<shawn> Meeting: EOWG
<shawn> Chair: Shawn
<WayneDick> Good thing I woke up when I did.
<dboudreau> morning everyone
<IanPouncey> Hi there, I'm not going to be able to attend the call today, or pay much attention to IRC, but will keep an eye on it when I can.
good morning all
Shadi am I scribing?
<shadi> why are you asking me instead of mdm chair? ;)
<scribe> scribe: Sharron
<scribe> Chair: Shawn
<dboudreau> please remind me how to mute unmute myself? #60 or soething?
Shawn: Last week we spoke again about the title of the 3rd subpage. The one we came up with is too long.
Shadi: and apart from the lenght,
it repeats the overall title and doesn't work.
... we have had good brainstorms and have played with the diversity word
... the repetition accurately reflects the analogy with that title
<shawn> other titles:
<shawn> Stories of Web Users
<shawn> Diversity of Web Users
<shawn> ___?___Accessibility Principles
Shadi: suggesting Diversity In Web use
<dboudreau> "diversity of web users" followed by "diversity in web use"
Shawn: What is actually on the
page and a way to communicate the content to guide people who
may be looking for it.
I like it
<dboudreau> +1 to shadi's sugestion
Liam: I like it very much, using "in" helps differentiate.
Jennifer: Yes, I like it too. and there are good reasons to repeat.
All: yes, agree, go with that
Jennifer: Glad we stepped back a bit and had not realized how close this page title was to the overall title of the suite of dics. Good change.
<hbj> me/zakim, mute me
Shawn: Remind me to regenerate the nav.
<shadi> ACTION: shadi to use "diversity in web use" as the provisional title for "ways people use the web" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/01-eo-minutes.html#action01]
<hbj> \me zakim, mute me
Wayne: On review, I wanted one of our scenarios to be of someone who is remarkable and I think Ms Laitinen fits that.
Shadi: There is a standing comment from Liam to give them first names.
<shadi> zakim who is making noise?
Shawn: Since it is internatinal, we err on the side of formality.
<dboudreau> Personnas with first names is what MArk Pilgrim had used in "dive into accessibility" back in 2002
Jennifer: Wednesday deadline?
Shawn: Or let me know if you need
... reminder to update availability for upcoming conferences. Anything else for this topic? Does the timing work?
Denis: My only concern is not to bring up issues that have already been discussed.
Shawn: If you put it as editor's discretion, we can point to how we made the decision. But if you feel strongly, we may rethink it.
Denis: The different personas were meant to show all relevant disability?
Shadi: No it is not meant to be
exhaustive, just to provide a perspective of people in
different circumstances, demographic groups. Tried to be
concise and well-blalanced but is far from
... and we put a disclaimer about that on the page.
Shawn: any other questions?
Jennifer: Why are the survey answers coming to the editor's list?
Shawn: We set it up to forward to
... just for this survey.
<shawn> other documents here: http://www.w3.org/WAI/users/Overview.html
Denis: We are talking about people with disabilities but what about other issues that make it difficult for people to use the web? broader audience that includes mobile, low bandwidth, etc?
Shawn: We have that elsewhere -
Biz Case, Designing for Inclusion, others.
... agend points to draft version with old navigation, may be some confusion. With new navigation, more use cases are clear.
Denis: One is an older man? Is
his difficulty becasue he is older or becasue he also has a
disability> If only age, opened other scenarios.
... aging seems a slightly different topic and blurs the limit.
Shadi: William would certainly
say that it is not age alone that create barriers but that age
tends to be accompanied by acquired disabilities. Usability
aspects come into play as well because older users may not have
as much experience. There are additional resources, including
literature review related to aging and web use. But this is
meant to show disability regardless of relation to aging.
... they are hetergenous groups with overlaps in certain areas.
Helle: We wanted to show the diversity of users with disabilities and since we started more than 8 years ago, the mobile web was not as widely used, so the main target was to show diversity.
Shadi: We do have some reference to mobile technology.
