Shawn: ... One of the things that we will be doing in outreach in this area is at ATIA. I am doing a session on promotion and advocacy and this document will be part of it. Jennifer had some good ideas about promoting this in the disability community. I have been waiting to have this officially in our documents. Jennifer misses us and will be back as soon as she can.
On Brow Beating, some people wanted to say 'complain' about inaccessible, and William said get tough. We published a draft that was relatively mild and people can introduce it and added their own zest to the argument.
... Comments?
Shawn: We started looking at this one last week, and Andrew has been making additional changes. Shadi will facilitate the discussion.
William: Let's get going!
Shadi: Welcome everyone! The three main pages of the resource suite are what we are considering now. There has been some good back and forth on at least two of them. And we will be working on different sides until it gets ironed out. The Topics for Web...includes topics you can use in training. Would it be useful to start each section with a question? We took a similar approach in the business case. Maybe overall presenting each of the topics as spinnable as possible to identify what you are looking for.
... Andrew?
Andrew: Just along the lines of consideration for some of those topics, think of how people engage their audiences in a presentation.
Shadi: Engaging the audience, and here on the page engaging the reader, and making it skimmable. We want to allow people to quickly glance over a topic and really get what is inside. What do we think of starting off each section with a question?
Shawn: You said engaging the reader. I think the point is for the presenters to engage the audience.
Shadi: Yes, ok, the audience is not the trainers, but we could provide questions for them. Andrew could you explain more?
Andrew: Depending on where you present, people may not be engaged in the issue of accessibility. Asking them questions is one way to engage them, and to understand more of the audience background, by getting discussion going very early in the presentation. That anyway is the theory behind it.
Shadi: So should we lead with questions that could be asked at the start to understand where the audience is at? Should we consider to sometimes ask questions at the end also? I'll leave that there, and hear what others think of the suggestion that, in the descriptions of the topics we include questions to engage the audience to ask throughout the presentation.
William: Ask people for their thoughts, introducing web accessibility, is the first point we are talking about>?
... we have already included such suggestions for the instructors.
Shawn: What do we think of that is the question.
William: That is very important.
Shawn: I'm not clear of what goes here, and what goes in scenarios for training. I haven't figured out what goes where.
Andrew: The theory, the previous practice, as I understood, is to continue in this document a series of shorter topics, to break it up. Then provide direction about how to put the scenarios together and step instructors through a typical training session.
... the topics are examples of building blocks & the scenarios are the buildings.
Shawn: My question is this - does the discussion go here or in the scenarios?
William: Both?
Shawn: I don't know but I had that reaction.
William: So far there isn't an item in the scenario that does not include opening with all you know about this. Should be in both places.
Shadi: Let's look at from a slightly different perspective. The first point here is to discuss. I am not sure that applies to all presentation modes. What are the outcomes of asking such a question?
William: Another outcome is that people get more involved.
Shadi: What if the presenter is new to accessibility?
Shawn: It is still useful to engage people.
... Maybe this belongs in the scenarios. There are many cases. I'm all for engaging the audience, but when you talk about training, and you present that idea, it is not as appropriate. So the idea of engaging belongs in the scenarios.
Andrew: Yes. I think that is an error in engaging this document.
Alan: Go in the tips, and qualify in the scenarios? In each scenario?
Shawn: Thats about what goes where, how you expect people to use this resource?
Andrew: In some different places but do not expect it to be comprehensive.
Alan:Will it be in the tips?
Andrew: Yes, the opening of this document includes some of that.
William: And in the objectives also.
Shadi: I am wondering the structure would lend itself to ask such questions. Differently, under the point, provide overview of. There are three bullets there. That's the outline of what's being presented, and pulled up in the document, and asking the audience to engage the audience, without specifying a bit..
... I am wondering about the value of separating the points, discuss, present and... could a different order of those three bullets be improved? And what about the resources?
... having a bullet format of the three topics inside the presentation, for the trainer, preparing the topic or presentation. Shawn?
Shawn: Instead of discussion, present demonstrations, have topic demonstrations and resources.
William: where do you use topics.
... You use the word topics in a different context here.
Shawn: noting that, we may want other topics, we don't two topics. Key points. Along with skimmability look at the introductory paragraphs. They would skim the sections and read if really interested. If I skim through I miss the topics of social and technical.
