See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 14 March 2014
<Sharron> Scribe: Sharron
<shawn> cover page http://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/
<shawn> feedback in wiki: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Tutorials#Feedback_12.2B_March
Shawn: Refresh your agenda, the
page has been moved. We are planning to announce on Monday and
want this cover page to be ready so let's look at it. We can
still change it if needed, but want oit to be clear on
... feedback in wiki
<Andrew> I notice typo in opening para - "usefull" instead of "useful"
<AnnaBelle> +1 to Sharron's edit of final paragraph
Shawn: first comment was addressed by Eric before getting on the plane.
<Andrew> could we just have [Status - This is an in-progress, unapproved draft.] at the top?
Wayne: Can we remove the "draft jargon from the top and put it at the bottom...it seems unfriendly.
<Andrew> and the second sentence repeats the bit in the box at the bottom already
Shawn: I think it is important since this version is still a very rough draft and is not approved by EO
Wayne: I understand but think it is just unfriendly
<shawn> Sharron: last week I was agaginst even announcing it because it was such a tentative state. need to be clear that it's a work in progress. can work on wording so not unfriendly. but so much of it we haven't even reviewed. it's gonna get a lot of attention
<shadi> +1 to sharron
Sharron: In general I agree, but in this case it is in such a rough draft that I don't think we should risk any misunderstanding
Andrew: What if we leave only the first sentence, this is an in-progress unapproved draft.
AnnaBelle: Or something even more brief, leave the word DRAFT at the top with an asterisk leading to the detail at the bottom. The green color is eye-catching to me.
Andrew: Do we need to include the term"unapproved draft" as well as "DRAFT"
Shawn: Yes, it may be splitting
hairs but there are different kinds of Drafts, "WG Draft"
"Editor's Draft" etc and many do not know what it means.
Nevertheless I think we need to make clear that this is not an
... how do people feel about Andrew's suggestion to leave only the first sentence and move the rest to teh bottom and tweak?
<Wayne> +1 andrew
<shawn> +1 to andrew's suggest
Wayne: I like annabelle's suggestion and if we could move the whole status down. But I understand now why we were so tentative about it.
RESOLUTION: Remove second sentence from status declaration and make the word Status in the same font as the rest.
Shawn: Another question was do we think project managers are the primary audience and should be named first?
Sharron: Who would you name first?
Shawn: Developers...and what is the difference between authors and developers?
Andrew: Authors may use authoring tools to write content; developers do technical development.
<AnnaBelle> +1 to Shawn's suggested reordering
Shawn: Should we make that distinction? Seems to me we should talk about developers, designers (who are not mentioned here) and put authors later on and PMs last.
Andrew: Maybe authors will need to use the CMS tools properly for tables
Sharron: and image content
Shawn: and what does it mean to frame content
Shawn: so do we want to move PMs lower in the sentence?
Shawn: and do we want to add designers?
<shawn> s/ move PNs lower/ move Project Managers lower/
Shadi: Developers are the main target audience. Adding designers makes it clear that these are our main target sudiences. Add a qualifying statement to the "authors" to disambiguate that they may not look at code but will benefit from the principles. Include the others as secondary audinces
Shawn: Do we want to remove PMs altogether?
Wayne: Absolutely not, they are the ones who make the changes
Shadi: I agree with Wayne, they need to understand the princliples and ideas
Sharron: +1 Wayne, Shadi keep PMs as an audience
Shadi: Maybe a rewording to make it clear that some folks need the technical detail and others like PMs and authors need to understand comcepts and principles
<shawn> suggested wroding ->> PMs: get basic understanding of the concepts and principles
<AnnaBelle> I think Web Designers need to be added right under Web Developers
Sharron: Maybe make it two sentences or clauses, one for technical skills and others for principles
<shawn> suugested wording for authors ->> maybe non-technical content authors
Shadi: non technical content authors can learn concepts and principles/ requirements, that they need to create accessible content
<shawn> authors - change "frame"
Shadi: maybe add the suggestion of CMS
<Andrew> Authors will learn how to frame their content in an accessible way >> Content Authors will learn the concepts for preparing their content in an accessible way
Shawn: What about content writers
<shadi> +1 to andrew
<shawn> +1 to andrew's suggestion
Andrew: change "Authors will learn how to frame their content in an accessible way" to "Content authors will learn the concepts for preparing their content in an accessible way"
<Jan> +1 designers separate bullet
AnnaBelle: I feel strongly that Web Designers should be mentioned separately and included. If I were a designer and heard web developers and designers, I would assume it was another instance where they did not know the difference and I would leave the tutorials site..
<Wayne> designers +1
<shawn> +1 for separate bullet for designers
Shadi: I think AB's explanation was good and I am convinced, but it will be difficult to find different language to describe what designers will get.
