13:26:26 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #eo
13:26:26 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-irc
13:26:28 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:26:30 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 3694
13:26:30 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
13:26:31 <trackbot> Meeting: Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference
13:26:31 <trackbot> Date: 07 December 2012
13:26:33 <Sharron> Hi Suzette!
13:27:00 <Sharron> Chair: Shawn
13:27:06 <Sharron> Scribe: Sharron
13:27:19 <Sharron> Regrets: Anna-Belle, Sylvie
13:27:44 <shawn> agenda+ meeting at CSUN
13:28:34 <Wayne> Wayne has joined #eo
13:28:40 <shawn> agenda?
13:28:48 <shawn> zakim, drop agenda 1
13:28:48 <Zakim> agendum 1, finish Introductions, dropped
13:29:25 <shawn> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:29:25 <Zakim> I notice WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has restarted
13:29:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.650.348.aaaa, Sharron, anna-belle, Shawn
13:29:40 <Sharron> zakim, aaaa is Jennifer
13:29:40 <Zakim> +Jennifer; got it
13:29:42 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
13:29:54 <annabelle> annabelle has joined #eo
13:30:03 <shawn> Regrets: Andrew, Sylvie, Shadi
13:30:25 <Zakim> +Wayne_Dick
13:30:52 <Suzette2> Suzette: has zakim found me?
13:31:21 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
13:31:36 <Sharron> zakim, [IPcaller is Suzette]
13:31:36 <Zakim> sorry, Sharron, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller'
13:31:40 <Vicki> Vicki has joined #eo
13:31:49 <Vicki> + Vicki
13:32:01 <Sharron>  zakim, [IPcaller] is Suzette
13:32:01 <Zakim> +Suzette; got it
13:32:21 <Vicki> zakim, [IPcaller] is Vicki
13:32:21 <Zakim> sorry, Vicki, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'
13:32:48 <Vicki> Zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me
13:32:49 <Zakim> +Vicki; got it
13:33:01 <shawn> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:33:01 <Zakim> On the phone I see Jennifer, Sharron, anna-belle, Shawn, Suzette, Wayne_Dick, Vicki
13:33:03 <Zakim> +??P7
13:33:23 <Bim> zakim, ipcaller is me
13:33:23 <Zakim> sorry, Bim, I do not recognize a party named 'ipcaller'
13:33:40 <Sharron> zakim, ??P7 is Bim
13:33:40 <Zakim> +Bim; got it
13:34:27 <Sharron> Topic: Introductions
13:35:29 <Sharron> All: Jennifer, Sharron, anna-belle, Shawn, Suzette, Wayne, Vicki introduced selves to Bim.
13:44:05 <Sharron> Jennifer: Will consideration be made about linking application notes to existing materials?
13:44:26 <Sharron> Shawn: Yes, and have talked to Chris Mills about the relationship to WebEd work as well.
13:44:45 <Sharron> ...rather Web Platform Docs
13:45:16 <shawn> zakim, take up first item
13:45:16 <Zakim> I don't understand 'take up first item', shawn
13:45:23 <shawn> zakim, take up agenda 1
13:45:23 <Zakim> agendum 1. "finish Introductions" taken up [from shawn]
13:45:28 <shawn> zakim, take up agenda 2
13:45:28 <Zakim> agendum 2. "meeting at CSUN" taken up [from shawn]
13:46:19 <Sharron> Shawn: Want to mention a plan for meeting for a Face-to-Face at CSUN. Wayne has arranged for a room at Cal State U atSan Diego
13:46:31 <Sharron> ...how far is it?
13:46:58 <Sharron> Wayne: It is in La Hoya, not called the Jewel for nothing, it is beautiful.
13:47:34 <Wayne> La Jolla
13:47:41 <Sharron> Shawn: Will check into a room at the hotel as an alternative.
13:47:51 <Suzette2> Hi I'm back now!
