Improving the Accessibility of Your Website

<shawn> latest draft: http://w3c.github.io/wai-planning-and-implementation/improving.html

Sharron: My apologies kevin, for posting these comments so late in the week. They were mostly related to the need, identified last week, to more clearly distinguish between this document, meant to near-term repair oriented and the other Implementing doc which is longer term and meant to provide integrated thinking for how to raise awareness and skills around accessiiblity throughout an organization.

Shawn: Are these comments for discussion?

Sharron: More for editor's discretion, I think but am happy to discuss

Kevin: The difficulty with this document is to connect and yet differentiate from Implementing. I can review and comment individually.

<kevin> Sharron's paragraph: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Feedback:_Improving_the_Accessibility_of_Your_Website#Assess_the_Situation

Jon: The comment about training and planning is already in the other document so this actually repetition

Sharron: It seems more relevant to the long term planning rather than short term remediation

Jonathan: Can I add comments now to the wiki?

Shawn: Sure but it would be more useful to talk about them now if they need discussion

Kevin: I get what you are saying, Sharron and it does speak to the longer term. But I am trying to make the point that when you understand how the barriers are generated that can help you to remediate. If you find that your content continually shows common barriers, it may be useful to train to avoid those in the furture

Sharron: Yes I agree it is quite important but not sure it belongs here.

Shawn: So in this case, if just a few tables are missing mark-up it is good to remediate. If ALL are missing, put in the queue for longer term attention, inclusing training and code pattern libraries, etc.

Shadi: Maybe refer to it at the very end, now that you have fixed the problems, it would be good to analyze the nature of your problems and integrate a way to address them into your longer term planning and implementation. it would be a good bridge to the next document. Do people think this would be a good approach?

AnnaBelle: I like the approach

Sharron: Yes I like the idea that at the end, we suggest analysis. Once identification has been made of what was causing the barriers, avoiding those mistakes going forward will be a critical part of the longer term implementation and planning.

Sharron: I also suggested rewrite of the first sentence to draw the line more clearly

<shawn> Suggested replacement text for introduction: Web accessibility is achieved and maintained as the result of deliberate design and process choices and full integration into the development software lifecycle. For guidance on how to most effectively succeed in that long term goal, you will want to study WAI's Implementing Web Accessibility. In the meantime however, you may have an organizational need to identify and remove immediate barriers to a web site or application. This document is meant to help you do that.

<shadi> +1 to sharron's text

Wayne: I like that introduction

<yatil-lurking> +1

<shawn> +1 to the general approach with Sharron's wording

<shawn> +1 to Sharron's help with the lines between the docs!

AnnaBelle: I am sure that this is a helpful direction.

Sharron: And your wordsmithing skills could make it even sharper

Kevin: It does differentiate more clearly, I wonder about the ordering of things

Shawn: We may want to put first what this document is for and then the point to the big picture

Shadi: it also covers what this document is for and they could be merged together.
... let's leave it to editor's discretion. I like the flow of this approach.

Shawn: Kevin is updating the document and is likely to change quite a bit in the next couple of days so keep alert for when he announces those for review

Kevin: Most changes are likely to be to the introductory materials.

Shawn: Kevin has responded to some of our comments in the wiki. if we have time at the end of the call we can review. Shall we discuss the title?

Shadi: Yes discussion will be useful

Shawn: Previous title...

<kevin> Previous title - Improving the Accessibility of Your Website

<kevin> Shawn title idea - Improving the Accessibility of Your Website: Fixing Accessibility Barriers

<shawn> Sharron: Removing Immediate Barriers

<shawn> ... removing existing barriers

<shawn> retrofitting

<shawn> <shawn> Fixing website accessibility barriers

<shawn> addressing remediation of web constent

<shawn> doing it right the second time

<shawn> <kevin> Revisiting accessibility

<shawn> <Wayne> Retrofitting Inaccessible Web Content

<shawn> Identifying and remediating accessibility problems

<shawn> <paulschantz> Fix what you missed

<shawn> <Wayne> Removing Barriers for People with Disabilities

<shawn> <Wayne> Upgrading Inaccessable Web Content

<shawn> <metzessive> Taking another look at your accessibility

Shawn: We talked about the need to differentiate between this document's short term fixes and the other process related guidance in the longer term

Sharron: We want to create a sense of urgency without inducing panic. This is repairman mode for now and then move to longer term thinking

