> EOWG Home > EOWG Minutes
<....> //minutes from first half of meeting temporarily missing, will be entered//
Introductions, Doyle does second half of the minuting,
Start 6:30 am PST, 9:30 EST.
Judy how's the flow? On Expanded Implementation Plan
Andrew Make Your? Web Site Accessible
Judy drop Your? What about develop in the nav thing,
Grace, I think it is confusing to look at. When you use the nav bar, nice to have each section has return to top.
Judy We don't generally use return to top.
Sarah with this document, doesn't make much sense in this kind of chunking style. The nav doesn't work so
Harvye on the expanded form means many screens full of stuff,
Judy on any versions have it on all. When I am going in to documents, I use to get at a particular section. The wording of the first section we have heard development implementation. The same wording, go back to the issue? Detail right here. Any ideas for
Andrew implement an accessible web site.
Judy sounds like the whole thing
Sarah develop accessible site, start from scratch
Judy develop site.
Harvey develop is in organizational policy below
Marja take out the verbs
Judy training awareness,
Sarah talking about what you need to do, develop something, or deny something,
Judy lets look at this section. Back off the title,
Marja the nav bar?
Judy talking about the section and nav bar. On this section the title needs fixing, builds accessibility in the first draft, I would llink the techniques there, take out software tools, and put in select software. Any of these things in this section redundant? Right stuff in the section? Comments
Harvey many sites will be retrofit sites. This doesn't suggest that.
Judy what if we preface this for new sites build accessibility,
Helle, for new or retrofit sites, You would have a first draft of the retrofitting,
Andrew you will redesign.
Judy people like redesign...
Sarah I wonder if you need to qualify that. Everything would be happening in either case one needs to do a first draft,
Judy I am not sure, two possibilities, from scratch, someone who sees problems and thinks start over, and someone who sees some problems to fix but not redesign. Don't want to lose that persons from this section.
Grace, a checklist?
Natasha comes into the call
Judy look up earlier on the document you will see the checklist
Audrey first level bullets, all the developing team members understand move up build accessibility the second bullet.
Judy I am looking at the flipping the awareness thing in front of the first draft. Lets back up a little bit. The document is mainly very solid. We felt in the last meeting we missed adding in a key section. One has to figure out that the first order bullets what they ought to be. Does this section look what
Andrew I think it is roughly right. I am worrying about building accessibility is really the first bullet, Building draft be a sub bullet.
Chuck, on re-reading the document I think this section is ok. I don't have anything to say. Works for me as is.
Helle I agree with Chuck
Natasha No comment
Harvey I don't see your current site accessible?
Judy I thought we were getting at that in the could we have companion piece not capturing what you do when you have an accessible site,
Carol to take an existing site, I am not going to do a draft and mainly back end stuff. I hope I am not going to find a whole lot. They won't notice a lot of the work. The checklist is what I would do.
Judy let's plow through this section. Which first or second level bullets are necessary. Build accessibility into the first draft.
Judy second level bullet?
Carol Andrew said that put it under organizational policy
Andrew I was saying put
Marja make a web accessible. Not referring to that.
Judy if reader is not familiar with the EO stuff. Go to getting started, that is more basic than this document. I think it is less specific than this.
Audrey the differences is that are we looking at from the point of view of developer, or organization point of view.
Judy mainly in the implementatin is the organization. What do you think then Audrey. Let's go on to another item. Let's try to think very carefully of this section. Do we want to keep that. Appropriate at a second bullet level?
Audrey I think that is important leave where it is.
Judy take out the word pertinent. We don't need the qualifier. Do we like that item.
Natasha, we don't need to go into more details if there is a link there.
Judy I worry about solving this by creating something else.
Natasha you are saying that there is no such document on W3C?
Judy this is the closest to that.
Natasha then emphasize in this document
Judy do we like the way this is said here.
Carol I really like this. It is not necessary, each person would be go along
Sarah do we need a first level bullet, under provide tools.
Judy how does provide tools from software. Reactions to that.
Marja I would keep the develop team members separate from tools. Add accessibility to the first draft.
Judy other reactions.
Judy verify the process. That may be a second level bullet. Don't need to the sub bullets under that. We could drop out those two bullets of detail. Build accessibility add to that.
Andrew I agree.
Judy eleminate the two sub bullets under accessibility, bump accessibility to a sub bullet parallel to a draft. This is more parallel to develop a checklist. Develop disability checklist. Making more sense? We have the right information but re-arrange and almost there. What would the key first level bullets in this section. Tools is one.
Marja, members of the develop team and accessibility part of the process.
Judy develop one tools two, integrate throughout the process is three.
Natasha, integrate is the first point.
Judy I was looking for a container. A first level bullet.
Natasha the most important to keep in mind accessibility while developing the site. Sometimes they know HTML without following the guidelines. The most important issue is they don't think aobut accessiblitly
Grace, you have section accessibility. When you go to a dictionary, look up a word, telephone, a telephone is or walking the word accessible is vague.
