| EOWG Home
JB: Find tool for row and column swapping at user choice. Daniel Dardieller built this. Include in document containing table of auxiliary benefits.
JB: This working group should focus on content, not its presentation. Invite Wendy Chisholm to evaluate table.
HB and SD: ACTION help AA with table headers and IDs, and cell references to them.
JB: Will put out on email "who is working on what."
JB: I'm in contact with many in Europe about EOWG meeting on 22 June. Some may come to EOWG meeting in Amsterdam. Possibly another meeting will be in Berlin 18-19 September. Its subject could be the adoption of WCAG and the exchange of ideas on promotion of WCAG.
JB: Also considering a meeting in US about interaction between EOWG materials and Section 508, possibly in October?
CV: No response yet from anyone in Spain to Europe meeting.
HB: Please clarify JB prior comment on WAI inappropriateness of involvement in Section 508, as it isn't an international issue?
JB: No reason WAI cannot have meetings to talk about Web accessibility, and its commonality with Section 508.
AA: see new draft:
AA: Table is intended to show what is covered in the benefits document.
DS: Like the structure. Recent experience within the bank, although the appendix is long to read, the information is useful. Want to encourage AA to add more.
JB: Adds value.
HB: Each of the YES would be a link.
JB: Can we make the explanations irrepressibly credible.?
AA: Table of contents too:
JB: Accessibility of table? Headings would link.
WL: All other tables of contents have other structure.
JB: Auxiliary page "Benefits Matrix"
WL: Feature list
DS: This makes sense, easier to see document organization. Good way to resolve the links.
HB: Possibly after the TOC.
JB: Resource suite design. This would be another page.
WL: See to believe that integration is appropriate.
HB: Table headers need top alignment.
JB: Summary: what happens next with this Appendix B: "Auxiliary Benefits of Accessible Design for Business Case" Link all YES in matrix. Add more where AA has noted new ideas.
HB: Need attributes to navigate the table.
JB: ACTION HB and SD to help AA with table headers and IDs.
JB: Make first section in this appendix after the TOC.
JB: Top Left Cell needs to left column accessibility features.
JB: Would expect to transpose table: Across top: accessibility solutions is what we have. Benefits are whom we help.
WL: Some would prefer either way.
DS: More rows, longer content, would make table
SD: Seems OK.
WL: Semantic web belongs on other dimension.
JB: Swap rows and columns. Label the headers as categories: accessibility solutions and auxiliary benefits.
JB: ACTION: Find tool for row and column swapping at user choice within a document. Daniel Dardieller built this. Include in document containing table of auxiliary benefits.
JB: Device independence: a benefit.
WL: WCAG 2 guidelines cover device independence: 2.5, 4.1.
HB: Need to retain low literacy in other dimension.
DS: This is an important market-share issue.
JB: Left column: keep as checkpoints. Could link from matrix to the checkpoint(s) as parenthesized numbers. Use "mega-checkpoints" rather than the individual detailed ones.
HB: Link to WCAG 1.0, as stable, not to WCAG 2.
JB: Use checklist major topics as captions as already groups.
JB: Beauty of the matrix: it helps us orient content more completely.
AA: Checkpoints as rows. They can grow.
JB: Table lead-in paragraph. Matrix shows primary auxiliary benefits for the features.
?: Try "na" rather than blanks?
CV: Red checks?
AA: Invisible image, alt="na"
CA: A blank cell means "not applicable"
HB: Easier for screen reader to saye "no" than "not applicable"
AA: Style, make "no" very light, make "yes" stand out.
AA: Will check with a partially-sighted colleague. Will experiment.
JB: Maximize cross-disability use.
WL: Try "+" instead of "YES".
HBj: Checkmarks are different in different countries: In Finland they mean errors.
AA: Jaws: link img 7.2.
HBj: The cells with "YES" are those we highlight. The blanks we haven't discussed in the appendix.
WL: This document expands on this combination.
HBj: Cells are effectively index to the text, link to section where it is.
JB: This would confuse with links to WCAG checkpoints.
AA: Section numbers look like confusion with WCAG.
JB: Process issue -- consider WCAG recommended technique.
JB: ACTION: This working group should focus on content, not its presentation. Invite Wendy Chisholm to evaluate table.
JB: See change log.
HB: Concern that "Metadata" is jargon. become "Metadata about content."
DS: Not a problem for his company.
WL: Add links to sibling documents.
JB: See Sheela Sethuraman's email message:
WL: We haven't paid enough attention to those not diagnosed with any disability.
HBj: There are internationalization differences.
JB: US and Canada now has K-12. Australia Primary K-6, Secondary 7-12, Tertiary college.
HBj: Public school is what kids go to by law. Ordinary school. After first ten years kids go to Gymnasium.
JB: What are international terms for this?
DS: "Basic" "Secondary" and "Higher" education are I18N preferred.
HBj: Centralized vs. decentralized (groupings, a policy issue) local government vs. state government. Avoid "districts"
WL: How broadly is this document applicable. Can individual teachers make decisions independently.
JB: "School systems" identify decision-making level where system change can be made. Consider categories of people.
JB: Anyone can become a change agent. We need a document to speak to this individual.
HBj: Often the student becomes change agent.
JB: Make sure document can speak to whomever becomes interested in this issue and be catalyst.
JB: Identify change agent and get concurrence.
HB: Mention that assistive technology may be needed, and provided for individual students.
WL: A benefit matrix?
JB: Gretchen is doing business case that would contain it.
JB: Use style of others.
JB: At yesterday's alternative time meeting, got a fresh look at this top page of resource suite, and got some good feedback, in the change log:
JB: Made some repairs and reworked based on those comments.
HBj: Understandable, what we are working on.
WL: Check appendix numbering, enumeration.
JB: Need business case for software development.
CV: "One to one" match, business cases to implementation plans?
JB: One for business case, two for education.
AA: Higher education is into distance learning, [Basic and Secondary mostly classroom.]
JB: Add software implementation plan.
CV: Should the Authoring Tools group provide the "Considerations for Managers in Selecting Authoring Tools"
JB: "Selecting Authoring Tools" is simpler title.
JB: Evaluating Web sites for accessibility: move from implementation plan.
JB: Dropped "Implementation Resources & References" as they are in the individual pieces.
JB: "Legal Requirements" is from Policy page, "too complex." Simplify to "How to find them."
WL: Importance of legal requirements.
JB: Dropped "Benefits of Standards Harmonization." Build into the Legal Requirements.
JB: ACTION Will put out on email "who is working on what."
Friday 2001-06-15, 8:30 a.m. EST, +1 617-252-7000
Last updated 10 June, 2001 by Judy Brewer, email@example.com
Copyright © 2001 W3C® (MIT, INRIA, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply. Your interactions with this site are in accordance with our public and Member privacy statements.