Wayne: The older fellow also has low vision and is a significant demographic in that group. It is a realistic description of that disability.
Jennifer: And can apply to tons of places along the spectrum.
Denis: This is just what I meant
about hesitation to open a can of worms. If the intent is to
focus on disability as such, we must be careful about opening
it up to mobility (the teenager) age (the older man) and losing
the focus on disability.
... by intoducing these other topics, do we diminish the focus?
Jennifer: This actually strengthens to me, the disability case becasue they are dealing with a wide range of technology just as everyone does.
Shadi: I can review with you the work we did to get here and then you are welcome to bring further comments.
Denis: I don't want to blunt the process but wanted to raise the issue.
Shawn: This set of sub-pages focuses on disabilities, it tries to explore scenarios of mobility and age which are part of the reality of web use. But the focus is menat to be on disability.
Shadi: The next section does focus specifically on the disability itself and discusses what barriers are commonly associated with specific disabilities.
Shawn: additional comments?
... help me remember to ask about mobile.
Shadi: Did we resolve Wayne's comment in the survey?
Shawn: yes, he was satisfied with Ms Latinen.
Wayne: She is a good example of a leader, but I understand the need to stay closer to the actual demographic.
Shadi: And I think Ms Martinez is actually pretty remarkable as well. But if your issue is resolved, please make that note in your comments.
Wayne: And I will echo Jennifer's praise of these scenarios, they are just great!
Shadi: Credit to Judy Brewer and those who began this...
<dboudreau> i think the scenarios are great too. a lot of work has been put into them obviously
Wayne: and those who have improved it so much.
Helle: 90% of the scenarios are based on people we knew and we tried to combine it with work situations and specific WCAG guidelines.
Shawn: a couple of open issues,
the parts that have changed and see what kind of time everyone
... first look at alt-text example. For example: alternative text for images
... earlier version had a logo and we showed tool tip and mobile display
Jennifer: One of the ones I see very often that lack alt text is search buttons
Shawn: we might decide that
common errors are useful to show
... I thought the example was good because it does not have the SEO benefit as much. Buttons are often text links rather than graphical button. Wanted discussion and if "Buy Now" is still best choice, to determine that.
Liam: Becasue you are speaking to business, Buy is the best.
Shawn: Sign Up Now is a similar thing.
Wayne: Like the donate site where the contribute button is inaccessible.
Jennifer: I wish I could think of a good SEO example, but I think Buy Now is the best.
Shawn: Look at the slide there is
an example image on the bottom that is tiny.
... we are agreed on Buy Now then. Any other feedback?
<dboudreau> +1 for Buy now
Shawn: Ok then on to the photo slide, Number 6 we were hoping to get more ethic and geographic diversity. If you come up with someone else who is well known and representative of other demographic groups, speak up. Also in the notes, we suggest presenters to replace with local or familiar people to their audience.
Jennifer: CSUN photo stream?
Wayne: What about ??
Shawn: Wanted famous people - has Stevie Wonder, Steven Hawking, Cher, etc If you think of anyone else for that, let me know
Jennifer: What is the concern? US centric?
Shawn: 3 are not - they are UK
Jennifer: seems like a good group to me
<clifftyllick> Good morning, all. Just monitoring chat here. (Following a usability test in the background.)
Shawn: Slide called "market quote" number 7 is from a study of US computer users. We took US out of the slide text, we did not know of a broader study. Reminder that if you have access to similar data from elsewhere, please share.
Shadi: If someone looks and thinks since it is US based, it is not relelvant? What if we speculate that similar trends or figures would be expected elsewhere?
Shawn: Two things in the notes, including how to present the materials and how to interpret.
Shadi: There were caveats and regional differences, but there is a striking similarlity across demographics and living conditions - consistantly around 20%
Denis: I could find a UN study
that shows that it is based on the criteria that you base your
study upon. Roughly around 10%
... I have used the MicroSoft study quite a bit. There are many very interesting stats that can be used here.