<metzessive> Addressing accessibility barriers

<Wayne> Quick Accessibility Fixes

<metzessive> Improving your accessibility kung fu

<kevin> Tactical Accessibility Planning

Shawn: Thanks for the ideas everyone

AnnaBelle: I love the word "your" in there to personalize

Sharron: +1

<shawn> Addressing Accessibility Barriers in Your Web Content

Shadi: Quick Fixes etc with the idea of Fixing may indicate a more granular set of instructions, not what this is

<metzessive> nix "in your web content" for brevity IMO

<shawn> Addressing Web Accessibility Barriers

<metzessive> ooh I like that

<shawn> Addressing Your Web Accessibility Barriers

+1

<Wayne> Planning to Meet Your Urgent Accessibility Needs

<shawn> An Approach for Addressing Your Web Accessibility Barriers

Sharron: How to Approach Your Web Accessibility Barriers

Kevin: The nature of this document is not necessarily going to give you the actual fixes but will give you a process to do immediate repairs

Jon: "web content" is a broad term but it seems that there is a good deal of confusion about what WCAG applies to. I am in favor of "web content" to indicate the breadth of the material that WCAG applies to. Emphasis is OK

<shawn> [ websites = static content, dynamic applications, non=HTML docs, etec! ]

Shawn: WAI defines website to include all of that and we want to make sure that is clear. Technically we should not even say "web site and web applications," but "web site including web aplications." For some, web content sounds pretty jargony.

Shadi: I agree with you about the need to broaden people's understanding but I think "web content" might actually do the opposite. So, what are the issues with the title?

Sharron:Improving and Implementing sound alike and so it adds to the confusion. I would like there to be more difference between the titles as well as the content.

<metzessive> yes!

Shawn: Maybe the other document is the one we need to look at for a title change

<shadi> +1 to shawn

Shadi: Other than the similarity, are there any other issues with the title "Improving the Accessibility..."

Wayne: It lacks the communication of urgency, it is very passive

Shadi: What is a typical turn around time for carrying out the steps in this document?

Wayne: It depends on the size of the organization

<metzessive> It also depends on their project management approach

Shadi: But is several weeks or months for anyone, any size

<shawn> good point Shadi

<shawn> other doc current title: Implementing Web Accessibility Across Organizations and Projects

Sharron:: What about the idea of strategic planning....maybe Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility Across Organizations and Projects

Shawn: Do we want to try changing the other title first and then see if that works?

<shawn> previous title of this "retrofitting" doc: Improving the Accessibility of Your Website

Shadi: Yes OK Let's leave this for now, we don't want to make it sound too easy. "Fixing" sounds like it would be a very local and rapid thing, a day or two. Improvement , moving toward conformance is a mid-range plan. It is not entirely short-term and not long term strategic planning but somewhere in between. The timeline must be recognized

Wayne: yes that makes sense. So you need to ask the question of whether you are dealing with Acme, Inc or General Electric. Just saying "hello" in one could take months.

Shawn: If we look to change the title of the other one, would you be OK with keeping the title of this one?

Wayne: Sure, I think we should write the documents we actually want and then name them.

<AnnaBelle> +1

Shawn: Better not to change the title twice. we could just stick with old title for now and keep it open. .... OK with no objections, I propose that we leave this name for the short term

Shadi: Yes I like this and I beleive that a change to the other document will make more sense.

Sharron: I like "Strategic" since that is in fact what it is

<metzessive> good point

<metzessive> +1 Comprehensive!

<shawn> Organizational Planning and Project Planning for Web Accessibility

Wayne: There are people that ascribe particular structure to strategic planning documents. I like the idea of long range or comprehensive planning or something like that. Something that refers to the Big Picture

Kevin: I agree with Wayne's comments about the use of "Strategic" and wonder if we can shorten the title

Jon: Yes, Strategic is a bit loaded, Comprehensive is good. Maybe just for future use, we could stop at Comprehensive Planning for Web Accessibility

<shawn> Organizational Planning and Project Planning for Web Accessibility

<kevin> Comprehensive Planning for Web Accessibility

<yatil-lurking> Planning Accessible Web Projects?

<shawn> Planning for Web Accessibility

<shawn> Organizational Planning and Project Planning for Web Accessibility

Shadi: Why is Comprehensive better that Strategic?