<shawn> Anna Belle will provide wording for the designer bullet
AnnaBelle: I disagree, but can't come up with it right now. Will work on it.
Shawn: Second paragraph...is it
... how important is that?
... in Easy Checks the disclaimer was vital, is that true here?
<shawn> can simplify "This collection of tutorials" to "These tutorials"
Andrew: I don't think there is much danger of people believing this is complete coverage
<shawn> change "readers" in "It is usefull to a variety of readers including"
Shadi: There were 2 points: Tutorials do not cover all WCAG requirements. Second in each turtorial, like the images, there are lots of good examples, but does not cover every situation or instance. There will always be missing information.
Shawn: Why is that important to say?
Shadi: So that people do not think they have learned everything about it by taking the tutorial
'...at the end of the day they will still need to know how to meet WCAG and this will not give them complete information for that.
<Andrew> s/ '...at the/ ... at the/
Wayne: If that is the main point, take the exhaustive comment away and make it more positive.
<shadi> "These tutorials help you learn WCAG 2.0 ... but you still have to learn it :p"
Shawn: What if we mention the basics in advance and then get to what we think is the main point of WCAG understanding
<shadi> [[please avoid "basics"]]
Shawn: like "these tutorials cover the basics and some advanced aspects. They are a good starting point for learning and addressing WCAG. You will still want to use WCAG directly to ensure that you meet the requirements
<shawn> starting point for...
Shadi: We are working hard to include advanced techniques and would like attention from those who may understand the basics already and will benefit from learning from these.
Shawn: if we avoid basics, how is the approach in general?
Shawn: What about the call for contributions that is on the bottom of each page?
AnnaBelle: Is it OK that we use the GitHub icon?
<Howard> I didn't recognize it either
Andrew: Oh, is that what that is, I thought someone was just being cute
<shawn> deleted from top: "Please send any suggestions, edits, or comments to the publicly-archived list: email@example.com."
Shawn: The sentence we deleted
from teh top was [above]
... it feels a bit too specific and could be confusing. Maybe just use the sentence removed from the top
Shadi: It was taken from the boilerplate that we used in the Images tutorial where we were seeking an ARIA example. It should be more general overall, more generic.
<shawn> Call for Contributions box - on main page, make more generic. probably use text moved from the top
Andrew: send suggestions, edits or comments is pretty generic
Shawn: OK, anything else?
Shawn: what about the More On the Way page?
<shawn> More on the way page
<shawn> not link to our wiki pages
Shawn: I don'
t think we want to link to the wiki pages
Andrew: Don't think we want to draw public attention to it
Shawn: I agree
Shadi: But there is a lot of what we are thinking about and it might help people who are interested in what's under the hood.
Shawn: We have a table with current issues, what if we move that to a public page and point to that so they don't get the jumble of past comments etc
Shadi: That will be OK but I would encourage people to contribute so that we have ideas even after WAI ACT comes to an end?
RESOLUTION: Create wiki page intended for external interaction which includes Eric's table and some context?
<Andrew> whatabout putting it in WAI-engage?
Sharron: Will that be on the EO wiki or the WAI-Engage wiki?
Andrew: I wondered that as well.
Shawn: Shadi any thoughts or reactions to that?
<shawn> Call for Contributions box opn this page would be a little different, too
Shawn: call for contributions will be different here as well
Shadi: I am kind of thinking of what is the benefit of using WAI-Engage?
Shawn: It allows people to add comments directly
Shadi: But it needs a bit more curation in my veiw to encourage volunteers. I am not entirely sure about pros and cons and will think about it
Shawn: On Sunday we will choose the next three to work on and can list that on this page
Shadi> Yes agreed that would be a good thing to publish in the wiki
<shawn> List on this page the ones that we're working on -- which we'll chose on Sunday
Shawn: On tables we have Editor's
draft, not ready to reveiw. Not sure we need to confuse the
issue with the difference between draft categories
... I propose not to use the term Editor's Draft, that we make "Not ready for review" more clear, and ...
<shawn> AA suggest: This is an in-progress, unapproved draft not yet ready for review.
Andrew: If it is not ready for review we don't want comments, suggestions, etc. You can't have it both ways, they are contradictory
<shawn> Call for Contributions box should be different for the pages that are not yet ready for review.
<Andrew> saying it "is not yet ready for review" means we should not call for comments at this stage
<shawn> [ don't like draft as an image in the h1 ]
Howard: The outline of the paragraph etc does suggest that this is a much more rough draft, it came across clearly
Shawn: The call for contributions must therefore be different on those pages not ready for review
Andrew: Yes, "draft" in the heading MUST be changed from image to text
Shawn: So what we are thinking for the announcement to address some discomforts
<shawn> Web Accessibility Tutorials in Progress
<shawn> Dear WAI Interest Group Participants,
<shawn> WAI invites you to provide input into our new Web Accessibility Tutorials at:
<shawn> We have a *draft framework* in place and welcome feedback on the navigation, visual design, etc.