... it is broken down very specifically. I usually start with the overall and break it down until more than half of your audience can benefit from accessibility.
... show people how to relate to that 57%
Shawn: We tried to come up with
something as short as possible and give them a grabber rather
than piling on a bunch of statisitics. And stat analysis does
not resonate with all audiences, so we backed off that
... as we get these slide sets out, we are hoping to get input about how people customize the information and present to various audiences. Link out to how others present the Biz case.
Wayne: I think people tend to
distrust statistics becasue of how they are used in the news. I
think we must validate how we gathered ours.
... we need to make sure our statements are credible.
Shawn: review notes of "OK but what does it cost?"
<dboudreau> Yes, this is really important. However, when you get your stats form government and use them as raw material, you reduce skepticism
Liam: reads slide 18 notes
Shawn: This is new material, significantly different. Thoughts?
Liam: If you are already doing it, it costs nothing? But how MUCH time and money will it take to get you on the right track?
Jennifer: So much depends on their level of skills and where they are.
Liam: You have to assume
cluefullness. Assuming I am competent, uses standards, getting
them competent in accessibility is relatively
... but negligible cost? not really - layers of approvals, understanding, etc.
Wayne: Training people how to make their content management systems meet requirements can be pretty hard.
Liam: You are also likely to have
issues where your team makes beautiful templates, sent off to
subcontractors and gets butchered in the process.
... templates, implementation of templates and maintenance afterward.
Jennifer: so how can we say it positively?
Liam: It will cost money but it will make you more money than it will cost you.
Shawn: Now we have a grabber, a
general series of statements, some famous people you know,
differnt situations, broad benefits, SEO overlap - then what
does it cost?
... costs of specifics - transcripts for example, wrap up.
... Do we want to even mention cost?
<clifftyllick> Stepping back, this is one example of many areas where assuming something is easier than it is winds up increasing the cost.
Denis: For us knowing what to do,
it comes up to about 2 to 5 percent. Associating basic
accessibility techniques with cost based on years of web
development within our organziation and with customers who want
to learn. But when people have no clue and have to learn and
develop process it is a big 40 - 50%. Including training budget
and audits, etc.
... but when they really measure the coding practice it is about 20-30% on their first experience.
<clifftyllick> For example, most people who use Word have no clue as to how to use it as a word processor. They're using it as an electronic typewriter plus a paint program.
Denis: when we get to work with a team that is stable it rapidly goes down to about 15% and continues to decrease.
<clifftyllick> The points Sharron just made touch on this.
<clifftyllick> Retraining people to use their tools properly costs a fair amount.
<clifftyllick> The time required disrupts your normal workflow.
Shadi: Overall, the concern is to document it and how to account for the costs that are associated even when not directly related to accessibility.
<dboudreau> @cliff true, but when your team knows what to do and when to do it, that disruption dramatically decreases as well
<clifftyllick> But in the long run, you wind up being able to do more things better, so you get paid back.
<clifftyllick> Denis: You're making my point.
<dboudreau> @cliff cheer! ;p
<clifftyllick> We need to change "cost" to "investment."
Shadi: when we say that things are technically simple, that is difficult to apply broadly. Must include content authors and others along the way. It is a significant cost.
<clifftyllick> If you've already invested in getting a team that codes properly, the shift to accessible coding is cheaper.
<clifftyllick> If you haven't made that investment, you need to make it to be ready to create accessible content.
<Wayne> One of the most common authors is a program
<clifftyllick> Once you make the full investment, you will see rewards.
Shawn: Throw away what's in slide 18. Then the question is what do we want to say about the cost?
<clifftyllick> Sharron, Shawn: That it isn't a cost, it's an *investment.*
<clifftyllick> *Cost* is what you spend for something that depreciates or has only ephemeral value.
