21 May 2010

See also: IRC log


Ian, Doyle, Andrew, Shawn, Wayne, Sharron, Liam, Shadi, Jennifer
Alan, Yeliz
Doyle, clean-up Wayne


<scribe> Scribe: Doyle

<scribe> ScribeNick: doylesaylor

<IanPouncey> Good morning Doyle

<Wayne> is anyone there, I seem to have lost the names pane.

Hi Wayne, this is Doyle

<Wayne> found it

New pages on Web Accessibility and Older Users

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-sites-older-users.html

Shawn: Let's look at the first topic. There is a requirements document linked from the agenda. An analysis of the purpose and goals. There is a rationale under audience. The primary audience, web deveolopers, there is a scope. There is H3 scenarios.
... for example see IRC.

<shawn> Scenarios

<shawn> Jane DeVeloper has been told to make her website work well for older users. We want to provide a resource that Jane DeVeloper uses as her guidelines for doing so.

<shawn> Acme Insurance has older people as a key market and want to be sure their website updates and new applications have the features required by this demographic. We want a resource that the project manager can discuss with the developers.

Andrew: On the analysis page, (reads scenarios above)

Shawn: That is an example of what we are looking for in a technical document. Comments?

<Andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-sites-older-users.html#scenario

Shawn: Thinking about the technical page first. Think about the scenarios. Link in IRC to the specific point above. ... thinking about the technical document for developers. Thinking about the scenarios. Comments?

Sylive: When I read the scenario, the developer wants to make the web site accessible, and ?

andrew: I was thinking of a project manager for an insurance company.

Sylvie: If I am a developer and a web site manager, I would wonder what is the different between the document and WCAG. What is not relevent in WCAG or in this one. What am I missing.

Shadi: I agree with Sylvie on that. Should I follow WCAG or other guidelines specifically for older people?

Shawn: can we make that an issue to get later on. Remember to get to this when we reach it. A specific issue for the document or a higher level?

Shadi: both, part of the rationale for this document, and part of the rationale for WAI age.

Jennifer: you guys want to do standard harmonization. For older people you want to make guidelines, when you make a sub guide for WCAG you might want to be explicit, make it a checklist so it is not quite the same. Make it look different.

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-sites-older-users.html#lp

Shawn: let me get through the two different pages you were thinking about. From the landing page we would have two different pages. I'll read the two points, one had technical information, and the other a front door or landing page. When you give presentation, on page to give to people, here is a page about design for older people. We have a draft as well. We are working on where to go.
... We want to clearly say in the beginning go to the landing page, and be careful not to repeat information we want them to know.

Wayne: I am wondering about that one substance question. I don't know this is a subset of WCAG. I don't think it is.

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-sites-older-users.html#titles

Shawn: yes, one more thing under the landing page for older users there is titles users section. What I think we should do is look at both documents in both titles. We can keep in mind ideas. Andrew go through the titles.

Andrew: for the landing page, Designs for Older users, (Reads different titles) For the more technical document (reads titles)

Shawn: we talked about if we wanted about what to talk about. Any questions from the big perspective any comments? Jump to agenda three

Developing Websites for Older People

Shawn: Let's hold the title until the end. Let's talk about the point Sylvie brought up supported by Shadi, and Wayne. What is this? How do we want to communicate what we want to do. Wayne?

Wayne: to me it seems like it ought to be accessible, standards compliant. For older people it needs to be accessible, address the needs of older people. You can't communicate to older people without being accessible.

Liam: I am thinking as a developer, I would hate to have this to cross reference to WCAG. If you want to develop for accessibility use WCAG, then here are some specifics for older people.

Shadi: The purpose of this document is what Wayne said. If you want to make your site available to older people. You need to use WCAG and here are what makes it optimal for older people. We specifically did not want to go down the route of Double A for WCAG. Regardless of what you want to do, you have to achieve if you pay special attention to optimize.

<shawn> Liam: If additional, great, just make it clear.

<LiamM> Extra-to-WCAG2 is great

Andrew: the idea is that in WCAG 2 there is a lot of different options you select. The difference when you do a particular criteria makes sure make these ones a part of your kit.

