Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference -- 15 Mar 2013

<trackbot> Date: 15 March 2013

<scribe> Scribe: Sharron

<Suzette2> here in voice and chat - maybe download speed is down again Suzette

Welcome and intros

<shawn> EOWG current participants <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/EOWG-members.html>

<Andrew> Bim - http://www.w3.org/WAI/ACT/

Shawn: Thanks to everyone who sent in comments last night or this morning. When possible in future try to get comments in by Wednesday so that members have a chance to review before our Friday meeting.

WCAG-EM Working Draft

Shawn: My understanding is that Wayne sent comments in email. Is there anything else that I have not seen?

Bim: It is very well organized. Wanted to comment on the mis-use of definition list. I don't like one item lists generally, but in this case a one item definition list creates page noise.

Shawn: Can we add that to the wiki
... Wayne, I have not had a chnace to review your comment. Should we look at it now or next week.

Wayne: Sure why not now. One table is a flow chart that is described in terms of visual geography. I tried to re-word in more accessible terms.

<shawn> wayne's comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2013JanMar/0056.html

<Andrew> Wayne refers to diagram at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#procedure

Suzette: What Wayne described bothered me as well. I thought about a long description but I think what Wayne has done is quite good.

Wayne: It also was incorrect as well as inaccessible, so I tried to make it more clear and more accurate.

<paulschantz> I agree with Wayne...good comment

Wayne: I tried to explain the problem with templates in the second comment. Where they talk about users, they need a subgroup to work on that because they are talking about a different group than we identified in the Overview.
... need a group of people working on this for a few hours to refine and hone in on who the users actually are.

<shawn> EOWG particularly focus on http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#audience

Shawn: Thanks Wayne, we should probably focus on the audience here as an EO project

Wayne: Last few sections, other than those comments, seem really clean. Nice work.

Sharron: Sorry, it will be next week for me

Shawn: The comments are due next week, so if those who are doing the review could get comments to the wiki by Wednesday, flag the things you believe need discussion.

Easy Checks

<shawn> draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/checks

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

Wayne: Need to change the terms for Color/Contrast. It is a mistake. Maybe make a note that it used to be called color contrast, but it is not scientifically correct. Luminousity, the difference between light and dark is the actual issue.

Shawn: Michael Lenz (?) former EO member made a comment

<shawn> Having clear and simple language that coveys the intent and purpose is important. While technically accurate to the layman that is a nuance that is lost.

<shawn> It also would mean that search engines would not guide people to our resources given the lack of queries for Luminosity Contrast.

Howard: I agree with this. You want people to be able to find it. You want people to know what it is about from the heading.
... while it may not be precisely accurate, you have a danger of confusing people.

<Zakim> LiamM, you wanted to note that 'color contrast' is short and sweet (if misspelled)

Wayne: Here is my problem with that. There are tools that are giving bad results becasue of the term color contrast. You will get inaccessible confirmation. You are directing people to do the wrong thing.

Liam: But in this document don't we want to sacrifice accuracy for clarity of communication.

Shawn: What if we do some expolanation within the body of the paragraph. Find a good place to point to explain further.

Wayne: I just have a problem putting into an official document something that is in fact, just wrong.
... seems we would want to be sure that as part of our educatinal purpose we would want to start at some point changing the understanding of this uissue. Rather than perpetuationg something that we got wrong the first time around. If not now, when will we change the understanding to something that is actually true.
... I guess for me it is disturbing as a scientist to stand by soemthing that is just wrong.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to brainstorm putting it in quotes of parenthesis

AnnaBelle: For me, I would prefer using luminousity or simple saying contrast. I am one of those who thought it was color contrast. it is patronizing to someone like me who has understood it in one way in the past. I would appreciate having a correct understanding.

Shawn: What about finding a bridge from the term people recgnize to a more accurate one?

<Andrew> what about 'text contrast' or 'contrast in/with text'

Bim: I agree with Wayne's educational perspective but also understand the need to use familiar terms.

<Sinarmaya_> what about "luminosity color contrast"?

Bim: If we put color in quotes "color" contrast and explain that it is in fact a measurement of light and dark, not color.

Sharron: I agree with Bim

<Zakim> LiamM, you wanted to suggest "Visual Contrast"

<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to draft a different title and explanatory text for the Contrast section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/15-eo-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-284 - Draft a different title and explanatory text for the Contrast section [on Shawn Henry - due 2013-03-22].

<Andrew> +1 to Liam's suggestion

<Bim> +1 to visual contrast

Liam: Visual contrast should be distinguished from audio contrast

<AnnaBelle> +1

<paulschantz> +1

<Sinarmaya_> +1

<Andrew> makes it quite different from aural/audio contrast without mentioning colour

<shawn> +!

