Shawn: Reads the agenda, starting
with WCAG 2, Look at the last link add quotes.
... Tangent, Shadi I made another change to address your point,
and sent an email to inquire about sufficiency. The question
was Liam wanted to have a WCAG 2 is great. We have quotes about
WCAG 2 is great, when published in December. Would we want to
include those quotes in the presentation? Second question is
what issue might be in that. Permission of the Quotee, one but
not others. We are investigating the second questions. To see
how much effort
... One of the things if we agree it might be good, I would
look specifically at, are there quotes that might support a
particular point like internationally developed standard, and
policies. Something that would go with slides content.
Sharron: I think it makes sense to have quotes relevant to the current content.
Shawn: A little extra effort to get approved to use. How much does it spice up the presentation and be worth the effort?
Doyle: direct quotes for support to the material sounds good to me.
Sharron: this is dry material, and the quotes show the relationship to the real world. A good step in that sense.
Andrew: lends support to the fact the W3C is a consortium.
Sharron: In the WAI slides one has stats as an option. Put in as an option here. They support the case we are making. Tangible real benefits. Developed by this global community.
Shawn: another thought, human aspect, it would be nice to have a photo of quotee.
Jennifer: I agree to having a photo.
Shawn: any other comments?
... I will pursue getting the issues worked out.
Yeliz: I agree with the quotes and they see these are international organizations.
Shawn: cover page is first page,
then the next is the tutorial page. Usability test
Jennifer?
... components of web accessibility, I want to check, but now
look at the instructions cover page. Sylvie sent in some good
comments. Please read through the comments.
<shawn> sylvie's comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2009JulSep/0011.html
<shawn> and follow the links [ Next in thread ]
Jennifer: Last night I was looking at in Firefox, and now in I.E 7 it seems quite different. I'm not sure this will work.
Shawn: Sylvie pointed out it
wasn't clear the difference between the presentation and
tutorial content.
... Sylvie I don't know if you saw my changes?
Sylvie: I saw that, except the final page.
Shawn: Sylvie did you look at the tutorial version. Can you see one topic or all the topics on one page?
Sylvie: I saw one topic per
page.
there were some conflicts between scripts and the Jaws shortcuts, so I had to struggle a little bit. But at last it worked out.
Shawn: four different ways to advance to the topic. Sylvie if we need additional things for the tutorial instructions like tips for screen readers?
Sylvie: don't have the page too loaded. Too much for people who don't need that.
Shawn: provide a link to it.
Sylvie: you have the help page.
Shawn: good point. That is
generated by someone else. Not very well written. Should we
update that if we use that.
... It's the general page for the default slide show. Not written
clearly as we might want to write.
... Back to the instructions page. We want most of the
presentations now are in a PPT format or HTML designed for
presentation. This was designed first as a tutorial. We have a
version that is easier, we have three here. We want to make the
differenciation when people first come to the page. We don't
want this to be too complex, for people who come repeatedly. I
changed the word and the instructions. Tutorial, presentation,
and HTML format and links
Sylvie: my problem is the tutorial is self study, the person is supposed to read without any external help. The tutorial page is written without the notes that give more information. People who want to study by themselves don't have the notes, and where can they find the slides which are really concise.
Shawn: there is not additional information for this slide set. Exact same in the tutorial and the presentation formats. In the tuturial, the quotes are in the page itself. Most of the slides some quotes are in the notes, but the same information.
Sylvie: what I understand from the tutorial. Here with those short slides. Not sure this is a real toturial. Only differnce is presentation.
Shawn: what are some thoughts how
we might call that to make that clear?
... tutorial, mini tutorial or something else?
Sharron: I can see that is a little troublesome. Promises more than it delivers. Call it with less expectation. A guide? Introduction is not enough to say.
Andrew: introduction or overview for self-study?
Sharron: anybody want to defend the use of tutorials?
Jennifer: I agree with need a different word.
Jennifer: I was thinking of overview myself. I wonder if that is accurate.
Sylvie: I think using a different word(s) is the best way.
Shawn: we use overview a lot in W3C stuff. How about mini tutorial?
Sharron: what about guide? Guide to...
Shawn: what about something that says what it is like step by step? Something like that?
Sharron: components of web accessibility made simple.
Shawn: components for dummies?
Shadi: isn't it a slide set?
Sharron: what does it say about tutorial.
<yeliz> self-study training
Shawn: Shadi we want to say two things, one differenciate from the presentation format. Not intended for slides and intended for self study. A different to learn the components of web accessibility page.
