Shawn: I just got a draft case study for the
business case for accessibility from Liam and one for multimedia. So what I'd
like to do is follow the agenda order, but since item number 2 was updated
just 18 hours ago, let's start by having you skim those new items.
... Let's get started on the agenda. Questions? The recent changes to the new
accessibility page is first. It's getting close to publication so we should
discuss what was brought up in email and the recent cahnges.
<shawn> changed to : Indeed, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recognizes access to information and communications technologies, including the Web, as a basic human right.
Shawn: Here is a changed phrase from the first
section "Why." In the first paragraph, the last sentence has changed. This is
the current version.
... Any comments on that change?
... Next, look in the "How"section. (Reads from previous version) I thought
the first paragraph needed to be stronger.
<shawn> "Most of the basics of accessibility are even easier and less expensive than providing transcripts. However, the techniques required are poorly integrated into some web tools, education, and development processes."
Shawn: The suggested change is ... comments on that change?
<shawn> "Most of the basics of accessibility are even easier and less expensive than providing transcripts. However, the proper techniques are poorly integrated into some web tools, education, and development processes."
Jennifer: sounds fine to me.
<yeliz> +1
Sharron: I agree
<andrew> +1
Alan: yes
Yeliz: I agree
Shawn: The intnet was to support our approach
that if you do things right - use proper tecniques, they are accessible. In
the last section, I changed the grammar. Then, at the bottom of the page I
added the comments section. I thought we needed those for the redesign. Liam
may be listed as editor or contributor if he wants to be. And I will list
anyone who has made significant or notable contributions.
... if you want your name listed the acknowledgement section let me know.
Send a direct email or post to IRC now.
Sub Topic: Why second paragraph.
Shawn: I made a minor change which doesn't help
one of the comments sent in, ...I wanted to bring into this discussion.
Currently reads...
... There are a couple of things, not sure if grammatically ok. Shadi? what
did you think over all and does this address your concern?
... can you talk about your discomfort and if it is still and issue?
Shadi: I did not get to read the changes before the call. My discomfort was around the grouping of the term developing countries with the other barriers that people may face in getting ponline. That topic has many discussions associated with it. It is aside from disability and this is a kind of a blanket statement, as if all developing countries lack have high internet penetration. This wording seems better, but I will have to read more attentively.
Shawn: Can anyone summarize Catherine's email?
Shadi: Because both people in rural areas and in developing countries fit into the overall term "digital divide," Catherine thinks the use of the term is repetitive.
Shawn: I think her concern was with confusing people and losing the focus on disability.
Sharron: She seems to say that reference to developing countries is a big umbrella and that we should list digital divide or the list of specifics, but don't do both. And definitely to maintain a clear focus on disability.
Shadi: Yes, accessibility for people with disabilities benefits all the people, including people in rural areas or something such like that.
Shawn: Up a level. The previous version of this paragraph was considered byt the group to be too weak. Someone at EO said that was not a strong or compelling enough case to be convincing. Yeliz wanted it left in aand strengthened. We thought that the term "developing countries" would catch people's attention and give them a commonly understood term that referenced other types of barriers experinced by people who did not have equal access to the Internet. So in that context, I ask the group to decide if this reference has the potential to strengthen the page or if the contribution is insignificant and should be taken out.
Shadi: I think the next paragraph talks nicely about the the business case and the complimentary benefits for mobile design, and I strongly agree with Yeliz to keep the reference in. So yes, we should keep the paragraph but work with it so that it is more directed to the social aspect. The idea is to use the capacity of the Internet to build a more inclusive society. Along those lines. Should keep it. A matter of re-phrasing.
Shawn: Shadi is for keeping the paragraph and changing the wording. Focus on the social aspects. Others? Want to do in a way to motivate people to actually implement accessible design. Is it worth keeping?
Sharron: worth keeping.
Yeliz: yes.
<achuter> +1
Jennifer: yes keep.
<andrew> +1 to keep the people para
Shadi: Maybe a comment is needed to motivate people to implement accessibility, but this paragraph seems directed more to policy makers. It seems a different group or audience.
Shawn: So we are making the case for web accessibility, but Shadi points out this is also for policy makers.
Shadi: My point exactly. We highlight that in the first sentence which tells what the paragraph is about. I can skip to the strategy for the next paragraph if I don't need to be convinced but am looking for tools. Something like web accessibility is for social inclusion. Straight away you know what it is about.
