Shawn: For invvolving Users page.
I made some changes based on the face to face.
... Shadi do you have thoughts discussing with a small group, still need to run things by EO. Clarify points for EO. Sound Right?
Shadi: sounds good.
... briefly, the more I look at the two documents, involving users in general and involving in evaluations. The more I think about the two documents. Involving users should be quite generic, quite broad, developers, mobile developers, to have several use case quite different from a web site developers.
... and keep involving in evaluations for developers. We end up chasing technologies if we don't from the beginning involving users and see what accessibility benefits, standards being developed will have. I am arguing to widen up the audience.
Shawn: if we did that? What would it change from the current draft? Maybe taking out the user center design, and in the steps changing 3, 4, and 5?
Shadi: not very much. Everything
is there. Depending on a project you are developing HTML per
se, those phases for involving users will vary slightly. We are
making implicit assumptions about web site developers. One
example, we jump into quite guickly, involving users in the
implementation and development in some setting for example
policy development, there is a lot of listening to users, in
developing web sites there is a pre-canned users in the
... one would develop in some cases you want to use real users. And learning from users may be considerably longer.
Shawn: one concern that Andrew mentioned. If we broaden too much, it may not feel relevent to web site developers, of which there is many more. I would like to see if we can do both. Have some sections that specfic enough for web site developers. What are the changes, if not a lot we could do it.
<shawn> ACTION: involving users - involving users to develop requirements (throughout) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action01]
Shadi: I think it is all there, but tweaking it for the developers. When involving users for developing requirements. You can use WCAG to kick start development but remind developers, but I had a different persona in mind as well.
Shawn: other thoughts?
... I did not quite understand your email this morning? Go to the changelog?
Shadi: If we go to the changelog, during the face to face, the first bullet in the primary audience, web developers, second bullet policy makers, and moving up some bullets to the top, and Andrew had in mind who the primary audience is web developers.
Shawn: I remember now, the bulleted audience order is not real important. I would not be comfortable of putting standards developers above web developers, because of sheer numbers.
Shadi: If we agree they are of equal weight?
Shawn: relatively equal weight. How many standards an policies developers are there, if web developers don't understand the basics you will still have problem.
Shadi: I am leaning more and more involving web developers in the evaluate the site. Some sort of evaluation is an entire document. We can address web site developers fairly well. I don't want to put policy and standards at the head, we need to remind ourselves of this group.
Jack: question there is a much
smaller group involved on policy. They have a real big impact.
My question, I am wondering if a separate document that
specifically focused on them. That audience that combines
interweaving things would do a disservice to both groups. You
want to make a point to policy people to adhere to standards
and also understand the needs of people with
... it would be nice to address that group, and I wonder if one document will be able to do that. Or break to two separate documents?
Shadi: I think it is more than
policy makers. One big new thing is augmented reality. Mobile
phones can know where you are by measuring the tilt. One
example based on where you are looking with the phone, and
supplement what you see from the phone camera with information
from say Wikipedia. In couple of years we will have to chase
those for accessibility. And WAI ARIA audiences. I wonder if
this document people outside WAI working groups don't think
... we could have some impact. Specifically for policy makers we have documents to point back here.
Shawn: Are these target audiences will get here? What will they get out of this? And cool mobile audience a blog post would effective to point to is more effective. To reach them through thje format and tone of blog post.
<shawn> ACTION: consider blog post about including users in cool new technologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action02]
Shadi: I agree with you Shawn about mobile developers, but we want to reach opinion leaders here, to bring in standards development we are involved in. Many people don't visit the WAI sites, and we go out and to promote,
Shawn: Looking through emails for more, Shadi I feel very strongly that web site developmenters need to have users from the beginning.
Shadi: we can keep using web site developers I agree.
Shawn: the page being written generically and a specific section how would you feel?
Shadi: ok, have a look at that.
Shawn: Anything else overall?
Jack: I agree with Shadi, it is important to include others to do proactively rather than reactively. Involve people up front, have a diverse range and audiences is a whole lot easier than a retro fit a couple of years down the road.
Shawn: the other thing, we could say when accessibility can be seamlessly integrated with web design. Also something when you include accessibility early you can realize additionaly benefits from that. Think about cool new apps. You will have a design that works for more people not just about disability? Too much too focused on design, and not apply standards and polcies?
<shawn> ACTION: involving users - consider opening - if you consider ax, can learn cool things that will make your product work better for more users in more situations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action03]
Shadi: more than standards and policies. Think about access to digital books, you solve so many more problems for many more users. This is better than using the legal requirements to say to developers, instead to imply the site will be more usable for more people.
Jennifer: basically as positive in the introduction as possible is good.
Shawn: looking at the
introduction, any comments?
... Lets have in the introduction, one thought about pointing to evaluation of accessibility?