13:48:13 <Sharron> s/La Hoya/La Jolla
13:49:05 <Sharron> Anna-Belle: There is no information about the hotel rate and conference registration fees.
13:49:52 <Sharron> ...need content of presentations as well as cost
13:50:06 <Sharron> Sharron: Can look at last year's schedule.
13:50:07 <Bim> q+
13:50:29 <Wayne> The room will be at University of California, San Diego Student Union.  $60 for a day, I pay because my travel cost is $30.
13:50:30 <Sharron> Shawn: Our Face-to-Face has no associated costs
13:50:50 <shawn> ack Bim
13:51:00 <Sharron> Bim: What are the dates for CSUN?
13:51:13 <Sharron> Anna-Belle: Feb 25-March 2
13:51:41 <Sharron> Shawn: First two days are pre-conference tutorials, followed by 3 days of conference.
13:52:25 <Sharron> ...and we are thinking of doing a WAI-IG meet-up as well during CSUN
13:53:14 <Sharron> ...and in terms of the hotel, we used to get a car and stay at less expensive nearby hotel.
13:54:04 <Sharron> Wayne: I will do some research on hotel alternatives.
13:54:42 <Sharron> ACTION: Wayne to research alternatives for hotel costs in San Diego
13:54:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-249 - Research alternatives for hotel costs in San Diego [on Wayne Dick - due 2012-12-14].
13:58:47 <Sharron> Topic: Accessibility Basics Summary
13:58:53 <shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Basics_with_Notes#Summary
13:59:16 <Sharron> Shawn: We worked on this for inclusion in the Web Platform Docs.
13:59:44 <Sharron> ...it is very prominent there, one of the major six categories on the main page - good work, all.
14:00:02 <Sharron> ...someone added a summary that we should consider and revise.
14:00:12 <shawn> draft: Accessibility is making the Web work for people with a diverse range of abilities. Accessibility is essential for developers and organizations that want to create high quality websites and web tools, and not exclude people from using their products and services. Accessibility is vital to enable people with disabilities to participate equally on the Web. It is a legal requirement in some
14:00:13 <shawn> cases, and a best practice in all cases.
14:01:11 <Sharron> Shawn: Comments?
14:01:45 <Sharron> ...Jennifer and Vicki noticed that each sentence starts with "Accessibility is" May be redundant.
14:02:18 <Sharron> Jennifer: I wondered if we wanted to start as "Accessibility is" followed by bullet points.
14:02:31 <Sharron> Vicki: Or merge first two sentences.
14:03:23 <Sharron> Wayne: You should end the first sentence w/end the sentence after "...and web tools"
14:03:41 <Sharron> Anna-Belle: I had exactly the same thought.
14:04:01 <Sharron> Wayne: In my calss there was no way to get an A without including accessibility.
14:04:17 <Sharron> Shawn: Is it important to include the inclusion idea somewhere?
14:04:45 <Sharron> Wayne: Yes, but in another, independent sentence. An important thought but needs to stand alone.
14:05:06 <Sharron> ACTION: Shawn to edit Web Accessibility Summary for Web Platform Docs.
14:05:06 <trackbot> Created ACTION-250 - Edit Web Accessibility Summary for Web Platform Docs. [on Shawn Henry - due 2012-12-14].
14:05:35 <Sharron> Topic: Evaluation in Process / Address Accessibility Early
14:05:38 <shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_in_process
14:05:55 <Sharron> Shawn: Considering a new document, have not finalized scope and title yet
14:05:58 <shawn> Current realted WAI info: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_in_process#Current_related_WAI_information
14:07:37 <Sharron> Shawn: With WCAG-EM the formal evaluation methodology focuses on evaluating web projects that are existing or complete. Needed another consideration of how to make accessibility considerations at other stages.
14:08:08 <Sharron> ...we have many references to this subject distributed throughout exisitng WAI materials.
14:10:33 <Sharron> ...Let's go through an look at document overall and come back to this. Vicki, can you introduce what we have here, different approaches, etc?
