Shawn: We have a new participant on the call today (Emmanuelle)
Shawn:First topic is
Shawn: Let's revisit this fresh. Additional thoughts of what should go here. Especially what to call this? Brainstorm meaning, like Users Perspectives or a new title?
Liam: Two different audiences, users, and people who think about users. For users it could be accessibility for you or real people. Getting more from the web.
Shadi: I like the idea of users perspective but doesn't click. Starting with a verb in most, but doesn't give a lot of what is inside.
Shawn: one option is limit to 'for users'. We could limit to that.
Liam: push involving users in web projects, out of this section to back where it was before.
Shawn: we wouldn't have a good place for? Are any of other planned documents targeted for users that would fit here? Anyone?
Shadi: the training one has several audiences. Sometimes we want advocate users to use this material.
Shawn: not the primary home for it? Do we want a category with two things?
Liam: we should encourage in the category.
Andrew: nothing jumped out for me.
Shawn: If we had lots of people power that might work.
Liam: better web browsing is a great topic, You could break down into 5 documents. Built quite quickly, contacting accessible web sites makes six. Lots of issues about using, seeing, understanding and navigating.
Shawn: interesting idea! Might work.
Shadi: Not sure.
<shawn> fyi http://www.w3.org/WAI/managing.html has lists of pages
Andrew: very long document already. Most people maybe fall into one category or another primarily.
Shawn: page on managing accessibility has lists. Let's play with that as an idea. Imagine this category we concentrate on four users.
Andrew: using web sites?
Liam: accessing web sites?
Shadi: accessibility for users?
Shawn: tips? Do users consider themselves as users?
Sharron: I don't know if that is the right vocabulary.
Shadi: accessibility for you?
Liam: the problem is we have to deal with expectations. Not likely to find anything?
Shawn: one scenario, these people would wonder across our site. That won't happen for a while. We haven't had stuff for that user.
Liam: an audience that might want to direct users to information. Just users would be directed to this by an accessibility statement.
Sharron: if you look at documents part of is understanding and customizing. Some kind of engaging in accessibility what accessibility means to you. A term of engagement instead of just a category.
Shawn: can we play with that for a minute.
Shadi: configuring your browser is that engaging? Contacting organizations for sure.
Sharron: Understanding how people use the web engages your mind. Most of the documents encourage that kind of participation.
Shawn: more than getting involved.
Liam: covers both schemes. What you can do with a web site, and for builders of websites.
Shadi: sometimes people don't want to engage they just want help. Feedback or whatever.
Liam: I thought Shadi's point was good. Accessibility Help.
Doyle: works for me.
Shadi: takes us to a very single track for that part of the site. Works well for those two documents, but restrict us in the future use.
Liam: could say what now or to come. Could be a long time. Change when it becomes apparent.
Yeliz: "accessibility help" sounds good but has the same problem, not clear if it is targeting developers, or users.
Liam: do we have an idea of what comes in the future?
Shawn: we don't have anything on the two year plan.
Liam: Shadi do you have something in mind?
Shadi: no nothing specific. In the future, it's always been one of our hopes to get more to more advocacy oriented. Nothing planned for the next while. Your point is taken to reflect what is there.
Liam: aimed at users, what can you expect your experience of A or double A sites.
Shawn: I could see things of interest to this user. I'm a mom and pop shop. Tell me the basics of that. But not the main home of that document.
Liam: managing what users could expect from a web site. In the UK we are always dreadfully sorry to access your web site. We want to give a sense of what you 'should' expect from the web site. I know I should be able to do that, but not is a very bad thing. I didn't know I could navigate by heading.
<LiamMcGee> "what you can expect as a bare minimum of accessibility"
<LiamMcGee> "what you can expect from a commercial website"
Shawn: yes. Ok that's an idea of something that might be here in the future. Any other brainstorms of what to call this? We talked about access help, accessibility for users, access for you. Encouraging accessibility, taking control of accessibility.
Shadi: shall we look back to the idea of the two audiences again. Is it good? Leave some in the different areas for now.