Andrew: Find a concise phrase that can be presented in bold, and attract people to the social side, as opposed to the business side.
Shawn: OK, let's talk about digital divide and the wording there. Shadi you had a suggestion for alternative wording?
Shadi: No exact wording. I was suggesting to use an umbrella term like digital divide earlier on, to soften the emphasis on the developing countries phrase. Why does accessibility help developing countires more? The assumption is that developing countries are different, more likely to lack band width, or whatever, but more reflective of the digital divide. And that is not necessarily the case in all instances of developing countries.
Shawn: Is that the only aspect? The benefits for anybody particularly in a quote developing country. Is it only a digital divide issue?
Liam: There are considerations of low literacy, poverty and other aspects that are often associated with rural or developing conditions.
Shadi: I don't know if that is the only reason for the digital divide.
Shawn: I am uncomfortable with the term and would like us to consider removing the term digital divide. I am really uncomfortable with that being the main term and all others a sub point of that.
Jack: Shawn please describe (to help us focus) why you are uncomfortable with digital divide?
Shawn: I am uncomfortbale with it as the umbrella term. My in-laws who live in a rural area can't get broad band, but in all other aspects, they are not part of what would be considered an underserved population. Specific example to the digital divide associating to developing countries, the conotation is that those experiencing the digital divide are under privileged. I am uncomfortable with saying that. It sounds as though all people in rural areas are under served or underprivileged.
Sharron: Well, that seems to me to be more of a misunderstanding of the term. I have always thought of the digital divide as something that applies for various reasons across all economic groups. So a person could experience the digital divide because of poverty, low literacy, lack of access to hardware, software and training, etc. Or rural people could experience the same barriers simply by means of geographical circumstances. In other words, the digital divide is a practical term about access, not an economic identification.
Liam: But is it well understood to mean that?
Sharron: I don't know and if not, that would be a good reason to avoid using it.
<LiamMcGee> Liam: I am concerned that 'digital divide' is jargon and not uniformly understood.
Jennfier: I am not sure there is a consensus definition of the digital divide. Like someone in a city that can't access the internet. I see the point that we are trying to make to connect the two. But we may be mixing apples and oranges in some sense. Do the economic issues make it happen for PWD not to have access to broad band? I am not sure how to tease them apart.
<shawn> fyi: "The term "digital divide" is often used to refer to economic and social barriers to computer use for people without disabilities. Many people with disabilities are affected by the same economic and social factors, including very low rates of employment and consequently low income. Together with barriers in the physical environment and in computer technologies, these factors can result in:" - http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/soc.html
Shawn: We decided at that time that there wasn't a shared definition. If one of the main points of the paragraph is to capture people who are interested in these areas, we can simply state that web accessibility is related to all this. The question is - is digital divide a good hook phrase? Or shall we not use it at all?
Shadi: I concur with Sharron that various groups are impacted by the digital divide. And I strongly concur with the observation that the term itself is jargony and not commonly understood. I was tossing in other terms that are typically used in policy talk.
Andrew: instead of?
Shadi: of digital divide. Social inclusion would be a more appropriate umbrella term. Socical inclusion works better to include older people as well.
Andrew: And includes literacy as well.
Liam: Use social inclusion to gain what we mean?
Shadi: Yes.
Shawn: ...social inclusion, people in rural areas, developing countries?
Shadi: developing countries is a bit
orthogonal.
...Have the key term bolded for the next paragraph.
Shawn: Leading to the action, in the second paragraph. Make the over all term social inclusion. And the others as such as ... delete digital divide. Leave the others. Is that right?
Shadi: Yes.
<shawn> ACTION: shawn - 2nd paraph: overall term "social inclusion, such as" - remove "digitial divide" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/11-eo-minutes.html#action01]
Shawn: I will take a pass and send out email. Any other comments?
<LiamMcGee> Suggest: Accessibility increases social inclusion, benefiting older people, people in rural or developing areas with poorer internet connection, and many others.
Shawn: The last point, under the section how. There is a summary statement in bold, how to make your web site accessible. (reads from text)....is that good, strong conclusion and should be left in? ...or redundent and take out because there is previous content like that?
