This week's meeting centered on the ongoing work group members are contributing to the wiki projects that are finally intended as contributions to the Web Ed wiki. The goal is for EO to create current resources to support accessibility awareness and skills within the WebEd effort. These articles will be posted to WebEd learning Materials We discussed changes made this week and changes still needed for three pieces EO plans to provide to WebEd. They are:
In discussing the specific articles, the need surfaced for a consistent way to talk about wiki changes and how to manage small versus significant edits. Denis took an action to develop a general guide and Sylvie and Jennifer will report on best ways to make changes clear for screen readers.
ACTION all: Shawn encouraged all group participants to make notes and changes to the wiki based on the discussion.
A new W3C community group has been formed, WAI-Engage, chaired by Jennison Assuncion. Denis has contributed extensively to the Accessibility Roles and Responsibilities section of the group wiki and Sharron and Molly made a start to the Virtual Access Camp. It is suggested that this is a place for rough ideas and sketches that can take shape and perhaps form EO work, but will generally serve as a place to foster ideas for broadening accessibility awareness and skills. Outreach is needed to encourage participation by the general public and people not previously involved in WAI.
ACTION all: Shawn asked everyone to put out the word that a designer is needed to help with RDWG Symposium Design. The need is to develop formats that are thematically tied together but that also reflect various sources and purposes within the symposium. Additional announcements included that there will be no meeting on April 20th and members are urged to check action items, remembering that there are general action items at the top of the EO page and to update availability for future EO teleconferences and especially availability for potential Face to Face meetings. Please indicate which of the days are best around TPAC.
Shawn: We talked last time about changes needed to this wiki, I made a few. Has anyone made others?
Sharron: I've reviewed and made personal notes, but have not added to the wiki. Still a bit intimidated.
Suzette: I took notes at last meeting but have not added to wiki either.
Shawn: Suzette, would you be willing to review minutes from Mar 30 minutes and your notes and make those updates?
<scribe> ACTION: Suzette will update Accessibility Basics wiki page based on Mar 30 teleconference discussion. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action01]
<scribe> ACTION: Sharron to integrate notes to wiki pages on all three WebEd contributions currently on WAI wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action02]
Shawn: We also looked at the main theme - is it primarily about human rights or the business case? Our tendency was to focus on human rights aspect and deemphasize business case somewhat. Also considered how to include older users.
Suzette: Discussion on organization last time concluded with the decision to shrink section on older users, and to re-organize along the lines of what, who, how and finally why
Shawn: Take a look at how these things are currently presented. Have we succeeded in our plan - what are your thoughts about the overall flow, structure, organization?
Denis: Is the purpose to direct readers - in the "More" category - to existing resources?
... I think maybe we don't have a link that we could send to explain the "more."
Shawn: In the Business Case we do include some of the low literacy and new computer users and the support for other groups of users.
Denis: There could be a WAI page to talk about these things as well.
Shawn: We do actually have some. The link to "others" actually goes there but we could make it more clear.
Denis: It seems that those reasons became integrated into the Business Case. But the Social Factors maybe should stand alone and go even further.
Shawn: I guess the question is what is the priority for that considered along with all the other projects we have?
<scribe> ACTION: Sharron will make clearer the existing resources around "more" or "other". [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action03]
<shawn> *** EDIT: Make more clear that the link to "others" provides supporting information for those other users. --in "Accessibility supports social inclusion for people with disabilities as well as others, such as older people, people in rural areas, and people in developing countries." maybe change the sentence, maybe add a paragraph at the end...
Shawn: Thinking about an article expanding the question of Social Factors - is what is in the Business Case sufficient or do we need a separate page that further expands the Social Facotrs article?
Denis: I very much think so but agree that it is not the highest priority.
Suzette: Looking at the landing page from the "others" link, it is quite good but is not described well from the name "others." The link text needs improvement.
<dboudreau> *** EDIT suggestion: Accessibility supports social inclusion for people with disabilities, older people, mobile users and others (link to social factors in business case) such as people with low literacy, people in rural areas, people who only have access to low bandwidth connections, etc.
Vicki: I would bring the last paragraph to the top, after the second sentence. Would remove the paragraph under the review questions.
... we repeat ourselves with the diversity of users.
Shawn: I had the same reaction that the two links were the same, but actually they are not. One is about people, the other is about tools.
... in editing, we need to make the distinction in the surrounding text clearer to avoid confusion. Suzette, can you talk about the main point that the users should be up front in the order of presentation?
Suzette: It is a good way to grab attention - to talk about real people. Not sure these two are the right ones to discuss, but I presented them as a taster of what you will find if you go to the links.
Shawn: What are the thoughts of the group on the usefulness of having the people's stories lead out?
Vicki: Aren't we being a bit repetitive? Given that the audience is developers, we are being quite wordy and redundant. Not sure it is relevant to what we are doing. Would suggest eliminating a lot of the text and streamlining for our target audience.