Shawn: Let's get back to Wayne to say thanks for raising the issue, other comments have come in. Andrew your comments, care for discussion?

<shawn> andrew's comments: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/index.php?title=Easy_Checks&diff=4250&oldid=4243

<shawn> draft page title section: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/checks#title

Andrew: Under the section Page Title, made comments and thinking about how to avoid clutter. Might be more appropriate to make sure we know what version is being illustrated. I could not replicate.

Shawn: So should we provide more information about browser and version in image title or alt?

<Bim> +1

Shawn: what is balance between clutter vs information?

AnnaBelle: I had expected to be doing more illustrations for some of these. I am a bit confused of what I should be doing.

<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to add AnnaBelle's illustrations to the Easy Checks wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/15-eo-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-285 - Add AnnaBelle's illustrations to the Easy Checks wiki [on Shawn Henry - due 2013-03-22].

AnnaBelle: There may be some I was supposed to do and have not done yet. But, again I am confused.

Bim: if there is just one illustratin, just make the point that the experience may be different in other browsers, other versions.

Shawn: There are several different ones.

Bim: Then it will probably be better to know the difference.

Shawn: How is that good for screen reader users?

<Andrew> people discusses approaches - need to know

Bim: Only that they will know there is a reason for these many illustrations and not just a glitch of re-reading the same graphic.

Shawn: So Andrew proposes that we put browser and version info in image title.

<paulschantz> browser versions change all the time, do we expect to update sample images in easy checks on a periodic basis?

RESOLUTION: For images within Page Title section, we will put browser, version in image title

<Andrew> no - so we need to tell them what version we illustrated

Howard: What exactly will the screen reader user do with that information? I'm not sure I see the benefit of adding the extra info.
... don't we want to keep noise to a minimum?

<Zakim> Andrew, you wanted to mention visual screen readers users discuss testing with visual users

Paul: When you ahve images here, we may not want to refer to specific versions. They update weekly sometimes and we will not be current unless we change illustrations often.

Andrew: That is just why. So screen reader users know that this may not be their exact experience. it comes back to comments about how much info people want. It should be a matter of choice.

Shawn: Strong opinions?

<LiamM> ok

Shawn: how about we give it a try and see how it plays out.

Andrew: Comment on h3 and will think about and do more later on. Nothing else for discussion, just general consideration.

Shawn: Suzette, want to talk about your point?

Suzette: In the examples, showing how the company name may come first or the specific page come first. We recommend the specific first as a best practice, but we do not do that.
... the examples don't match.

Shawn: It is becasue the visual example is just the Home Page. We would need another part of the site to have a matching visual example.

Suzette: They need to do the same thing.It is confusing otherwise.

Annabelle: I wish I could place images in the wiki so that Shawn does not need to read my mind.

Shawn: You can link to the image elsewhere

Annabelle: Not the same as in context

<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to suggest page Title image screen grabs that match suggested practice for title format. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/15-eo-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-286 - Suggest page Title image screen grabs that match suggested practice for title format. [on Shawn Henry - due 2013-03-22].

Shawn: Any other comments for Easy Checks?

<shawn> Howard's wiki edits: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/index.php?title=Easy_Checks&diff=4243&oldid=4228

Howard: As a first time user, I thought that with the sections collapsed, it was easy to miss the introductory information which is important. It was unclear.

Shawn: On the draft page, the collapsed section is Using this page. What if it was changed to Using Easy Checks

<shawn> proposal: change "Using this page" to "Using Easy Checks" or "Usaing the Easy Checks"

Shawn: any objections?

Annabelle: Like it

Howard: Next point was that it is easy to miss the section. Perhaps it should be open by default.
... when I saw the down arrows next to the section I expected that section to expand rather than an indication that you will be moved further into the docuemnt.

<Sinarmaya__> Agree with Howard!

<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to ask Shadi if we can have only one section expanded by default. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/03/15-eo-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-287 - Ask Shadi if we can have only one section expanded by default. [on Shawn Henry - due 2013-03-22].

Howard: Wordsmithing, we can skip that one

Annabelle: I have a style question. I use the Chicago Manual of Style. When there is period and quote at sentence end, what is the convention?
... at the W3C?

Shawn: We don't have a strict style. We do have some strict guidelines. I am happy to address those on case-by-case basis. You have a pending comment along those lines. I
... can we take that offline. If you put it in the wiki, it won't get lost in the email.

