on this page:
meeting information: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2003/07-wai-training.html
agenda detail: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2003/0717-detail.html
Before doing training, pre-tests Web site for audience. Starts by using JAWS to get their awareness of some limitation.
In Denmark have national testing questions, including Web accessibility. Submissions can receive a maximum 5 kroner ranking. This year many of the formerly 5 kroner rankings degraded to 4 kroner because of unawareness of Web accessibility.
Major failings: simple things like no alt text on graphics.
Training informs about W3C and WAI. Good idea to use similar rules about Web accessibility Then shares about the E-europe accessibility agreement delivering eAccessibility http://www.clh.dk/links/webinfo.htm (in danish)
There are no laws in Denmark on accessibility.
Instead are the National IT and Telecom
Agency's guidelines http://www.netsteder.dk,
which are a subset of W3C WCAG.
The Danish Center for Accessibility site
is:
http://www.dcft.dk
All who need it get computers with JAWS installed. Jaws is only software with Danish included.
Presentation details how to write Web sites, how to use forms, etc.
An hour is used for JAWS use.
Then shows a report from testing using an automated evaluation tools (Lift Online) result of selected tests of audience's Web sites. Explains examples of errors found in the test form Lift online. Shows examples of these errors on audience's Web sites.
Emphasize that these are only examples and the other Web sites have similar problems.
It is not hard to get WCAG level one. Use appropriate text on links.
The National
IT and Telecom Agency has a collection of links to WAI resources:
http://www.netsteder.dk/foelgegruppe/wai/index.html
JB: How to use JAWS online, is an important capability.
MK: How People with
Disabilities use the Web
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/PWD-Use-Web
JB: What is level of audience?
HBj: varies - clueless, to some who know people with disabilities. Some who are Web designers know of government requirements.
Handouts - originally passed around a version in Braille - made point that many of us cannot understand. We need accessible handouts...
The conversational way works best. How communicate core values of institute. Michigan State University (MSU) requires documents to work cross-browser, and cross-disability.
Apply to general Web coding. The statement of encouragement: Maximize accessibility, intentionally omit WCAG level.
Once establish approach to accessibility, then communicate it. Paper, tell directors, some in training. Don't maximize. How change culture? With budget cuts, minimize cost, maximize communication of information. At MSU all computers have JAWS. But - no instruction on it. Didn't know that it could be used to test Web sites.
Help people understand that when implement to guidelines, understand impact on people's lives and processes.
What changes occur in lives of people, who we are, and what to do with it.
Implementation of new technology has impact on-line and distance education. Need to include impact on persons. Have a task force, funded usability lab, tools for use cross-campus.
Team work - relieves tension between Web coders, and graphic designers. At CSUN - a session showed how to do Web design with limited graphics.
Do graphics and pretty pictures to make accessible and look good. You are most and least important person at the same time. Most (except blind) see pages online. Place in process: See things in coding point of view. Make expandable, regardless of screen resolution. Have better way to expand. Use Photoshop or Illustrator. Design to cut image so it can expand. Think ahead before cut up. Can make site expandable, liquid, flexible. Can make any site have those capabilities in a few weeks.
Does Web coding. Appreciated the talents of VC for adding aesthetic qualities of Web site. Mesh ideas. Learned from CC the importance of aesthetics, balance, and communications. Think outside the box, including functionality, accessibility, and aesthetics. Can reach maximum audience.
CC: when working a new site, consider process needs of organization, including awareness of accessibility, good look and feel, liquid design, and accessibility issues. Most important is effective broadly used communication.
CC: Audiences differ, so adapt presentation: top management, specific designers, etc.
LK: How catch the technical issues - cut.
CC: Have three sites now. It is not that hard.
DS: Do lots of learning and training at Wells-Fargo. Different aspects presented. A new bank vendor has a collaborative tool, effective in profound way. Key is collaboration. Lots of learning environment drives this. Online work with group of people.
CC: Use instant messages in group.
MC: Time and cost issues?
JB: Table those issues, we have Web site pages.
PG: Training at BrailleNet, people expectations need to change. Accessibility team is good.
MLS: What audience levels - how bring on-board.
CC: Achieve 100% of MSU moving to Web.
JB: Lost during quote. Would like more structure. Normal presentation use lots of slides. The conversational approach works.
CC: Use technology, generally speaking on behalf of VC and JT.
LK: What feedback do you get and how do you use it?
CC: The biggest requirement is to explain how to prepare documents before they get to us.
LK: Generally audience: clients from on-campus (presidents office, external affairs, etc.) Sometimes State of Michigan Dept of Treasury - 30 administrators.
Assume audience awareness of Section 508, Bobby, Wave.
Three day certification course in creating accessible Web sites - also offer various durations 2-day through 2-week.
Greatest fears: Guidelines (WCAG), user centered control and design stylesheets.
Need visual appeal. Leave unattractive. Consider how much content per page. Flash, Shockwave, java, animation problems.