<shawn> Accessibility is a must for developers and organizations that want to create high quality websites and web tools, and not exclude people from using their products.
Jack: Strong conclusion.
Shadi: Basic human right and scroll, don't exclude from these products.
<shawn> shadi: Good punch line and summary. if skimming bold, see that.
<yeliz> Keep it +1
Jennfier: Could say at the very end - servicies?
Shadi: any objections?
Liam: I am not keen on 'must' - seems colloquial?
Shawn: suggestion?
Liam: essental for?
Andrew: I think that is stronger.
<yeliz> +1
Shawn: anyone else for keeping reads... anyone else for the record, support keeping that sentence. Or argue for deleting.
Liam: +1
Andrew: +1
Alan: Simplify but keep.
Shawn: ok. Let's see. I think those are the only things. At the beginning of the call I went through the changes of the page. Some words to check through. Quick question. The current page has an image for transcript. How does it work?
Liam: I would rotate about 4 or 5 degrees to make it clear that it is an image and not words to be read.
Shawn: thanks for the idea Liam.
Andrew: agrees
Liam: And I like Andrew's suggestion for a ragged edge.
Andrew: I can make into a raqged edge in two minutes.
<shawn> ACTION: shawn - transctip image - ragged edge &/or angle [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/11-eo-minutes.html#action02]
Shawn: That is linkable to get to the actual transcript. Liam on the bottom of the page, we added acknowledgements. Do you want to be listed as editor or contributor?
Liam: I do.
Shawn: Anything else on this page?
... a really good page, good team work all! next on the agenda?
Shawn: W3C implemented an multi-media policy
overall. Thjey have referred it to EO to look at and make suggestions to make
the presentation more clear. For any issues that we need to address. Any
questions on what this is?
... to let you know, this comes up because at least two W3C groups want to
record their teleconferences. We told them you have to have a transcript for
that. It doesn't need to be polished, but must be clear and correct and
agreeable. Comments? Like question number one. Make audio accessible. Do you
agree with the points there?
Sylvie: I have two questions. One H1 draft and then an H2 which is frequently asked questions.
Shawn: I'll change that.
Sylvie: Before the W3C policy I see only a link and a star.
Shawn: I'll change that.
Jennifer: I think I saw 'yup' in there? seems awfully informal.
Liam: It's covered by the tone of the piece. Trying to convey to the reader - don't be afraid.
Shawn: Unless there are objections I'd like to keep informal.
Liam: Unlike publishing a standard, this is for people who are scared of this and need to be reassured and guided.
Jennifer: I like the don't be afraid.
Shawn: Anything else? Like accessibility standpoint?
Liam: Could be more emphasis on best practice for presenting transcripts. Strong wording at the beginning of para like the name of the speaker. Highly important for transcripts, need them.
Shawn: I dont' know what is done in transcripts? Anyone know?
Alan: I can look into next week.
<shawn> ACTION: Alan - research best practices for transcripts [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/09/11-eo-minutes.html#action03]
Shawn: Best practices for transcripts or
suggestions for format. I'll put an action for that.
... what else?
Sylvie: I am bit frustrated when reading this
and it sounds like - it's easy. We are trying to caption and it doens't work
very well. I read your comment and is presented as though it is really easy.
I tried to read examples, and dot serve and add captions to video. Well, it
is quite time consuming. You must write the text in and synchronize it. To
hear a video of one hour you have to work three hours. We have to type the
contents the means with dot doesn't work. Free tools are not easy to use.
...I couldn't fine the web site. I found it very frustrating. There is a
reference to information on how easily caption and I couldn't find.
Shawn: Transcripts are cheap and easy. Captions are not.
Sylvie: Play and pause, can't use with all browsers.
Shawn: I will take out. I will edit that. And the term "hire it out" means you can hire someone to do that. I will change that. Did you look at the resources section of the techniques?
Sylive: Yes, but I didn't understand it.
Shawn: You CAN be afraid when it comes to captions.
Liam: I can identify with your pain Sylvie. It is a difficult process.
Shawn: I copied and pasted Sylvie. I will say here, that captions are far more complex than simple transcripts. I will take out the reference to specific tools and point more to more general resources.
Andrew: On the opening page of the FAQ you have a link to a asterisk? Do you want it to be obvious?
Shawn: I will change that.
... I will change the captions one. Anything else?