<Sharron> Components of Web Accessibility - a self-paced guide
<yeliz> self slide guide
<yeliz> I meant self study guide
Sharron: nothing much in thesaurus. See my comment in IRC.
Jennifer: I was thinking a step by step guide.
Sharron: Yeliz wrote a self study guide.
Shawn: what is working for people?
Sylvie: Is it correct to say the tutorial is the same as the PPT version and the HTML version?
Shawn: no the PPT and HTML presentations are designed for not much text to display. What is on the slide itself is a heading and an image. Not much text. and then the tutorial has a whole lot of text in the page you read.
Sylvie: it is a slide form.
Shawn: I would be uncomfortable billing this as a slide presentation. Generally should not have this much text when they are doing a presentation.
Jennifer: A self study guide?
Sharron: Yeliz put that in IRC and that looks good.
Shawn: step by step sounds
easier?
... comments?
Sylvie: It should be a wording that reflects the slides.
Yeliz: I like that.
Shawn: try on for size? See how it looks?
Sharron: yes
Shawn: propagate that out.
Jennifer: step hyphen by hyphen step?
Shawn: yes. I got your copy edit
Jennifer.
... step by step guide, change throughout. I will put that out
reminding you to look at that. Anything else? Sylvie, you
mentioned for advice for presentation the issue to put here or
put elsewhere? We will have several of these instructions pages
do we repeat on each one or point to in one place. The
challenges, if we repeat each time you have to change each
version. A maintenance issue. The other issue if you have
someone that looks at just one, i
... that is the challenge have on each page, or a link to.
<shawn> WAI slides instruction http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2009AprJun/0121.html
Sylvie: I read the email where you explain. I have the same feeling about maintenance problem. I understand people who don't want to click each link. I don't know what to suggest.
Shawn: I put the link in IRC, the
email was sent to the EO mailing list on the 24th of
June.
... Shadi and Andrew in response to your questions about the
WAI AGE slides. No clear right answer. What if we took out the
maintenance issues and think about the user perspective. In six
months assuming we have six of these. We have six different slide
sets. And three of them are WCAG related and the other three
not direcftly.
... there is obvious benefit to have the info repeated.
negative to that from the users perspective. Annoying it is
redundent? What do you think?
Doyle: annoying
Sharron: user presenters?
Shawn: anyone who comes to this
presentation?
... the two sections are advice for presentation is four
paragraphs.
Sharron: I can't think this too terrible. The readers would skip over. Read it and understand they would skip over. I can't think it negative.
Shawn: Shadi?
Shadi: I don't have any
thoughts.
... I think it is annoying to repeat this over and over.
Yeliz: What you have on the page in the intro is good. A page to get the info without it. I think the best experience to include on every page.
Shawn: not a clear answer. Some
on each side of the question.
... definitely maintenance is the deciding factor.
<yeliz> I agree
Shadi: I think it great to have information specific to the slides. The purpose what it contains which is up front. There is a lot about how to use the material itself. I think some of that has also gone into advice for presenters. Go with that which is not specific to the presentation.
Shawn: that might change. For the
notes section for presentation materials says why that is
included. That was why a bit was repeated. The reasoning for
that.
... is this summary adequate? No clear answer leave as is
now?
Doyle: yes
Shadi: I think that is fine. Much more is the advice of the presenters we agreed to take that out. I wonder about the permission. I think wherever there is repeatition and not a strong case for it, I would take out. For the note section is fine.
Jennifer: my thought is you may hear by anecdote they are not using this right, or not clicking through. That would hint about that.
Shawn: good point. Anything now
on the content in the presentation itself?
... we need someone to make the PPT?
Yeliz: I can do that. PPT of the tutorial or just the presentation?
Shawn: presentation. I will send you that. Anything else?
<Andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/
<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/before/home/
Shadi: this is basically a reminder about the BAD. Also links from the agenda. Goes to the overview page of the demo. Under the heading demonstration contents. Those are now completed. Select inaccessible web sites. A sub page should complete. Nice and inaccessible. Switch around different pages and between the accessible and the inaccessible. It is done.
<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/before/survey/
Shadi: one thing that I would like to go through the page, but first any over all comments.
<yeliz> it looks good, I think
Shadi: find the inaccessible
survey page please?
... I hope that everyone can find.
... we have updated the survey page taking out redundancies.
And also online forms info. Not user friendly form. One
question here not labeling forms properly, basically option
buttons on the left are not labeled. The second example is a
large combo box. Not option groups, and you need to find city,
and organized by country, not organized well for keyboard. The
free newsletter, read out name and then reads out the text box
name and that will miss gui
... in the feedback for submitting we broke all techniques, in
the accessible one these issues are fixed. In the combo box
city is first.