Talking ATM machines may be inappropriate. Voice output may be overheard. So, maintain privacy. @@
Simplicity: www.useit.com
Enrichment: www.robdougan.com
Sites involved with art or design provide challenges. http://surface.yupp.com
Level-three compliant sites: http://www.imtc.gatech.edu, The Center for Assistive Technology and Environmental Accessibilityhttp://www.catea.org @@
Want sites that are accessible and beautiful.
Text-only sites - are they equivalent?
Alternative text-only sites;
Rarely complete
Rarely updated often as graphical site.
Use only as last resort.
Example: Amazon.com Came up with access site. Text only. Link at bottom of the page.
Using color appropriately - www.lighthouse.org/color-contrast.htm
1 in 20 have color deficiency - use redundant conveyance, without color. Test by printing mockups in gray-scale.
Also see visicheck site.
DS: on color, see Joe Clark's comments as well.
VC: important to know what your qualifications as instructor are.
PG: Now have dynamic data base. Developers in technical way "it works". Managers claim "it works."
DC: How address dynamic sites?
RT: Generally deal with static sites. If know how to create sites properly, can generate code appropriately. It is inappropriate to claim that dynamic pages are excuse.
JB: avoidance of "text only". More fundamental misunderstanding. Tendency to construct boxes: blind, cognitive, sighted, deaf. People come with continuum. Low vision - need images. Section 508 does not require scalable fonts. People with dyslexia and reading limitations need visual information. Misunderstanding of disability.
RT: Not same experience.
DS: Much goes on moving between HTML, JAWS. HTML standardization not appearing in other tools. Need good examples. Text only is part of continuum of practices.
SLH: Another example of why text-only site is not adequate: Use main site, break glasses, used to main site, don't want to use different text-only site.
PG: Now when ask for text-only, two sites-hard to maintain.
HB: Voice browser.
RT: Do include PDA.
JB: Liked organization. Not sure about Web designers scared to death, how horrendous to make accessible Web sites. Avoid "extremifying" about accessibility. Don't feed prejudices that may not be present initially.
JB: Did presentation at RI school of design - students were open to extension.
LK: Making Web site accessible, rather than retrofit. Any fears about doing it?
RT: Hope that over two weeks, four sessions, folks could design.
VC: Once you are done, satisfying - did good for some others. It is possible.
Does a five-day training course in Spain
2003 European Year of People with Disabilities
Spain Legislation: public Web sites accessible by end 2005.
Includes legacy data
CEAPAT (National Center for Personal Autonomy and Assistive Technology), Real Patronato, ONCE (Spanish National Organization of the Blind). (Funded by national lottery.)
Together form IWASP initiative
IWASP (Initiative for Accessible Web in the Public Sector)
Publication of new, integrated, set of translations of WAI documents as paperback book,. online and on CDROM
Series of one-week trainer training courses for Web designers.
Students from public sector:
Universities, provincial governments, municipal councils
Always some without necessary prior knowledge.
None attend only first day - for managerial high-level content.
Five days, Monday to Friday
One day general introduction for wider audience
Four days specialization for designers and Webmasters
Monday: Intro: Accessibility, added value for the Web
Disabilities, barriers and access strategies.
Tuesday: Design techniques - content
Wednesday: Design techniques - Navigation, data input
Thursday: Tools and Technologies - Flash MX, Authoring tools, Dreamweaver, PDF (accessible)
Friday - Evaluation and certification, further information
Presentations are knowledge-based.
Modules: Design techniques
For each problem with solution: Accessibility problem: Demo, groups affected, design solutions
For each problem with prohibitions: Accessibility problem: Demo, groups affected, relevant checkpoint
Modules: Evaluation and certification
Sampling plan
Evaluation techniques
TAW (Test de Accesibilidad Web - Web Accessibility Test)
Modules: Further information -none on paper.
On-line resources
Bibliography - unfortunately all books are in English
WAI documents and relationships between them
Translations
Course documentation on CD-ROM
Students get course diploma - For attendance only, No Examination. Students must attend all sessions
TAW, evaluation tool in Spanish of WCAG checkpoints, gives report with problems located, explained, with pointers to WCAG checkpoints. Analyze site http://www.teleservicios.com with TAW. The results are similar to WAVE. Generates reports in XML.
Have an example set of bad pages for students to correct. Students should learn to produce pages accessibly initially, not necessarily fix bad pages.
At the bottom of pages with problems, has a link at the bottom to a page that identifies the problem, and shows an accessible alternative.
WC: Can make available?
MK: A student who misses a day gets no diploma?
AC: Correct.
AC: Classes held in local offices. Training is free.
MK: Has trouble getting managers to come for even half-day classes.
AC: Ten in each class. Run every six or eight weeks. Had expected that Monday would be interesting for managers. Don't get them in practice.
SAZ: Downloadable version of TAW?
AC: There is an on-line downloadable Java version. It produces a checklist as corrected.
LU: Liked bad examples, with links to corrections.
AC: It is a lab-based class, learn by doing.?
KG: Oracle does some hands-on training.
AC: have used blind manager to show off how use JAWS. Generally haven't had any disabled persons in the training. Many staff are disabled, but not in the right way to demonstrate things.