Shawn: right now has five documents [1. Better Web Browsing: Tips for Customizing Your Computer, 2. Contacting Organizations about Inaccessible Websites, 3. How People with Disabilities Use the Web, 4. Involving Users in Web Projects for Better, Easier Accessibility and 5. planned: usability-accessibility overlap] Shadi you are saying to have these fives grouped together? Right now how people with disabilities. involving users is under managing accessibility. Any thoughts about leaving these five grouped together, leave the other two somewhere else? Leave just these five together? Thoughts. Involving user document (Number 4) is primarily for project managers etc., one of the advantages to put together with users documents. And advocate pointed here would come here for either better web browsing. Then read the other and they might try be hired by an organisations.
Shadi: don't we have related organisations on these pages?
Shawn: we do. Thoughts on grouping these together? Or not?
Shadi: I was wondering what people thought, this specific proposals.
Andrew: I like how people use the web, gives a better idea, successfully using the web is a good strategy, but Involving Users stretches the friendships between document a bit more than the first three.
Liam: Andrew is right, the fourth
one is not very groupable. That is the problem with that users
and accessibility format where they might go.
... almost an argument for the general overlap area. Not really part of accessibility but for doing something about accessibility. Even introducing accessibility is overlapping type.
<LiamMcGee> Suggest that 'overlap' type content - mobile, usability, (seo?) might even live within 'introducing accessibility'
Shawn: mobile also. Any other ideas before we move? Take some time to have any other thoughts and send via email. Shadi will take over from here.
Shadi: This is a recap from last year. A multi part suite. Second part that describes specific scenario, highlight different kinds of disabilities, and access strategies. Trying to make this current especially technology. Especially how it addresses the needs of older people. Today we can go through these scenarios. What is outdated, missing. Don't get stuck on the editorial and word smoothing. Before we start digging in, any overall thoughts?
Liam: I think it is a really good document. One thing I'm not clear on. Linked from color blindness, there is a strike through. Is that because it is done away with?
Shadi: yes, a long document and
now broken out there are links that don't work. Idea when you
look at a scenario. Other parts of the suite about disability.
Descriptions of different types of disabilities. A lot of those
links will link into other parts of the suite. Let's go down
through the scenarios. There is a note about captchas was
identified as missing by WAI-AGE task force.
... first scenario with color blindness. Basically using style sheets, and over riding style sheets. Next is a reporter with repetitive stress injury. Change to content management?
... access keys have been removed here. Next one is an online user who is deaf. Some comments about media players, captcha support for media players. Next one is with the page with a screen reader. And then the classroom student with dyslexia, using text to speech in some cases.
... then we have the retiree. Has several related conditions. The task force brings up that screen readers aren't used by older users. Screen magnification is used in a later scenario below. Those are brainstorms right now. Some possible to user for older people, the myths to address. A civil engineer is approaching retirement.
... could flow into one of the existing scenario. A grandmother using a social web site. For communication primarily. That is another aspect about older people are not online. A motivation for creating this scenario.
... We are on the scenario of older female users. People develop age related impairments. Idea to use different search options. Teen age deaf blind using a mobile device, reflecting more the interactive and social media. Mobile aspects to consider. To summarise one thing missing captchas, logging and content management, the third as missing mobile access.
Liam: chat room or auction (with realtime updates)?
Shadi: real time updates! I think that might be very useful, either for teenager or deaf blindness. Real time text, captioning.
William: twittering is very common.
Shaid: think about the accessibility challenge for twittering. Other ideas?
Doyle: augmented reality with images labelled with titles.
Shadi: could go under mobile accessibility.
William: games aren't mentioned in these scenarios.
Shadi: good suggestion.
William: happen so quickly, social facebook barely existed when we started doing this.
Shadi: over seven years since this has been touched. Other aspects?
William: GPS navigation.
Doyle: watching television on the internet.
Shadi: accessibility on different devices.
<Andrew> ACTION: PWD use Web - ideas: 1) real-time updates (chat room/auction/stock quotes); 2) augmented reality (point phone at scene and it gets labelled - mix with mobile) maybe plus GPS; 3) accessibility on different devices (eg TV for web browsing) + convergence [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action01]
Jack: I think not only different devices but combining different functions, people conduct there lives. Functions people perform.
Doyle: you purchase things via the internet. In a mobile sense.