Judy I don't' completely understand. We should go on to another item. This section needs the most work so on from this point. Sarah can you attempt a re-organizaiton of this draft based on our comments. Avoid too much circular defintion. Look at agtain next week. So many comments at this small area of the document it would be better for one person to re-write.
Audrey, I am wondering at the general organization of sections. Put providing training further up?
Judy that does seem to be a little odd the current order. People support fliiping the order...
Audrey can you even select the software before the training?
Judy We established early on that implementation is varied from organization to organzation. Let's revisit next week. Let's go on to the software document. Chuck you made some comments on the list I invite people to discuss things on the list. Let's go onto the software document.
I would like to have general reactions first. We already have some reactions.
Chuck I think it is a good start and possibly a good finish. A good compromise.
Judy other reactions?
Natasha, could you elaborate on the second page
Judy I had a more extended version which the shorter version might be less understandable. In larger organizations
Marja do we need to keep a list of the manual of what they don't do. That is what we need to know.
Judy that is true. What is the status of the conformance evaluations. From what I saw is not particularly easy to use, not all up to date.
Harvey there are some features of some tools that you shouldn't use.
Judy give an example like don't use such and such feature of a product.
Harvey I am thinking in a MS product, do as HTML only. To lose the proprietary formatting.
Judy the thing that this doesn't do at all. How to use what is out there. That could be an entirely different kind of resource.
Doyle I would like to see a collaboration.
Judy when I did the draft when I got to the vendor query section. I would like to send this set of questions to all the developers, and recommend answer these questions on your site.
Audrey I like that idea. I put together some of the questions in ALA that covers that topic.
Judy I got inspired doing this. Tell me what is missing here. Other general reactions here. Maybe this is the right approach. That it would be helpful to have more information about to use things we have now. May not be able to have in this document.
Grace you have potentially two things to separate out. One information docuemtn about software you can use, and another people with disabilities can use to develop sites.
Judy in WAI there is a lot of thought to not segraetate those topics. I don't think the latter one is addressed well here. Well it breaks down haven't got a disability sometimes softeware is locked into something when a few people might make. Explain better why this might have an impact of a number of different people with disabilities.
Grace I think that has potential to do that. People in one area need to understand authoring tools. Have in a same document but separate a little more.
Judy I would like to attempt to do to explain how they are related. Look at how to pull apart.
Helle, are the authoring tools group asking this questions? I think we ought to follow that line.
Judy let me expand upon this issue. I had a bunch of different questions. I would appreciate feedback on about the navigation. Are there are users of different tools IE Opera users, Netscape? Try the tabbing order at the top of the page. One invisible. See the order, some fixes that Jonothan Chetland suggested. Questins I tried shortened forms of the WAI resource chunks, Charles thought was too abbreviated. I will add that back in. Settle on something, and not spread to much in the site. Feedback on that section. Other question is the problem at one point the business case and implementation to split apart, the I tried to spread the nav bar for the resource suite, any comment about this general navigations approach?
Helle skip navigation comment on this page can't find?
Chuck I can find.
Judy any quick reactions to the resource suite nav bar? On top of the document.
Sarah I wonder about the different site navigation, suite navigation, and so forth.
Judy some of them are named.
Sarah make that visible. Title the page visibly.
Judy if we can do it from consistent use. That might be better.
Natasha this consistent with the whole W3C design.
Judy I wish it is that consistent.
Chuck once you standardize it will be clear. Right now that makes things confusing.
Sarah why don't I fiddle with the inconsistency?
Judy comments about the navigation?
Audrey is tabbing down
Judy We are close to closing. I want to check on the Wednesday for next week. There isn't a problem with a Wednesday just particular Wednesdays. For anybody who wants to. Who might come?
Helle I might be able to if we following
Judy if you can put out of some revisions Sarah. Wrap up now. Stay on to do tabbing order.
Harvey I was distracted by the hidden nav bar.
Judy why is skip now hidden. We thought that was for screen users who are browsing by speech or text and the traditional way is through an invisible link.
Harvey if you dwell on it that is a good idea?
Judy if you are a sighted users you wouldn't notice. If you are browsing by speech or Braille. I was asking for the tabbing order feedback.
Andrew I have started using opera seeks. Use f9 and it doesn't work. Opera six.
Helle I am only using opera 5. I can't open files.
Judy I use opera 5, I don't know anybody could help.
Andrew tab does nothing. F9 doesn't work.
Judy who has IE
Helle I don't know what version.
Harvey I have six
Helle I have 5.002314.
Chuck with netscape 4.7 resources site map translation, about I don't know where is went.
Judy that skips the logos. Skips nav and WAI logos. Darn, this is still a problem then. Need another redesign.
Last revised 21 December, 2001 by Judy Brewer