Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

07 Nov 2012


See also: IRC log


Shawn, Kerstin, Peter, Markel, Giorgio, Yehya, David, Annika, Silvia (via IRC)
Klaus, Vivienne, Justin, Simon, Luz, Markku


<shawn> ACTION: shadi, if use this teleconference system, include intructions for dialing in with Skype (Call menu...). Also no "*" with the code number. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/07-rd-minutes.html#action01]

Text Customization for Readability

<shawn> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2012/text-customization/>

shawn: posted papers and invitation for additional contributions

… David and I have the agenda which is the content for the call from papers

… we've been going back and forth by email, David did an analysis for which papers address which questions

david: so we have 3 topics with sub topics, so we could just ask those questions to the related authors -or- we could be more specific "In your paper you said this statement..can you elaborate.."

… that is our current debate

<shawn> ROUGH DRAFT of potential specific questions:

<shawn> (paper r2) Discovering Typographic Environments for Reading with Low Vision

<shawn> [agenda: 3. Integrating functionality] Question: Typometric Rx is presented primarily as a research tool. How usable will it be for the "average" web user? Will they be able to use this tool to create custom user style sheets or other?

<shawn> (paper r11) Optimal Colors to Improve Readability for People with Dyslexia

<shawn> [2. Understanding needs] Question: How do your findings support or refute the position stated in the The Need for Text Customisation <http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Text_Customization#The_Need_for_Text_Customisation> that there is not a single (color combination) that will meet most users' needs?

<shawn> [3. Integrating] Question: Discuss the implications of: "Our results suggest that text customization preferences needs to be complemented by quantitative data from actual reading performance since we found no correlation between the reading performance and the personal choice of the users." Are you suggesting that users should use the text display that has better reading performance based on

<shawn> qualitative data, rather than their personal choice?

<shawn> [4. Moving forward] Question: What practical application do you see as the result of these studies? Ideally, how would this impact web tool and web page design?

<shawn> (paper t8) The development of a text customization tool for existing web sites

<shawn> [agenda: 4. Moving forward, b. What functionality in products] Question: You say: "we realize the importance of detailed customization, and this part is under construction. The customization will address options like: text size, text color, background color, font, character, line and paragraph spacing, column width." How will you determine what options to provide? What additional inputs (specific

<shawn> user studies, etc.) will help you make that determination?

<shawn> (paper t6) How feasible is text customization for PDF documents?

<shawn> [agenda: 3. Integrating functionality] Question: Please explain your statement: "A tagged PDF may contain custom tags whereas custom tags are not a known concept in HTML." Can these custom tags not be converted to HTML class or ID?

… so it's really managing the jump for what people wrote about it to organising the the 2 hours..

… I wonder if there are other opinions and whether it's appropriate to ask each question in the agenda (order) generally and wait for responses or notify authors in advance

annika: I think that's exactly the issue posing the question: mainly logistics

shadi: let's focus on the meeting and debrief at the end

shawn: but what I think anika was saying is .. whatever system we use having it more open is challenging

annika: not just the logistics, it's the timing issue, gaps..
... rather tight schedule already

<shawn> +1 to annika

… to make better use of the time, assigning the questions before hand might be best

shadi: sorry, I misunderstood - so asking a specific question may be more efficient?

annika: yes

… just on the phone without visual feedback it's hard to know who goes first..

Kerstin: you present a wide range of questions where I would love to hear all the answers - do you plan to assign an open question to all panelists?

shawn: we haven't discussed adding an additional question to all panelists

… dave did an analysis on which questions fit which author

… can you clarify?

Kerstin: regarding the e2read

… we plan to ask a question to all panellists - a transfer to standards guidelines/tools

… all panellists could answer the prepared quesitons

shawn: we hadn't thought of a broad question for everybody - the papers are very different

… so we had discussed making sure if we chose the way to have specific questions for papers to make sure that we had at least one question for each paper that would go in the categories as opposed to one question for all

… if anyone has suggestions that would great

david: challenge in dealing with the diversity of the submissions

… we're really just matching a type of paper and knowledge with the question we would like to have answered

… and two hours is not a lot of time if we have to add a questions to everyone

<shawn> +1 to Dave

… the challenge is to make this as efficient as possible

markel: I generally agree with matching papers to questions

… making the symposium more coherent

… I also agree with David ..

… I would give priority to the matching from Dave but also to remaining authors to give an opinion

… good use of time..

David: and should we do that in advance? here is a list of topics..

… or do we leave it to the day..

markel: the 1st symposium we sent the questions in advance

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say open questions at end? at end of each subtopic and to say ALSO logistics of participant questions

…depends on the contributors, you may miss freshness on the responses, and it may be challenging for those who's first language is not English

shawn: thinking about the organisation of things

…1) open question at the end of each sub topic and then open question

…2) think about the logistics of participant questions, do we want to take participant question at the end of each sub topic..

… any suggestions or comments are welcome

markel: i think you can allocate a time for each quesitons

shadi: I was thinking.. tell the authors this is what we want to contribute to such and such…

… perhaps not a specific question but the role we'd hope they would play..