Shawn: Feel free to edit.
Vicki: Sure, I'll do that.
<scribe> ACTION: Vicki to edit to streamline Accessibility Basics wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action04]
Liam: Suggest an h3 for users with disabilities and add sibling headings to Older users, mobile users, and more
Shawn: One of the other suggestions was to change and broaden the references from just WCAG to ATAG, UUAG, ARIA etc. We talked about the big picture and the Essential Components. Denis added focus on the guidelines themselves and took out some people aspects. Can look at the older version to see how they compare.
... thoughts about clarity, length, brevity, etc?
Denis: When I look at the all the things we are referencing, it seems that we jump around. We seem all over the place and not logical.
Shawn: A possibility is to group it as Wendy and I did in a previous paper - people and tools.
<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to Find and submit grouping of People and Tools from old paper w/Wendy. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action06]
Suzette: You talked about putting ATAG and UAAG under principles but now they are under The Big Picture. Should only be in one or the other.
Shawn: The accessibility principles there now makes it look as though the only reference is to WCAG. Either not mention any specific guideline at all, put the Big Picture first, or somehow make it not appear that Principles are only about content - WCAG.
Suzette: Having Big Picture first will allow people to understand that ATAG and UAAG are included.
Shawn: Principles however is such a great place to start, and it links to the guidelines. So I think it is good to encourage people to read this page, even emphasize this page more.
Suzette: Should mention techniques as well, they are often overlooked.
Shawn: Because the Principles article is so good, the order on the page is right, but maybe de-emphasize the guidelines in the following section.
<dboudreau> i agree
Shawn: My suggestion is to leave the flow as it is, but change Principles to be not so focused on guidelines.
<shawn> ACTION: Shawn Accessibility Basics - to WCAG Overview section add some about clarifying Techniques [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action07]
Denis: I agree with the idea of not focusing on Guidelines so early in the page. Our point was to emphasize the user. Guidelines are a means to the end. Now we are mixing them up. We will be helping people understand how they all work together but must understand the principles first.
Shawn: When I look at reorganizing Big Picture I will look at that approach.
Shawn: If you make minor wiki edits, there is no need to notify, but if you make significant edits, please send a message to the list and add your name to the contributors. Also, there is a discussion tab. Can add notes there as well.
Shawn: Before we leave this topic, we should consider Suzette's question about whether the two people chosen to highlight are the right ones for this.
Suzette:I just took the first two as placeholders, not really thinking about their profiles.
Denis:Well, they both have visual disabilities which reinforces the sterotype that accessibility is only about visual issues. And being colorblind myself, I don't think that one is a top priority. Would prefer to show another disability group as well.
<Sylvie> +1 to Denis
<shawn> Mr. Yunus, Retiree with low vision, hand tremor, and mild short-term memory loss
<dboudreau> Mr. Yunus at least opens opens it up up to older people, already more interesting as it broadens the scope
Shawn: OK, with all the people who will be in their editing, someone can make the change to remove Mr. Li, retain Ms. Laitinen, add Mr. Yunis and perhaps another with hearing impairments.
Shawn: Has anyone edited that recently?
Sharron: No but I have in my notes to ask about the question of whether there should be a discussion of choosing a standard to test by?discussion of chosing a standard
Denis: Maybe just a mention?
<shawn> Shawn: is that at the Confirmance Eval level ?
<shawn> Vicki: agree
Denis: Whenver I talk to people about level of conformance, they say - I want the best, Level AAA. Then they found out what it means and fall back to AA. This document might mention that.
... maybe reiterate that AAA is too demanding for most as an intro comment.
...and should not be viewed as failure.
Shawn: We want to more clearly point to Conformance Eval for more specific information about this.
Helle: I was thinking of the preliminary review as a high level review that is simple and that conformance level is irrelevant here.
... we are not mapping in that way but only looking for high level basic accessibility.
Sharron: Good point.
Shawn: So perhaps need to make the point that this is high level and to look elsewhere for conformance.
Suzette: Perhaps include level that is being tested even though this is not a conformance test, it could be mapped to various guidelines to let people know that even preliminary tests have relationship to guidelines. Conformance may become less scary.
Denis: Looking at the document specifically that was brought in through Ian's. This is quite extensive. I have another technique that is to focus on 5 to 7 elements only and if those are not in place, don't bother to test further since you know the basics are not covered.
... maybe we should even further simplify so that anyone can get something out of the result, to come up with a very basic level of accessibility.
Shawn: Possibly two different section - if you you have 5 minute, no extensions, what can anybody do in the browser to check a few things? One sction might be the 5 minute low-skill, low-tool section; then followed by this longer check
Sharron: My tendency would be to keep this and segment into two sections.
Helle: Yes the basic one is good to get people started.
Shawn: Please jump in - feel free to make significant changes here. Much is outdated and all needs rework.
