Shawn started the meeting with the acknowledgement that in the rush to get items reveiwed for CSUN we may have tabled issues that people want to bring to group attention. She encouraged everyone to raise those issues now as we prepare for the next round of reviews and other EO work. For the next round of tutorial review, the following process change is to be implemented: During the first review round please try to suggest any and all significant content changes. In that way the final round will be polishing/word-smithing only and will reduce the number of review cycles needed.
Surveys:
The group then debriefed from CSUN with particular discussion of the WCAG session (well-received). Brent noted the general agreement by the end of the talk that the supporting documents were becoming more helpful and geenral appreciation of the tutorials as a useful resource. Additionally the group noted the movement away from CSUN as an AT conference and more of a web accessibility focus. Wayne summarized his testimony to the US Access Board and noted his interest in forming a Low Vision Task Force at W3C. Finally the group spoke briefly about the May F2F. Sharron will follow up on the availability of people to meet on Thursday.
Shawn: Thanks everyone for all the work in February getting things ready for CSUN.
... we rushed through some things at the last few meetings. Does anyone have items to bring back to the group that got overlooked before, during the push. I know AnnaBelle had some usability concerns that were tabled, is there anything else that someone wanted to bring back to the attention of the group?
Shawn: Previous review cycled things back to the group more often that we would like going forward. To aim for fewer cycles, we are making some process suggestions.
... we want to make sure that we get content issues and significant comments for change made in the first round of review. Next up is the Page Structure tutorial.
... The hope is that significant content issues will all be addressed in this first round. The second round of revew could then be focused on polishing and wordsmithing.
... questions or comments about that process?
... Page Structure review survey is posted now. Mar 23 is the target date for completion. Sooner is great and if you need more time, it's OK and if you will just let us know it can be arranged.
... Are there any questions or comments about the due date and process?
Shawn: Will have survey for the Planning-Managing Guide that Kevin has been working on.
Shadi: If you recall, this resource is meant to be for non-developers, people with the responsibility to implement accessibility across a project; those who are integrating and applying accessibility considerations across a project.
... this is related to the Strategic Planning and Start with Accessibility docs. After the card sorting and persona development, we are using that input to develop this Planning Guide.
... want to make the survey available by Monday, you can take the week for preliminary review and discuss next Friday.
Shawn: And remember to point to the background info, Kevin when posting the survey
Kevin: Will do
Shawn: Sharron, Shadi, Brent, Wayne, and Paul attended CSUN.
... there was a session on the WCAG resources, what did you all take away from that?
Brent: It was a really good session, they began by looking at the resources and started with an excercise and asking how would you find what you need, get into the W3C to find what you needed to do.
... It was interesting, people immediately asked who is looking, assigning roles to to the searcher
<paulschantz> I blogged 18 sessions, felt a bit like a scribe
Shawn: Did you blog the WCAG session, Paul?
<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/0306_WCAG/
Brent: one comment that Jan made was the idea of doing a design contest. Then Eric shared the work from the groups and people were surprised and very receptive. They liked what they saw and people generally agreed that we are on the right track.
<paulschantz> http://paulschantz.com/2015/03/07/the-2015-csun-mega-post/
Shadi: Credit to Michael Cooper taking people through an excercise, people were very engaged, soemtimes a bit heated. Very different perspectives, very different approaches.
... when we then showed the resources, it specifically addressed many of the concerns that had been raised. They were particularly happy with the tutorials.
<Andrew> glad Tutorials were well received :)
Shawn: Were there any attendees to the WCAG is broken session?
Shadi: What I understood was that it was not as bad as the title, there were very specific needs expressed from the POV of one user. His info was pretty dated since he was unaware of the specifics of the new work.
Howard: I enjoyed the sessions about what the Universities are doing for campus wide accessibility issues. There were good sessions from Penn State and Ohio state
... Terry Thompson on designing an accessible media player, how hard to find. I had good experience with most sessions I got to attend.
... WAI has put really good tools out there, I would like to see how people responded, all in all a good conference.
<shadi> http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/Talks/2015/0306/Eval/slidy.html
Shadi: Here is the other session on Eval resources, I spent time introducing the evaluation resource page, mentioned Easy Checks and the Report Tool. Very nicely received.