Liam: Link to magpie ...in the resources section.
Shawn: I am looking at the resources section. I'd like to take that out all together. I was hoping they are in the resources section but they are not.
Liam: could be added in?
Shawn: yes but it is a note and it would have to wait until the next publication.
Liam: maybe leave until the next note publication.
Shawn: yes I will put the no endorsement disclaimer in.
Liam: from question six. Mention a hint there to encourage youtube to be able to do this.
<LiamMcGee> http://www.youtube.com/t/captions_about
Shawn: this used to say before youtube developed capacity for captioning that "You can post to youtube as long you point to an accessible version." But no longer needed since Youtube now supports captions.
Liam: descriptions also.
Shawn: anything else. Question seven has an example, reads....Think of any other common examples or quesitonable to add to that?
Liam: for example when interviewed by a media or organization does that mean you put an accessible version on the site?
Shawn: we often do, but not always. For example I did an interview for radio New Zealand, and we have a transcipt. For a podcast I will only do if the provide a transcript.
Andrew: Strongly encourage seems sufficient.
Shawn: I want to say require.
Andrew: Could turn it around to say that you should require and at least strongly encourage.
Shawn: yes
Yeliz: use multi media for W3C training materials.
Shawn: a good example Yeliz.
Yeliz: I have a comment on question nine. My case is an exception. About nine?
Shawn: There are questions but I need to make more clear.
Liam: There exceptions but not very many.
Shawn: W3C is not a controlling organization as you know so this went against some groups and staff. Such exceptions need to be approved. What else?
Andrew: question eight. What is CART?
Shawn: computer aided rated transcripts? Real time transcription? In a lecture or presentation environment, a transcriber types in real time and it is displayed as text on a scrolling LCD screen.
Liam: computer assisted real time transcription.
Shawn: I'll put real time transcription. E.G.
CART. Anything else?
... I'll put these in today. And if you see anything else. On this one, if
you see anything else send to Shawn and EO editors. You can send something if
it is a list discussion.
Yeliz: This is really a good resource that could be useful for lots of people. Would this be an EO document later on? It has a lot of use for resources. Like people are confused and could be useful on developing transcripts.
Shawn: Two things, one is there a reason to make a formal EO document or to get attention to it, without formally making it an EO. Is that primary interest Yeliz? Once we have polished it, letting people know it's there?
Yeliz: yes, it is a useful resource and we should put it somewhere that it is easy to find and access.
Sharron: It's an area where a lot of people struggle.
Yeliz: A lot of people struggle with this. A good resource.
Shawn: I support your statement. As W3C polishes and makes more accessible, we can link to it and IT messages. Let people know about it. Easy to find and work on that. Anything else?
Shawn: reminder we had we talked about having
case studies on separate pages. Liam sent one in today.
... go to the draft appendix page.
... Plenty of time to comment, but I wanted to get some comments this
morning. Liam?
Liam: first of several being written at the moment. Not really a single source. I identified the Legal and General case study first. We will use the same sort of format. I'd like comments. The styling is very simple. Have a look at the content.
Shawn: Have the web address up front?
Liam: Possibly. We don't mind taking a screen shot of the site. A before and after is not available. Maybe the way back machine. The main thing to bear in mind is the intended audience. Focusing purely on those.
Shawn: Should that be up front? The first paragraph doesn't turn me on at all. If I am a big business I want something comparable telling me that it is very important.
Andrew: Yes there are reports you pull the important pieces for similar organization this has been reported in all these other places.
Liam: Accessibility complaints have been reduced to zero. But reduced from what? So to only present the most exciting factoids that are relevant to businesses. They won't spend a lot of time reading. Just quick take aways.
Yeliz: I agree with that. Just to highlight the gray box. Would that be earlier on?
Liam: We'd like to have two strong summary statements - one at the beginning, and one at the end to take away. You are right that it is a good summary.
Yeliz: a good summary but I like the over all document.
Jack: you might want to do as a template, some kind of short anchorage statement about what this is. A sentence like this is a series of accessibility studies so that people realize this one fits into a whole series of these.
Shawn: To follow up it is going to be on the W3C site and would be styled that way. It would be integrated into the appendix.
Jack: Whether or not it is a W3C site or not. The template can help. Clients want something close to their interests. However they land on this, this is just part of a larger context and they need to understand what that context is.
