See also: IRC log
<andrew> meetng: EOWG face to face
<andrew> -> Requirements http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2009/11f2f
<scribe> Scribe: Sharron
Andrew: In literature review,
recomendations and published findings, many made reference to
usability issues rather than accessibility issues. When those
issues were examined as usability requirements for older
people, many of those requirements (with few exceptions) were
addressed in WCAG 2
... got us thinking about how many thought of accessibility on one hand and usability on the other hand as significantly different.
... when in fact there were a great many common factors. As a result we decided to revisist the overlap, where one starts, etc.
Shawn: yesterday we looked at docs for developers primarily. This document on the pother hand is aimed at usability people and policy makers.
<shawn> audience: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-accessibility-n-usability#who
Jack: Question about what you saw as the overlap between the researchers understanding of overlap between the two...no distinction?
Andrew: Most di not refer to accessibility at all, only spoke of usability for older users.
Jack: And those were within the issues we understood as accessibility issues?
Andrew: yes many of them were the principles, not necessarily the tech details.
Shadi: What happened is that recommendations would suggest things like font adjustment widgets without realizing the limitations.
Shawn: Some suggestions would be so specific to a particular user group, it became inaccessible to others.
<andrew> -> audience http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-accessibility-n-usability#who
Shawn: review audience in changelog.
Shadi: wonders where developers
and designers fit in
... information architecture problems may be mis-identified as usability or accessiiblity barriers
Jack: Also do we need to talk about the business of standards harmonization? universal design?
<shadi> ACTION: accessibility-n-usability - add to the changelog that standards harmonization is one of the primary motivators for the document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action01]
Shawn: Misunderstnding and Myths
sections listed in changelog do address
... caution about addressing myths. When people state a "myth" even seeing it on screen sometimes reinforces it.
Shadi: Problem with phrase "technically accessible." Seems generated by auto testing and would suggest that WCAG2 is more user centered.
<shawn> issue: WCAG 2.0 coverage of "usability" beyond "tecnical accessibility"
Jennifer: It meand I have ticked off all the check boxes.
<shawn> shadi: not like "technical accessibility" maybe "conformance"
Andrew: yes, that I have got coding right but not thought of any other aspect.
Helle: We have seen those "technically accessible" categories used officially and agree we need new terms.
Jack: rewording ?
Doyle: As currently stated it emphasizes the mechanical check-off. "Technically accessible" has another meaning to me.
Shawn: Concern about how we talk about it since WCAG 2.0 specifically did NOT address usability issues.
Shadi: But is this document not meant to address that?
Andrew: Many have usability considerations separately considered and expect accessibility to be addressed by the coders as a technical specification.
Jack: The distinction is not clear to me and I don't know what to do with the information.
Shawn: WCAG 2 guidelines are user-centric. approach is user centered but SC are more on technical level, not usability metrics.
<andrew> from WCAG 2.0 introduction: These guidelines also make Web content more usable by older individuals with changing abilities due to aging and often improve usability for users in general.
Jack: can you, Shawn elaborate on the relationship?
Shawn: There will always be gray
area. Many minor usability issues may become major
... if I can't do it, it is an accessibility issue. If I can do the task but it takes 5 times longer, is it usability or accessiiblity?
<shawn> issue: what is the purposes of this document? and audience? - current Analysis missing the folks making guidelines for older users and not harmonizing with WCAG 2.0
<shawn> jennifer: accessibility can be a [platform, motivation] for innovation
<shadi> ACTION: accessibility-n-usability - purpose (1): address standards developers (eg. requirements for older users) not to confuse accessibility and usability [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action02]
Shawn: Policy makers? procurement officers?
Jack: In addition to meeting accessibility standards, we are recommending meeting usability too
Shadi: We want to be careful not
to say that even if you meet standards, you are not accessible
until you do something extra.
... to turn it around, I would say that in order to say that to be most EFFECTIVE, you can combine with usability considerations.
Shawn: My beleif is that if you understand WCAG 2 and understand the basics how users (w/disabilities) use the web, you will find that you have a resonably usable site.
Jennifer: And that is the positive message that Suzette always looks for.
Shadi: In terms of process, we would have a 100% match. It is in the technical requirements where they may diverge.
Shawn: How does that impact the purpose and the audience.
Shadi: Not sure...trying to think
in Venn diagrams
... usability process, the skill to develop scenarios and profiles, etc. When to involve users, for what? Process methods used by usability professionals to achive a better experince. Then there are technical requirements for numbers of links, error correction, etc
... look at overlap with accessibility? The process, the methods are a complete overlap. Would want accessibility professionals to have those same skills, but the technical requirements may be different.
<shawn> usability technques get X, technical checklist gets Y ???
