Shawn: Let's have everyone go around and briefly say who you are, where you are and where you work.
Shawn: I hope all read the email thread starting with Karl's note. Karl, when you spoke of risk, were you speaking of legal risk or...?
Karl: Yes, legal would be the easiest to define and discuss.
Shawn: So the question is what do we say in the context of trying to build a persuasive business case?
Karl: People in certain industries with certain levels of income would be at higher risk. Those factors should be mentioned.
Shawn: And when you said risk, was legal action what you meant?
Shawn: Did you have a specific proposal on how you would address the concerns that you have?
Karl: I have been working on this on a personal level to determine how we can define someone's risk. There are 65 cases in the US focused around specific industries.
Jennifer: But remember our work is for an international audience.
Shawn: Rather than going into these details, let's look at a general approach. Is it a slide, notes in a slide. What level do we want to cover it?
Jennifer: I think just one sentence in the notes should be enough. Then let the presenter make the legal/political spin that makes sense to the specific audience.
... I am leery of the legal approach because it adds to the confusion and it is much too complicated for what these slides are trying to do.
... too complicated to articulate in this context.
... Not even sure that the sentence in the notes is appropriate unless we know exactly the sentence and our intention for expansion.
Jennifer: You may want to mention the legal requirements in your country.
Shawn: We do some of that. It is covered in greater detail in the Biz Case itself. After reading Karl's comments, in this group of slides, I see that we do not have good enough pointers to the Business Case article itself where more information is available.
... could add to the notes to ensure that speaker's review the entire Business Case argument before presenting.
Vicky: From the perspective within the UN system, I often hint about legal risks when I speak publicly about this. I point to nations where legal action IS being taken.
Alan: Something should be included to alert the audience, but in some contexts, it could be counterproductive.
<dboudreau> +1 on the counter-productive aspect of legal issues, at least in Canada
Shawn: Karl, are you comfortable with the group's perspective?
Karl: I am comfortable, but don't agree. If a presenter is making the Business Case for accessibility, he or she must address three basic questions: will it make us money, will it save us money, will it mitigate our risk. As it is, these slides do not address risk sufficiently.
Shawn: Everyone think about how we might better address risk. We don't expect to build a Business Case that works in all situations. So we try to find a mid-point position and ask presenters to customize.
Denis: We should have a slide on risk, as Karl said. But leave to presenter discretion on how much and what to emphasize and how much detail. In many countries there is no history of litigation. Since it needs to be international, we could just make the point lightly and allow presenters to customize to their own audience.
Shawn: While Shadi and Alan are here at the same time, I want to explore the ideas around the graph and issues with what the graph illustrates.
... what are your reactions to slides 20, 21 and 22?
Alan: The slide on ROI is a bit over optimistic.
Vicki: Perhaps when you say investments up front, you need more detail. I agree that the third is overly optimistic and there are no measurable examples.
Alan: It would also be useful to have a scenario where no accessibly features were included and costs actually increased due to remediation.
Denis: Based on my experience, the line for ROI needs to be less high. The cost is always higher at first. Once it reaches a certain plateau, it stays there. The illustration should be more realistic, more plausible.
Shawn: I deliberately asked those who had not been involved in the earlier discussion.
... we have an overall issue in that this is not real data. It is supposed to convey the idea that yes, there is an overall investment, but that the return will be greater over time.
... we are working to make it look like an illustration rather than a representation of real data. Is the graph sufficiently illustrative, does it make the point well enough? or do we need to recognize that people will challenge and ask for data?
... is there another illustration that makes the point?
<dboudreau> I think it is useful and illustrative enough... challenge will always occur, hopefully, from one presenter to another, and some will be able to back it up with data
Alan: Maybe state explicitly that it is an illustration rather than based on real data.
... maybe it could also include that accessibility is only one cost among others.
Wayne: It is not realistic. Why not come up with real data cases that illustrate them? We have things that look real and that we have good data on and then this last one that is not and that we have no data on. Even though you make them as illustrations, the mix of reality and speculation undermines credibility.
Denis: The graphic is relevant and challenge will always occur. My hope is that all claims will be able to be backed up with real data. Speakers can say there is no exact data on ROI, but that the experience is that it really happens. Some will accept, others will remain skeptical no matter what we do.
Shawn: We have two case studies with some data.
Alan: I have heard that there is a study that shows that it is always more expensive to retrofit for accessibility as with other requirements than to build in from the start. But I have never been able to find it, unfortunately.
Karl: Cost-per-defect data is for software mostly. The problem is that it brings up the other option - which is not to fix at all.
Cliff: One factor to consider is that the line for return will be different based on how much your website is tied to your company revenue.
... if not directly tied, the ROI is quite different. Everyone will see improved effeciency and reduced cost for that. The slope of the line beyond that is directly related to revenue related to the web.
