In the process of doing the check on progress of individual action items, a question arose about the line between technical considerations and EO purview in commenting on the Understanding WCAG documents. Sylvie voiced concern that the wording of one of the Techniques for alt text may lead some to believe that standard alt is no longer needed if WAI-ARIA is used. Sylvie's concern is that this may leave out people in environments where WAI-ARIA is not fully supported and/or who are using old technology. Group response indicated this to be a shared concern. Shawn therefore asked participants to do two things: First, draft potential comments to share. Second, help each other to a thorough understanding of the issue through use cases and unshared group discussion. Pending these actions, Shawn and Sharron will consider suggestion for EOWG on commenting from EOWG perspective.
Next Shawn reminded the group that the Actions for All are meant to be reviewed by everyone each week. She had asked for specific comment on a number of issues and so far there had been no response. This led Sharron to introduce the topic of volunteer participation and to emphasize the fact that when an organization like the W3C depends on volunteer contribution it is extrememly important that volunteers (namely, all of us) take the commitment seriously. The work will only progress if we all stand by our commitment and take the time to actively participate and contribute.She asked the group to identify what were the barriers they experinced to full participation and how we might address them. Group discussion led to the resolution to move the Actions for all to the top of the wiki page. The expectiation now is that each participant will comment within their individual section on their disposition of each action item (as well as whatever they have taken on individually). Detail for suggested variation on types of responses within the minutes.
Additonal topics doscussed at today's meeting included the ongoing review of WCAG Techniques and Understanding documents; planning for the upcoming F2F at CSUN; and update of the Tutorials development schedule; a reminder that we will try to do Easy Checks Usability Testing at CSUN - please submit suggestions for that be submitted soon since Shawn's time gets filled up as CSUN gets closer; and a request for consideration of whether to link to the Gartner Report. Thanking everyone for their contribution to a very productive meeting, Adjourned.
Shawn: Andrew did some of his, Annabelle working on illustrations, Eric cranking away on tutorials and we'll talk about that more in a bit, Howard ?
Howard: I was looking at the training items, looking at integrating accessibilityinto courses, I will send to you in an email
Shawn: Sounds great, when can you do that?
Howard: Probably today...had sometrouble figuring out the common ground but have made progress and will send today
Shawn: Good, the increased interest in training, and offers of someone who wants to offer training through EO so we will consider
... And Paul, did you review the docuemnt?
Paul: Yes, I did
Shawn: Great, once we get Anthony's comments, we will go through them. Nit picky comments are fine for group consideration and we will bring those to the group when we get Anthony's comments too.
... and you had EasyChecks as well but that may be moot. The Indie UI intro looks like it is postponed until after CSUN but we don't want to hold that up.
... Sylvie: Did you want to review WCAG Techniques and Understanding, can you do that before Wednesday?
Sylvie: I had a look have no comments on the Understanding. Some of it was a bit technical but I am afraid that the change of how to provide image alternatives may leave some out.
... if ARIA replaces standard provision of alt text, what will happen?
<Andrew> +1 to Sylvie
Shawn: That comment should be made but by you as a person and bring any more general comments for group consideration.
Sylvie: Do not seem to be amny for EO
Shawn: It may be beyond our scope to comment on technical issues - our job is to be sure their information is communicated clearly - this one may be on the borderline.
Sylvie: I am afraid that from the outreach perspective that people will get a message that alt text is no longer needed but may not go the next step to the ARIA
... the issue is that if we say, we have a nice technique that makes alt text in HTML no longer necessary becasue of this new ARIA technique.
Sylvie: but the support for ARIA is not complete, or people use old tech that does not support and they may be excluded
Howard: Yes it does seem that way
<Jan> +1 - that is huge. Good call, Sylvie.
<Andrew> what the issue of 'accessibility supported'?
AnnaBelle: And the way it is handled in some CMS also makes it more problematic. Muddies the water unnecessarily. For people who don't have a good grasp, it may be even more murky.
Shawn: In order for us to comment, we must all review the Use cases and be able to have an informed understanding of the issue and what the actual recommendation is. So the question is do we have enough people to do that thorough review before commenting as a group
... I imagine it to be about a 2 hour review
AnnaBelle: I will
Howard: I would be willing to do that as well. Do you think it is clear from the way it is written now the alternatives are clear?
Shawn: I have not looked at, considering it out of scope.
Andrew: The other issue here of how widely it is supported.
... people may choose to take that route without an understanding of what is/is not accessibility supported
... it is an issue I come across often
Shawn: Are you willing and able to work on this?
Andrew: I could devote some time?
Paul: I will take a look at it, are there specific things to look at?
