perhaps the examples should have more direct language about accessibility right from the start?
shadi: For at least one of the example, I agree that would be useful
Andrew: The first one would lend itself to that.
Sharron:Overall, the page is quite good and will be useful
Andrew: Any other thoughts? Alan's first response was that the page content seemed quite long.
Alan: Yes, if someone just wants to make a complaint, this seems like a lot to go through, but I don't really know how to summarize.
Jack: I too wish it was shorter, but don't see any where to edit things out.
Andrew: The suggestion to lower the language level might shorten it and good structure will hopefully allow jumping to what is needed.
Shadi: While having the final pass of polishing, you may find that you reduce wordiness a bit, but agree in general
Andrew: Will go to work with these suggestions, thank you all and we are adjourned.