W3C

- DRAFT -

Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference

08 Feb 2013

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Suzette], Sharron, Bim, Shawn, Shadi, Andrew, Jennifer, AnnaBelle, LiamM, IanPouncey
Regrets
Wayne, Sylvie
Chair
Shawn
Scribe
Sharron

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 08 February 2013

<scribe> Scribe: Sharron

<Suzette2> Hi, am I first on the voice call? Suzete

<AnnaBelle> Morning! I can't call in with passcode 3694#

<AnnaBelle> Third time it's given me "This passcode is not valid" for 3694.

<AnnaBelle> Will try again in about 5

<AnnaBelle> Glad Andrew likes!

Andrew: The Indie UI diagram is great.

Easy Checks - Flow

Shawn: This is about the order of the checks, Suzette brought up a good point - what is the story we are telling? Are we saying, here is a process you can go through. Or are we saying, here are important, common things to check?
... Suzette had an idea for reorganization. She put that in a new wiki page for us to review. Thanks Suzette for doing that.
... several people commented

Andrew: reads the flow comments

Suzette: The main content is changing as we are still discussing it. I was glad to see trying out the new format with the Forms content. I think this order might be easier for the novice to relate to.

Shadi: Can you say more about the elements?

Suzette: Wanted to put things into terms that can be understood by those who don't develop or may not be familiar.

Shadi: To start with page title seems like it may be confusing because the accessibility issue is not as clear. Starting with something like headings might be better because it involves design.

Jennifer: But starting with page title is good becasue it is so easy. it begins with soemthing that is very easynto accomplish and understand.

Liam: If you only have access to CMS, headings are easier to change than page title.

Shawn: We're expecting that people may not be on their own site.
... so in summary, the questions are - do we want an easy win, and easy check, a clear accessibility issue, or what is the emphasis to be?

Sharron: I agree with Jennifer

Shawn: It is the simplest in terms of the instructions themselves - easy to do.

Sharron: I am not sure that people will be making judgements about what is or is not an accessiiblity issue

Shawn: And there is a short reference in the intro

<shawn> q/

Shadi: Jennifer convinced me. The better chance of winning is a positive encouragement so I want to move away from the idea that the order is not relative to the importance of the issue.
... color contrast then seems as though it would come before keyboard access

Suzette: Must identify which page you are testing and so if there is a good title, you will be more able to do that.

AnnaBelle: Are we going to explicitly state the order in the introduction?

Sharron: That would support Shadi's comment that we need to get away from the idea that it is in order of importance

Shawn: When we move this to a page, we will nto have numbered order.

Jennifer: No strong opinion.

<Andrew> not in order of importance, rather in (sort of) order of complexity - worth mentioning

Shadi: That may be a bit too formal. In the How to Use this Document section, perhaps make sure that there is no misunderstanding about ordered for importance.

Shawn: Are we OK saying to just watch for this later?
... that is something we can check out at CSUN. Informal user testing, and see what people assume?

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_Analysis

<scribe> ACTION: Andrew to add note about order to evaluation analysis page. Will add section on notes for usability testing. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-269 - Add note about order to evaluation analysis page. Will add section on notes for usability testing. [on Andrew Arch - due 2013-02-15].

Shawn: I had some comments on the headings and will see if we have time to come back to that

Easy Checks - Indicating nonvisual and visual checks

Shawn: Did you ahve a chance to look at that? Some steps require you to see the page visually. We have also been mindful of including checks that can be done without being able to see.
... Sharron and Vicki said the current way of labeling is cluttered, what do others think?

Jennifer: Absolutely agree with the clutter comment. I'm just having a hard time estimating how many sub points will there be?
... I think blind people will be able to figure out what they can and cannot do.
... in a wierd kind of way it shows that blind users may be limited if they are hired as a tester.

Sharron: one short sentence

<Bim> q1

<shawn> Some checks require you to be able to see the visual rendering of the page. These are marked [visual]. We've indicated checks that do not require seeing the page with [non-visual].

Jennifer: Yes that is what I was thinking and if people catch it in the intro , fine.

Shadi: Is it only visual that is an impact. What about multimedia aspect that may be inaccessible to some?

Bim: I was thinking about using the word concentrate. The test concentrate on ... or something. Many of these tests can be performed by everyone and if not, they are indicated.

Shawn: So the point is to say that everyone can do most things

Suzette: One of the benefits of ordering by elements as I suggested is that it moves away from the idea that people with disabilities cannot do effective evaluation.

Shawn: if youa re a screen reader user, or you are deaf and you can't do some of these checks, would it be annoying to realize that while you are in process?

Andrew: I think that most people will read through the checks first and be able to self-regulate about whether they will be able to complete the process before they jump in and find out while in process. They will recognize their ability to complete.

Bim: Blind people are very well aware of what they are/are not able to do. In many cases, if a blind person is testing, they are often assigned a work buddy. Let's don't be too precious about it.

Shawn: Take all references off of the section headings and add to the watch items.

Shadi: Yes, I support that. And related to the ordering, we should be mindful to start with things that can be perfromed by all.

Jennifer: Yes I can't think of anyone who can't check for page titles.