Jennifer: Has the inaccessible version been tested with a range of screen readers. It might appear to right when it is wrong.
Shadi: this is going on with a sub group we will bring back to show this is completed. We hope have to more public testing phase open up later this month. We do want to get other testers.
Jennifer: that sounds great to me. I can hear some people who say they can make it work.
Shadi: yes if it takes ten times
longer. We could demonstrate how to correct by techniques. We
need testers. Any thoughts on this form? On this survey. On
anything? Type of things displayed?
... One of the questions in the group, the survey shows an
optional newsletter. If you submit the form, you get a
successful message the thing was sent.
Yeliz: it seems the form elements the letters seem getting bigger are ok. Could you fix the sizes to be inaccessible?
Shadi: I believe we use the fixed font size on the home pages. We demonstrate different kinds of things. At the very top is description of barriers. What kind of issues are being displayed on each page.
Yeliz: ok.
Shadi: back again to the question, we are simulating letters of submission. All fictional when you are submitting successfully, the question is this fictional? Assumption the entire demo is fictional.
Doyle: put in a caveat about it is fiction.
Andrew: put in the email this
will not be sent and not get any information if you complete
this form.
... just because some people may expect to get something, a
follow up, put in a note that the email will not be recorded,
on the fixed page.
... you will not be recorded and not send info.
Doyle: put in a caveat in about it is a fiction.
Sharron: I don't see a down side to put a note in that says it is fictional. To make sure we address any possible confusion?
Shadi: in the footer, the information on the page is not real? Something more strong? Sufficient?
Shawn: for me this is obviously a fiction. The new layout visually anyway. Clearly this is a demo page. The H1 is a before and after demonstration. That is clear. I don't think for this has any possibility of wanting to receive a newsletter. Not necessary.
Shadi: we wanted to check out bases.
Shawn: you have opinions both ways.
Shadi: we don't need to finalize the position now. We can see how this develops.
Shawn: make a decision and have people way in if they feel strongly the other way. For this draft this decision is made if you feel strongly, please bring up.
Shadi: by email?
Shawn: especially if there are a couple of different points like that.
Shadi: the next steps for this demo. The wrap up pages describing barriers and we are working on the evaluation report. We have a third format to bring back to EO later this month. That is the status right now, in the next two or three weeks we want to do with volunteers from EO maybe. And then to open up a larger testing phase. Through September. then come back and wrap up and publish.
Sylvie: I did some tests on the form, and I looked how it works. When I tried to fill out all fields correctly, it has errors on the e-mail address. I succeed in filling out the form, and I got a page saying "thank you for submitting the form". May be you could add on that page a note to remind them that it is only a demo.
Shadi: which one, the accessible form?
Sylvie: I don't know why I got those error messages.
Shadi: when you do submit correctly it does give you a success message. Doesn't actually say all fictional. Maybe will work in there.
Sylvie: another question about the submit buttons. there is a submit button on the form to send information, another button to select the topic on the site. My question is: I don't remember if it is WCAG 2 if you have two submit buttons labelled with the same text, that is submit. Those two submit buttons are not really clear.
Shadi: good point should be differenciated.
Sylvie: change the design the inaccessible version look the same. May be a problem?
Shadi: not necessarily. The value
for the first is go, and the other submit. That might be the
problem.
... any volunteers?
Sylvie: I volunteer to test the whole thing.
Shadi: thank you Sylvie. She will be one of the testers. Anyone else?
Jennifer: I can't test right now, if I have time later I will email you Shadi.
<shawn> [ it doesn't matter, but I'm surprised "eMail" instead if "e-mail"]
Shadi: that is fine. In the next two weeks afterwards we will open wider.
Sharron: we have a staff person who can go through this and comment.
Shadi: non screen readers? Keyboard, magnification. Doesn't have to be a detailed review. They would find bits and pieces.
Andrew: where do you want comments sent?
Shadi: I will send to Sylvie and Sharron. Comments should go to the WAI AGE task force.
Shawn: could you send to the EO list?
<shadi> public-wai-eo-badtf@w3.org
Andrew: address to EO and WAI AGE task force?
Shadi: the comments should go to
the before and after task force.
... that is it for now.
Yeliz: When you click on the description of barriers, the only way to get back is to use the back button. A link at the top of the page makes it easy to get back to the demo.
Shadi: ok and when you read about a page/
Yeliz: something to complement.