Shadi: Be really clear, these are additional techniques you need to consider but maybe this is not clear. To make the web site accessible and in additional.

<sylvie> agree with Jennifer, I had the same feeling

Jennifer: skimming through the formatting, without opening WCAG 2 it looks like pieces.

Shadi: many people will be speed reading it needs to be clear. In a previous iteration, under each requirement we had specifically each one. The formatting needs to be looked at.

Shawn: let's make sure we all agree. We clearly want to say, first meet WCAG 2 double AA, and here are specific techniques to help you optimize your designs of older users with age related accessibility needs.

Shadi: Do we need to specify the level?

Shawn:Is there a reason not to? We can check with this. We have been wanting to say we want to specify double AA.

Andrew: there is a sentence there to that effect at the moment.

Shadi: What I am thinking is [to] we word carefully. If we label level A, if we say level double A we aren't there yet, so we can't. You can still optimize a lot more we recommend double AA for accessibility.

<Andrew> ACTION: Tech doc - want to recommend meeting AA, and here are some techniques's to help optimize the design (maybe in Intro) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action01]

Shawn: Andrew can you put an action item, at a basis we want you to meet double A, and here is some specifics we want to clearly come through here and make sure also to anything we point to as well.

Wayne: WCAG doesn't cover low vision. This is the biggest problem it has. An 80 years old person can't use zoom text. WCAG doesn't follow it's own recommendation. Old people can't follow the recommendation, if you take a person with failing vision can read a PDF document, you want to deal with older people different WCAG deal with those issues not in the shadows.

Shawn: Wayne suggest additional ones take this on.

Wayne; I went to a macular degeneration the number of technology being recommended was for was too much for older people.

<Andrew> ACTION: Tech Doc - andrew and wayne to look at specific techniques that might help older people with low vision (or think of additional techniques that we might recommend) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action02]

Shawn: we have some of that in there now. Maybe Andrew and Wayne to work on it. Either in what is WCAG 2 here, or some advisory group.

Wayne: that is a big problem with elderly people. They can't see it.

Shawn: the only stuff for older people is from WCAG now?

Andrew: make sure anything smaller there is nothing smaller than the font. They are in triple As.

Wayne: that is an exemplars in the normative language. Not in an advisory technique.

Shawn: WCAG is planning to publish updated techniques. Wayne you could work with them on an advisory. To make sure it is in the WCAg language.

Wayne: Send me someone to contact.

<shawn> Instructions for Commenting on WCAG 2.0 Documents http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/comments/

Shawn: Basically the WCAG editors, or Michael Cooper. I will send the link to technical documents. Use that form and it will be officially recorded. Everyone in the working group can see it.

Wayne: that is good I have it down in my bookmarks. One of the few examples they give to change the heading.

Shawn: in the design to read conference, someone has an automatic kerning of each letter.

Wayne: it is a big issue for aging. They don't cope well. They didn't get at an age early.

Shawn: At a high level on this. How we communicate that and how to use it. Other things?
... formatting Shadi?

Jennifer: I said about a checklist might be too much work. I would advocate something different something easy to include new advisory techniques as they come along.

Shadi: I don't have specific suggestions, change into table formats the older users became a heading and we added additional headers outside the table, it started to get lost. Shawn mentioned at the beginning the header to put the message and make sure throughout the document if you want to meet a specific audience I'm not sure that message is clear. Headings or notes whatever it needs to get done.

Jennifer: another thing to be done is to leave the format the same, this looks like WCAG but something to say this is in additional. Might be simpler to leave that way.

Liam: Just thinking about the fact this is referred to as techniques. They are not sufficient for any guidelines. Can we call these best techniques. to differentiate from good techniques.

<Zakim> LiamM, you wanted to ask websites that are accessible for older people? and to ask if this is WCAG2++ and to ask if this is WCAG2 AA ++ and to ask whether we could call them best

Shawn: put that as an action item, we want to differentiate best from sufficient.