<Andrew> ACTION: PWD use Web - ideas: 4) rfid with mobility eg for payment, location, etc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action02]
Shadi: bar code readers. Let's keep up the web accessibility in mind here, not to go out of scope. Good thought. Counter check. Anything jumps out outdated, not a good example or any other issues with that. The system aspect with the reporter. Anything else that jumps out.
<Andrew> ACTION: PWD use Web - remove 1) use CMS rather than text editor for reporter scenario [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action03]
Shadi: I don't want to stay here any longer. Comment on the scenarios now is a good time to bring in. Both Andrew and I are working on to make more readable. Next iteration to really read through well.
Shadi: The third agenda item. Very similar mind set in thinking of multi-part resources suite where all the documents relate to each other. This part introduces a different topic. Built into a presentation or training. Provides some materials in the presentation or training session.
andrew: this is older than the suite about how people use the web. The intention here, how the people use the web to update with WCAG 2, and a large number documents that were not referenced. Two extra topics added here as additional outlines. What is still relevant and how it needs to be changed.
Shadi: before we go through one by one. Overall comments?
William: what could be made more clear. How you could furnish information, to go and teach not where you stand up in a slide show. Go to one person, each one teach one. Start evangelists.
Shadi: I think that might go into for preparation. In one of the tips. Or approach for training. One teaches one approach. What kind of topics. Let's quickly go through the assumption why accessibility is important, the next module, description of the barriers access strategies.Business case follows accessibility might follow, designing accessible web sites. Basically the module where you introduce the key technologies that are available. A module for evaluating web sites. Accessibility and browser tools. Components, a basic approach what are the components. Involving users in accessibility. Working with users. All seeds in a work shop. Promote and advocate for accessibility is where Williams idea about finding additional resources for evangelists. Any other topics not a sub bullet for these?
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 1) 1:1 advocacy or selling accessibility - maybe as an approach or maybe under Promoting [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action04]
Shadi: think about the last presentations you had.
William: what do you take away from this? What you gain from advice and gaining perspective. When you encounter new persons who don't know the web.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 2) what does the trainer get from it (listen & learn) - maybe for 'post-presentation tips [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action05]
Shadi: very useful advice. Listen to the audience, and learn from that. I think this is related to the different devices and tips. Focus on the topics. What kind of topics you would present? I wonder if we break up into accessibility of media, and authoring tools. Talk about in the same context.
Doyle: I don't think so.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 3) consider splitting browsers from authoring tools [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action06]
Shadi: I don't hear anything missing. Andrew?
Andrew: one topic I had in mind, the issue where does WAI ARIA, falls under designing web sites. I don't know if it is it's own area, scripting ARIA. As a word it is not mentioned. In 2000 we said you shouldn't have scripting.
Doyle: a lot of scripting of mobile web now.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 4) relationship to mobile web / mobile design [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action07]
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 5) maybe modularise Designing with scripting, ARIA, multimedia, etc [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action08]
Shadi: regarding scripting itself to break out. Breaking out multi-media. You won't end there. Inside that section designing web sites, some modules that clarify making web sites. WAI ARIA is in there, but talk about scripting specifically there. One of the topic, relationship to mobile design. Other thoughts.
William: the notion of device independence, for mobile devices. Applied through an automobile, where the web participates the accessibility or refrigerator.
Shadi: under the business case?
William: where TV to watch is after we write the document. Some means for allowing future for carrying projectors.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 6) mainstreaming of accessibility with device independence - car, tv, mobile-phone, etc -> bus case [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action09]
Shadi: device independence is very jargon so we have to be careful. What sort of topics came up in your last three presentations.
Liam: I go through a lot of technical advice, of what you can do. To introduce how good semantic works.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 7) value of good semantic markup -> Designing [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action10]
Shadi: Parts of designing accessible web sites. Break up, or have several subsection. Semantic mark up would be under designing web sites. Just like scripting. Others?
doyle: touch screens?
Jack: new things that might be coming, future directions, not necessarily defined, people heard about from some source. One of the things, we talk about some of that dazzle excitement where things might go sometime. Not just nuts and bolts.