Andrew: in present.
<shadi> [Goal, Description, Objectives, Resources (maybe Demonstrate below that)]
Shawn: You have two different present sections? Why have it in the paragraph?
Andrew: People read differently. Some people would jump to the heading, and other people skim and go back.
Shawn: Andrew would you take this for later consideration? The paragraph redundency of information between paragraph and bullets.
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - reconsider later the redundnacy of info between opening para and bullets [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action01]
Shadi: I have a suggestion about skimmability. I agree with Andrew that people read differently, some like narrative, and some like bullets. Could there be a one sentence goal, before the introduction. So it is slightly longer than the title, one sentence about the goal. A description could be the intro, objectives would be key points, and then resources under that demonstrations. Give you an idea of what's inside.
Doyle: I agee with that.
Yeliz: I agree, I think it might be also useful to add resources as a separate item.
<Shawn> suggested organization: goal (sentence), description (paragraph), key points (bullets), resources, [demos], [activities/exercises]
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - consider goal, desription (into para), key points, resources, demonstrations as a consistent approach [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action02]
Yeliz: Demonstrate, discuss, ... the resources are in one of the bullet lists. I was wondering for skimmability if they should be one of the main items.
Shawn: Start out with a goal, support it with keypoints, bullets, resources, demos, exercise.
<Shawn> ACTION: training topics - suggested organization: goal (sentence), description (paragraph), key points (bullets), resources, [demos], [exercises(or activities?)] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action03]
William: In Wikipedia, they chose to do to redundant things. They repeat since they don't know at what point or from where people will enter. Here you might have say a header and a thing. That kind of redundancy appeals to me.
Shadi: Any other comments?
Andrew: It's been a good discussion!
Shawn: Most of the questions would go in the example scenarios.
<Andrew> ACTION: Training topics - most of the opening questions would probably move to Scenarios page as suggestions for engaging audience [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action04]
Shadi: As the key topics different ideas engaging the audience might create the questions. Andrew. The paragraph descriptions, starting off with 'development', then description colon box is clear enough.
Andrew: Right.
Shadi: I want to spend a bit more time on structuring this document. I would like to go to the H 1 the title, the paragraph there, and look at those for a bit. How does it read? ...my first question is there a better term of presentations or training? for the general public. Is there a better term?
William: Trainers?
Shadi: Presenters and trainers?
William: I am not sure it's for presenters but for trainers.
Shadi: I am raising this because when you read the paragraph after the H 1, it just talks about presentation presentation, is it confusing to talk about presentations under that?
Alan: under presentations you have exercises to take. You would have that.
Shadi: Unless you define the whole scope.
Shawn: A presentation to me is one person standing up in front of group but most people learn better other ways. Some people can't learn in presentation formats. I don't want to get rid of training.
Andrew: I don't want to get rid of either one unless we come up with a more comprehensive term.
<Yeliz> I think it's better to keep both
Shawn: We have this issue of suite navigation. Each page of the business case is related. And evaluating accessibility is related to the tools database. One thing I look at across these different pages is how their titles reflect the relationships. More important as it is a suite. They go together.
William: I thought this was designed to teach people how to be trainers, instead of how to do presentations.
Andrew: Not how to be presenters, but specifically how to present about web accessibility. This page gives some ideas about resources that anyone can draw on to give the presentation. If you haven't presented this would give you some ideas for the presentation if you are not experienced.
Sharron: It gives an indication of what to consider. It's not detailed enough to be a stand alone training document. We might provide more detail, as we present the topic, but don't think we can expect this to work as training material. It is presentation material.
Shadi: I agree with Sharron. When Shawn said presentation is speaker and lecture style, some of these don't lend themselves to a training but an interactive presentation.
Sharron: Right on.
... whether these are training materials is the context.
Shawn: How might that impact the title or intro?
Sharron: State what the actual expection is for use of the material in the introduction?
Shawn: yes.
Shadi: In the left navigation bar. Using training and presentation alternate. We seem to be using interchangeably. The trigger in peoples head an overlap?
Shawn: What do we do with that?
Shadi: Andrew how much have you researched potential terms?