<Zakim> LiamM, you wanted to note cliff's points in IRC
<dboudreau> I think the important content to say about cost is 1) it will cost you more to do accessibility, 2) the benefits form doing so will be greater than the costs, 3) the more you work on accessibilty, the lower the costs will be but the higher the benefits will become. In other words, your ROI increases as your team becomes more procficient
Shawn: Point of order. Please don't discuss in IRC for those who are not signed in.
<clifftyllick> One last point: *Investment* is what you spend on something that appreciates or produces returns.
<clifftyllick> That's fine. I'll chat with you later, Shawn, to see what I've done wrong.
Liam: Agree with Cliff that this slide should say that yes, you will have to make an investment in accessibility. Rather than saying it won't cost anything, define the invsetment against the ROI.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say blaa blaa
Shawn: we do have in the Biz Case some of these points.
Wayne: Do we have examples of businesses that have actually done it?
Shawn: and I have a lead on some others
Liam: and so do I!
Jennifer: I would love it if we did not have to use the word "significant" If this is so bleak of an aspect I can see myself sitting there reacting with - hey, this is going to be harder and more expensive than I thought.
Liam: I don't know that I agree. it must be an honest appraisal or you set the wrong expectation.
Jennifer: Not to mislead, but if most people in there are convincable we should be encouraging nor discouraging.
Shadi: I suggest that we explain the types of cost - training, assessments, maintenance. Maybe explaining that wherever the costs accrue it is beneficial in the long run. The slide must be there in some form to discuss costs.
<dboudreau> big +1 to Shadi's suggestion
Jennifer: That is essential and good to make people feel that don't need a designated pot of accessibility cash, but can incorporate into overall development budget.
Shawn: we have slides that reference training, tool upgrades, and a section on decreasing costs.
Liam: raiding some of the tactical budget allocations
Shawn: We kind of touch on that to say what is it worth to you to increase traffic, decrease maintenance, etc Budget for accessibility can come from advertising, etc
Liam: Online marketing
Shadi: depends on so many variables
Liam: thinking about large retailers, what is the worth of conversions
Shadi: even then may want to think in terms of timing and redesign
Liam: do you make a strategic case or a tactical one?
Shawn: Is this calling for a paragrpah to be added into the Biz case document itself?
Jennifer: Yes especially if we are revisiting it anyway.
<LiamM> raiding your tactical marketing budget to fund strategic marketing improvement
Jennifer: Online marketing is generic enough that it covers the question without drilling down too far. Allowing them to decide tactical vs strategic
Liam: The drivers are not from IT
but from the business proposition.
... is it worth having a slide that challenges the audience about where they would look to fund an initiative?
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn, bcase changelog consider putting in something about this point strategic versus ... (see minutes) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/04/01-eo-minutes.html#action02]
Shadi: Raising an ownership point. And it is a great question.
Liam: It is IT's problem to deliver but would not come from ITs budget. More interested in getting them to think about where the $$ comes from.
Jennifer: Don't we want them to think about several pots of money? potentially training says, we could come up with soem of that, marketing some, legal some, etc
Shawn: We do have a reference to
sharing costs. Could expand to include more of this
... this needs to be updated in any case although may not be a top priority.
Jennifer: and that is the perfect place to do it.
Wayne: What about those that are not for profit? large government insittutions?
Jennifer: They will go to Section508.gov
Wayne: University systems do look for the Biz Case. and so do other government orgs. We need to realize this will be applied to a broader group.
<dboudreau> Shawn: review the business case, review how ppl w/disabilities use the web and fill in survey by wednesday
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/ I think Ms Martinez fits that./ I think Ms Laitinen fits that./ Succeeded: s/radining/raiding/ Found Scribe: Sharron Inferring ScribeNick: Sharron Default Present: Shawn, Shadi, dboudreau, +1.512.797.aaaa, Sharron, WayneDick, Jennifer, Liam, +44.453.649.aabb, hbj Present: Sharron Shawn Shadi Denis Wayne Jennifer Helle Liam Got date from IRC log name: 01 Apr 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/04/01-eo-minutes.html People with action items: shadi shawn[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]