W3C

- MINUTES -

Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference

06 Dec 2013

Summary

Shadi was called into another meeting, so the agenda was reshuffled. Action item review moved to first place in the order of discussion. Once those were addressed, we looked at the requirements, guidelines, and requests for ATAG outreach, and UAAG and WCAG-EM review. Most has not gotten to those yet. Ater a brief set of instruction from Andrew, the group adjurned to work on UAAG review and agreed to reconvent at the hour that Derek agreed to join the discussion on illustration. That conversation convened and Shadi rejoined along with the others. Derek complemented AnnaBelle on good work and proposed an alternative way to think about the illustrations. Despite the wish for responsive desing in principle, the fact is that in most cases you do NOT want the illustrations to shrink since the test and other aspects become hard to read and use. Instead, Derek suggested scripting techniques that would remove the illustration from the page context and display it as an optional element that retained its visual aspects. Shadi and AnnaBelle will confer with Shawn and talk again on Wednesday. The meeting adjourned with the reminder to update individual actions in the wiki and add comments to UAAG and take the WCAG-EM survey.

Agenda

  1. WCAG-EM review (e-mail) - reminder to put urgent issues before publication in survey and can put other issues for EOWG discussion in wiki (Shadi)
  2. (if needed) Easy Checks illustrations (Sharron)
  3. (if needed) UAAG review - discuss open issues (Sharron)
  4. (if updated) Eval Tools Database rejig - review updated User Stories (to be updated) (Shadi)
  5. Guidance on the development and assessment of web accessibility evaluation tools - introduce EOWG pre-publication review (Shadi)
  6. ATAG promotion (Sharron)
  7. Action items, short term in wiki - review status of all (Sharron)

Attendees

Present
Sharron, Howard, Bim, Sylvie, Anthony, PaulSchantz, Andrew, Jan, Shadi, AnnaBelle, Derek Featherstone
Regrets
Wayne, Denis, Shawn, Vicki, Helle
Chair
Shadi
Scribe
Sharron

Contents


Agenda shuffle

Sharron: Since we have a guest attendee today who an attend only at 10am ET, we will change the order of the items for discussion and we may not get to the ATAG review. Derek Featherstone will attend to comment on our current problems with reponsive vs accessible in the Illustrations for the Easy Checks.
... so we will start with the action item check and I will ping Jeanne to see if she can join earlier.

Action Item review

http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Action_Items

Andrew: I have had exchange with Jim Allan about mouse vs keyboard actions, put link in action items wiki. I Would be interested in others following the link to see if there is agreement about the coverage a Jim suggested.

Howard: I did a webinar with Kathy Wahlbin for GSA, showed the audience the Easy Checks and BAD and how to use those
... the response was great - good feedback on webinar and liked the specific examples of good practice. Attendees found it a very useful.

<Andrew> Anna Belle's blog post on 'Five Fundamentals of Accessible Responsive Web Design' - http://www.happywebdiva.com/2013/12/03/accessible-responsive-web-design/

Jan: Not yet seen that but am interested

Andrew: ATAG outreach: Someone from Drupal executive board attended OZeWAI and was very interested in participating. She would be a good one to follow up to coordinate with Drupal folks

Sharron: Mike Gifford as well

Jan: My action items are complete and I will change the wiki

<Andrew> Drupal's commitment - post on IDPWD: https://association.drupal.org/node/18898

UAAG review

http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/UAAG_review

Sharron: Has anyone reviewed the latest UAAG draft?

All: No

Sharron: I know it is hard to review the technical spec, but we need to do it and get on the record the fact that we have looked at it even if there are no changes
... the idea is that the working group needs input, and feedback from outside their small set of inputs so far.

Andrew: Specifically we don't need to comment on whether they are technically correct. Rather we are looking for the approach. Think about what are they trying to do? Is it clear? How well are they succeeeding? Is the relationship clear between UAAG and the other WAI guidelines,. etc So don't be intimidated by the technical nature of the document, we are looking more for clarity of purpose nd overall organization and orientation to the document.

Sharron: Would anyone volunteer to do that?

Howard: I will do so

Andrew: Me too

Sharron:Thanks Howard, thanks Andrew, that's terrific!

ATAG outreach

Sharron: Does anyone have any updates to share?

Howard: Mike Gifford was going to come to AHG but did not make it. I could reach out to Joe Dolan at Wordpress

Paul: I have seen Joe speak, he's great

Sharron: Maybe we could get the competition going between WP and Drupal

Howard: What would I say to him about what we are asking for?

Sharron: My understanding is that the purpose is to ask toolmakers at this point to look at the Guidelines and demonstrate that they can be implemented

Andrew: Make it clear when you talk to them they do not need to implement all of Part A and all of Part B but what we really want is that you have been able to implement a variety of pieces of it.