Shadi: A thought, reading along, this is really clear thinking and is easy to follow. But when I looked at the references, I got disoriented. Arguments are pulled from different blogs and sources. To my mind the message got diluted. Are most of the cases this kind of stuff. Are there any with single sources?
Liam: If there were single source case studies, we wouldn't need to do this.
Shadi: is it likely to be the case further along?
Liam: Yes but there are only about five that I have seen, and they are all scattered.
Jennifer: I've never seen this sort of thing. People just don't do it.
Shadi: I think it is really great. Motivates me to do this.
Jennifer: via the template make sure this is very clear this is a synopsis, to use headings to provide orientation?
Liam: could you be more specific? What do you mean by using headers to provide orientation.
Sharron: I think this is a really good template. I've been trying to synopsize some studies of organziations we have recently worked with. Can I send those to you Liam? To style and format?
Liam: Yes.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to suggest summary at top - maybe same as on the main page (http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/resources) and to suggest keeping more data, and bolding more
Shawn: Liam, I am not sure I agree that these studies should present only the most compelling points. Some not so compelling points could meet specific needs of some organizations. YOu could bold the most important points. A summary up at the top, to make sure that the most compelling are at the top. And on the over view page. We can put some points on that to link to them. The same summary.
Liam: I will take away and sort it out. In the results section the first set is the big ones, and the second ones not quite so convincing. Taking Caroline Faurcets terms and here are the benefits.
Shawn: Inaccessbility complaints reduced to
zero might mean something to someone.
... anything else? On this?
Yeliz: I was thinking about Shadi's commment. Maybe he is right that the number of references should be reduced, one two and nine provide the case. The others not so much.
Liam: yes, basically the included references are due to the fact that there were significant outcomes that we couldn't pull from the main references.
Yeliz: I think it better not to say too much. Sometimes people are blocked by so much.
Liam: I think it is an interesting point. I am not sure where we would be good to lose. Be a shame to lose that.
Yeliz: can use google?
Liam: it is possible but we didn't find these references through looking at google.
Shadi: Are there additional resources to draw? We don't want to lose that either.
Liam: We tend to find things like this on
blogs. That set is the source references.
... there are not conversations we wanted to rely on.
Yeliz: Isn't Mike Davis a developer?
Liam: yes it certainly looks like it.
Shawn: Yes I'm pretty sure he was. Anything else.
Liam: we'll go away and try to improve.
<yeliz> +1
Shawn: question? Are you comfortable linking to this putting this on the W3C web site as a draft and putting into the appendix.
Liam: I want to tweak first.
Yeliz: yes once tweaked.
<sylvie> +1
Doyle: yes
Sylive: yes.
Andrew: yes.
<hbj> yes
Shawn: any concerns with that?
<hbj> I haven't read it closely enough yet
Shawn: ok.
<shawn> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/availability/
Shawn: two things if you plan to attend please register. There is a 50 dollar per day fee to cover food and so forth. The cost will increase after the 21st. The second point is to identify who will participate by phone. I would need to know when you would participate in Pacific time. In the regular questionaire for availability for EO teleconferences there is a place for response. For the face to face please comment about when you will participate on the phone.
Sylive: I couldn't find it yesterday?
Shawn: I just added it yesterday. I think it was there after you filled it out.
Sylvie: I will go back to complete it.
Shawn: Thanks to Helle and Liam and Song, and Doyle for completing. Again put the time you can participate. Any other questions? General comments? Share your recent experiences. Successes or needs. comments? What you hear or see? Help inform our work.
Liam: what's going on with HTML 5?
Shawn: both the WAI's Authoring Tool working group and the User Agent working group reviewed the draft and are sending comments. We were going to consolidate all the comments from WAI. But we decided it would take too long. Each group will submit their own comments.
Liam: Will we discuss formally within EO?
Shawn: No. My current feeling is that most of the issues are on the technical side, and not so many on the EO side. We won't talk about the technical issues. There is one point that we need to discuss for the EO side - the marketing is relevant to EO. Do we need to do the accessible FAQ for HTML 5?
Liam: Yes, thank you.
Shawn: questions?
... depends upon what comes up for next week.
Liam: Realistically, my work is not up for discussion for next week.
Shawn: we'll see what happens and what is ready for review. Everyone have a great weekend.