The meeting began with an informal discussion about where we were and who was available to work on what before the end of the year. Then the group took up 4 items for review and discussion. First was the Easy Checks comments from Tom Worthington, submitted to the wai-editor's list. Sharron had posted a response and Tom posted back with comments that made us think he had not noticed the expandable/collapsible sections. We agreed to a generalized response and the need for user testing. Jan and Anthony will review the document as newbies for more insight.
Next we discussed the ATAG outreach plan. A new outreach group was identified - the service providers who customize tool implementation. members observed that this group may need a specific targeted message and agreed to add them to the list. All members are asked to review and add thoughts to the ATAG Outreach plan page of the wiki and prepare for meeting with jeanne Spellman of ATAG-WG, possibly next week.
The next discussion was the regretable announcment that EOWG does not have sufficient representation to allow us to meet F2F at TPAC in November. Discussion of other possible dates and times seemed to point to CSUN in March but no final decision was made.
Using the Before and After Demo (BAD) for teaching was next on the agenda and Wayne and Suzette took actions related to that. Howard will chime in when his conference has ended. Shawn thanked everyone, reminded them to add new personal actions to the wiki, stay current with Actions for all on the EO Home page, and update availability for EO meetings. The meeting adjourned.
Short agenda items today. We have several items we COULD take up, such as using BAD for teaching.
Shawn: Suzette has to step away from BAD work until end of the year, and since Howard has his conference in early November, it is not likely he can ...
Howard: I could try but not sure about the ability to commit time.
Shawn: Better to know one way or another, could you start after the conference, say mid-November?
Howard: Yes probably able to do that.
Wayne: I wrote up some of the techniques I use for Knowbility, Sharron can we share that?
Sharron: Of course, that's a great idea.
Shawn: So what approach shall we use? Do you and Suzette want to collaborate now, Wayne or should we wait for Howard?
Wayne: Well I have quite a bit of time in the next few weeks so I am ready to go. Suzette?
<shawn> Shawn asks Suzette: we are wondering about using BAD for Teaching -- are you able to work on it with Wayne in the next couple weeks? (I know you said you had to take some time off later in the year...)
Wayne: So I could put the work I did on the EO wiki and remove the part on US-centric law
<Suzette2> I guess we could make a start for next week
Shawn: If Suzette and Wayne lead, then Howard you could fill in when you are back from vacation in November.
Wayne: There are some inconsistencies in the bad BAD example and the good BAD example. What to do with them?
Shadi: send to the wai-editor's list, please. Sylvie too had noticed some things. The issues seem to be minor.
Wayne: Yes they are but they do appear when you are teaching.
Shawn: Suzette says she could
make a start so we can put that on next week's agenda -
... AnnaBelle gets a short reprieve until she retires...but then look out :)
... Sharron and Paul have a to-do with the IndieUI intro...
Sharron: Yes Paul sent me a prompt, we should have something in draft by early next week.
Shawn: and the notes for the tutorial design?
Sharron: I have been corresponding with Andrew's friend, do you want those posted?
Shawn: Yes please.
... Tutorials and a number of liitle thing with EasyChecks. We should be able to wrap those up and have a final by end of November
<Wayne> AnnaBelle - I am assigned to help comment
Shawn: UAAG was trying to go to last call. They were willing to add text customization but only if I could write it all. it took a full 3 days of my time, which has thrown me a bit behind. But the good news, we'll have good stuff in UAAG on that.
Shawn: You looked at the Tom
Worthington letter and SR's commetns last week.
... links to the thread in wai-editor's list
<shawn> Easy Checks "published" draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/preliminary
AnnaBelle: This reminds me that I
really wanted to do usability testing on the Easy Checks and
get some real data.
... we did a few a while ago but it would be useful to do more now that it has moved along and I would be happy to help with that.
Shawn: I wonder if he has not
understood that there is an expandable section that explains
the things like IE WAT etc with an expandable section.
... the last comment seems to say "you should do this..." which is just what we did. I would like to know people's reaction to this.
AnnaBelle: The page title comment makes me go back to my experience with SEO and page title. Many people don't understand the difference betweeen the page title and the major heading. So that may be a valid comment.
Shawn: OK to the first point, should we provide instructions about the expand/collapse section?
Shadi: I wonder if the page title comment might be more about saying what the page title is for. Do we need to show them not only how to test for it but why it is important.
Shawn: But we do say that.
<shawn> page title: "Good page titles are particularly important for orientation - to help people know where they are and move between pages open in their browser. The first thing screen readers say when the user goes to a different web page is the page title."
Sharron: Yes, I thought we did explain as well the role of page titles in way-finding, etc
Shawn: So our overall response is what? Any thoughts on first comment about accessiblity?
Howard: I can't see how "accessibility" would confuse anyone, if they are on the page, they are interested in some way.
Shawn: We could link the word accessibility at the beginning to the Intro to Accessibility...and then Suzette says.
Suzette: Too many links are distracting, are they really necessary?
Bim: I wonder if when talking
about FF and BAD is the letter talking about content that is contained
within collapsed sections?