Shadi: I think they are two companion documents, to jump off from there.
Shawn: we don't want them to jump off from there because there is information we want to read, and we say it is there later.
Jennifer: it's good to alert people but not too jump off too quickly.
Shawn: the other things on the agenda didn't happen. So lets do more on this. Hoping to do as much as possible now rather than later.
Shadi: I agree with Jennifer not send off people too quickly, but also I don't want to force people to read something they don't want.
Shawn: let's leave to editors
... next section is involving users early. We looked at this at the face to face. There were three different sections and at the face to face, when I started to rearrangement there was overlap. So I basically I mentioned there benefits for stakeholders, for developers, and this is open for discussion on this. Very different from what we looked at. Too long?
... thoughts on involving users. Do the three subsections work? Is this clear? Too much make shorter? What?
Shadi: I think those two sections talk about the benefits the users and the stakeholders. Quite a bit of overlap, this is too repetetive. I see what you are saying but difficult to make out from reading. I like the motivation section. I would add a section on understanding and developing for the needs of users. Missing. Understanding the needs leading to more effective development. Or more motivation.
<shawn> shadi: maybe 2 sections: "Understanding Needs Leads to More Efficient Development" and "Motivation"
Shawn: You are not including to users then?
Shadi: they would be together.
You end up with better more effective products. Put in one
section I think.
... I think the bulleted list is helpful. Nice to skim. I can see how this applies to me. Better solutions for end users could be one of the bullet points.
Jack: the section about
motivation is true. The thing you say about motivations, since
the audience are those people telling them they would be more
motivated but you aren't saying why they would be more
... in other words you are acting as if they are not the audience, but they are audience. Who do you address when you say this. For us we know this is true. But the real question is the carrot to get these people involved. They then understand and are motivated.
Shawn: you make a good point, when you or anyone see a PWD managers and stakeholders budget this in after seeing.
Jack: Shadi was getting to that. Why when they see these things they are more motivated is part of what you want to address. What you gain, and how that impacts their behavior.
<shawn> Motivated section - audience. "you" first, then managers second sentence. also say more how useful &/or barriers
Shadi: I think it is adding a
word or two. The web provides or something of that sort. People
are motivated by they didn't know the site would be used by PWD
and they think there is a added value to the product. I provide
access to real people who have a real benefit from that.
... the motivation is the product could be so good. An opportunity being missed.
Shawn: It makes it human. It's hard to say in a few words. We'll probably add in. It's get that real human connection that lights the fire. I don't want to say in this document.
Shadi: I really love it makes it human.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - Motivated section - audience. "you" first, then managers second sentence. also say more how useful &/or barriers - opportunity - "makes it human" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action04]
Shawn: Maybe I will use that. A lot of times PWD is just a number on the paper. When they see someone it makes a huge difference.
<shawn> "makes it much more real" - Jack
Jack: I like the phrase too. When talking about compassion. YOu hit the same themes. Becomes much more real, how to better invlove people and their needs.
Shawn: I am thinking of the HTML working group, They can see the real faces behind standards.
<shawn> [ignorance or evil. ignorance can be cured.]
Shawn: On the motivation I got as a change item. I am not convinced to merge the two items. I am convinced to edit. Shadi?
Shadi: I don't feel strongly. I couldn't tell right away what was the difference. Speak to the editor.
Jennifer: my two cents, maybe I read too many blogs, the more you split up by headings. The more you can skim the better.
Shadi: what do you think about a section developing, a stage where you get where you involve users, to learn about the requirements. Looking at the cool app on the mobile web. You don't know what accessibility challenges to learn about the requirement later on.
Shawn: the first section was
intended to be benefits, the second section was what to do and
when. Shadi is that not working?
... the first section is about involving early and the second section is how to.
Shadi: I think it is a benefit.
If you don't see a benefit for involving users and you go on
developing, and try to sell to government and you can't sell
it. A benefit to involve users early you would see the
... I think a benefit to involve early in the process.
... you mention in the first sentence.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - benefit: understand the requirements (taht you will need to meet lateron, eg, if you seel to govt) - doing it early helps [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action05]
Shawn: anything else in this
... I still think there needs to be different sections but I'll tighten up to see how that works. The version we looked at the face to face had examples sprinkled throughtout. I moved to the end. Do we not want them at the top? Any examples at the top?
Jennifer: the one advantage is this makes this human right away.
Jack: I agree with Jennifer about making more human. But I would leave the examples at the bottom.
Shadi: It's linked fairly prominently.
Shawn: I feel like the top being shorter to get into the nitty gritty. They were marked up to be indented to skip easily.