<Zakim> Shawn, you wanted to wonder if "education" covers both presentation & training & discussion
Andrew: Apart from presentation and training, those terms are often considered as different. Not exclusively, the heading in the navigation is purely place holders. I just used those as placeholding navigation.
Shawn: I wonder if education covers both presentation and training? Or is it too formal?
Shadi: I wasn't proposing so much as brainstorming. We might look for a more global term or continue to explain the scope with those words. In a previous iteration of this document training was used exclusively.
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - introduction might more introduce that this doc is for ideas [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action05]
Shawn: One idea is to do that. One thing to do with a heading, but early on we explain that we mean the short headings. Those are training, discussions, one term in the heading and throughout but then make really clear what the scope is. One thing about education, to a professor would training and presentation even apply to me?
William: What is this for?
Shadi: Let's move along?
Shawn: Andrew take an action to consider what this is called, leaving it, but explaining a broad scope in each sub document.
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - condider titles - maybe keep it simple and expalin the scope (presentation, training, eductaion, discussion, etc) in the intro to each page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action06]
Shadi: Responding to the simple title, the issue is training, the professor might not like, or a community person, the H 1 has to speak to a broad audience. Having both presentation and training not fit the audiences.
Shawn: One brainstorm. Something like for each of these Training tips: presenation topics. Short bit and long explanation.
William: What's the audience?
Andrew: It's in the changelog.
... would awarenes and training work in the title?
Shawn: Not to substitute for presentation.
Shadi: Anything else on that point? The introduction and the understandability of what the resource is all about?
<Shawn> Maybe short bit, then longer list, e.g.: "Training Topics: For Web Accessibility Presentations, Education, Discussion"
Shadi: One more thing to consider, to link from each topic to some of the scenarios. May not sense, some topics may be in not too many scenarios.
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - consider from each topic linking to all/some scenarions that include them [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action07]
Shadi: What else? What about the order of the topics? I wonder if people have thoughts about the order of topics. What is the current order now Andrew?
Andrew: Starts off with why accessibility is important, then using the web, then more technical, and then ends with promoting accessibility and finding additional resources.
Shadi: Any thoughts on the order?
... I am wondering if an idea to use categories, like introductory materials, or technical presentations, those kinds of categories would make the page more manageable?
Andrew: Have lists and sub lists to the topics.
<Yeliz> I agree with that
Shawn: Yes but it is not feasible. it is ambiguous how they go, so hard to do.
<Yeliz> and the audience might use some from each of these topics
Shadi: Instead of introductory like awareness raise how different ways work out.
Shawn: It is a good idea for the editor to take a pass at it.
Andrew: I will take an action when we have a full list of topics. Makes some sense Shadi, but some fall into several, and some not in anything obvious.
Shawn: The soft stuff and the specific stuff. finding resources is more indirect, There are two categories, direct, and indirect, but I don't know how to call them.
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - consider grouping topics for easier list scanning [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action08]
<Shawn> Alan's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2010JanMar/0005.html
Shadi: I think looking into would be useful. Fits very well now to take up Alan's first comment.
<Yeliz> what about using the WAI categories: introducing accessibility, guidelines and techniques, and evaluating accessibility?
<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2010JanMar/0005.html
<Yeliz> This is something to consider
Shadi: Alan? say some about the comment?
Alan: I know we are now pushing WCAG 2 but many people still need to know about WCAG 1.0 since it is the official standard in many places. They'd like to move on to WCAG 2.0 not realistic just to present about 2.0. And it needs to cover other technology. PDFs, for example... people need to know about.
Shadi: We are very interested in migration as a topic. From 1.0 to 2.0. Andrew would you explain about 2.0?
Andrew: Most of the material comes from 2.0 and designing web sites is a big catch all. But most is about WCAG 2.
Shawn: This is really about WCAG 2. If I give a presentation designing accessible web sites, a fraction of what I talk is about this list of bullet points. If I gave a presentation about alternate text, form labels. Gets to what Sharron said earlier. Organizing and sharing about the resources we already have. We need to realize the material we have is more geared to WCAG 2 could use in the foundation of what they they'd still have to a whole lot of work.
... they can take the material and tweak, if they are designing web sites they'd have to do a whole lot of work.