<Andrew> ACTION: consider calling the table RHS col "best practice (techniques)" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action03]

Shawn: it currently list all the guidelines and success criteria. Is that useful because they list, or does this cause confusion of what isn't? Of just list the techniques. Consider?

Shadi: in a previous version we only list techniques we thought we needed a mapping. If you fix an image and you use WCAG 1.1 what do I need to consider to go with that it gets pretty if they are just listed there.

Andrew: you won't do some techniques you want to make sure you pick up these. You can easily the relationship to follow back and forth, to get the requirements for best techniques.

Shawn: should everyone technique box follow with a link back to that point.

Liam: yes if sufficient links. I want as an developer I want to work down. I don't want something I don't have to do.

Shadi: On the success criteria links to the quick reference.

Liam: something we can fold into understanding WCAg 2? Under the advisory techniques for older users.

Wayne: there are probably aging techniques that would be more appropriate.

Liam: even better, in this case they can be promoted ...

Wayne: a good list of techniques you know are good for people who are elderly.

Liam: if we can fold into the main understanding of WCAg it makes it far more important to meet.

Shawn: yes, like mark the things that are more useful for older users.

Liam: only for older users techniques.

Andrew: there are more techniques to be added as Shawn that may or may not be older users to handle when an update is being created.

Shawn: nicer to integrate as not a separate page.

Liam: that's good as a general rule, if there are no techniques outside the existing guideline. Is there a good case for not folding into the current WCAG document.

Shadi: when this work was first discussed this could be an application note. I don't see that happening anytime soon. I would love to put into the quick reference thing. But it would need to be turned off. I don't know if we need something temporary or not.
... seriously maybe we should have been looking at that more. I don't think it will happen soon. If we can redirect this work, I still if there should be something for a developer in the quick reference.
... one of the scenarios is Miss Jane developer has a task for all the users. We want to catch Jane by following WCAg you can optimize for older people and many more. That is a one use case. Do we need the page anyway? Even listed in the quick reference?

Shawn: If we have the time?

Wayne; I was looking through various techniques. The technique G 1 40. Have you gone through Tom Jewett that talks about in a detailed way, we might do we might do aging use cases we could do in quite explicit detail. Like you want to make sure you use technology which is good for access for low vision. We could say now when you implement WCAG you want to look at these particular techniques. How to implement them.

Shadi: I love Tom's document there are some interesting use cases there. The other thing this mapping here this list of techniques came from the literature review. That is where the comments should go. We are just beginning to older users. I would not expand the scope of this document and this stage. We would look at what we need to look at now. A use case of a developer, and a project manager what they need to do now.
... we want to welcome at things for product review.

Shawn: what would be ideal?

Jennifer: I was thinking of a different scenario. I could imagine someone doing accessibility, and have some older people had struggled with the site and would benefit from those techniques. The quick reference works really well for that. I think this scenario would make scenario.

Shawn: think of as a key scenario, and another is a researcher who was thinking of making their own guidelines we want proof for them that WCAG would have information for them to include in this scenario. That captures what Shadi was saying we want something here. If I was a project manager about to make my own guidelines. I want this to be easy to read. I don't care what success criteria they map to.
... On the other if I am doing WCAG 2 I would love to have a check box to highlight things particularly useful for older users.

Jennifer: I shake on this in regards to ideal.

Liam: I think the document as it stands it is great and my idea to keep as a set of guidance for older users what to do in WCAg and highlight what is good of older users. The only thing I find difficult. The advisory techniques that are not in the WCAG?

Shawn: everything there is listed in WCAG techniques.

Liam: where there is not a link?

Andrew: yes they might have a say a corrected page but they don't have a link for that.

Liam: I came here that we had new and extra stuff that is not in WCAG. Now I see this in WCAG 2?

Andrew: yes that is correct. It really be nice to have what has been suggested, and it would be nice to have a selection button to highlight the ones you are trying to select for a success criteria out of three options the best for older people.

Liam: imagine we added to relevant ARIA is that not a good thing. I don't want to do all this ARIA role stuff.

Shadi: say that again the issue?