Shawn: If we put it in the speaker notes, we can talk more about the variable of the line.
Karl: Agree with Cliff. If you look at data on EO site, there is a lot about benefits to low bandwidth and other factors in a wholistic view. This presentation does not do that well.
Shawn: If we want to repeat some of the points made in the first part that may make the wholistic view more pronounced. But are we comfortable with the graphs?
Shadi: I feel quite concerned about putting something on a slide that looks like it is made from data when in fact it is a fictional illustration.
... could we not use bags of money, coins, or something else that makes it clear that we are talking about an illustration? When I see a graph I look for what it is based upon, where is the data?
Karl: I agree that having a scientific illustration assumes real data.
Jennifer: Does anyone know a graphic designer who could understand the fact that this is a conceptual illustration rather than a factual one.
Cliff: I like Jennifer's suggestion about bags of money or coins piling up. Show a graph line for costs, ask the question how much is your revenue tied to the website. Money piles up on the page related to that.
Shadi: I am not convinced that the cost graph is appropriate.
Cliff: We have data on investment.
Shawn: No none is based on real data.
... I am not a graphic designer, but am not sure that there is anything to make it look less scientific.
... this is an important point and my perspective is that it actually does look unreal enough not to be confusing. We had talked about another metaphor.
... I have tried to envision coins or money bags but not found a way to make it look useful or professional.
Karl: I have a good friend that I will hit up for a favor to make the graph look less scientific and the implication that it is data-based.
Shawn: Thanks for the offer. What might that be?
Sharron: The tree metaphor was to show investment and growth as a result.
Shawn: Metaphors can be very powerful but you have to be careful about non-intentional implications. In this case, the time it takes to grow a tree.
Cliff: Are you suggesting Karl, that your guy could come up with a new metaphor?
Karl: Sure, I think he could.
Cliff: I think one of the reasons the tree metaphor died is that none of us is a graphic artist.
Shawn: No there were concerns about the implications.
... other ideas about the current graph or other visuals?
... Karl let's you and I follow up.
Vicki: I'm actually OK with graphics and presentation. Do you use photos? First to have a photo of money bags to show investment. Next the actual points that we want to stand out in people's minds.
Shawn: I'll send email pointing to previous minutes where we had those discussions. One of the things I would say is that if you are thinking of a new metaphor, do a first rough draft without spending a lot of time. Sharron did a useful version of the tree that gave us enough to talk about even though it was not polished.
<clifftyllick> Sharron, your sketch was a *perfect example of a rough draft*!
Shawn: Leads to another point. How much text do we want on the slides? We have been focused on these three even though they are actually a minor part of teh full presentation.
... as Karl said we could just say these things. As we all know the fact is that in each circumstance, the outcomes depend on may factors. What do we want to say about investment and return?
... Thinking again about these three slides in the context of the overall presentation. Karl, have you gotten response to your points? We have been working on this a long time and are ready to wrap it up. Always the tension between having it finished and having it perfect. Do we need more discussion?
Karl: Don't think so.
Wayne: I think we do have to visit the risk side.
Shawn: Yep, we have agreed to do that.
Cliff: Looking at Slide 22 and if we bring it down just a little bit and stop the line after it levels out and put a question mark and add a bullet that says reduced risk.
Sharron: This is a good idea and could solve the problem. Could we see how that would look?
Karl: Shawn, you said that notes are considered essential information. If that is acceptable to the rest of the group - that it is in the Notes and so an essential part of the presentation - it seems fine to me.
Shadi: To Cliff's suggestion, it does not address the problem with the second slide where the arrow points down.
... let's see if it addresses that fact
Shawn: But we are talking about the ROI slide
Shadi: But they all relate and all of them contribute to the idea that this is based on data.
Shawn: Let's look at the text for slide 22 Return from Accessibility. One of the things I have from this discussion is to add more about "it depends.." factors.
Shawn: ...group reactions to the addition of concrete examples? With the instruction to presenters to customize, what are your thoughts on those examples?
Cliff: I like it. Maybe put the specific ones up front and relate to your situation.
Denis: I like it also, not sure the order is correct. We need to describe how much you are actually increasing your client base...older users, mobile users, second language users, etc to illustrate that you increase the numbers of people who have access to your products and services. That should be the first point. From that the others follow.
Vicki: I like Denis' suggestion. As you increase numbers, you have more statisitics, more money, more happy and satisfied customers.
Shawn: Any other perspectives?
Wayne: I just read how accessible CMS increases ROI.
Shawn: Can you send us the URL Wayne?
Cliff: I agree with Denis' point that broadening the customer base needs to be made more strongly. In Slide 20, make the line peak a little higher and in the next address how to make the peak smaller.