Andrew: We brainstormed in EO some tutorial topics, accessible media etcs.
Shadi: I want to talk about users in web accessible, if you want to provide introduction, if you want to go deeper you have to a lot of work. What about accessible forms and formats.
Shawn: We have all the details but not the overall.
Shadi: It is always about the scope and overlap. I wonder if that needs further advice about how the presentation could be extended, or go deeper.
<Yeliz> I agree with that
<Yeliz> guide for training and presentations
Shawn: a really point to consider how to communicate. Goes back to Sharron's at the beginning. If you do a 20 minutes presentation on WCAG 2 and you'd be done. But do a two day training hands workship, making accessible. The outline might be here, but the work of the details is missing. Really good to communicate. Annotation to the resources. What we offer for each thing.
Shadi: Make that redundant in places too.
Yeliz: There are things to highlight as a guide for preparing for trainings and presentations.
Shadi: I am wondering if the topics the goals the descriptions and resources, short long whatever could be there? Does that help?
<Yeliz> +1
<Sharron> +1
<Shawn> ACTION: training (all) - clearly indicate when resources are sufficient for a full presentation (e.g., Benefits of WCAG 2.0 20-min presentations), versus substantial fodder for an intro (e.g., Involving Users), versus background that the trainer can use to help them develop the training (e.g., techniques for WCAG for Developing Accessibility Websites and Web Applications) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action09]
<Shawn> +1
<Shawn> [+1 s were to "Transitining to WCAG 2.0]
Shadi: Going back again to Alan's email, and what I was thinking. It looks like designing accessible web sites, we always knew it was big topic that needed to be broken in smaller parts. Migrating to WCAG 2 would be good here. We identify all the plus ones in IRC. This section talks about more about WCAG 2, calling it whatever like introducing wCAG 2. A third one like designing accessible web sites, linking to resources.
<Yeliz> [+1 is also for "transitioning to WCAG 2.0"]
<Andrew> So in our discussion of training topics - we can intro each topic, and explain if it is 'off the shelf' or a basic guide. Provide additional resources for the presenter to draw from.
Shawn: Along the idea of what? What is the broader topic?
Shadi: Both to designing and into migration.
William: On migration I'm interested in the original quick tips page. Are we still promoting those?
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - migrating from WCAG 1.0 to 2.0; introducing WCAG 2.0; Designing accessibility websites (or similar) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action10]
Shawn: Even with WCAG 1 we should create a new quick tip cards since the advice from 1999 is different from what we say now.
<Shawn> ACTION: make sure that all Resources <http://www.w3.org/WAI/Resources/Overview> are included appropriately. , e.g., http://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/improving.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action11]
Shadi: We will have a migrating from WCAG , and does the group disagree with the current title? with introducing WCAG 2 or something like that?
... any objections of splitting a designing accessible web sites? Including WAI ARIA?
Shawn: I don't know, I don't how it would work out.
Andrew: Any technology companies that can be pointed to?
Shawn: not in the foreseeable future.
<Shawn> ACTION: training topics - NOT "migrating from WCAG 1.0 to 2.0" but "migrating to WCAG 2"(which includes migrating from other stds! ;-) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action12]
<Shawn> +1
Shadi: Not a reference because that would need vetting. Let's not go to other technologies. I advocate about something technical issues, even though not off the shelf but useful resources, to fill a gap that has been missed.
+1
William: Can you provide an example of what you just said?
Shadi: Designing an accessible web site. The goal is how developers would create forms and tables, the resources would be various techniques.
Andrew: Do we mention other technlogies depending on the audience?
Shadi: Let's not do that right here. Any objections?
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - Designing accessible websites topic - goal to inform about forms/talbles/images/etc; resources to inlcude HTML techniques; CCS techniques; Scripting & ARAI [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action13]
Shadi: Let's make that an action and see how that goes. The additional technologies in regard to those, non W3C technologies there are two places in the topics where we could at least reference. In the topic of finding additional resources, like those not available in WAI, and in designing accessible web site, have a note about other technologies?
William: How do I make PDF fit with all of this stuff?
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - Additional resources - inlcude 'hints' about other technologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action14]
Shadi: There are three pieces to that. First, WCAG 2 is basic advice, we don't provide a full answer. Second, some vendors are making a response to that. Third, WAI is doing on-going work on that.