Liam: a philosophical we are saying older users a special case. I can get the idea of additional user over WCAG but this feels we are slicing up WCAG if you only aim for older users this is all that you need to use.

Andrew: yes we need to be careful. We want to say you would need to do this, but these techniques are good for older users. Under the success criteria you need to do the technical stuff.

Liam: the difference to be for older users. you are actually trying to do a lot of design this for them to help them do. They don't see they need to use assistive technology.
... I want to get clear in my head what is different about older users where we would not be uncomfortable to slice up for blind users.

Shadi: that is supposed to explain that this is not a slice through WCAG. Most of those techniques are not advisory techniques. Only sometimes for older users is the case, but many times you need to make it accessible you would need to make the web site for accessibility. And we found in the literature review suggested a lot of those things on the surface. Very little looked at technical issues. Even something like re sizable text for example.

<shawn> ACTION: Andrew - make it clear that all the techniques listed are from WCAG 2.0 (to counter the assumption that the non-linked ones are not) [even consider linking them to a placeholder page?!?!] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action04]

<Andrew> ACTION: Tech doc- scenario option? - someone designing own GUI for older users, proof that WCAG covers what they would have put down anyway [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action05]

Shadi: that is what we trying to do to not focus on the users, instead you want to focus on the techniques. That is what this document should be trying to include.

Liam: it feels like the idea to highlight those advisory techniques are more than advisory for older users.

Jennifer: I like Shadi's concept of optimizing and use that word and use additional words bring out in the introduction.

<shawn> ACTION: Andrew, tech doc -- considering wording "optimizing for older users" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action06]

<LiamM> some advisory techniques become highly recommended when older users are a critical user group for a site (but... when are they not?).

Wayne: I am confused is this about the primary group is aging. Or an ordinary page with elderly people hitting. If you do a general page accessible for the elderly that would be an additional question. I am not clear what you are asking.

Andrew: no

Shadi: I don't understand?

Wayne: I think there is an understanding when you format you have to make it adaptable for assistive technology. On the other hand if I was making something for insurance to older people for older?
... Are we thinking about a primary audience for older people or a more general?

Shawn: we are talking about both.

Wayne: that is confusing for me.

Jennifer: we are philosophical for all not one.

Wayne: the development of the web is a particular audience. If you have a print page it seems like the discussion wavers from the person to pick up who is someone aging. Would have an easy time transforming.

Shadi: the idea I want to go back to use cases. This document is set up to trick people who want to develop for one group. A person who has no clue about universal design. Or product designer who wants to promote to older users. By the way you need to consider what to do to make it accessible for all users. I would like to get closure of this page or document. So we all agree is the purpose. The page is still unclear. Andrew and I need to go back
... we need to get clear on scope and design of this document.

Wayne: I was confused.
... i remember if discussed for an hour and half we are the experts what are other going to do. I think you are right Shadi but we don't need to trick them. If you really need this crowd you need to be accessible.

Shawn: that point needs to be clear in the analysis document. Focusing on older users that WCAG provides.

Doyle: That is a great comment Shawn!

<Andrew> action: Tech doc - one purpose is to catch people focusing on older audience that WCAG provides what hey need (and by he way, make it accessible to everyone while you're at it)

<Andrew> ACTION: Tech doc - one purpose is to catch people focusing on older audience that WCAG provides what hey need (and by he way, make it accessible to everyone while you're at it) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action07]

Shawn: any other comments?


Design for Older Users and Web Accessibility Overlaps

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/older-users

Jennifer: I have a couple comments on the title though that may come later.

Shawn: Shadi do you want to fit into today in terms of timing?

Shadi: if that is not possible the people can take a look at the questions in the agenda. I would love to get more input. I tried to input but not completely there but this is fine for today.

Shawn: let's come back to the title. The big picture this is where you are at a conference. You want to send them to one place. That would introduce the idea and provide links to resources. Comments on the amount of information or organization? At a high level.

Shadi: Some quick comments this focus on development. Web site developers need to be accessible. This document is where the other important audiences like usability experts for anyone [who are] interested in older people specifically and with specific resources.