... make the format more like the ROI slide.
Shawn: OK, anything else on these slides?
... let's look at Slide 15. Cliff and Wayne did you get my comments from yesterday about that?
Wayne: Not able to look at it.
Shawn: I did a rough sketch and sent it.
Wayne: Yes I got that but need a clearer picture of what sequence of slides we want. What do we want to illustrate?
Shawn: The idea is that if people have no idea of what alt text is and we want to show them that if there is a Buy Now button with no alt text, some folks won't be able to buy your stuff.
... show the broad view including rendering on different devices, etc.
... if everyone agrees that is what we want, then we just need the HTML illustration. The other thing is that it would probably be good to do the quick rough draft, as mentioned.
Cliff: Are we trying to present good examples of alt text?
Shawn: No we were trying to show the example of what happens when it is not there.
Cliff: ...and we will come up with good alt text
Wayne: Which is just the text - Buy Now. OK, will have it out by next week
Shawn: Because of F2F probably won't meet on 20th and 27th, so any drafts that people are working on should be out next week.
... cell phone image is Creative Commons with permission to change.
... anything else on these slides?
Wayne: are we skipping the tooltip reference since it is so ambiguous?
Shawn: what do others think? Imagine you are talking to upper level managers, giving them an example of additional benefits of accessibility techniques, is it useful to have the tooltips show or not?
Denis: I am having a trouble with the tooltip because it should not be exposed in the browser. It would imply the application of title as well.
Cliff: OK then. With Denis' concerns in mind, many people will have seen tooltips in IE browsers and is there value in showing that it also displays in the cell phone illustration?
Char: But that changed with IE8
<dboudreau> @char: title shows everywhere as a tooltip. alt only shows up in IE and is a result of a bad implementation from microsoft
Shawn: That's right and given the change and given the comments that Denis made, maybe it brings too much baggage.
... I propose leaving it out unless there is any objection.
... anything else on the slide show?
... For those who are new, I would encourage you to review the whole thing and share your comments as follows:
... There is always the balance between wanting things to be done perfectly and getting them done so that we may move on to other items in our list of things to do. For some of our tasks, it is critically important to get the wording down very carefully.
... For other tasks, wording is less important and we balance the inordinate amount of time it takes to be perfect.
... So we often ask you to clarify. If this is a suggestion, for consideration but don't feel that it is critical please indicate that you are making a comment for consideration that you don't think we need to spend a lot of time in consideration.
... But you may feel that something is really important and that the document should absolutley not go out in its current state.
... In that case, please make it clear how strongly you feel about it and what level of importance you place on your suggestion or opinion.
Sylvie: Is there a possibility to have an update on the alternate formats for the slides?
Wayne: I can't read the notes, they can't be enlarged.
Shawn: I finally figured out how to enlarge, will share.
Jennifer: About balance between perfection and good enough. One of the things I am really hoping is that this slide deck on the Business Case will be a foundation and that others will do creative things that will build on this beginning.
... I hope that people will share their changes via SlideShare, twitter, etc so that we can see different perspectives.
Shawn: Yes, so we can see how people modify based on audience.
Shawn: Still working on the agenda based on who will be available for editing. One thing we have discussed is ATAG. Liam did an update that may be on the agenda as well.
... a few other things that we are figuring out. Any suggestions, questions on logistics?
Liam: When do we start?
Shawn: Meeting room is available from 9:00 but we must get signed in so we should come earlier.
Denis: Follow by phone?
Shawn: It doesn't work very well in our experience. I will see if we can make it available.
Jennifer: Given time zones and such, count me out even if available.
Shawn: If we had teleconference, who would join for when?
<Sylvie> May be on 24.
<dboudreau> maybe on 23rd
<dboudreau> definitely on irc
<Char> OK on 23rd, iffy on 24th
<KarlGroves> IRC, skype would join on 23rd or 24th
<dboudreau> afternoon only, i'll be sleeping before (gmt-5 here)
<Char> 5 hr time difference right now, I believe
<Char> I could be there around 5 am on both days (I was going the wrong way when thinking of times)
<clifftyllick> I could join for an hour or so around 11 a.m.
<clifftyllick> 11am London time
Shawn: I will post a survey because if people will actually join, we will adjust the agenda.
... any other questions or comments?
Cliff: I think I won't be here next week.
Shawn: Reminder that on the EO Home Page there is a section for Questionaires, including availability. Please update as possible.
Jennifer: Through what date?
Shawn: June 10
Sandi: Garbled comment
<Sandi> Sunday May 22nd from noon on is earmarked for those of you in London
Shawn: Will be updating and also for the June conferences
... look at registration list, anyone can see it.
... Karl, Sharron and Wayne stay on for graphics discussion. Otherwise, the meeting is adjourned.