Sharron: Wayne's point was that "straegic planning" is a loaded term in academia and other big formal orgs.

Shadi: We wrote the document in such a way that you may not end up with a Comprehensive plan, for example if you are an advocate.

Jon: Strategic implies long term planning and integration into other processes. Strategy perspective is important, seems connected. Comprehensive seems more conceptually all inclusive. Strategic seems more narrowly focused

<shawn> Integrating Web Accessibility Throughout Your Organization and Projects

Shawn: I agree that we may not need a qualifier at all. if we step even further outside the the box, how about Integrating Accessibility into Your Web Planning and Projects

<shawn> Web Accessibility Planning Throughout Your Organization

<kevin> Making Accessibility part of your organizational DNA

<shawn> Making Web Accessibility an Integral...

<kevin> Implementing Web Accessibility Across Organizations and Projects

<Wayne> From Wikipedia: Strategic planning is an organization's process of defining its strategy, or direction, and making decisions on allocating its resources to pursue this strategy. It may also extend to control mechanisms for guiding the implementation of the strategy. Strategic planning became prominent in corporations during the 1960s and remains an important aspect of strategic management. It is executed by strategic planners or strategists, who involve many parties and research sources in their analysis of the organization and its relationship to the environment in which it competes.[1]

Wayne:With that definition, I withdraw my objection to "Strategic" in the title.

<shawn> Planning Web Accessibility Across Organizations and Projects

<shawn> Planning for Web Accessibility: [subtitle]

<shadi> Planning Web Accessibility Implementation

<kevin> From Wikipedia: Strategic planning is an organization's process of defining its strategy, or direction, and making decisions on allocating its resources to pursue this strategy.

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility

<Sharron> +1

<AnnaBelle> +1 to Strategic Planning

Shadi: Regarding the word strategic when we look at the document we do not strategize that much. We much more list a lot of considerations. It is more for how to get started. Strategic may be over promising for what the people will actually get.
... what about the realtionship between Planning and Improving and the communication of the long term vs short term

Wayne: Planning sounds good to me, Shadi is still not sure about Improving

<metzessive> planning implementation makes it seem like we're thinking about doing something.

Shawn: I am OK with Planning though it seems a bit weak, happy with Improving for now

Shadi: It does speak to those people who are thinking aobut what they need to do to

Shawn: Project planning is a term that has some pretty specific terms as well.

<metzessive> I would want to avoid using project management buzzwords since they fall out of favor so quickly

Wayne: The document is a planning framework

<metzessive> "Project Planning", "Process Management", etc.

Kevin: I agree with the fact that it is not yet a stategic plan, but it is about that and trying to help people prepare to do that.

Shawn: Guidance for Strategic Planning

<metzessive> that's much better

<kevin> Guidelines for Strategic Planning Accessibility

Wayne: Even if you have no authority and are an internal advocate, you still have to develop a strategy

<Sharron>Developing a Web Accessibility Strategy across organziations and projects

<kevin> Developing a Web Accessibility Strategy

<shadi> [[I like that approach - concern resolved]]

Shawn: If we chose to go for simplicity "Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility" with subtitle that qualifies

<shadi> +1 likes "Developing a Web Accessibility Strategy" as well

<yatil-lurking> [[Like it for the simplicity.]]

<metzessive> [[me too.]]

<Wayne> function strategic_plan( scope )

<shawn> http://w3c.github.io/wai-planning-and-implementation/Overview.html

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Guidance for Developing a Plan for Your Organization or Project

<shadi> +1

<Wayne> +1

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Considerations for Developing a Plan for Your Organization or Project :-)

<yatil-lurking> Wonders if this will replace the Managing Accessibility tiltle in the navigation or complement it...

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Guidance for Developing a Plan for Your Organization or Project

<shadi> [[guidance for infiltrating your organization and project with accessibility]]

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Guidance for Your Organization or Project

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Guidance for Developing an Implementation Plan for Your Organization or Project

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Developing a Plan for Your Organization or Project

<shawn> [[ Developing a Web Accessibility Business Case for Your Organization ]]

<shawn> Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Guidance for Developing a Plan for Your Organization or Project

<metzessive> Planning for Web Accessibility: Strategies for accessibility project management

Kevin: Yes this works for me. If it works for others, I'm happy. It covers everything and seems clear

Shawn: Any other ideas should be sent around, so if you want to be sure that people see it and respond, send to the EO list

Shawn: Any additional comments on the title or on Improving document?