Shawn: makes sense? Over all comments?

Jennifer: I would not make a whole lot bigger. Because there are lot of links from there.

Shawn: title?

<shawn> brainstorm (esp for SEO) Designing for Websites Older Users, People with Disabilities, and ALl

Jennifer: Using a thesaurus, thinking about searching on this Google I am not keen on the word overlap. To replace intersections was the best I thought about relationship and that is far as I got. The other thing to think about what else to put in search, and what to think about mobile. Make the title similar.

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/

Shawn: We do, W3C slash mobile. Web content and accessibility (reads title)

Sharron: I agree with Jennifer overlap in the title.

Shawn: Let's brainstorm, designing for older users, and for all. Brainstorms?

Liam: Older people seems to be the right phrase.

Shadi: Older people or older users?

Andrew: yes.

Liam: older people. Web design is only designing web pages, making pages accessible to older users.

Jennifer: I was thinking about parallels as well as overlaps.

Shawn: One thing on the list... Information architecture persons... We need an information architecture redesign page... This document doesn't have a good home now, and needs a redesign, an information architecture design. Under planning. The business case already mentions older users, but we might add a link to this.

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/ Web Content Accessibility and Mobile Web:

<shawn> Making a Web Site Accessible Both for People with Disabilities and for Mobile Devices

Liam: really long!

Shawn: One thing with that was a little different situation. The issues overlap and the guidelines overlap.

Liam: ...A different challenge. The older users doesn't have that. I vote for paralleling there.

Shawn: Key thing here is do we want to use accessible in the title. No we don't. That scenario of someone just focusing on just older users, do they use the word accessible.

Andrew: We want to capture them first.

Sharron: That's right!

Jennifer: It feels like to me designing is a better word....

Shawn: this discussion will help us inform on both documents.

Shadi: Designing is one thing and designing web sites is another.

Jennifer: the overview page doesn't need design in it.

Liam: ...the search engine is tiny. I am pulling up all searches how many searches like things for designs for older people. It is like 170 globally.
... accessibility is about 2100 per month.
... design for older people there is not a lot there.

Shawn: other brainstorms? Drilling down. We are not going to get a lot of search engine hits on the title. You give to someone for design for older users.

Liam: ...best practice design that is a good phrase.

Jennifer: ...turn into ten on a page - top tips for ....

Liam: ...I would be against because it feels less authoritative.

Shawn: .... any other brainstorms. Best practice, top ten, web accessibility for older, people with disabilities and everyone.

Liam: ... older people is a big market and other stuff.

Jennifer: ... be a success, design for older people.

<shawn> Jennifer [does] not like "overlaps" -- maybe "intersection" or "parallel"

<Andrew> Liam - applicability of WAI GL for older people

Liam: What are we doing with overlapping? WCAG 2 older users? Applicability of guidelines of WCAG 2 to older users?

Shawn: other ideas? Ideas on the table speak to specific wording or direction to work with more?

<shawn> Designing for Older Users and Web Accessibility

<shawn> Older Users Needs Met with Web Accessibility

<shawn> Older Users Needs Met with Web Accessibility

Shadi: I want to advocate for the scope as broad as possible. Don't restrict to web sites. Browsers and assistive technology for people with less skills for computers. I don't know what redesign does. The audience is very diverse here. Designing developing researching, surveys, but otherwise keep the scope broad.

<shawn> Older Users Needs are Met with Web Accessibility

<IanPouncey> Accessibility and older users - avoids listing designing, researching...

Shawn: Older users needs met with internet accessibility. Be more specific Shadi, besides not using the word designing.

<shawn> Shadi: Comments on Web Accessibility and Older People

Shadi: I was wondering if people had a reaction about older people and designing. We have the business perspective, and the overlap. We have a whole lot of stuff like about training. Are there comments against web accessibility and older people.

Shawn: I wonder if grabs the audience we want pulled in? ...My only hesitation with that.

Shadi: We could work with a sub title or colon. Web accessibility and older people.

Shawn: you don't care? Other ideas? don't care?

Liam: I think it is good and broad?.