14:11:13 <Sharron> Vicki: Ian and I began and got tangled in details, specifics about how to guide people through.  We have stepped back and made it more high level and role oriented.
14:12:05 <Sharron> ...now it is more of a high level document that links out to existing WAI materials. This is what we need to decide on approach. To make this longer and self-contained, or link out to other materials?
14:12:27 <Sharron> Sharron: I am in favor of not duplicating materials as much possible.
14:13:10 <shawn> ... point people to work we've already done & vetted
14:13:24 <Sharron> ...a good clear path to exisitng materials
14:13:29 <Sharron> Jennifer: +1
14:13:50 <Sharron> Vicki: And I have looked at exisitng materials and they are really good, quite useful.
14:14:40 <Sharron> Shawn: Ian's edits are focused on development and we will ahve them to consider soon. What is your overall response to this? Is it about the right level of information? Tone?
14:15:35 <Sharron> Anna-Belle: I don't feel grounded in where this fits with other materials so it is a bit hard for me to assess.
14:17:20 <Sharron> Shawn: High level web manager has been told to do accessibility. They read intro to Accessibility and this may be the second document they come to in understanding how to integrate accessibility in projects.
14:17:49 <Sharron> Anna-Belle: Thanks that's helpful.
14:18:26 <Sharron> Shawn: Anyone else?
14:18:51 <Sharron> Wayne: It really does look like it covers a unique and important level. A needed piece of work.
14:19:00 <shawn> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:19:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see Jennifer, Sharron, anna-belle, Shawn, Suzette, Wayne_Dick, Vicki, Bim
14:20:37 <Sharron> Jennifer: Thinking about the fact that even though it went on hold, can e pull from the Roles and responsibilities document that Denis was working on? Seems relevant. Was a good start and fits really well.
14:20:59 <Sharron> Vicki: We point to it and Ian is referencing it more specifically
14:21:25 <Sharron> Shawn: Not sure if we can point to it yet...
14:21:44 <Sharron> Sharron: But Ian has been pulling from the concepts
14:22:05 <Sharron> Jennifer: So we can maximize the concepts in any case.
14:22:46 <Sharron> Shawn: Denis has been swamped but looking to rejoin soon and can take it up again.
14:23:03 <shawn> Sharron: not sure ARB is point-to-able yet
14:23:35 <Sharron> Sharron: Last time I worked on it with him, it was not quite stable.
14:23:48 <shawn> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_in_process#Open_issues>
14:23:55 <Sharron> Shawn: So for now let's look at open comments in the wiki.
14:25:51 <Sharron> ...any objection to creating the new document as these comments support?
14:26:02 <Sharron> All: No objections, agreed
14:27:14 <Sharron> Shawn: So consider the scope - originally thought about concerns during development process but have evolved to considerations of consierations even before development begins, braoder concept of when to address accessibility.
14:27:32 <Wayne> Support new document with clear separation between planning and evaluation
14:27:36 <Sharron> ...are there any concerns against broadening the scope as suggested here?
14:28:07 <shawn> s/any objection to creating the new document as these comments support/any concerns or questions or objections to creating the new document as these comments support/
14:28:18 <Sharron> Wayne: I support broadening the scope but would encourage a strong separation of the difference between planning and execution or development.
14:28:30 <shawn> Sharron: Where would you put design concepts?
14:28:44 <Sharron> Sharron: Where would you put design concpets, the overlap is often not that clear.
14:29:37 <Sharron> Wayne: Once in the phase where people are laying code, you need a way to check what youa re doing to be sure you are on the right track, especially design flaws that may not be apparent until developers begine to lay code.
14:30:21 <Suzette2> q+
14:30:25 <Sharron> Vicki: I beleive Ian will cover that part in his discussion of coding and the process of evaluating for accessiiblity is iterative through out
14:31:03 <shawn> ack s
14:32:09 <Sharron> Suzette: One of the things that makes this document quite different is the consideration of the design side and the planning phases. It is important that this document include an emphasis on design and not go too deeply into development at the expense of design.