<shawn> The *Images tutorial* starting at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/> is fairly complete and we welcome detailed feedback on the content. Specifically, we would like input on the use of the WAI-ARIA attributes aria-label and aria-labelledBy for images.
<shawn> The *other draft tutorials* there (Tables, Forms, Sliders/ Carousel) are still rough, so you probably want to hold off on doing a detailed review.
<shawn> Over the next few months, we'll be developing additional tutorials covering basic and advanced topics.
<shawn> Please send any input to the publicly-archived mailing list:
<shawn> or you can contibute directly via Github:
<shawn> *For those at CSUN*, let's talk tutorials at:
<shawn> The WAI to Web Accessibility: Education & Outreach Update 2014
<shawn> Thursday 4:20pm
<shawn> Gaslamp B, 2nd Floor, Seaport Tower
<shawn> If you might be interested in actively contributing to the development of these tutorials as a participant in WAI's Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG), please read Participating in WAI at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/participation> and Participating in the EOWG at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/participation>, then contact Shawn Henry <http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/>.
<Andrew> images - disappointing to note that the complex image (graph) relies on colour alone :(
<shadi> uh, that should not be
Shawn: If this is adequately communicating that this is a work in progress, please provide that feedback, esp Andrew and Sharron who had those concerns. Make sure if you have changes to suggest, you send to wiki and WAI editors list
Howard: I think this is a very good way to communicate status, well done!
<shadi> andrew - why does it rely on color alone? the bars have labels beneath
Sharron: Do you need to approve the card before printing?
Shawn: It would be nice to look at it.
Shawn: so we will ahve buttons and cards, but are working on the elevator pitch
<Andrew> 250 buttons - excellent!
<Andrew> what size/diameter?
Jeanne: When people are looking for conversation starters, Ask Me About ATAG it will be a natural.
Shawn: And so if you have the button and someone asks you, what do you say?
Jeanne: Suggest to start with
"Have you heard of WCAG - the Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines?" to make sure thay have even that much
... the key point to get across is that ATAG enables web authors with disabilities to use tools and makes the tools more able to create accessible content
Shawn: AND do you want to submit impleemtnation or test?
Sharron: I agree with Jeanne that people need to make the points their own
Shawn: Even when I mentioned it at the WAI staff meeting, people asked for a link to the elevator pitch. So we do need to have a clear message that people can adapt as their own
Wayne: So maybe we need just a bullet list so advocates know what to cover.
<shadi> [[would like main points about the status and what kind of feedback/contribution AUWG wants]]
<shawn> when tools help with accessibility, it saves millions of developers work -- it's more efficient and effective for for the few 100(1,000?) tools to help with accessibility in order to lift some of the burden off the millions on content providers
Wayne: like it makes it easier to make accessible content if the tools are ATAG conforming
Jeanne: It helps you write more
accessible pages without having to be an accessibility
... which will save $$
... avoid retraining, retrofit, etc
<Jan> How about using the term automate in some way?
Wayne: From the POV of developers, it will save time
Shawn: Makes accessibility easier and faster
<Jan> ATAG helps automate the development of accessible content ...
<Jan> ATAG helps authoring tools automate the development of accessible content....
Shadi: ATAG doesn't really do any
of this, the tools do. There is an indirection going on there.
And if I am sold on it, what next?
... what is the call to action?
... how can they help?
Jeanne: Ask for ATAG in your authoring tool vendors
Shawn: When I mentioned adding that to the messaging, y'all said that you did not want to broaden the message
Jeanne: And that is true, it is not ready yet, but it is a background message for the general audience.
Sharron: So when you are talking to folks who are not testers, implementers, tell them to ask for ATAG the next time they consider an authoring tool
Shawn: What did we call the big implementers?
AnnaBelle: Influencers? Integrators
Shadi: So what if I am an implementor, what do you want me to do?
Jeanne: Test, we are not looking for feedback, we want validation
<Howard> that's an important point - regarding testing tools. I hadn't realized that.
Shadi: Are there criterion that are well covered and others that you need people for?
Jeanne: I have no testers for anything and those who are good WCAG testers will be able to do that.
<shawn> refresh: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Outreach_for_ATAG_2.0#CSUN
Shadi: Then we are likely to find many of those at CSUN and to communicate that (if you know how to test for WCAG, you can do this) is important.
Wayne: And I was looking at the audience list and I thought about those who use LMS, CMS could check to see if those systems turn out accessible end products.
