> EOWG Home >
EOWG Meeting, August 9, 2002
Agenda for this meeting: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2002JulSep/0051.html
- Judy Brewer (JB) - chair
- Andrew Arch (AA) - minutes
- Doyle Saylor (DS) - minutes
- Helle Bjarnø (HB1)
- Harvey Bingham (HB2)
- Grace Delaflor (GD)
- Henk Snetselaar (HS)
- Shawn Henry (SH)
- Charmane Corcoran (CC)
- Carlos Velasco (CV)
- Natasha Lipkina (NL)
1. Outreach updates
GD: The Institional Web Managers Workshop attended and addressed by ....
(Educational Institutions - UK)
AA: Accessibility Standards being taken seriously by Australian banks (see
Access at http://www.bankers.asn.au/ABA/Online/
default.asp?DeptID=21). Other people expressed interest in what is happening
in other countries - Helle and Henk particularly. Suggested to put Banking
Discussion on a future agenda.
JB: presented at an annual meeting of US Dept of Education NIDRR (WAI funder)
- presenters still being encouraged to present in inaccessible formats. JB
generated discussion about accessible formats to be used in future. Discussion
requested ideas for making PowerPoint accessible to assistive technologies
2. Auxiliary Benefits of Accessible Web site Design
Andrew a couple points on the next one,
Charmaine I thought from the W3C stuff that the main issue is contrast.
It threw me a little bit that this was for the non-visually impaired.
Andrew this is the best for the non visually impaired in most occasionally.
Judy use is instead …Henk?
Andrew Charmaine point c there, when I built …
Charmaine I would really like to learn about that.
Andrew there are some figures about color blindness, do we need to cite
Judy I think we should take that out. We don’t have framework for
demographics. At this point this may be our only statistical demographic
document. We should just toss this.
Andrew toss this statistic?
Judy you can make technical comments about color blindness.
Andrew the reason for putting color blindness is that the audience in
Australia most people don’t think of color blindness as a disability.
Judy we don’t restrict our thinking to self labeling.
Charmaine I didn’t have trouble with the color blindness is a good issue
to put in there.
Judy that is what we are saying, take out the stat, and keep the color
blindness. Andrew what is the next thing you wanted to discuss?
Andrew number 10. Yes that should be proper English.
Judy some of this is just responses to her. Charmaine your comments
Andrew does anybody else have a response there under the markup, which
is a brand new issue? Under 2.1 relative units to markup, …reminders
to Andrew which he will turn into English.
Judy what is the number on her list?
Charmaine 10 b
Judy people understanding the comment?
Andrew read again when I turn into English.
Judy what other issues?
Andrew We suggested we need the references. Charmaine has raised
as questions. Why we said we need references or substantiation.
I am not sure how to handle that comment and others scattered through the
Charmaine I was looking for something that explains how.
Andrew there is nothing in W3C.
Judy I think it just needs one more sentence. Give it a try Andrew?
Have a dialogue with Henk. Henk if you have any wording suggestion please
Andrew people look in section 2.4 in the original document. Is RDF
Judy a lot of people would not understand.
Andrew everyone I know just says RDF.
Judy you could say a W3C statement about metadata. Comments and
discussion? How much explanation.
Charmaine I was thinking about standard format. I think an acronym
is not supposed to start a document. Putting in Resource Description
Format is needed. You provided a link there but in a normal document
you put in the phrase first.
Judy This might be an audience of managers, and marketing that would not
recognize this, but a few would have heard about metadata. Adding
a hook there to add meaning to the document would help here.
Charmaine I agree.
Judy when we are trying to figure out how to define, we must think about
who the audience is. Sometimes almost every document has a different
audience and we want to communicate.
Andrew item 28. Can we,... Charmaine has made a possible suggestion
as an addition.
Judy lets discuss, …
Andrew Charmaine suggested it is partly a business issue, and partly an
employee issue. I think it a good point, but how to fit in here?
Judy I think an assumption is here, people who do remote work, are on
slow dial up. I wonder when I read this, it feels a little uncomfortable.
It assumes a uniform assumption. The issue isn’t how many staff members
dial up from home, but what the dial situation is. A high speed dial
is standard in many situations any longer is a possibility.
Charmaine in my situation many faculty members don’t have high speed dial.
Judy we might be moving into another part of the resource, and maybe we
could take this in advisement and look at this to revise.
Shawn use in the efficiency section?
Judy support for that.
Andrew ok, to take some account under efficiency? Maybe under the
Judy what else is there in Charmaine's Issue?
Andrew I think 30 is discussed by Chuck as well. Just checking with
Charmaine. Some comment on their comments.
Judy can we have a time check. We have so much good comment to work.
After Charmaine’s comment, Chucks, then Natasha’s and a new draft from Carlos
on the authoring tools document. I would like to make sure that we get
to talk a little bit of Carlos documents today. And he can devote some
focused time to it. I am thinking we giving so much edits to Andrew.
Would it make sense to switch to Carlos’ documents, and then come back to
Andrew if I could agree with most Chuck’s and leaves for me to incorporate
their comments for next.
Natasha, mine were suggestions for changes.
Judy ok so how about we do that, Andrew will react on the list, and others
react on the list as well. We actually stop on this document right,
and go to Carlos.
3. Business Case for Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines
[notes on this section from Andrew Arch]
JB gave background to document development (http://www.fit.fraunhofer.de/~velasco/businessCase.html)
and asked for comment.
NL & AA thought it was much improved
GD - clarify 'state of the art' please. CV - what is the latests develpopment
in the field that you are preparing an authoring tool for. JB - problem may
be that the standards are ahead of the develpopers. HB1 - try 2 parts - status
of standards, and status of their product. CV - but this is for the developers,
not for tool selectors. JB - try 'implementation status'.
Grace, Charmaine, Natasha & Doyle to read carefully and comment for
CV - please also look at the issues in the changelog (http://www.fit.fraunhofer.de/~velasco/businessCaseChangeLog.html).
[notes on this section from Doyle Saylord]
Let me give a little background on this. One of two people on this
call were not in the face to face in Toronto, or in the tele call.
We had a brief conversation on the document that Carlos was working on.
If you look at the message from Carlos this morning. The title is a
response to the agenda. And what this document is an effort to create
a somewhat parallel to the business case auxiliary. Rather than to
developer something to authors who do development tools. We want to
have a concise business case or construction kit for them to make their business
case. Carlos has been cycling some fairly fast drafts. In Toronto
people had a lot of comments about how to make more concise and clear.
John Richards, and Matt May, and I felt the draft was much much clearer with
some changes. Overall I think the executive summary is much cleaner.
The rest of the document could be made shorter or stronger. Have others
looked at this, can we look at this. Does everyone understand what
the document is about?
Do people understand what the document is about? Has anybody had
a chance to look at the latest update?
Natasha the language is clear the message is clear. All the explanation
about the authoring tools is clear.
Judy other reactions?
Andrew I would echo Natasha’s comments.
Judy Natasha or Andrew are there things you would like to comment on?
Natasha I haven’t had a chance to look in detail.
Grace I didn’t’ understand what state of the art means?
Judy clarify state of the art, Carlos what did you mean. Did you
mean current situation?
Carlos standard situations, multimedia objects, multimedia, video, smil.
Judy sometimes state of the art has complex meaning. The latest and
best of what is implemented. What is happening here is ahead of the
4. Review Teams & Gallery
JB - updated WAI pages (http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/Review.html)
following recent meetings and decision about the direction of this work.
Last revised August 23, 2002 by Judy Brewer