William: You didn't find out from us, it comes out on it's own.
Shadi: Any other comments on the list of topics?
Andrew: Targeted at content authors, might be a scenario rather than a topic.
Shadi: Yes and not be at such a level of detail.
Andrew: A very common material.
Shadi: It should be under authoring tool accessibility. May be some topics can be broken up more, but beware of scope creep. One topic missing here is developing organizational policies to web accessibility.
... look at the policy makers as well.
<Andrew> ACTION: trainng topics - consider developing web accessibility policies as new topic [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action15]
Shadi: Any further thoughts?
Shawn: The other thing is wondering if standards harmonization is needed as a topic?
Shadi: Yes
... fits under migrating to WCAG 2.
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - consider Standards Harmonisation as new topic [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action16]
Shawn: Break this up into two topics. Direct and indirect, any one of these levels could be presented at a introductory level.
Shadi: Break into two levels. Exponential of indirectness.
Yeliz: Use the topic should be on the left hand side. When I look at the topics it is more less there.
<Andrew> ACTION: training topics - consider WAI IA as topics breakdown [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action17]
Shawn: A good suggestion, if it works it would be nice.
Shadi: Other thoughts?
Tips for Preparing Web Accessibility Presentations and Training (Training Resource Suite)
Shadi: Here also primarily a scoping discussion. This page is intended to be suggestions and advice conducting trainings, before, during and after a trainings.
... the first question is what kind of advice do we include? The one extreme is only advice specifically related to accessibility presentation, and the other extreme, we provide any we can. The golden middle would be relevant to accessibility, but some additional like ethics, or working with groups, or typical of presentations? What are peoples thoughts?
Doyle: Hard off the top of your head.
<Yeliz> I agree
<Yeliz> I agree with Shawn
Shawn: Providing more specifics, consider the audience needs, that general presentation, consider online and offline is general, arrange the technical, availability of access technology, something that is more specific to a presentation for accessibility.
Shadi: Presenting audience needs, does that become relevant or not. Getting materials in advance to the audience. PWD in the room should certainly do that?
Shawn: Second questions, does that the audience know about how to use the web accessibly. Relevant for most of those topics. Knowing your audience is too general and the specifics is to the topics and scenarios.
Andrew: Make as targeted as possible and the specifics fall out of the presentation and don't need to be listed.
Shadi: Make this last? I think in terms of creating a training package. talked about in the previous discussion. The questions belong with the training module. What is the objective of a training. The question as it fits now, is it really too general, ask about the background of the audience. In terms of some of the questions we have listed here?
Shawn: I think there are some. Customize the presentation for the audience. There maybe a case for some general guidance but not the way it is done here. There is a lot of stuff we don't need here. Maybe audience background is one paragraph, but not a whole section.
Shadi: Is it premature to look at this detail now.
Shawn: I think we can agree to, give the editor to give not carry over everything in previous document. rethink this page and not try to keep the old materail.
+1
Yeliz: I think it better this document gives tips, regarding accessible, including introduce how people with different disabilities use the web. I had this problem.before.
Shawn: Yeliz is saying taking out a lot of general advice, and an example, some people don't know how PWD use the web and even about assistive technologies.
<Yeliz> Thanks Shawn:)
<Andrew> ACTION: training tips - remove general presentation tips & focus on advice for web accessibility presentation (eg make sure How PWD and AT is introduced) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action18]
Shadi: Does anybody disagree that this is relevant to the presentation?
Liam: I agree.
Shadi: Another question I don't want to drop, Shall we include on making presentations accessible?
<Yeliz> I think that would be useful, I think. Can be included as part of tips
Shadi: Shall we include that guidance?
Liam: Shouldn't detract from the guidance. so that any other training could link to that.
<Shawn> +1 to Liam that it should be a separate document so that other's can point to it... question is scope!
Yeliz: Most of the time people do share their slide. Useful to make the materials accessible because you will share afterwards.
Shawn: Separate document I agree with Liam. Also scope creep maybe happening. Set aside x amount of time scope out what this would be, fit here or somewhere else?
... I think is very needed. Some other resources stuff that we can draw others have done.