<Andrew> communication/education issue is probably awareness of the issues of accessibility supported if these techniques are promoted
Shawn: I will put the specifics on the wiki for review. I will ask people to do two things: First, let's draft potential comments Second let's have an area where we put thoughts among ourselves that we might not submit as comments. We need to help each other understand.
... for example, if we want to submit a comment, we need to demonstrate that we understand wWHY soem people hae suggested it
<shawn> 2. Add your thoughts on:
<shawn> Usability testing Easy Checks
<shawn> Situational terminology
<shawn> Linking to Gartner report in Business Case
Shawn: one was to put action, next was to comment on situational limitations
... as far as I know, no one did
Sharron: as co-chair it's been interesting to not only have to consider my own contribution and participation but to try to help Shawn encourage and nuture the participation of my colleagues. I have been thinking aobut what make the difference between getting good traction and participation - like AnnaBelle on the Easy checks illustrations and some other folks on Easy Checks vs those documents and projects where we seem to not be able to get the thing off the ground and to inspire dialogues and full participation. So I suggested to Shawn that we just bring that question to you all and get your input about what is your perspective.
... I had some side conversations with a few of you and got good input about what some barriers might be. One important aspect of our work is reviewing the documents of other WGs and that is not always the most engaging or can seem overwhelming. some people say EOWG process itself is challenging, e.g., coming to consensus. But the truth is that to be effective, we really must rely on each other to get through those. If in one given week, one or two people have things come up and can't do it, it is understandable, but if everyone is not able to, it begins to impact our work as a group.
...When nobody does it, it's really hard for EO to have the kind of impact that we are supposed to have in making sure that the documents of the other working groups are coherent and understandable
... so if each of us has committed to spend 4 hours per week on EO, in order to be a participate of the group we should perhaps think about how to monitor that.
... The Face to face meetings are always good impetus.
... in the next couple weeks I would ask that we all think about our participation and be ready to discuss what you expect from yourself and your colleagues
... what is it that would make your participation more meaning ful, possible, satisfying...
... it would be great if at this F2F meeting, we could have intractions that will get us back on track to where we can rely on each other, understand each other, meet our committment to EO and feel that satisfaction in making progress that we do when we complete somrthing like the Easy Checks.s
Shawn: feel free to come to Shawn &/or Sharron offline. And it would also be good to share your thoughts now
Sharron: As we think about recruiting new particiapants, which is good to do at CSUN, we need to have an effective group and Shawn and I as leaders need to understand what EO participants expect from participation.
Howard: y'all do good job. for me, looking at lots of existing docs, and how to fit into my work. I see lots of comments coming back, lots of work in figuring out how my work relates to it
... it is easier when the project unfolds sequentially and can keep up with it. other times, trying to pick up context for newly introduced docs is challenging. getting to the starting point on what we're doing with it can take more time that expected.
...I had to review so many documents just to get up to speed, comments make it necessary to review docs again. Getting to ther place up understanding the perspective that EO brings to doc review
Shawn:at least 4 hours per week including call -- so 2 hours outside of the call
Howard: When you get behind, between the meeting and the minute review you can easily use all the time in review
Shawn: I understand that the non-sequential aspect of the work can be challenging
<Andrew> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/participation#participant - Effective participation to Education and Outreach Working Group is expected to consume at least 4 hours per week for each participant
Howard:I don't necessarily have a solution or even am saying that it should be changed, just describing as a challenge
Andrew:From charter: Effective participation to Education and Outreach Working Group is expected to consume at least 4 hours per week for each participant; one day per week for editors. Right now we seem to have a bunch of different bits of work, can't predict time commitment. Sometimes I look at all the open items and just think, "well, I can't do all that" By the time you read several different things trying to decide where you could comment that would be a real contribution, you have used up all the time.
Shawn: That's a good point that if you read through and have no comment, is there a way to let us know that you havedone so? Maybe just say ...I read and have no comment to make. use the wiki perhaps to say, I looked at it and have no comments at that time...would that make sense?
<HelleBJ> good idea
<Shawn: Any objections or concerns with that?
<Howard:So we just put I reviewed the document and have no comment at this time?
<Sylvie:And if you did not have time to review shall we write it as well?
Sharron: but if the point is to have feedback, maybe a log that shows how you spent your volunteer hours
<Andrew> at least that way the chair knows if people have read things and we can have a useful discussion
Paul: Don't the action items fulfill that role?
Shawn: I had hoped so but it doesn't seem to be working that way.
Paul: I like the idea of a volunteer log
<Andrew> -1 to volunteer log due to extra work of completing it
AnnaBelle: I actually have been looking at my actions, the one that is open is completely out of date. So if we can make the volunteer log align with the actions list that may make it work better
<shawn> +1 to working with actions list & volunteer log together
Andrew: Then you must track what you do, log it and that makes extra work that would take time away from the real work we are doing.