<Bim> +1

Shawn: Andrew, please add that to the Analysis wiki

<LiamM> +1

<Suzette2> good

Shawn: and add to the usability testing as well, please.

Easy Checks - specific sections

Subtopic: Multimedia

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Web_Accessibility_Preliminary_Evaluation#Check_multimedia_.28video.2C_audio.29_alternatives

Shawn: Sharron updated this section. Have people had time to review?

Suzette: About auto-play, should we not mention that?

<Andrew> and what about audio contrast?

<Bim> level

<Bim> a

Sharron: Yes I did not even think about that, good point.

Andrew: What about the question of audio contrast?

Shawn: Is that beyond Easy Check?

Andrew: Well I think most people with standard hearing should be able to make a brief judgement about whether it is comprehensible.

Jennifer: It is an easy check but since this sectin is short and sweet, do we want to make it longer and more complex?

Shawn: And it is not really an easy check to make a final decision about it, only that it MIGHT be an issue for further investigation.

<shadi> +1 to liam

Shawn: since not easy to finally determine and not a frequently occuring problem, we can leave it out. Or we can say it is an easy one to understand and so we could include it.

Liam: I am in favor of leaving it out as a rare and unusual problem that could only confuse people.

Shawn: OK, if no objections we will leave that out.

Liam: and putting in specific instructions, such as how to turn on captions.

Shawn: Thoughts on that? anyone?
... Do we need to say how to in YouTube only? Vimeoas well?

Liam: We should do both.

<Andrew> I sometimes recomend also offering a download option to play in the agent of choice

Shawn: Because the multimedia issues may be quite complex, we have simplified to the point that an assumption might be made that every video must have audio description, captioning and transcript. Which is not true.
... is ther a good place to point about explaining the levels well for multimedia
... do we need to say something about conformance levels in relation to multimedia.

Bim: I was just thinking that it is very complex although it could be explained in a few words. Is there enough explanation of the fact that its audio description OR transcript to meet level A?

Shawn: It is not easy to find that answer in the current guidelines.

Sharron: Should that be in the intro?

Bim: Could it be in What to Look For? Audio description for AA, AD or transcript for A?

<Andrew> talk of levels would just seem to add a layer of confusion for new folk - especially if just on some checks

<scribe> ACTION: Sharron to take comments about multimedia and revise for review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-270 - Take comments about multimedia and revise for review [on Sharron Rush - due 2013-02-15].

Subtopic: Page titles

Shawn: This one is getting close, want to pull out few remaining things. Comments were made about visual complexity, needed simplification. Edits have been made, what to people think. Particularly about Tips.

<Andrew> examples are good to aid understanding

<Bim> like the examples

Sharron: +1

<Suzette2> +1

Shawn: I deleted a bunch of things, is it OK as is?
... a few actions that need to be done.

<scribe> ACTION: Andrew to look up keyboard equivalents on FF toolbar instructions for page title and other places where @@keyboard equivalent occurs on wiki page.? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-271 - Look up keyboard equivalents on FF toolbar instructions for page title and other places where @@keyboard equivalent occurs on wiki page.? [on Andrew Arch - due 2013-02-15].

AnnaBelle: Do we talk about trying to get images in. I thought about trying to do this on my own site as a sandbox.

Shawn: send me the images?

AnnaBelle: I like to work with them a bit first. I will point you to that when I am done.

<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to figure out how to add images in the wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-272 - Figure out how to add images in the wiki. [on Shawn Henry - due 2013-02-15].

Subtopic: Alt Text

<shawn> Alt text depends on content. For example, for an image of a dog on a kennel club website, the alt text might include the breed of the dog; however, the same image on a dog park website may be there just to make the page more attractive, and the image might not need any alt text (null alt explained below). [@@ new sentence:] One way to help think about appropriate alt text is: if you were helping

<shawn> someone read and interact with the web page and they cannot see it, what would you say about the image?

Shawn: Does the new sentence help?

Jennifer: Yes and is clear as is, do not need the phone reference in this context.

Sharron: +1 to Jennifer

Shawn: If the image is sufficiently described in the text � for example, a simple diagram illustrating what's written in the web page text � it does not need additional alt text. [@@ suggest null or "illustration described in main text" or other? Andrew: I usually suggest alt-text along the lines of "Diagram of (something) as describe above/below"]

<Andrew> important iomage still, so not NUL

Jennifer: I personally prefer diagram xyz is described below but not sure if I am in the minority.

Andrew: So a person who does not see the image, knows that it is there in case of conversation about it with a sighted user.

Jennifer: Yes, I like to know that the diagram is there

Shawn: The alt text does not need to include the words "button", "link", or "image of". [@@suzette: because the screen reader will indicate this automatically. shawn: too screen reader focused? what about others not seeing images? andrew: alt-text for PWD is primarily for screen-reader users]

Suzette: It is important to help people understand how it is announced so that they know why it is redundant.

<Andrew> Suzette's suggestion adds explanation

Shawn: We generally want to be careful about feeding the myth that it is for blind users only.