14:32:57 <Sharron> ACTION: Sharron to consider adding information to <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_in_process#Design_Stage> specifc to that.
14:32:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-251 - Consider adding information to <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_in_process#Design_Stage> specifc to that. [on Sharron Rush - due 2012-12-14].
14:33:03 <IanPouncey> IanPouncey has joined #EO
14:33:42 <Sharron> Wayne: When I was trying to actually implement accessibility into campus projects, it was the implementation skills that were missing and that we had to invent.
14:34:32 <Sharron> Shawn: Is this document itself going to provide all that detail? or is this document going to provide an overview for all and point elsewhere for the details.
14:35:59 <Sharron> Wayne: I agree that we should point to the detail in a place that is easily addressed and found. Otherwise the people who are actually handed the task of making accessible pages won't have the tools they need to succeed.
14:36:47 <Sharron> Shawn: WCAG-EM does not provide those details, not is it meant to. Prelim Eval does to some extent, but where do we want to put that level of detail?
14:37:07 <Sharron> ..is it something we want to provide?
14:38:01 <Sharron> Jennifer: The Web Platform Docs has traction right now. So anything that can be included there, should be. People spend weekends working on this. Need to think of how to include accessibility in their sprints.
14:38:40 <Sharron> ...don't see that more documents from EO will be as effective as including accessibility information there.
14:39:08 <Sharron> Shawn: Our goal is to be the guides as people add accessiiblity information through out the Web Platform Docs.
14:40:05 <Sharron> Wayne: As we think and advise about Preliminary development and design matters, people on the line need a way to understand as they develop that they are in fact meeting these goals.
14:40:51 <Sharron> ...are our accessibility plans working? incremental testing that we can provide so people can produce quality.
14:41:12 <Sharron> Shawn: Can you send an email to Ian ?
14:42:15 <Sharron> ACTION: Wayne to send email to Ian about development needs of incremental testing for accessibility.
14:42:15 <trackbot> Created ACTION-252 - Send email to Ian about development needs of incremental testing for accessibility. [on Wayne Dick - due 2012-12-14].
14:44:53 <Sharron> All: Our mantra - Accessibility is FUN!
14:45:18 <Sharron> Shawn: Next question is how long and how detailed should it be?
14:47:43 <Sharron> Sharron: I think it is important to keep this document streamlined and to point out according to roles. However, we have to then consider the accuracy and current validity of the docs we point to.
14:48:14 <Sharron> Bim: Part of my role at WAI-ACT is to make these living documents either through wikis or someway for them to be kept up to date.
14:48:54 <Sharron> Shawn: When we find old pages, we are updating with a note at the top that points to newer versions or more timely information.
14:49:52 <Sharron> ...that is one of the issues, Wayne with providing the details in EO is to share the responsibility for keeping it current with the community.
14:50:43 <Sharron> Wayne: An example is a discussion of the fact that there may be more than one way to test items, like the discussion last week about various ways to test color.
14:51:29 <Sharron> ...developers will understand the difference between a run time tool and a sematic tool, so can keep the discussion generic while providing specifics.
14:51:43 <Sharron> Shawn: Vicki and other needs from the group?
14:52:52 <Sharron> Vicki: I would like specific feedback about what is already there, what might be overlooked. My approach now is to keep this as short as possible and point out to other useful detail. The part that Ian is still to put in will be very very important about the developer implementation.
14:53:27 <Bim> I will
14:53:38 <Sharron> Wayne: I was concerned that implementation seemed to be not sufficiently addressed, I am glad to learn more about Ian's work and will keep an eye on it.
14:53:45 <Sharron> Sharron: I will
14:54:46 <Sharron> Shawn: Comments can go into the wiki page or send email to EO list.