Shadi: yes, research and development to further work. To look out into the future. Presented on is true.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 8) touch on future devices/directions - stargazing/razzle-dazzle - future resaerch/investigation opportunies and accessibility [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action11]
William: using the web site, avoids. Doing anything on facebook you create a site on the web. Much more general thing. Whereas you do that involved being online. Not just web sites anymore.
Liam: your web presence is far more than your web site.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 9) websites is restrictive (in Designing) - need to include applications (eg facebook, flickr, blogging) - merger of technologies (browser with authoring tool) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action12]
Shadi: interesting. Might fit under future development. Looking out, may be to think about. To consider. That was very useful. Part of the ideas to bring in the resources in bits and pieces. We won't go back to look in as much details. Now is the time to bring in now. Much more help.
Andrew: one more question. The previous material being drawn, were about CSS, SMIL, SVG, the technologies have moved on. How valuable to point back to. Or just in general?
Doyle: legacy issues makes that a legitimate concern.
Shadi: when I look at that, one thing missing there is the underlying technologies that support accessibility. The WAI ARIA could be listed in there. Out of date but highlights what is to continue to do with whatever technology comes out.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - ideas: 10) Componenets - add in underlying technologies (as well as referening the old Accessibility of HTML/CSS/SMIL/SVG docs) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/08-eo-minutes.html#action13]
Shadi: This document we had a look at before the winter break. Had some comments from different people. Most comments were editorial. Re-arranged the links, to explain where they are going, and also a predictable set of points. At the moment there is not something for discussion. for you to see the changes. Any thoughts or comments.
William: might be useful the main headings to go into principles of POUR. Operating as the basis for this page content. Robots.
Shadi: the target audience seeking advice about increasing text size in the browser. And now we talk about principles? a header?
william: reading wouldn't come under that. Perception and understanding versus understanding... completely different. I am suggesting the sub text the person creating page content, would be use to separate the perceptions parts from understanding parts. Clarifies out understanding. Something semantic that occur to me and so few understand. Perceiving is not understanding, different functions.
Shadi: I will follow up with you separately. Other thoughts?
Liam: I think it is a great document. I would like to see it published sooner than later. A needed document.
Doyle: second that.
Liam: quite limited word smoothing.
Shadi: yeah, we agree, in order for publishing, some review from EO content. I don't feel we have enough read through it. The next steps to take, some kind of approval taking, by review. I guess that will come at you. A good base of active participants and feel ok, or put their comments in. It's mostly done.
Andrew: worth considering breaking into smaller components?
Shadi: I don't have any major thoughts on this. I need to consider more. The pros and cons to more manageable, but then cross linking it's multi-part. (nine pages) a lot of printed pages. Not used reading front to end.
Andrew: might be worth exploring.
Jack: a long document, but somewhat cohesive. YOu would not expect people to read all the way through it. Functionally much more cohesive. See any good ways to break up Andrew?
Andrew: I hadn't thought about the idea until Liam brought up.
Liam: break out the introduction, could be in the first of the section. And then what stood, only one entry in the text, put out with more?
Shadi: I was much more ambitious, the horror of thinking of defining some of those terms.
Liam: just to come back to the breaking out the document. The key comments are hearing and seeing. We almost hiding behind the how better web browsing. Split off to a higher level the heading.
Shadi: page title?
Liam: these should be separate pages because they address separate users directions. The other reason the mileage increasing or providing more information in each of these applications. Like showing examples, separate pages is much more straight forward to do.
Shadi: a good suggestion, anyone have a comments? Let's think about it a little more. cohesiveness from Jack. I am seeing now if we break out to special documents, and someone would say they want a single resource. We can think about that.
Jack: in many cases someone, a library, or some other organization will point here. The pointing will probably talk about go to this section and talks about how to enlarge text. Easier by William suggests. Easier from one document or separate.
Shadi: we have an on-going documents is navigation is an issue. We are thinking more about that. In the past with the business case as an example many people had a problem navigating. Are many pros and cons. A good suggestion worth considering to break out. We'll follow up on that.
Shadi: review of the WAI ARIA document. That needs to be done. If you have any minor comments or thoughts. The deadline is the 12th of January, and we can get back to work group. Any other thoughts or comments? Thank you all.