Sharron: Could say assitive technology instead

<Andrew> people will wonder why not to add 'button' etc if they're new

Bim: Does it have to be about screen readers?
... There is normally a placeholder related to the size of the image so you would be aware that the image was not there.

Shawn: But if you are a sighted user, with images turned off, you might not know it is a button.

<shawn> alt decistion tree: http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/#tree

Shawn: There is in the EOWG notes section a link to the decision tree. We would not want to reference now, but maybe after publication as a draft
... question is whether to possibly confuse people about the Easy Check

<Andrew> +1

Sharron: Why not put it in the "To Learn More" section?

Jennifer: +1

Shadi: you mentioned earlier the Application Notes and I know this draft is coming out before that, but you could add that there will be more information coming. This might help us prioritize the Application Notes

Shawn: Andrew vbrought up the possibility of confusing people about the fact that CSS images will not have alt. But the explanation itself could add complexity. Thoughts?

Bim: I don't think it is that complex to explain.

Shawn: Our target audience for this may not know what CSS is.

Liam: Stay away from it. We can't get them to do everything, let's get them to do something that they understand fairly easily.

Andrew: Must accept that they will be confused in some circumstance.

Shawn: But during usability testing, we should look out for that confusion and see how much of a problem it is.

Topic - Title Ideas for Easy Checks document

<shawn> Easy Checks - A First Look at Web Accessibility

Shawn: Current title is "Easy Checks-a First Look at Web Accessibility"

Bim: I like it, it is reassuring but gives the clear message that it is not a complete audit. It has the right kind of wording for those who use search engines.

Andrew: I can live with it

<Zakim> LiamM, you wanted to ask about confusion with 'Preliminary Review of Websites for Accessibility'

<Andrew> proposed title doesn't quite work for me, but it's ok

Liam: Wondering if the title clearly provides a signpost to differentiate from previous documents.

Shawn: This will replace that document.

<Andrew> "A First Look at Web Accessibility" is misleading - it's just a first look at testing/checking

Shawn: probably should put somewhere "formerly known as..."
... Right but it does asay checks.

Andrew: But this really does not describe web accessibility but does describe a testing process.

Shadi: I had a similar reaction. It is different than a first idea of web accessibility.

<shawn> old notes: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_Analysis#Title_ideas>

Shawn: There is a link to title ideas with notes on other considerations
... The words test and evaluation were considered.

<shadi> Easy Checks - Way to Explore Your Website

<shadi> Easy Checks - Ways to Explore Web Accessibility

<Andrew> Explore is good - doen't imply THE answer either

<shawn> Easy Checks - A First Evaluation of Web Accessibility

<shawn> Easy Checks - A First Text for Web Accessibility

<Andrew> Easy Checks - An Initial test for Web Accessibility

<shawn> Easy Checks - A First Test for Web Accessibility

<shadi> A First Check for Web Accessibility

<shadi> First Checks for Web Accessibility

<LiamM> +1 what shadi typed

<shawn> Easy Checks for Web Accessibility

<shadi> First Easy Checks for Web Accessibility

<shawn> Easy Checks - First Tests for Web Accessibility

<shawn> Easy Checks - A First Test of Web Accessibility

<AnnaBelle> Maybe "First Review"?

<shadi> +1 for first review

<shawn> Easy Checks - First Review of Web Accessibility

<Andrew> Easy Checks - Simple Tests for Web Accessibility

<Bim> zamim, mute me

<shawn> First Checks - Simple Tests for Web Accessibility

<shawn> Easy Checks - First Review of Web Accessibility

<shawn> Easy Checks - A First Review of Web Accessibility

<Andrew> and 'simple' sounds like anyone could do it

<Andrew> Quick Checks - A First Review of Web Accessibility

<LiamM> 'First Text wins of

Shawn: Jennifer drafted a "next Steps" section.

<LiamM> 'First Test' wins over 'First Check' in prevalence in search expressions - https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=first%20check,%20first%20test

Shawn: please review and we will discuss next week. Also wanted people to note tha the time has been set for TPAC in China. Please check in on that.

<LiamM> ah... nope, Test here mainly referring to cricket...

<LiamM> Yep :)

<Andrew> yes - congrats

Shawn: Thanks all, have alovely weekedn, all the best.

trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Andrew to add note about order to evaluation analysis page. Will add section on notes for usability testing. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Andrew to look up keyboard equivalents on FF toolbar instructions for page title and other places where @@keyboard equivalent occurs on wiki page.? [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Sharron to take comments about multimedia and revise for review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Shawn to figure out how to add images in the wiki. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html#action04]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.137 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013-02-08 15:32:08 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137  of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Bimeo /Vimeo/
Found Scribe: Sharron
Inferring ScribeNick: Sharron
Default Present: Suzette], Sharron, Bim, Shawn, Shadi, Andrew, Jennifer, AnnaBelle, LiamM, IanPouncey
Present: Suzette] Sharron Bim Shawn Shadi Andrew Jennifer AnnaBelle LiamM IanPouncey
Regrets: Wayne Sylvie
Found Date: 08 Feb 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-eo-minutes.html
People with action items: andrew sharron shawn

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]