Helle: I completely agree with Andrew on that. I have a system at work now where I must log every 15 minutes and it takes time. I think if we integrate with action item list, it would be more effective.
Helle: When we finish a document, we must accept it. There is a third possibility that says I am not going to comment or participate in this document.
... can't we do that in the short term items in the wiki
Shawn: There is more to be done than everyone can all do together. It will be OK to recuse yourself from one set of documents or such, with the understanding that sometimes you may have to take on things that are of less interest. But it is great to be very out front about what you ARE interested in.
Paul: I was thinking the volunteer log would be just a bit of an enhanced version of the short term actions. And, related to the individual commitments, is there a way to make a profile list on the wiki, telling each other more about ourselves and what we are interested in?
Andrew: Maybe put a short sentence about interests in the action item list
Paul: Or a list of what we are currently working on
... for example when we do the intro emails, over time that info gets lost and becomes an historical document.
Shawn: We could do that in conjunction with upcoming work
<shawn> AnnaBelle: +1 to Paul's idea
<shawn> Sharron: maybe do it on the action list
<AnnaBelle> +1 to Sharron's amendment
<shawn> ... enchancing what's alreayd there
Sharron: I think we could incorporate these ideas in the existing short term action list
Eric: If there is not a central list of open issues, it is hard to keep track fo the particular items. What helps me is an issue tracker
<shawn> outdated issue tracker ofr EOWG: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/track/actions/open?sort=owner
Eric: I like to have my tasks very clearly defined and assigned. Allowing some type of feedback is useful but adds a bit of complexity to the task list.
Paul in my experience, trackers are great for software projects and loved by software engineers...not so much casual users
Shawn: We have used the issue tracker and action tracker but it didn't really work.
Sharron: People did not interact with it.
AnnaBelle: I did not use it because I did not understand it
Eric: Yes it is not especially user friendly but there are some that are more so.
Shawn: Sounds like there are ideas for enhancing some of what we are already doing, have it all in one place, a way to indicate that you have read/reviewed and have no comments...what else?
AnnaBelle: A barrier for me is that I just don't feel THAT much of an expert on some of these things. I hold back becasue of a level of discomfort. I don't want to put opinions unless I really know what I am talking about.
Shawn: So maybe one of the ways to respond to some topics is to simply say "This is not my area of expertise." On the Actions for All, I try to separate into - these are the things everyone needs to do this week. Would those be useful to put on the short term wiki page?
Howard: You mean to add them to everyone's list?
Shawn: Don't mean to add into each individual one, but put the action for all at the top so everyone could respond there.
<AnnaBelle> +1 to Actions for all at top to Actions Items page
<Andrew> +1 to putting the weeks actions for all into the short-term actions wiki
Shawn: Any concerns with that? I like it cause then I know where people are
<Sylvie> +1 for actions at the top and link from eowg page to the wiki where you can respond to actions for all.
Andrew: And that way you would know that there were comments that went into the appropriate wiki and be able to start the discussion and we will have a feel for how many have read it.
<Sylvie> maybe in the first weeks write a reminder by email to all
Shawn: This has been a very useful discussion. In summary, we will put the action for all at the top of the Action Item page of the wiki and each person, in their respective sections will respond with how they addressed each the action. You might say...I read it and have no comment; or I did not have a chance to read it this week; or I do not feel like I have the expertise to comment on this subject, etc. So there is not an expectation that everyoone will do everything, but will let the group know where you are on all projects. I would also encourage everyone to please use this as a starter conversation. We'll try this method out and I hope everyone will feel welcome to share with the group or with us individually what other ideas or concerns you may have as we use this way to communicate where we are with the various reviews and projects.
AnnaBelle: Sometimes the wiki itself is not the best place to do the work. happy to hearthat we will be using github more often...
Sharron: I agree that these were good ideas, I like what has come out of it.
Shawn: I will put the issues on a wiki page and send out a call for comments...any other comments on that?
Shawn: Background is that there are few places where we use the phrases situational limitations, situational disability. My preference is for situational limitation and wanted to get your perspective
<Andrew> other terms: situational impairment & environmental impairment
Shawn: can we discuss here and then bring comments to wiki
<shawn> Thoughts about "situational disability" as opposed to something like "situational limitation" or _???_ to refer to people (particularly people without disabilities) in situations that limit their ability to hear, see, use their hands, concentrate, understand instructions, etc.- including device limitations and environmental limitations.
Paul:I don't see the problem with the term situational. For example, my son broke his arm a couple weeks ago, which has prevented him from doing certain things temporarily
<Howard> I'm good
<shawn> = temporary disability
Paul: yes I don't see the problem with the term situational
<Sylvie> In French we call this temporary disability
Shawn: Yes there seems to be agreement about situational but more about the question of disability or limitation
<Sylvie> Don't understand the issue as many WAI documents talk about people with disabilities, but I seldom read people with physical limitations.