… just to plan more precisely to get out of each paper

… leave the specific questions .. depending on how the discussion goes

… another thing, a general questions, it might also be possible at the end on a voluntary basis, for the wrap up, "we'd still like more information on such and such…" and participants is free to send comments to the list..

shawn: i added this to the agenda (last item)

<Kerstin> looking forward to TC4R symposium

david: one of the things we were discussing was inviting other individuals - a question to the group

… we have a panel who reviewed the paper and we'd hope as many as possible would be present on the day

… if we can target individuals that we think the symposium should record and use in the output..

shawn: so a specific request would be - if you know anyone who may have something to contribute..

<shawn> request : send them Invitation for short contributions to Text Customization for Readability Online Symposium <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2012OctDec/0074.html>

… one of the other questions would be - basically saying if you send it by monday we can more easily incorporate into the symposium plan..

… anytime in November is still possible

… if there is someone that has a significant contribution would it be appropriate to invite them to comment during the main part of the symposium

shadi: I know a couple of you have organised a couple of panels ..

… they should not be treated on the lvl as the authors..

… but at the same time they contributed more than some of the other participans

… the whole thing also shouldn't seem to scripted..

… opinions?

markel: I think it depends on how you can attribute credit to that person, if she gives an opinion...

… not sure on the extent that can be cited

… if we want to be lenient we can incorporate their name in the research note

shawn: we would expect that would be for people who had already submitted their comments to the public list

markel: so the call for contribution is to the mailing list?

shawn: yes

… I don't think we would ask.. if we open it up to participants anyone can speak up but I don't think we'd ask someone specifically to comment on something unless they submitted something to the public list

shadi: we need to close this now because of time

… I think logistically this idea could be difficult..

… the authors are put in a position .. they are the main contributors, we don't want to promote late comers..

… esp. people that have position papers..

… and that participation can come from the floor..

markel: I agree

… depends on the expectations.. I don't think there will expectations for credit based on one comment

shadi: I think the authors should be credited differently..

… you might reference some random blog that has interesting content that matches..

… I think it's a different kind of referencing for information that is captured on line

… a different sort of citing to authors work..

david: would it be appropriate if the symposium output report.. and I acknowledge the importance of credit to authors.. but it could be that we have an acknowledgement at the end of the report to mention anyone that gave useful input during the or after the symposium

shadi: no I think that's usual

… we can talk later.. we can differentiate between the different levels of contribution

kersten: update - regarding the easy to read symposium - accepted 14 papers, notified the authors..

Easy to Read on the Web Symposium

… 14 papers is a lot, we had intense discussions regarding the amount of panelists we'd like to involve

… we decided that all can enrich the symposium from their point of view

… this is the reason for the large number

… we decided to separate the symposium into 3 parts

…1) guidelines, 1 or 2 broad questions, and motivate further questions from the audience

… we have more questions to ask the panellists if little participation from the audience

… 2) tools: how to integrate easy to read to the web

… we have 7 papers (quite a lot) we plan to make 60 minutes for this part (quite a lot)

… 3) work flow processes service: we have 4 papers, and should last about 30 minutes

… we hope to manage this challenge

… understand so far?

shadi: so you plan to go for 3 hours

kersten: in general a panel disc. for 2 hours, and further hour for a further discussion

… we plan to collect questions from the audience, if the time is not enough, we'd like to add the third hour to discuss these/this question(s)

… we also discussed the issue of writing the authors and asking them to prepare their questions in a written format

… we couldn't decide, so we'll probably do the same as in text customization

… should we ask the panelists to prepare the questions in a written format?

shadi: thoughts?

… I'm wondering if this might be a longer discussion which might be kept for next week? any quick thoughts/responses?

kersten: we got the feedback from s/he that s/he would like to prepare for the questions and would like to be well prepared

shadi: i think in the past when we discussed pre-written questions - worries of it sounding to scripted

giorgio: general questions, 3 hours may be a lot of time to commit to an online conference

… (breaking up)

… (sorry giorgio didn't get it)

anika: we could leave this up to the authors, some people who like to know advance, could get these..

… or allow authors to answer during the symposium

<giorgio_> giorgio said that "the event is already 3 hours long, and thus not so involving. If people have t provide outout in written form then it is going to be even less involving"

shadi: I think this is important to continue - I think one of the issues is that when people read out their answers is less involving

… one thing to play around with is .. why you have them on the panel kind of thing..

… helpful for participants to prepare..

… you could prepare more generic questions..

kersten: we thought about preparing broad questions to the panelists which could be interesting for the audience

… then following with open questions

… thank you for your ideas

shadi: might be a good idea to go to the list

… I'll ask simon to schedule more time for easy to read next week

… one more question, do we want to use the distribution list for anything?

… we have low registration numbers so far

… how do we use the distribution list and we probably don't want to send two emails through this

shawn: didn't understand the question

shadi: we have the list that we send the list for the call to participation - do we want to use those to get more participants involved..

shawn: I would like to use the distribution list .. maybe the ones who send to the respective list could consider whether it would be appropriate to send the invitation

… and send one..

… for text customisation use zakim?

… and use this system for larger participation?

shadi: Kersten action to send to the list pre-prepared questions

… shawn: if you could ask Yeliz, Klause, about respective lists

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: shadi, if use this teleconference system, include intructions for dialing in with Skype (Call menu...). Also no "*" with the code number. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/07-rd-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.137 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/11/13 15:31:39 $