Paul: was thinking the exact same thing re: style

Liam: No comments but have used the Easy Checks to run some tests last week. It does quickly and painlessly catch some of the larger issues. Thought it was generally very good. Well don us!
... needed the most work around form labels. Understanding why it is broken and how to fix it is a bit of a challenge.
... especially when those are using MVC

Shawn: Great to hear. Out of curiousity, how long did it take you to run these?

Liam: it was a morning and I was chacking quite a few pages.

Shawn: At some point it would be good to see what does it take to run these checks on one page?

Liam: Under an hour but certainly more than 5 or 10 minutes.

Check-in on work in progress

Shawn: Last week we talked about charter scope and deliverables. Current charter is up in June. As we renew, we spoke about education, integrating accessiiblity into courses
... what do we want to fit in the next twenty-five minutes? What aspect of that high level description should we discuss today?
... Howard, we have a wiki page "Promoting Accessiiblity in Courses" we have rough notes
... we have WCAG-EM work, Easy Checks, Big Picture charter discussion, education discussion.
... should we talk about Big Picture charter scope or just wrap up current work and then discuss?

Sharron: Big Picture thinking can start now to be most effective. since it will start the momentum for the next severl years.

Paul: there's a huge push for "moocs" and online learning with tablets, at least at CSUN. promotion of accessibility in authoring course materials should be a priority imo

<shawn> Massive Open Online Courses

Howard: I was going to say that I agree with Paul and think we should be pushing inclusion of accessiiblity in course work. I could work on it and use as a grant activity.

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

Shawn: In the wiki are "brain dump" level ideas and thought about direction and brainstorms. Can make a snapshot of the page today for archives and then you can pull from and organize it.
... can take this and step up, address the bigger picture issues, who is our audience, how might we reach tehm, what resources and massages will we offer, etc.
... would you like to jump in here? shall we have another discussion about next steps?

Howard: maybe we could follow up and set a most useful direction.
... there will be a track of sessions in November at Accessing Higher Ground on Universal Design in university course. RFP announcement is up.

Shawn: Please send conference info to WAI-IG list
... we can follow up on specifics and next steps on courses

<Sinarmaya__> The Sidar Conference this year will be about higher education too. Will be in november in Portugal ;-)

Charter and Big Picture Focus

Shawn: Had talked generally about training and education being a focus. What might that look like for our work?
... remember that what Bim is working on - the Application Notes - may turn out to be more like tutorials.

<shawn> Sharron: Easy checks is good model of practical

<shawn> ... think about tools for specific rooles

<shawn> tools = practical guidance (rather than high level conceptual)

<shawn> s/tolls = p/tools = p/

<shawn> ... agree integrated in training. this would help in the meantime for people already out there

Paul: The easy Checks is a practical. I have seen at least a half dozen versions of something like that. It is great to have a master version at the W3C
... since product specific tools are being pushed by vendors, it is a challenge. But the provision of neutral and practical tools and examples is valuable.

Howard: Develop modules for courses (may be beyond scope). Some of what is in the Training Resource Suite could be integrated. perhaps modules that can easily be placed within existing curriculum.
... there was talk of the professional association being promoted by ATIA and the certification idea. training reuirements for that certification. Could cehck in with
... them to see if they ahve needs we could address through this work

Shawn: And must of course think abut what is reasonable to accomplish with volunteers. Review needed resources and where is the overlap between ongoing research, grant funded projects, and W3C interests.

Bim: Certification solutions are fne but I think we all agree that integration into existing courses rather than a separate discipline.
... would be preferable. Can we push for that?

<shawn> ACM

Shawn: Wayne identified the CS curriculum of ACM Assoc of Computing Machinery has curriculm. Need to explore options for integration of accessibility into their work.
... are there other things we should focus on for the next three years?
... we have practical tools and guidance, university curriculum. other focus areas?

<shawn> Sharron: outreach. engage through WAI-Engage. lots of momentum ...

<shawn> ... there is energy

<shawn> ... our community wants to have large influence ...

<shawn> how to bring that together?

Howard: How about a MOOC on Accessibility?

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to wishlist videos

<Zakim> Howard, you wanted to MOOC on accessibility

Howard: and like the video resource development idea as well.

<Zakim> Andrew, you wanted to mention dispelling ivory tower notion

Shawn: It would be interesting to see what is already there. We talked about different online courses. Web Standards Group did a course, now outdated.

Andrew: One of the excercises you did about what do you think of when you consider....different aspects of WAI. How can we dispell some of the negative aspects?

Shawn: Thanks for a great discussion. Please update and post commetns to wiki by Wendesday, have aggod week!

trackbot, end meeting

- DRAFT -

Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference

15 Mar 2013

Attendees

Contents

Welcome and intros

WCAG-EM Working Draft

Easy Checks

Check-in on work in progress

Charter and Big Picture Focus

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output