Jennifer: I worry about titles with a colon in them people would think too academic and complicated.

Doyle: I agree with that.

<shawn> Web Accessibility and Older People: Existing Guidelines for People with Disabilities Meet the Needs of Older Users

Shawn: one thing is the subtitle the second part if very explanatory the short title the second is more clarifying.

Jennifer: I wonder what people think, but I am not opposed to. This is a getting starting thing. Where you would go to get started thinking about it.

Shawn: guidelines might be a good thing in there.

<shadi> Web Accessibility and Older People: Broadening Access to Older Web Users

Liam: best practice crops up a lot in government.

Shawn: that might be a good title for the other one.

<shadi> Web Accessibility and Older People: Ensuring Access for Older Web Users

Shawn: What do you want for this page. We are thinking about refining this page. Go ahead and put up fairly soon. Instead of pointing the WAI project page, point to this. Any comments before we quietly put this up and pointing to it?

<shadi> Web Accessibility and Older People: Guidelines and Access for Older Web Users

Shawn: going back to the title, any other comments. Still plenty of time to change, but we might put into place.

<Andrew> Web Accessibility and Older People: Meeting the Requirements of Older Web Users

Shawn: any resonate with someone or other ideas?

<shawn> Web Accessibility and Older People: Meeting the Needs of Older Web Users

Jennifer: switch requirements with needs? Sounds guideline(y).

<shawn> Web Accessibility and Older People: Guidelines for meeting the Needs of Older Web Users

Shawn: good to get guidelines in there.

Shadi: we have other resources besides guidelines.

Jennifer: training people for resources for aging?

<shawn> Web Accessibility and Older People: Resources for meeting the Needs of Ageing Web Users

<shawn> Web Accessibility and Older People: Best Practices for meeting the Needs of Older Web Users

Shawn: ...curious do we feel like guidelines is trigger words. Training is related to guidelines. How much do we think guidelines is trigger word. Do we want to get in here anyway. How about best practices? If we don't use in the other one.

Shadi: ... this page doesn't give best practices. This page captures everything and sends them to more resources.

Shawn: We want to think about the balance being the most descriptive as opposed to trigger words. Send in the an email if you more ideas.

Reminder: Training Resource Suite detailed review

Shawn: we had asked for comments by the 26th next wednesday, please plan to review and send in by the 26th. We set up a questionnaire to put in all you comments. Typos in one batch you can send to the EO's editors list. If you need more time than the 26th.

Andrew: I appreciate feedback from people. Say what you find or if you approve.

Shawn: we expect everyone will have comments. Every participant in good standing needs to fill out the survey. If you need more time? Andrew? editors list?

Shadi: Any of us emailed we can deal with internally. Send to at least two of us.

Shawn: the other thing is, if you need more time that is fine. We don't have a deadline to the next revision. We do need people to book time for the review. Perfectly if you need more time. Please let us know.

Jennifer: I will go through the four pages. I would start the four pages, put the training suite in the subject line. I will do substantive comments in the survey.

Andrew: sounds good.

Shawn: yep. If you only doing typos. Makes sure you filled out the survey. Send all the typos is great but the survey also. Fill free to email Shadi about how PWD use the web. We'll update the links for the agenda.
... thank you have a wonderful weekend.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Andrew - make it clear that all the techniques listed are from WCAG 2.0 (to counter the assumption that the non-linked ones are not) [even consider linking them to a placeholder page?!?!] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Andrew, tech doc -- considering wording "optimizing for older users" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: consider calling the table RHS col "best practice (techniques)" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Tech Doc - andrew and wayne to look at specific techniques that might help older people with low vision (or think of additional techniques that we might recommend) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Tech doc - one purpose is to catch people focusing on older audience that WCAG provides what hey need (and by he way, make it accessible to everyone while you're at it) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Tech doc - want to recommend meeting AA, and here are some techniques's to help optimize the design (maybe in Intro) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Tech doc- scenario option? - someone designing own GUI for older users, proof that WCAG covers what they would have put down anyway [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/05/21-eo-minutes.html#action05]