Jack: Very helpful synopsis. Wondering about the skill sets of those working the process. 100% overlap between professionals with u=sability skills and those with accessiiblity skills? When you talk about process, don't we need the two groups of experts to learn frome each other?
Jennifer: Take a real world example. In working with uability folks and run into a JS barrier, if the usability person doesn't know JS, it becomes more difficult to address.
Shawn: Agree with Shadi that we must keep in mind that meeting WCAG2 is critical part of accessibility and must keep that message strong. Then you will be pretty durn good for accessibility. But using usability testing techniques will enhance the goals.
Shadi: For commercial, government and major academic sites, etc I would strangthen that to say that you will not achieve the goals without usability thinking and implementation.
Shawn: You will optimize the effort through usability.
Jack: mnay usability pros have mental models, etc in their heads and it becomes intuitive.
Shadi: From my own experience as a programmer I have come to think not in terms of "alt text" but in terms of what the user needs.
Shawn: That was the power of WCAG2...thinking about what does the user need? and by the way, here are the techniques to get them what they need.
Jennifer: At a usability compnay I worked with, they were must happier because of the user-centered aspects.
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn - make sure Benefits of WCAG 2.0 clarifies that the guidelines are [more] user-centric [than 1.0] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action03]
<andrew> -> ICCHP http://www.icchp.org/
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn consider f2f with ICCHP - query WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action04]
Shadi: Second Jack's thought about supporting more exchange of skills and perspectives between usability and accessibility professionals
Shawn: Different from what we have here
Shadi: But it is related in that it clarifies roles of both the actors and the standards proponents.
<shawn> clarifies roles of the actors as well as the standards
Shadi: Are there issues with using a Venn diagram with the partial overlap?
Shawn: Caution about how to
present the overlap and how much is left out.
... more modern term is user experience
Shadi: Is usability the process and user experience the individual situation?
Shawn: Not widely known or recognized that accessibility is one of the disciplines that includes two compnonents...technical and user experince.
s/ compnonents. components
Shadi: Do we need a section in
this document specific to WCAG2 and its focus on user
... from standards harmonization perspective WCAG2 is a milestone and a target for any other standard and best practice for the web.
<shadi> ACTION: accessibility-n-usability - add a section to specially talk about WCAG2 and how it fits into the usability concept [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action05]
General discussion of "Questions and Misunderstandings" section.
Jennifer: The document should address these myths in a positive way but not become a myth-busting page.
Shadi: Could be perceived as defensive.
Jennifer: Presumption that everyone believes this.
Shawn: Document will be completely reorganized. Is the content of a type to be included?
Shadi: I am missing the mention of WCAG2 and how the different technical components fit together.
Shawn: Should this doc point out the fact that if you are researching web accessibility guidelines for web sites that you should be aware of the fact that browsers and AT may handle some of the issues.
Jack: What is the approach for
the question about "what if something (like AJAX) can not be
... idea is that people want to use the widget and feel constrained that they can't use it and still have an accessible site?
<shawn> jennifer: what are the outcomes you want
Jennifer: We have defined the audience well, now I feel like we need to decide what actual outcome(s) we want as a result of this document.
Shawn: We want people to quit publishing studies that inappropriately relate usability/accessibility;
Jennifer: Once outcomes are understood, then think about how will I get it in front of those I want to read it and market it to various audiences.
Shadi: want to have a place to point people to when they publish wrong info.
Jennifer: Yes but also want preventative result. So that misinformaiton is not put out there in the first place.
Jack: Yes, this was my question
... and how do they find it in the first place.
Jennifer: and create almost a use case of how you want the doc to be used and disseminated.
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn - connect with Whitney w/ UX issue on usable accessibility (contribute & review) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action06]
Jack: The more I understand, the more I understand how important it is.
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - keep Page Contents on RHS as is [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action07]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - change "encountering ..." to "Are you encountering ..." [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action08]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - consider an alternative to 'encountering' (finding/experiencing/...) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action09]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - move opening sentences into the Overview and replace the phrase before the bullets [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action10]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - change bullet to include "key" - and in general match the bullets to the headings [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action11]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - bold the key words in the bullets that are currently links (remove links) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action12]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - remove 'clearly' from bullet 2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action13]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - remove 'resource material' bullet [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action14]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - replace bullet 4 with 'follow up as needed'; remove 'taking further action ...' bullet [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action15]
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - 'keep records of all communications' [look for an alternative to 'keep records'] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action16]
<shawn> agenda: reporting - relook at section headings
<shawn> This page includes _email templates_ and _sample emails_.
<shawn> Use the _sample emails_ when helpful. Use the _sample emails_ if approripate...