... The brevity of the sessions was a challenge but I actually liked that. It kept attendees and presenters focused, seemed to support dynamic presentations
<paulschantz> large-scale organizational approaches and professionalism seem to be more elevated this year
Shadi: my general observation was that there were many sessions on online learning, was surprised that many schools still continue to scan their content and do OCR etc. Interesting to see how schools are working on their MOOCs and online courses. Sessions on SVG accessiiblity that was good to see as well as Math accessibility and math players, etc
Wayne: I didn't go to many sessions of math since I have been working with those groups but there really has been amazing progress.
Shadi: And Wayne, congratulations on your testimony to the Access Board. Wayne had an excellent intervention on behalf of people with low vision. We will continue to look at that and I understand Wayne that you had a good discussion with Judy.
Wayne: I mentioned that I don't think that the Access Board can in fact accept WCAG2 as it is since it references screen magnification. I pointed out that the underlying law that created the Access Board requires reasonable accomodation...screen magnification is not reasonable in the era of responsive design and flexible media.
... so I don't think the Access Board can accept the WCAG as it stands now. The way WCAG addresses low vision needs is not reasonable accomodation.
Shadi: Look at the Mobile Guidelines for another perspective on that.
Wayne: yes, but it won't go into the law
Shadi: I don't agree with your interpretation that screen magnification is the only remedy suggested by WCAG. Whether the US harmonizes with WCAG will be very important.
<Zakim> shawn, you
Wayne: I admire the idea of harmonization but I don't think at this point WCAG guarantees those levels of access required by US accomodation law
Shawn: We did have a session on WAI 2020...
Wayne: Yes I was there
Shawn: We have been talking about that for some time and there were notes about extension specs to address needs of low vision and cognitive users. EO will be interested in how that idea is carried forward and how it will effect the strengths of WCAG while addressing the needs of specific user populations.
Wayne: There really is this issue. I know that Australia for one created stronger law than WCAG .
... we have to consider that when thinking about harmonization.
Shawn: Is the testimony public yet?
Wayne: I will publish my written comments and send the URL to EO. I focused on what people with low vision used to be able to have a higher level of access in the existing 508 than they would have if WCAG is accepted as the new 508.
Shadi: The sign language kareoke was really fun
Howard: The call for papers is open for Accessing Higher Ground. So if EO would like to have a presence or provide sessions, that would be great.
... checking on arrival and departure dates for AccessU
Sharron: The nature of the CSUN conference has changed from AT focus to web accessibility
Shadi: Do you think it may be a trend, an ebb and flow?
Brent: I agree that it has changed, this was my second CSUN and it was greatly differnt content. it was all about the fact that you can't do everything - you can't meet all SCs for all populations. Sessions were focused on how to prioritize SC conformance.
<shawn> fyi, WAI resource with some input on prioritizing: http://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/improving#prioritize
Brent: getting buy-in. Many sessions were about measuring, implementing web accessibility. Focus on legal pressure, getting it done. Very little on the AT devices, change in the direction of the conference.
Wayne: I saw many of the history that Shadi mentioned of putting things on paper and scanning to get them ready for specific AT. Focusing on accessiiblity is not such a bad thing. Even though the grass roots feel may be gone but in many ways it is a success for our work that people are looking at content and its availability before the devices.
... I did notice some interesting light technology. A Freedom Scientific demo with this huge piece of hardware and they were happy it got to just 10 pounds. But then I found another one that clipped on the laptop screen and you could carry in a book bag.
<paulschantz> accommodation model is giving way to baking accessibility into products from the beginning
Wayne: We might be observing a change in the technologies to take advantage of a newer approach
Shawn: What did you find Sharron about people's availability for Thursday?
Sharron: It would be a smaller group
<shawn> meeting page https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_F2F_May_2015
<shawn> availability https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/eowg2015f2f/results#xau15d
Shawn: Sharron, please follow up and see who actually IS available on Thursday.
Sharron: OK, and Andrew how is it looking?
Andrew: Not good from a work perspective, will have to determine if I want to come on my own.
Howard: I will wait until I make my travel arrangement, may book for evening
Shawn: With no comments, we will adjourn. Thanks for attending, work for this week is updated. Thorough review needed for Page Structure tutorials, will have weekly survey updated with Kevin's work on Monday. So please watch for it.