<Andrew> ACTION: training - look at how advice about accessible presentations can be provided - within suite or external (beware of scope) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action19]
Shadi: Related to that advice for presenters. A couple of bullets from WCAG 2 the introductory page we had a sub page advice for presenters, there are several pieces there. Internal and external how to best do that without having scope creep would happen. End up having here some advice with creating accessible presentations and conducting accessible presentations. And a stand alone document later.
... to close this point. Any other thoughts?
<Shawn> [there is presenting accesibly, and making the material accesible. e/g/. describing projected images, and proving ppt to attendees that is accessible]
Shadi: I hope this helps Andrew? A bit on hold and focus on the topics and scenarios line.
Shawn: I wonder if people can last a little longer? Look at the big picture or not.
<Yeliz> It is fine by me
Shadi: The scenarios document. The term scenario is under discussion. The idea to say different presentations or trainings. Our way to say different ways.
... there is an outline of each scenario the learning objective, the topic that can be drawn upon from earlier in the call. We also talked about adding some questions that may be specific to the audience, due to background of audience.
<Zakim> Shawn-focusing, you wanted to ask for minute cleanup
Sharron: yes I will and am happy to help with the whole issue of training materials - it is really important!
Shawn: The distinction between topics and scenarios. I don't understand how to use those two. Put a scenario hat on. A thought instead of doing the topics to present, and then the scenarios, give a sample outline, perhaps, or organize by topic. Have a page a sub page that introducing web accessibility. Go a little bit more than present. go there if you do a five minute presentation you might do this, and if it is part of four day workshop you might do this
Liam: Speaking from a selfish point of view, a very short list of say UK legislation, might be one, or two or three, Suggestions for long or short, and kinds of points of view like government. Learning modules very short you can put together.
... one minute per side.
Shadi: Shawn? Those are not scenarios but examples. I think the initial idea is to incite how to put together. Liam's idea here is having learning modules which is way more exhaustive.
Shawn: I don't know. I agree with what Liam wants, but I don't know how that fits with our scope. We have taken what we had before and are trying to update.
Andrew: We know it doesn't work the way it is at the moment.
Shadi: What about over all comments on the page now? We have some modules, and advice, and some examples to be put together?
Andrew: Are the examples even useful?
Liam: I looked at all the WCAG materials last week, I was making a custom built material, and I gave in - it was just too confusing. Obviously there is plenty of stuff on WCAG 2 and so on. But not enough basic stuff. What illustrates a screen reader? Other suggestions and examples of ludicrous outcomes. Chainsaw squirrel cycling.
<Shawn> "Chainsaw squirrel cycling?" story at http://www.uiaccess.com/accessucd/involve.html
Yeliz: I like the example.
Shadi: Back again to the examples, does this add something?
Doyle: Yes
Shadi: Liam falls into the topic to have enough resources, provides examples you wouldn't have ready made here. Close to modifying for your specific requirements. Not doing as many presentations. Somebody that wants to do about web accessibility. To build their own outline. Is that helpful? Is that what we need nowadays?
Yeliz: I am not sure how useful this page would be. Different people would have different problems. I like a multi level approach, the examples are not that useful.
Andrew: designed for people who might know about the topic, to put together a ten minutes presentation or full day. Some thoughts for that are not regular presenters.
<Shawn> ACTION: "Scenarios" - change to "Examples" for now [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action20]
Sharron: It would be quite useful for, say a small state agency with limited resources. They need the skills but don't have a training budgets. Usefulness is certainly there. A few people who understand this. Even if it is not widely useful there are some real specific circumstances in which it would be critical.
<Shawn> ACTION: "Scenarios" - fix the "contents" and <h2>s to match [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action21]
Andrew: useful but not to spend a lot of effort to clean up and make accessible.
<Shawn> ACTION: consider asking WAI IG or others what would be useful -- and how useful the Examples("scenarios") are [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/01/15-eo-minutes.html#action22]
Shadi: Maybe this group has too much expertise for this to be useful. Someone wants to purchase a training, is that good or bad. I'll leave it here. Keep as food for thought. Look around for web accessibility. A list of examples to make it more useful. Not for a power user here.
<Yeliz> I agree with Shadi
<Yeliz> +1
Shawn: Watch for upcoming stuff be this Wednesday.