Denis: How do we manage not to lose something along the way?
Shawn: It is a bit of an issue. Comparing historical versions is doable but hard. One is to make comments so we can look. Another is to send to the list when you make big changes. Finally we do review as a goup.
... can mark with strike through so people can see what you are suggesting to delete before it is put in place. But that technique is not helpful when you do a significant rewrite.
... Lots of opportunity here. Thanks in advance for your contributions. Denis, imagine that we are trying to go back - leave notes that show where big changes occur.
... we could take snapshot of this page, call it Old Version of 18 April since we know that we will make significant changes.
Sylvie: It is difficult to know what has been changed, what sections, etc
Shawn: Yes, it is. Can we all be sure that we make notes about changes. Can use both HTML and wiki mark-up if it works.
... change heading mark-up to wiki markup so that sections can be edited.
... when you make significant changes please do send notification to the group.
<shawn> Wiki Syntax help http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Contents
Denis: I don't know much about wiki mark-up so I have to look at how someone else has done it or I look it up through Google. Maybe a document to give us a guide to wiki syntax.
Sylvie: There was a link sent a few months ago about wiki syntax. But we still need to agree on a way to indicate comments rather than edits.
Shawn: I used a curly bracket for comments, how did that work with the screenreader?
... there is a difference between square and curly brackets.
Sylvie: OK I will search and find it. But we are not using those consistently.
Sharron: We need a cheat sheet for comments so that we do it consistantly.
Shawn: What indication would be most useful for you?
Sylvie: Don't mind as long as it is consistent.
Shawn: Should be short, be distingusable in context...
... let's check in on what will work for everyone.
<scribe> ACTION: Sylvie and Jennifer to suggest notation for indication of comments in wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action08]
<suzette> there is a wiki icon for signature with time stamp - is this any use
<scribe> ACTION: Jennifer to work with Sylvie to suggest notation for indication of comments in wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action09]
<shawn> ACTION: Denis add "cheatsheet" to http://www.w3.org/community/wai-engage/wiki/About_WAI-Engage#Wiki_Tips -- or make a separate page for this [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action10]
Shawn: Once Denis gets the draft of the cheatsheet out, we can add to it.
Shawn: Did you send email Suzette?
Suzette: Yes, just before the meeting today I sent thanks to Sylvie.
Shawn: Let's address those issues that Sylvie raised.
Sylvie: My comment was about the first exercise for students. Reveiw of it made me think it was too much for a first exercise. Separate layout from content items, for example and not try to do everything in one exercise, simplify.
Suzette: Since it was in relation to the BAD demo, I was taking into account what was present on each page and taking examples from there. tried to cover the issues highlighted on each page.
Shawn: and the second point was to use one image in the different ways.
Sylvie: The exercise was to ask students to find an image that needs different kinds of alt text. Making the point that one image might be used in different ways and students will not need to find a unique image for each example.
Sharron: Sylvie's suggestion is good to because it illustrates that the same image may be given different alt text depending on what it is doing.
Suzette: One image might actually serve several of those purposes.
Shawn: Second point was to separate the exercises.
Suzette: Yes, I agree.
Shawn: Also might check your heading levels...
Shawn: Suzette added a separate part on forms...did your email summarize that?
Shawn: Will you send the email to the group that will help people review?
<scribe> ACTION: Suzette to send email to group to summarize forms and data collection addition to BAD Demo wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/13-eo- minutes.html#action11]
Suzette: Could use the techniques from prelimianry evaluation and apply them to the BAD demo
Shawn: That is a great suggestion!
Suzette: I'll have a look at the two together and see what makes sense.
Shawn: Yes, especially as they become more stable.
Shawn: Thanks to everyone for nuturing that along. Denis has put a tremendous amount of content into ARB. At this point, let's all work on outreach, let's get many people especially those outside of WAI and EO.
... any questions or comments?
... the idea is that there is a possibility that as things develop through WAI-Engage they may be taken into EO and we can also put things out to that group that are not quite right for WAI articles or documents.
... one of the topics currently there is tips and techniques for promoting web accessibility
Denis: How do we get people to understand how much easier it is to participate here? if the public does not feel comfortable contributing, we will have created just another elite group.
Shawn: When Jennison announced it there was not much content. Now that there is content, there will still be questions. What do you think about when you imagine someone coming to this page, how would you feel comfortable contributing when you land on such a well developed resource? Maybe point them to places where they can contribute or to the wiki cheat sheet, etc.
... we'll keep thinking about encouraging people to contribute.
Shawn: And encourage people to post rough drafts and sketchy ideas that invite participation.
Shawn: Hoping to find a designer to help with this. There are several different elements, each have specific design requirements. They are spearate and want to maintain separate identity while showing relationship.
... know anyone who can help.
Shawn: We will not meet next week, but there is plenty for everyone to do so feel free to jump in and we'll meet on April 27.