14:55:12 <Sharron> Suzette: I will review
14:55:14 <Wayne> Off the agenda:  Can a few people stay after to talk about the action in the US Senate this week.
14:55:36 <Sharron> Shawn: Can we brainstorm the title?
14:55:43 <shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_in_process#Title_ideas
14:59:21 <Sharron> Shawn: While you review, make comments on title and if we want a survey we will revisit next week. Add your name to acknowledgments.
14:59:45 <Sharron> Topic: Preliminary Review
15:00:59 <Sharron> Shawn: Last week we talked about the criteria for which checks to include in short checks and which might be posted to a wiki for more thorough explanation. I went through and added our first impression of what to include in the 15 minute check.
15:01:25 <Sharron> ...first thig to do might be ot look at what we have, is it still too many, looking good, or what?
15:02:30 <Sharron> ...then for each check, how much explanation do we want to have about who it's for, why you do it, etc vs how much we want to just do the mechanics of the check and point elsewhere for the rationale.
15:02:38 <Sharron> ...and look at the title
15:03:20 <Vicki> +1
15:03:24 <shawn> +1
15:03:32 <annabelle> +1
15:03:34 <Sharron> Sharron: I would like to make some decsiions about what to take out and then just take them out.
15:04:16 <Sharron> Shawn: Can go through and move to an archive page.
15:05:43 <Sharron> ...Descriptions for images - stays in
15:05:48 <Sharron> ..Headings, yes
15:06:37 <Sharron> ...Keyboard access, would probably include visible focus, and content order
15:06:42 <Sharron> ...yes
15:07:15 <Sharron> ...proposal is to move these three together
15:08:53 <Sharron> ACTION: Sharron to combine Keyboard access, focus, content order and group them.
15:08:53 <trackbot> Created ACTION-253 - Combine Keyboard access, focus, content order and group them. [on Sharron Rush - due 2012-12-14].
15:09:33 <Sharron> Shawn: Check page title is a probably...does it need more write up?
15:10:02 <Sharron> Sharron: It is an easy thing to check, should leve in
15:10:17 <Sharron> Suzette: But the browser is an issue
15:10:31 <Sharron> ...may not go through every browser and might be noted.
15:11:23 <Sharron> Shawn: Link text, now is maybe not
15:11:34 <Sharron> Sharron: Let's move it out.
15:11:56 <Sharron> Suzette: Links are so fundamental, is there some part of that that we could include?
15:12:10 <Sharron> Vicki: Quite improtant that links are meaningful
15:13:17 <Sharron> Shawn: You can get false negatives on this one. If we have a Quick Check people may fail something that in fact passes because of context.
15:13:52 <Sharron> ...we have too much here and we need to cut in order to keep this a short list that gets people started.
15:14:38 <Sharron> Wayne: It won't really be meeting the need, which is for developers to understand the real issues and how they can be tested and if there pages are ready to go to the next development stage.
15:14:49 <shawn> q+ to ask Wayne & Jennifer to send links to other quick checks
15:15:17 <shawn> Sharron: this is quick checks, not necessarily technical
15:15:27 <shawn> ... waht can I do in 15 minutes
15:15:44 <shawn> .... more detailed development material elsewhere - maybe on Web Platform Docs
15:16:29 <Sharron> Shawn: So we are not saying that this is not an important issue..
15:16:46 <Bim> q+
15:16:51 <shawn> ack shawn
15:16:51 <Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask Wayne & Jennifer to send links to other quick checks
15:17:02 <Sharron> Jennifer: We don't want to add a check that would be misinterpreted or misunderstood by non technical people
15:17:35 <Sharron> ACTION: Jennifer to send Quick Check list to EO
15:17:35 <trackbot> Created ACTION-254 - Send Quick Check list to EO [on Jennifer Sutton - due 2012-12-14].