... it is an acronym that is not explained.
Shawn: In the first section, Using these Easy Checks.
Bim: I see, missed that.
Shawn: Thanks for the continued feedback, (straw proposal). Target audience generally understands and we provide a link to general concepts and principles...then we need to understand if he "gets" the expand function and in case not, provide instructions
Shawn: in terms of producing the
simple checker, confess that it is outside of scope for our
... we welcome specific suggestions, such as if we are not explaining the page title concept sufficiently, please feel free to give us the language that would explain more completely. and for any other concepts you find are insufficient. And let him know we have usability testing planned.
Howard: Not everything may be completely defined, but we do convey information about how it is used and the graphics help explain. But the usability testing will be the way to verify. Expand/collapse may be easily overlooked.
Shawn: Jan and Anthony, we will be coming back to this document so we are really hoping to use your fresh approach, take a look at the document and welcome your comments.
Sharron: I will do a wiki
orientation on Monday at 7:30 am Monday
... and record it.
Jan: How long will that take?
Sharron: 45 minutes to an hour
Shawn: Jan and Anthony, are you willing to review EasyChecks and comment?
Jan: Sure I need to anyway.
Howard: I am looking at the expand/collapse sections and wonder if it might be helpful to have text that explicitly says expand to cue people both semantically and visually
Shawn: And there are many places where we use it, so will need to consider clutter on the page as well
Howard: Someone new to this site, it may not be clear right away. The plus sign by itself may not convey the sense of expand
Shawn: Can you add, Howard, a new
h3 usability section that reminds us to do that so we can
gather some of the things we want to focus upon
... and Jan and Anthony, if you feel comfortable after your orientation session to use the wiki, please do that. But if you are still more comformatble sending comments in regular email, please feel welcome to do that as well.
... And by next week I should have draft wording for the smaller, minor points to discuss. Anything else on EasyChecks?
Shawn: Sharron started a fresh
... we went back to pick up some of the good points that had been made previously.
<shawn> Sharron: good suggestion from Andrew. Wayne going to review & comment.
<shawn> Wayne: started contacting people
Sharron: Good input from Andrew and Wayne is working with it as well.
Wayne: I have started working with people doing outreach, a friend who does data base and CMS users that we will do the outreach.
Sharron: Can we get any of that in the wiki?
Shawn: Let me clarify timing.
They issued another Last Call. Hoping no more significant or
substantive changes. Instead we are trying to prepare the
outreach to get implementations. (Candidate Rec). So not really
looking for comments, preparing outreach plan to get
... to encourage authoring tool makers to demonstrate implementation
Wayne: Good clarification, thank you Shawn
Shawn: Hey we will be posting public implementation report so it is a way for tool makers to go to the top of the list of tools that meet standards, good PR for them
Jan: There is work going on to develop accessibility roadmaps, so if I can get some language to them that would be great.
Sharron: So you and I wayne can craft language for the different target groups to reach out to
Wayne: Since there are two steps:
the tools may have the features, but then how are they
institutionaly made convenient and imperative to actually
... within big institutions, it becomes important.
Shawn: But that is separate from the fact that the features are included to begin with.
Wayne: But if it is very difficult to use the accessiiblity hooks, that becomes an issue
Shawn: I put notes in the wiki, the document "selecting and using" is related to that and there is history about it that I don't know. Can you check with Judy? We should follow up on that and see if we need to update or unlink or what.
Shawn: Jeanne Spellman has done a lot of outreach to authoring tool vendors, so we should coordinate with her and that we avoid duplication. Sharron, shall you talk to Jeanne.
Sharron: Can we invite her to our meeting so we can all hear her.
Wayne: I would like to speak to
Jeanne asap for guidance.
... There is a difference between using authoring tools and creating a process for using authoring tools. One thing the ATAG should be supporting is the development of process. Making it easier for entire groups of people to use the tools accessibility.
Shawn: What can you see is our role in promoting that?
Wayne: Good and bad examples of implentation of Drupal, for example. I have not necessarily a centralized system. How easy is it for me to have accessible process and frameworks?
Sharron: It seems like the development of process may be seaparate but I may not be understanding.
Shawn: I agree that people may
need guidance in developing process but that it is a separate
issue to the focused question of the conformance of a tool to
the ATAG standard. If you develop tools, meet ATAG. If you buy
tools, ask for ATAG conformance.
... otherwise, we have some outdated guidance that we may want to update but is a next step, how to integrate into process
Wayne: I was actually thinking about how the authoring tools make it easy or difficult to develop the process related to how it supports ATAG.
Shawn: I am still not seeing quite how it fits into this initial outreach for impleemntations.
Wayne: The turnkey people who set
up Wordpress or Drupal templates for you. They often introduce
templates that ignore the accessibility features, introducing
... when you procure a system, you may not even see all the features that were enabled by the toolmaker. Third party add ons etc may obscure the foundational ATAG conforming features.
Shawn: Now I think I understand what you are saying, it relates to major implementers who set up systems and templates as a service. How to approach it?
Shadi: The ATAG question would be "are the accessibility features on by default?" Not sure if that made it into the final, but it was a consideration.