Howard: I am teaching a class on universal design for the web...I will use the term disability to communicate the idea that we all fall somewhere on the spectrum
Sharron: Does it have to be one or the other?
<Andrew> andrew: there are two different types on non-permanent/non-ongoing situations - one that is by choice when you try and use you technolgy in a non-ideal situation like in the car or in the pub or in the sunshine
Howard: In a written document, "situational disability" could be a problem, but when making a point in a presentation, it might be appropriate. In a document, "situational limitation" might be more appropriate.
<Andrew> andrew: the other is a temporary medical condition like a broken arm or an eye infection - this is disability, but a temporary one that you will recover from
Jan: Maybe we should step back and define what a disability is?
<shawn> [ Shawn on perspective of disabilities... ]
<Andrew> +1 to shawn too
Jan: Not sure that if you use the term situational disability that it will make people more sensitive. I think the awareness issue is broader
<shawn> ... even a broken arm is temp. disability is something people have to live with everyday
Jan:Yes I agree that we should protect the term "disability" for what it truely means
Howard: Universal Design is not just for one segment of the population. When people try to convey the idea that there are broad benefits, these terms are being used out there. The term "situational disability" is being used in the literature.
Shawn: There are times, when it is "carefully used" in speaking, where it can be used effectively.
... Some people may not be aware of some of the negative effects of using it.
AnnaBelle: Can we discuss this at our face-to-face? It's an important topic.
Shawn: It would be good for us to organize our thoughts.
... RDWG is the only place in the W3C where this term is being used.
... We might be able to come up with a term of what we can use in the W3C reports, but we may not be able to ask other people outside of the W3C to use a particular term.
AnnaBelle: We can make sure that we are modeling terminology that we think should be used.
Shawn: We can point to the minutes from the Wiki page, but it might be helpful for people to put comments in the wiki.
... Howard will put comments in the Wiki.
Jan: Yes - I will comment in the wiki too.
Shawn: We might come up with a proposal that for WAI documents and writing, we don't use the term, "situational disabilities."
Shawn: We want to craft the agenda to take advantage of who is going to be at the meeting and when they are going to be there.
... Implementation Guidance - from the WAI Act Project
... There is a lot of history with this, so we will determine how to effectively work on this and get it completed this year.
... We will work on this topic on Sunday.
... Eric is working on the tutorials, so we are hoping to have concrete stuff to work from on the tutorials for Monday and Tuesday.
... Easy check review on Tuesday
... Training resources are kind of vague right now, but we might have more concrete stuff at f2f meeting that we can discuss.
... AnnaBelle had recommended that we might also want to talk about situational disability terminology at the f2f.
Annabelle: I would like to be able to talk about what we would most like to be doing. What makes us tick and what helps us throw our energy into this work?
Shawn: With the f2f, we will have some active participants who cannot be there.
Howard: I should be there by Tuesday morning ... hopefully 10:00.
Shawn: We still have a few more weeks to plan, so if you have more thoughts on the agenda, just bring them up so that we can refine what we are working on.
Shawn: Eric is working on tutorials. We are not going to jump into this today, but this will be a primary focus in the next few months.
...: Eric is finalizing the interface mark up
... Bim led us in drafting the content for some tutorials. Eric is putting this on github.
... Images tutorial that Bim has mostly completed is important for us to finalize soon - especially in light of everything that is going on with images. Preferrably before CSUN
... The plan is for us to have one meeting to look at the changes on the images tutorial and then finalize it. Feel free to look at the old version of the images tutorial to familiarize yourself with it if you have not looked at it yet.
Shawn: Hopefully Eric will have the UI for us by Wednesday next week. Please look at that on Wednesday or Thursday so that we can discuss it next week.
... Andrew made a comment about github. We will probably schedule a separate session on github. We could do a bit on github at the f2f because most US people will be at the f2f and then we will have another session that works better for European time zones. Thoughts?
... Paul put in a primer on that.
Shawn: AnnaBelle and Andrew have been working on illustrations.
AnnaBelle: Vicky has been helpful and I hope to use her more.
Shawn: So far there haven't been any questions. For the most part, these will just be shared as an FYI.
Shawn: We are planning some big announcements about publications before CSUN. The sooner we can get some of these things done the better, because my time will be limited as we get closer to CSUN.
Shawn: This is not time sensitive, but we need to look at this to see if we want to add this to the business case.
<Howard> Shawn, do you want to stay on the line for talk about training resources?
Shawn: Thank you Sharron for bringing up the topic for how we can work together more effectively. Thanks to everyone for your work.
EO Action Items[End of minutes]