15:17:55 <shawn> ack bim
15:18:33 <Sharron> Bim: I would rather see Page Titles dropped and link text included
15:19:12 <shawn> Reminder Criteria for checks <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_Analysis#Criteria_for_checks>
15:19:13 <Sharron> Sharron: My experince is that every page in a site often has the same name.
15:19:35 <shawn> Common accessibility barriers (what we see often as mistakes in web pages)
15:19:36 <shawn>  Easy to understand
15:19:36 <shawn>  Not complicated issues (not if lots of debate on forums)
15:19:36 <shawn>  Pass-fail not complex; Not likely to give false positive or false negative
15:19:36 <shawn>  Checks that clearly related to specific WCAG success criteria
15:20:15 <Wayne> Link text and Titles have the same issue - Missleading Text
15:20:49 <Sharron> Shawn: We are looking for things that are relatively non controversial, that pass/fail is relatively noncomplex, not likely to give fals results, and finally that they are clearly related to WCAG SCs
15:21:08 <Bim> OK, in that context, ignore me please.
15:22:30 <Sharron> Wayne: Perhaps an item called MisLeading text, where all pages have same title and/or link text that give false impression
15:23:37 <Vicki> +1
15:24:20 <Sharron> Sharron: I would be willing to take a pass about using the misleading text idea as a caution, not a defintive pass/fail on this issue
15:26:15 <Sharron> Shawn: We drafted initially as The Things You Check. May end up oing it more as an actual process document. Base it on what you actually do rather than what you are checking.
15:26:56 <Vicki> +1
15:27:05 <Sharron> Shawn: Have NOs for More Robust and Color coding, shape coding
15:27:18 <Sharron> ...Forms which we will talk about next week
15:27:33 <Vicki> +1
15:27:46 <Sharron> ...next is tables which Ian is drafting (probably not)
15:28:35 <Sharron> ...and the rest of these on the page we had said probably not.
15:29:25 <Sharron> Wayne: Incremental Analysis is what it is
15:29:51 <Sharron> Suzette: My students found that sometimes the auto tools passed everything, but when you validated, it did not pass.
15:30:57 <shawn> that is, because the site didn't validate, the tool didn't parse it
15:31:01 <Sharron> ...the validation errors cause the tool to return false info one way or another.
15:32:19 <Sharron> Shawn: Sharron, move the archived work into the existing archive or start new one as you prefer.
15:32:34 <Sharron> Shawn: Yes, to BIM we spoke about human language.
15:32:50 <Zakim> -Jennifer
15:32:59 <Bim> Bim has left #eo
15:33:10 <Vicki> bye
15:33:12 <Vicki> -Vicki
15:33:13 <Zakim> -Bim
15:33:15 <Vicki> Vicki has left #eo
15:33:23 <Zakim> -anna-belle
15:33:30 <Sharron> ...only one more meeting in 2012, please stay current with tasks and assignments.
15:33:39 <Sharron> trackbot, end meeting
15:33:39 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:33:39 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.650.348.aaaa, Sharron, anna-belle, Shawn, Jennifer, Wayne_Dick, Suzette, Vicki, Bim
15:33:47 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:33:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-minutes.html trackbot
15:33:48 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:33:48 <RRSAgent> I see 6 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-actions.rdf :
15:33:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Wayne to research alternatives for hotel costs in San Diego [1]
15:33:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-irc#T13-54-42
15:33:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Shawn to edit Web Accessibility Summary for Web Platform Docs. [2]
15:33:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-irc#T14-05-06
15:33:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Sharron to consider adding information to <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_in_process#Design_Stage> specifc to that. [3]
15:33:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-irc#T14-32-57
15:33:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Wayne to send email to Ian about development needs of incremental testing for accessibility. [4]
15:33:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-irc#T14-42-15
15:33:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Sharron to combine Keyboard access, focus, content order and group them. [5]
15:33:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-irc#T15-08-53
15:33:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Jennifer to send Quick Check list to EO [6]
15:33:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/07-eo-irc#T15-17-35