Jennfier: definitely get into the nitty gritty tighten up as much as you can at the top.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - maybe leave examples at the bottom, but point to the them ? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action06]
Shawn: the motivation of this
section you would have the humaness. The next section is how to
involve users in your project. What I am thinking here, we have
five steps, learn the basics, find PWD, etc., those might be
one section. Learn how people use your product. steps four and
five, and have a separate implementing accessibility. Shadi?
Anybody, divide into two sections. The first for all audiences,
and the second for developing a product.
... appropriate headings and how to develop?
Shadi: I don't have much more to add. I think you addressed my comments really well. I wonder if we want to emphasize consideration. Should be included before you start. An example where we want to web site developers. I think this is fine. I am convinced. Maybe a header in between to help distinguish the second part.
Shawn: Let's put on the developer
hat. As early in the project one two three is the begining
process. Would it be good to emphasize doing NOW. And 4 and 5
at the implementation stage. Or 'just' five steps?
... the question there are five steps now. Would it be better as they are, as one nice list. Or to break up into two different sections. Understanding issues early and design and implementation.
Shadi: maybe divide into three part, before, during and end.
Jennifer: I am always for breaking up, but this might be too long. Easy to read now to me.
Jack: Still mulling over.
Doyle: As they are.
Sylvie: new to me. I don't know what to say right now.
Shawn: If we did leave this list. We need to make it clear, and changed the previous section. I did make some changes based on your feedback Shadi. Move the change somewhere else?
Shadi: I need to take a break and read, but right now it reads pretty well now.
Shawn: Other comments on this section on how to involve users in your project.
Shadi: adding some more qualifiers. In step four, considering the design aspect, added the such as. Such qualifiers works. Make it not so web site specific. Basically happy how this is going. You make it clear from the beginning. Easy steps that help people for quality standards as well.
Shawn: a web site developer may not consider their web site as a product.
Shadi: I said 'or product'.
Jennifer: web apps, thinking as iPhone developers would think a product, rather than a web site.
Shawn: I used to hate the construction web site slash product, but this would be simpler to do that.
Jennifer: if you don't do constantly it's fine.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - in steps, maybe add "or product" or website/product (which would talk to , eg iphone app developer) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action07]
Shadi: find web sites or products in four that are already doing it.
Shawn: maybe look at like in five, the nice part is that works for everybody. The word prototypes meets your needs.
Shadi: prototypes or drafts.
Shawn: anything else on this section. How to involve users in your project? next. Sylvie, do you have over all comments you want to bring in now?
sylvie: I read the overall document while skipping through the heading in the examples for more information headings to have an example after that. Long to read. When I try to read as a developer I'm not sure they time for all that reading.
Shawn: a little more discussion. I thought some were appendixes to the document. I would like more input.
Sylvie: when I read for more information. At the end to have examples is a bit surprising. If you don't want to have in the middle have a second page to go to this page.
Shawn: one question I had would be appropriate to call an appendix, but have on this same page.
Sylvie: consider having the page have the appendix, have these before the appendix.
Shawn: I am curious when you read the examples, did you think they are really nice, I would have liked earlier, or to dense and be last.
Sylive: I skimmed rapidly, they needed to be read in depth.
Shawn: You need to think about them to understand them. I agree.
Jennifer: these examples you have to read to understand, short videos are really good here. Picture myself as web developers. Click through quickly.
Doyle; what kind of video?
Jennifer: scenarios using assistive technology? Perhaps irrelevant?
Shawn: Can everyone look at the examples for a minute?
<Zakim> sylvie, you wanted to talk about the examples
Sylvie: I read through the examples. To have short sentences for the examples, and have handles a search button, short and clear not too long sentences, so the reader doesn't have to concentrate.
Shawn: in the first example before the example have a little short example of alt text?
Sylvie: video with sub title, you know what inside the example. Some that is concrete. The developers know explain how to users, understandable to someone who doesn't know the words of the users.
Jennifer: format wise like bullets, and then a short form. That kind of idea?
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - examples: add short "handle"/heading for each. maybe add "Appendix" to heading. reorder ending sections [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action08]
Shawn: Another note is in this the order, the for more information, is more important in this document than in some other documents. I think our approach in this document we are just touching the surface and you spend more time do more and learn. For more information is more important. Do we want to say something different in the heading. Heading be different. next steps.
Doyle: I think next steps is a good idea here?
Shadi: next steps I expect at the end of document. Either the examples don't help. Remove completely. They should be above. I like Sylvie's example of a web developer who spends too much time. Since someone argues to widen up the audience, and have something about a cool new web app. Examples from really different areas, to understand reading this document. This example section would have substantial value.
Doyle: Please add more info here.
Jack: I think Shadi's idea of the examples broaden out. The examples llink to the broader things we are talking about. Is a powerful point.
Shawn: Shadi you are leaning to including examples at the beginning and a broader audience.