Shawn: Refresh the wiki
<Howard> scribe: Howard
<Andrew> wonders if we want any tool tested, or have we had tools volunteered that claim to be implement (at least part) of ATAG 2.0
<Wayne> asks Jan can we speak today?
Jean: we have about 15 tools claiming to implement ATAG
Andrew: that's the tools we want tested?
Jean: can send those with
questions to my talk Thurs at 12:00
... or can catch me after the talk or at the bar, tweet-ups, etc.
<Andrew> * Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines for your accessible web - Jeanne Spellman - Thursday 12:00 noon Balboa A
Jean: do not say that ATAG
prompts you for accessibility - agreed that this is terrible
way to do accessibility
... ATAG focuses on the unique parts of accessibility for authoring tools
... for example, the editing view - how do you identify and manipulate movies when they aren't identified on the page.
Jan: requests meeting between Jean & her senior developer - see about meeting part b.
<jeanne> If you want to arrange meetings with me, my email is firstname.lastname@example.org
Shawn: asks Jeanne if she plans to make the meeting on Tuesday
Jeanne: depends on how her flight goes
<shawn> refresh: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Outreach_for_ATAG_2.0#CSUN
Shawn: any news on the brunch
Wayne: there's a Mediterranean place
Shawn: will talk after the call about the brunch
<shawn> EOWG meeting time 28 March: Note different time (one hour earlier?) in several non-US locations
Shawn: reminder: not meeting next week
Shawn: on the bottom of the page
is the logistics for the meeting
... on Sunday afternoon, start talking about implementation guidance
... Shadi will walk us through that
... in afternoon will work on tutorials planning, then work on dev'l topics planning table, what next topics should be
... on Monday, 2 different breakouts - one on tutorials, 2nd will be from list of potential topics (see bottom of page)
... Tues - may continue in the breakouts or get back together as a group and discuss what came up in the breakouts
... in the afternoon, Eric will cover using GitHub ... then reminder on ATAG promotion. See the url above for more details.
AnnaBelle: wondering about usability testing - can we get images moved over before the testing?
Shawn: will try to get that done
in the next few days.
... Asks AnnaBelle if she has any availability for this.
AnnaBelle: maybe on Monday
Shawn: will figure out a way to
get it done (moving the images)
... We have a list of other potential topics for the breakout
... one group working on tutorials and other on one or more of the potential topics listed
Howard: asked about talking about EO participation at AHG 2014
Shawn: would be time in morning
but Howard won't be there any mornings; will find some other
time to bring up.
... on Sunday, we'll talk about which widgets we want to do
AnnaBelle: about a year ago talked about doing easy checks for dev'l
Shawn: will put that on the topics. I think it was called Easy DD
Shawn: Andrew will be missed
trackbot, end meeting
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Do we need to inlcude the word "unapproved" within the Draft/Do we need to include the term"unapproved draft" as well as "DRAFT"/ Succeeded: s/disturbing/eye-catching/ Succeeded: s/+1 shawn/ / Succeeded: s/Authors may use authoring tools/Authors may use authoring tools to write content; developers do technical development/ Succeeded: s/PNs/PMs/ FAILED: s/ move PNs lower/ move Project Managers lower/ Succeeded: s/Content Writers/ / Succeeded: s/Add content authors to prepare there content in an accessible way/Add content authors to prepare there content in an accessible way/ Succeeded: s/Add content authors to prepare there content in an accessible way/change "Authors will learn how to frame their content in an accessible way" to "Content authors will learn the concepts for preparing their content in an accessible way"/ Succeeded: s/where they did not know the difference/where they did not know the difference and I would leave the tutorials site./ FAILED: s/ '...at the/ ... at the/ Succeeded: s/geenric/generic/ Succeeded: s/whjat /what/ Succeeded: s/Yes, it MUST be changed/Yes, "draft" in the heading MUST be changed from image to text/ Succeeded: s/a=want/want/ Succeeded: s/Jean/Jeanne/ Found Scribe: Sharron Inferring ScribeNick: Sharron Found Scribe: Howard Inferring ScribeNick: Howard Scribes: Sharron, Howard ScribeNicks: Sharron, Howard Default Present: +1.615.417.aaaa, Shadi, AnnaBelle, Sharron, Shawn, Jan, Wayne, Andrew, Howard_, Jeanne Present: +1.615.417.aaaa Shadi AnnaBelle Sharron Shawn Jan Wayne Andrew Howard_ Jeanne Regrets: Paul Helle Vicki Eric Anthony (?)Sylvie_and_Liam._No_response_from_Denis Wayne Suzette Bim Found Date: 14 Mar 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/03/14-eo-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]