Sharron: I aksed Bim to see if she could chase Shadi out of hiding and get him to join us.Shadi

Bim: No response from Shadi

WCAG-EM comment

Sharron: We have been asked to complete the survey on the WCAG-EM to get on the record the fact that we have read it - you may remember that we reviewed it in some detail a few weeks ago. It is now ready for another round of comment or acceptance.

<Andrew> check the W3C process summary at http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/w3c-process re ATAG in candidate recommendation phase

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/WCAG-EM-20131129/

Sharron: Should we take the survey now or do it on our own time?

All: Would rather do it on our own

Sharron: Since no one is here to lead the discussion of the other agenda items, I suggest we temporarily adjourn, do the WCAG-EM review and reconvene for the scheduled discussion of the EasyChecks Illustrations. Adjourned until 10:00 am Eastern time (about an hour from now. Thanks all.

Easy Checks Illustrations (responsive and accessible)

<AnnaBelle> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Easy_Checks_-_Illustrations

Sharron: Thanks everyone for coming back for this consideration of the EasyChecks Illustrations. We have AnnaBele to lead and Derek Featherstone as a guest to help us think about the responsive vs accessibility requirements of the illustrations. Can we go around and introduce?

All: introduce selves to Derek

AnnaBelle: Did you have a good understanding, Derek from what I sent about the barriers we have encountered?

Derek: I looked at the pages and the background of how to use responsive design techniques needs while maintaining good accessibility.

AnnaBelle: We had been proceeding well and were about ready to wrap until I looked at it on the iPhone and things went haywire. Adding a Viewport made things worse in my opinion.
... I don't know how to make this clear without confusion so let me know if anything is not clear.
... I thought perhaps we should not even try to be responsive at this point becasue of putting it into a non-responsive site.
... that would mean that the illustrations will not render well, the multiple ones are the greatest issue. Do you have them pulled up?

Derek: Yes version 9 screen shot

<AnnaBelle> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/checks#illustrationeg1

AnnaBelle: If this were a true responsive site, the width would shrink and multiple images would stack and shrink. That works fine in theory but what happens on mobile is that the widest image determines what everything else looks like.
... is it best to accept that we can't do responsive here?
... From some research it seems that people would not do EasyChecks from a mobile but if they happened on it, they would actually use it on a desktop. I'd like people's response to that.
... after watching Wayne do testing with zoom
... when we were working on the illustrations before, I got feedback from them that I integrated. The zoom type stuff might break with viewport meta tags.. Thoughts?

Derek: The thing that I would do is review some of the previously done good work around responsive. I would probably approach the problem a different way. While the screen shots are useful, you want to understand that screen shots need to be treated in their native size; allow the layout to remain responsive but rather than squishing the image...allow the mechanism to send off to a script to see it in its full glory

Paul: I agree, often when images are squished down in responsive layouts, the text in them becomes too small to read

Derek: in this case, I would keep the overall image as responsive but not treat the images responsive in a traditional way

AnnaBelle: That is a real shift. So the images themselves need to show in their native size?
... maybe you would not even show the image on a mobile..instead link to the desktop image. So it requires a fundamental rethinking of our approach

Derek: When you have images like this that form a significant part of your content, there is a limited amount of transformation that you even WANT to have occur. We want these images to retain native sizes, native aspect, etc. They are illustrating the points so fuundamentally and so you do not want them to be trnasformed. Similar to numbering in legal docs, don't allow those to be changed.

AnnaBelle: I need to consider this

Derek: We would be likely to keep these images and when the veiwport width is less than the image then we would use JS to detect that and include another call to action that allows us to then view it and put the image in a place that allows it to be displayed in its native format along with an easy way to get back.

AnnaBelle: These are great ideas.

Paul: I think that makes alot of sense as well. I had a similar issue with a clinet who needed to be able to print so we had to have the print view that was not transformed.
... the alternative makes sense. In our case, we have a screen shots that includes text and things that in themselves are examples of zoomed text and others that must retain size and aspect ratio to be meaningful
... so I agree with this idea and this is actually an implementation detail, in my opinion

Sharron:Shadi, do you have comment on this approach?

Shadi: No nothing immediate, no downside that I can think of but I would want to check with Shawn. We have a number of resources that have more and less detailed information. We are learning quite a bit about the ways to manage this

AnnaBelle: Derek, can I check back in with you in a week or so?

Derek: Sure that is not a problem, I am happy to help out.

AnnaBelle: Do you want to meet again on Wednesday the 12th 7:30 Eastern?

Paul: I can do it.

Sharron:Thanks everyone. Thanks Derek for the visit, much appreciated! Don't forget to update individual actions, take the survey, make UAAG comments and/or sign-off and have a good weekend.

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013-12-11 13:15:53 $