Shadi: not at the very beginning, but before more information. Still leave here.
Shawn: Something for standards developer?
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - examples: include other scenarios (e.g., cool new app developers? specs developer!) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action09]
Shadi: For standards they have to address in some way. Tell me what to do.
Shawn: let's go for more information heading.
Shadi: as an alternative third
example, one would be a policy being deveolped for PWD without
including older people therefore addressing the needs of older
users. A major reason why this was proposed as a WAI age
product. Another is a researcher doing something about older
people. Two candidates as well for examples.
... three examples is sufficient. I just was giving options for examples.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - examples: policy &/or researcher developing ax &/or older user, w/o including both. (how make compelling ?) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action10]
Shawn: they should be how about
going right or wrong, to be compelling. Nice to have one of
those examples but how to make compelling? Andrew could work on
... for more information thoughts on heading to learn more.
Jennifer: something like learn more?
Jack: more of what you need to know.
Shadi: I like the word more, or further. It clarifies there is more to read. More information.
<shawn> More Information and Guidance
Doyle: I could go along with that.
Shadi: Doyle mentioned throughout
the document to link down to the references area.
... I am not sure how to in the section how to involve users, link there or to the resources section?
... I am too much in the adaptive strategies mode, small links to the references section which has more detailed resources. We could have a nicely structred instructions section, small annotations have examples to send people to. I'm not sure what other online resources are, but there might a bunch of things to link to.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - play with putting all external resouces in sectoin, not throughout. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action11]
Shawn: I'll play with that and see. Editors discretion. Play with putting all external resrouces.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - consider For More Information -> "More Information and Guidance" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action12]
Shawn: next section is Getting a Range of users.
Shadi: I like this and everything is there. I wonder if the flow jumps around a little bit. The third paragraph users with a variety of experiences. Experience is one of the next diveristy aspect. I'm not sure of the flow and a strong focus on web site developers.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - Getting a Range of Users - check flow & emphasis on website developers [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action13]
Jack: I like the section too. You would need to introduce the idea there is a variety of experience levels, and then pointing to know more about that and evaluate. Is there any useful to say how to balance out overall other than the way you approach that?
Shawn: thoughts about a short bit to say on that?
Jack: I'm not sure there is. I'm just raising the question. Becomes really interesting in itself.
Shadi: I agree, but not too
... cross disability aspect of PWD. Have a person with a wheelchairs can talk about ramps. But not know about accessibilty.
Shawn: In the section above there, but does it belong in both places? We might need to point to that.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - "Caution:...." belong where it is? or down in "Getting a Range of Users" or pointers [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action14]
Shawn: The next section is working with users. This is a huge scope challenge. There is tons to say here. What do you about what we have here? Say more? right for the scope.
Jack: some place that could be pointed to about common practices?
Shawn: something more broad like interacting with period?
Jack: beyond the specific, beyond what is there now which is appropriate. Working with PWD but apply the broad practices, like working with any people. All you do is point to the ethical. but not pointing to the broader users.
Doyle: second that.
Shadi: I wonder if there is something to add here users typically have little time or users organizations staff and skill. A precious resource. Say that. Something about respect. Missing that word, research ethics. I feel something about developing mutual respect. Something specific on that.
Shawn: I had a tough time, what's the short version. People are people don't be afraid of disabilities. I'm not sure if you just say.
Jennifer: I would say this is difficult.
Shawn: If you just say respect if that works.
Shadi: I kind of agree.
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - Working with Users... [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action15]
doyle: have something to be specific about the respect.
Shawn: Anything else with working with users?
Jack: this might be a place to mention something about respecting other organizations. Respecting consultants. People say I know someone with a disability. And take a few minutes to look at my site. A lot more to it to pay people for their time. Treating people appropriately.
Shawn: Shadi type up use their
time pay them?
... combine user involvment with standards. Does that work? Do we need? Obviously the web developer is the audience not policy. Shadi?
Shadi: I think this is fine. People can follow that software standards that can help me. Have a generic scope.
Jack: works for me. I like the way you have done it.
Shawn: we worked out at the face to face. Anything else. If you see anything else send an email soon. Possible another draft today. Please update your expected availability. For example the 27th day after thanksgiving.
<shadi> ACTION: Involving users - Working with Users - time and resources of people with disabilities and user organizations are typically very low -- use this valuable resource of their time and skills very wisely [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action16]
Shawn: thanks for your input today. The next two meetings are still to be determined. Based on who is available. We'll keep the home page updated.
<shadi> ACTION: Involving users - Working with Users - maybe something about developing respect -- may need an object -- maybe because accessibility is about humans at the end, don't forget that humans are on the other end [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action17]
<shawn> ACTION: Involving users - Working with Users - their tikme is valuable, pay them [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-eo-minutes.html#action18]