Shadi: it is huge issue. Same with the evaluation demo. When you go to the description of barriers. Jumps back again in the tickets page. People find it confusing to end up in a different document.
Shawn: I wonder if on the
explanation pages putting that bar like maybe under the
H1?
... it gives some tie in both visually and gives a good link
usability wise. Helps with navigation and helps with
conceptually knowing you are in the same place. Labeled non
visually like pages in the demonstration.
<yeliz> yes
<yeliz> I think so
Shawn: On a green bar, or red bar, when I go up to the top I get to a page that looks completely different. On the description on each of those. Not only a descrption of barriers, on every page have the same bar on them. Serves to give navigation but also ties in visually and conceptually. Where the status block is you have the same bar. That would address what Yeliz brought up.
Shadi: good suggestion. Feel free to provide input for the BAD task force. Testing things in the main pages.
<yeliz> me too
<yeliz> I agree with Sharron
Sharron: I loooove the BAD demo it is so fun to show people.
Jennifer: the bottom line this reaches developers who want to see examples in code of what that means. They want to see what it looks like it is wrong. They want to fix right away.
Shawn: Shadi are the annotations supposed to be working?
Shadi: no.
Shawn: Last week we looked at the
new page for the W3C site redesign. We talked about the
international page. I gave to Richard and Ian they appreciated
that very much and Richard changed the international page
already.
... thank you for your input. The input was taken into account and impacting the design and content in a week.
Basically we were talking about what we wanted in our page. I
wrapped up a quick analysis. The goals and audience.
... The purpose, goals and objectives. The audience is really
all there is so far.
... any comments for this page, the audience, purpose goal for
this page?
... Is there something missing? Agree with the audience?
Yeliz: why not also target people who know about accessibility??
<yeliz> yes
Shawn: the question if people
know accessibility will they browse through the W3C site to
find information on accessibile or would they go to the WAI
site. Use a search engine? If you look at the analysis page the
second link says analysis. Follow that link this shows where
the page will be. The thinking was, is that main audience would
be come across this page are people who are on the W3C site for
whatever reason would get here. Most people who know ac
... good assumption be the people who are not aware of
accessibility? Make sense?
Andrew: I think you are right. There could also be other people in the secondary category who might know something.
Shawn: we want to add that.
Yeliz: I think that makes sense they won't know much about accessibility. I am looking at the design. For the secondary audience it will be useful.
Shawn: I started drafting what it
might be. Under the current status. got to be too much so I
didn't point to that yet. Anything else on that?
... I will update the audience for next week. Can we have an
open discussion about word on the street. Hear about
accessibility issues. Authoring tools, WAI ARIA, what questions
people are having? Sharron? folks not relating the
accessibility info doesn't relate to 508.
Sharron: The Texas DIR are
looking for ways to train agency staff. Whenever I point to
them from different people this isn't 508 I have to explain the
relationship, another thing we keep hearing over and over
again. People can have the steps to there and maintaining
across the enterprise and through time is a real challenge. to
sum up 508 and we've gotten here how do we maintain.
... State agencies the put up their RFPs maybe they use tools
like a form builders that don't include the right kind of
labeling. They post PPT and PDF that aren't HtML of add a flash
to a page or video the accessibility standard when redesigned
degrades over time.
Jennifer: human lack of knowledge. Help when they can and do so.
Sylvie: I have enjoyed the French translation finishing. One member of the committee has started on the translation on how to meet. I have some questions for the procedure to follow. Now how to implentation, we have to read all the material and make intelligible who don't want to read all the stuff. To them interesting but complex. We don't have much feedback now.
Shadi: yes Sylvie feel free to contact me about translation. The technique doesn't have to authorized translation. Could less difficult translation process. i was wondering about the French adoption process in the RGAA
Sylvie: RGAA is the implentation guide from the French government. We had a version 1 that focussed on WCAG 1.0. and this last year they worked on the version 2. They rewrote version 1 to comply with WCAG 2. They had restricted a call for review that ended up last week. They are working on the next version. They are working on the vocabulary we used in the official authorized translation. They have to change the RGAA to match with the vocabulary used in the authorized French translation.
here is a link to the official page of the French government giving the status of the document as work in progress: the document has been published on July 3, 2009. The final version will be published at the beginning of August 2009 as a final version. See the RGAA Web site.
Shadi: talk off line.
Sylvie: yes.
shawn: for next week from Liam on the business case appendix. See the reference link listing on the EO list. Not public but some EO people on the list. Keep in mind what you send there. Send any ideas you have to help Liam draft a page. We will see what shakes out by the end of the week. That's it.