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn - consider providing digg, delicious, etc. icons for WAI pages [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action17]
<shawn> Encourage opthers to join you in reporting inaccessible websites
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - 'Consider book-marking this page and passing it along to others' change to ' Encourage others to join you in reporting inaccessible websites' or similar [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action18]
<shawn> join the revolution
<shawn> first three things are steps. next four bullets maybe:
<shawn> - keep [records]
<shawn> - template email & sample emails
<shawn> - - [tone, approach]
<shawn> - join the revolution
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - steps = 3 bullets as OLs; tips = other stuff as ULs (keep records; emails, encourage others; constructive message) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action19]
<andrew> sharron: consider what approach might acheive the results you want
be respectful, non-threatening, non-demanding, and be really honest about what you feel and why without being confrontational
<andrew> ACTION: Reporting - consider 'tips' from action 18 as a short paragraph isntead of bullets [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action20]
<shawn> negiotation - success includes figuring out what teh otehr persons' issues are
Jack: From book "Getting to Yes" part of success in negotiation was the ability to at least perceive what issues the other guy may have so you are coming up with solutions that recognize all perspectives.
<andrew> jack: negotiation - know what your concerns were + knowing what their concerns are = coming up with creative solutions to deal with the issues
<shawn> be effective in effecting a change
Jack: Suzette referenced a
situation in which the webmaster listed all relsated tasks for
getting the site up. Maybe in this context, encourage writer to
understand the other point of view to create rapport.
... in addition to setting emotional tone, encourage understanding what motivates them.
Jennifer: Do not think it should
be its own separate heading
... talk to them about how to create a subject line and other tips and this would be one of them.
<shawn> remember subject lines <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2009OctDec/0022.html>
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn - consider blog post about approach (remember approach of advocay - it should have been accessible anyway...) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action21]
<shawn> goal: effect chagne
<andrew> Intro - start positive - you can have an effect, probably not your fault, different reasons why it is bad
<andrew> intro - middle para - add ... so your feedback might be helpful realise these benefits
<andrew> intro - work on the flow
<shawn> ACTION: reporting - bullet Identify key contact & Contact points on the website [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action22]
<shawn> ACTION: reporting - probably delete " � if this option exists, it suggests that the organization welcomes visitor feedback and may respond positively to your input. " [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action23]
<scribe> ACTION: add contact library resource for contact info [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action24]
<scribe> ACTION: How to Report - reconsider the title [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action25]
<scribe> ACTION: How to report - consider other types of organziations as well [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action26]
<scribe> ACTION: How To Report - add the "join the revolution" message up front [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action27]
<shawn> ACTION: Hot to report - "If you would just like to see how you might write an email or letter, there are some email samples provided at the end of this document." -> "(See sample emails.) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action28]
Action - How to report - where/What is the problem. Tighten up and drop "encountered" in title
Action - How to report - What is the problem. 2nd paragraph, if -> this, 3 bullets
<shawn> action- HOw to report - consider deleting ", then this may be useful to include with your email as it can show the organization exactly where the problem arose. "
Action - How to report - where/What is the problem. Tighten up and drop "encountered" in title
<Sharron> Action - How to report - What is the problem. 2nd paragraph, if -> this, 3 bullets
<scribe> ACTION: How to report - where/What is the problem. Tighten up and drop "encountered" in title [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action29]
<scribe> ACTION: How to report - What is the problem. 2nd paragraph, if -> this, 3 bullets [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action30]
Suzette: Can they record a screenreader experince?
Jennifer: yes but very difficult.
Doyle: Not that difficult.
Shawn: example emails...too many, too long, too short, OK?
Jennifer: They are very good, useful for those who need them.
Jack: +1 and addresses some of the issues of tone.
Doyle: Yes, very helpful
... it is what advocacy is all about.
<scribe> ACTION: How to report - Your Computer System / What computer system are you using [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html#action31]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/soemtimes reinformces/sometimes reinforces/ Succeeded: s/since WCAG/since WCAG 2.0/ Succeeded: s/informaiton/information/ Succeeded: s/SC are on technical level./SC are more on technical level, not usability metrics./ Succeeded: s/ accessibility can be a [platform, motivation] innovation/ accessibility can be a [platform, motivation] for innovation/ Succeeded: s/ resonably accessible site. / resonably usable site. / Succeeded: s/ loks/ looks/ Succeeded: s/ requirements/ technical requirements/ Succeeded: s/ optimizr/ optimize/ Succeeded: s/ realted/ related/ Succeeded: s/ stadnrds/ standards/ WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/ compnonents. components Succeeded: s/ beleives/ believes/ Succeeded: s/ componenets/ components/ Found Scribe: Sharron Inferring ScribeNick: Sharron Default Present: Ponderosa Present: Ponderosa WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list! Agenda: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2009/11f2f Got date from IRC log name: 03 Nov 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/11/03-eo-minutes.html People with action items: - ... 1 accessibility-n-usability add address all alternative an bullet change communications consider developers eg. encountering for ho hot how keep look not of older purpose records reporting requirements shawn standards users[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]