Developing Organizational Policy document

<shawn> http://w3c.github.io/wai-planning-and-implementation/pol.html

<shawn> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2014OctDec/0004.html

Wayne: I really like the outline and that it is lean. It reflects the fact that it policy docs need to be lean. That said, they need to be linked to the Strategic planning doc.
... often all three of these things happen as once. So some part of the document might want to refer to the fact that this soemtimes gets messy and lines do get blurred.
... People get touchy about academic freedom or intellectual propoerty, etc. People get confused between content and Accessibility of content. We shoudl recongize that people often \beleive that their authorship may be impinged upon by Accessibility.
... also it seems that authoring tools are improtant but they are not the only consideration.

Shawn: We would like to put unannounced drafts online before TPAC although we will continue to work on them. Your comments on intellectual property is improtant but I am not sure we can address it very well before TPAC. Can we put it on the agenda for November?

Wayne: Sure, but we have to address it at some point becasue it can stop a policy dead in the tracks because the creatives will misunderstand and dig in ther heels.

Shawn: Kevin, Sharron, and Wayne do you want to form a sub group to look at those issues after TPAC?
... thanks for bringing that up Wayne and we can look at it in detail after TPAC. Let's jump to ATAG. Looking at Kevin's draft from earlier this week, it seem that the ATAG reference is not clearly enough positioned.

Wayne: Where it is located in the document seems arbitrary and stuck to other issues. The only developed use case for employees is the authoring tool issue. Employees do more than authoring and the reference seems isolated.

Shadi: I don't understand the issue. is it the one reference or the ATAG throughout?

Shawn: What about policies in general and how they relate to ATAG and other standards? One of the issues is that if we recommend policies that require purchase tools that conform to ATAG, I am not sure there are any -?-

Shadi: What we want to say is simple - don't forget in your policies that there are standards for authoring tools and user agents. It can be said in a brief paragraph.

Wayne: I really like the policy template. it is just what people will be looking for

<shawn> include specific guidance to third-party vendors? include "dates for establishing internal resources for training, technical assistance, monitoring..."? include "review period and process"? include "how visitor feedback will be captured, responded to, and used"?

Shawn: The long version of the policy template includes a lot of stuff

Wayne: I thought about that quite a bit and yes, there are institutions that will require that much stuff. I have seen both long and short versions done effectively

Sharron: Can we make it more clear that we're not necessarily recommending that? and that we have no preference for one or the other?

<Wayne> + 1 to Sharron's comment

<shawn> +1 to Sharron's comment

Wayne: I did not have that confusion when I read it, but it should probably be clarified

<shawn> old doc said, "Organizations wishing to require conformance to the latest version of the standards may specify conformance without specifying a version number."

Shawn: What do we do about version numbers? ATAG for example

<shawn> Shawn: w/o version # could use old or new

Wayne: The California law says "the latest version of..." whatever guidelines they are referring to

Shadi: Actually we have good guidance in the harmonization document about avoiding version numbers and gives different scenarios. My suggestion will be to have a brief sentence here and link to that discussion.

Shawn: Any objections to that as general approach?
... anthing else for now on these documents?

<Wayne> good work Kevin!

EO Approval to Post Drafts

Shawn: I mentioned earlier that we want to post several items - tools, tutorials, these docs - without announcing them and while continuing to work on them. We would like everyone to do a high level review of the documents to make sure that we are not saying anything wrong or contradictory. So not a review for detail, but just for errors or anything that would be bad to publish.

<Wayne> +1

Shawn: is everyone OK with that approach, any questions about it?

AnnaBelle: I appreciate the clarity of the instructions and feel like I know what to do in the next few weeks.

Wayne: I am sorry about the timing but since the documents are refreshed on Monday, I can't do much on them until Thursday due to my schedule.

Shawn: We will ask Eric and Kevin to see if they can do any of the changes immediately after the meetings. This kind of posting is not ideal. We would prefer to do more work on them, more polishing before even this level of public posting. But we do want to make them available for TPAC. So for now, we will just ask for major concerns before posting as drafts.
... homework for right away will be posted today so you can have some review to do over the weekend.
... any other input. Thanks Kevin for your great work, thanks to everyone for your input, have a great weekend.