Shawn: Wayne, aren't you talking about setting up the process for using the authoring tool?
Bim: Regarding implementations,
we had a process at RNIB, they used the engine at the back and
wrote an accessible interface that produced accessible output
and ensured that the authoring tool itself was
... the question is if the tool has an accessiiblity feature but it is obscured, whose responsibility is it?
Shawn: What can EO do?
Bim: Those who do custom implementations are also responsible to meet ATAG.
AnnaBelle: I imagine what I think
of as powerhouse authoring tool implementers, like Lullabot, a
monster Drupal implementer, critically important in the Drupal
... how do we do outreach to that type of person?
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say Implementing ATAG and to say http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/ATAG_review#Implementing_ATAG
Shawn: So there are two things.
First is focusing our message for this promotion. What do we
say to whom? Next is a document called "Implementing ATAG"
Sounds like lots of the ideas we have been discussing may fit
in that document. We have a wiki page where we collect
suggestions (maintained by ATAG-WG not us).
... we can suggest items and edits now that will not interrupt the development of ATAG itself. So think about how much of these thoughts should be included int he Implementing doc and how much in our own doc of Promoting.
Shadi: I agree that the Implementing doc is the place to go with some of this and the audience needs to be expanded so that we remember that the audience is not only the authoring tool makers but also those who customize. they need to be approached as well.
Shawn: To say what?
Shadi: To implement ATAG and to take responsibility.
Shawn: So the big powerhouse implementers and customizers should be asked to advocate within the ecossytem of the tools they customize as well as supporting the ATAG features.
Shadi: And even improving the features. And they have more insight into the code and tool mechanics. Could be effective advocates, important target group.
Wayne: And one reason I was thinging of going after those monster implementers - they are really big users and in the case of University systems, esp Northern California there is a group that uses particular authoring tools and LMSs and are involved in the evolution of those tools. Major influencers.
Shawn: Then it may become one of
our primary audiences, but must craft the message
... anybody can jump in. please take a bit of time to dump your ideas into the wiki. You can put unpolished, rough draft, brainstorm kind of thoughts.
Wayne: AnnaBelle: Send more ideas about those monster implementers that we should target
AnnaBelle: I will email you.
Shawn: TPAC is coming up and
everyone will be trying to publish by then. Would be useful to
tie promotion to that
... would make sense to wait to see what comes out of TPAC.
Wayne: In the meantime we can prepare, and move along with them
Shawn: Get everything all ready and then as soon as the next stage is published, we contact people and start the outreach campaign. Will be able to make announceements about looking for examples, etc. Messaging will be more coherant at that time.
Wayne: OK sharron you and I will meet next week.
Shawn: We decided not to meet Face to Face in China. Just was not working out for most people's travel. Instead, Helle suggested ICCHP (Paris in July) or CSUN (San Diego March)
Helle: It is European version of CSUN and you are always welcome in Copenhagen and I could host a meeting for ten or so.
Shawn: Any other thoughts about that?
Wayne: CSUN is good for me and if we have a group coming, it makes sense.
Annabelle: I was planning on it
Howard: me too
Wayne: If we pick a focused topic like we did last year, we could make good progress
Sharron: Wayne, didn't you have an in at UCSD?
Wayne: It's on the other side of town...a 20 minute drive or 35 in traffic
Jan: I am going to CSUN and will rent a van so I can help with transportation.
Shawn: We would often have a company that sponsored, like the London meeting at BBC, where they met and supplied food.
Wayne: One of the problems with the big software companies are in North San Diego. Not so many down near the hotel?
Shawn: Prefer to meet before or after CSUN?
Helle: I would prefer our F2F be after rather than before CSUN
<Howard> doesn't matter to me
Wayne: no preference
Sharron: no particular preference, what are the dates?
<shawn> March 17 to March 22, 2014
<Howard> scribe: Howard
Jan: assuming Pearson has an office but can check
Shawn: Let's take next 15 minutes to look back on what's there (in using BAD for teaching?)
Shawn: this is just to get a sense of what's been done so that we can recommend next steps to Wayne, Suzette & Howard
Jan: easy to follow; great idea
to do it this way
... assume we will have direct links to success criteria that are mentioned in the document
Wayne: if have success criteria, can then have links or directions on "how to meet"
Shawn: good point - to have it go to "how to meet" and not directly to WCAG
Jan: better to link to a "how-to" within the document
<shawn> "Using WCAG 2" Presentation http://www.w3.org/WAI/presentations/WCAG2_using/Overview.php
<shawn> The WCAG 2.0 Documents http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag20
Shawn: Wayne and Suzette - if
you can decide what you want to do for your next steps for
Teaching w\ Bad based on experience teaching with these
... you two can contact each other via skype or email and everyone else should take another look at "Teaching with BAD". Can put comments into the wiki.
... Wayne and Suzette please let us know if you will have specific questions or things for us to look at for next week. ...that's our time, don't forget to update your personal actions in the wiki, watch the Actions fro all on the EO Home page, and update availability. Thanks all!