Using this at BrailleNet. They have a set of three trainings at BrailleNet: 1 hour for top executives at their offices; 2-3 days (the basics) where 3rd day is an option; and a 5 day training (for experts) linked to BrailleNet network. People get a diploma for a 5-day training.
Pierre will be presenting a short version of the 2-day training.
There are 3 main innovations to their trainings:
In this presentation, he will focus on the 2-day training.
The goal is to teach webmasters the basics. The training usually consists of 6-10 people with 2 trainers. They start with a form to check participants' expertise in HTML and web accessibility. They also end with a form for feedback.
Day 1: They aim to make it clear that an inaccessible web site excludes persons with disabilities. To start, they invite a blind BrailleNet person to come in to the meeting and run through participants' websites. They also talk about WCAG1.0 and 2.0.
In afternoon, they present how to use the free tools for evaluation as well as presenting how to change CSS in a website. The kind of webmaster they want in these trainings is one who knows how to work in base HTML. They want people who know the basics of HTML so they can get into the detail.
Day 2: The aim is to teach the BrailleNet easy to use method First, they review the previous day. Then they present the easy to use method.
In the afternoon, they let the participants work in small groups to apply the easy to use method to web sites.
Day3: (optional) teach criteria of AccessiWeb Label Present criteria one by one, how to check and consequences if not implemented. They use a lot of examples.
MK: Can you clarify if it is 43 or 99 criteria?
PG: 27 basic criteria, but all levels total 99.
JB: You invite an organization, but tell them how many to bring?
PG: Yes, but we ask them to send the most relevant.
HB: Are the 99 cross-referenced to the WCAG 1.0?
PG: Yes, 70 come directly from WCAG 1.0, the rest are ones that BrailleNet says they want to check.
HB: These should be in WCAG 2.
PG: We hope.
DS: Did you say you have 2 trainers and 1 blind demonstrator?
PG: Yes. But the blind demonstrator is only there at the beginning of the first morning.
KG: On the feedback form, do you ask what is most motivating about the training, and what is the answer?
PG: Usually we get responses like "the trainers are good, but it is hard for us to implement these methods because they are not quick" and "Call my manager and tell him what we have to do."
JB: Do you have a follow-up to update your trainings?
PG: In 5 day training, we do a once a year refresh of the staff to update the training. Please give email and we will come and give a 1-hour demo.
MK: Is the 1-hour presentation for managers?
PG: We have considered a longer training, but that is why we do the 1-hour. It is not just about technology.
KG: How frequently are you doing the 2-day training?
PG: We have training every 2 weeks. There was a change in France this year, President Chirac made people with disabilities one of his priorities. So, mainly public websites need to get accessible. Also, it is hard to find companies in France that do trainings on accessibility that do it correct. That is why there we have a lot of work.
DS: I have talked with people in other countries-how is this being implemented in France. In Canada they are doing it by policy, not law.
PG: I am not sure yet because the decision was given just last week. On Friday morning, we saw the law will change by the end of the year, but we don't know how. BrailleNet is written in to the partnership but we don't know how.
MM: I applaud you for getting mindshare of executives.
slides: @@
JB: [Talks about her presentation and what she typically does in a training session. She shows Quick Tips card. She makes sure the materials are accessible to all participants. Make sure transportation is arranged, site is accessible.] This presentation is one that hasn't been done before.
You can run an automated test for technical assessments. The tools can not determine a mismatch. Some things require a manual evaluation. [Goes to WAI site and runs through Evaluation Suite.]
Preliminary review requires low skill to do. Quick and easy, but incomplete. Resources on site expand on the topic. Best approach requires a combination of skill sets. People who know a specific area and techniques to solving problems. Be sure to include people who are users that require accessible sites to complete their tasks. If you are sighted you may skew results even if you are experienced. Real users are required to do an accurate test.
Determine the scope initially (whole site or piece). What is the intended level of conformance. Tests should be done by trained evaluator. Make sure reports are clear. Does it meet client expectations? Modify the evaluation template. Articulate who the reviewers where.
Bring vendor in to the process. Think about what authoring tool the vendor is using. Use an authoring tool that generates valid code.
How virtual teams can work well.
Documentation and list of resources.
MS: Do this project separate from usability testing?
JB: Apples and oranges. It would be nice to combine the two: a conformance evaluation, plus an assessment of it working for the needs of the user.
MS: Would you address how to do this with no budget?
JB: You could partner with another organization and trade some time.
PG: You said to use different tools, does WAI plan to make a tool for evaluations?
JB: On the WAI site there are a list of tools that can be used for evaluations. There is a working group that isn't very active. They were working on a standard output format called URL for this. There is work on an "ERL wrapper" (ERL is Evaluation and Report Language) that would combine the output into a central report. We do communicate to the tool developers and help them evolve the tools.
WAC: The W3C Validator has some checks related to accessibility.
CC: Sighted users can't do it quite right. She has found that her disabled users can accommodate things in testing that are wrong.
JB: True, the tendency is not to tell the truth or that they have a different level skill set than the typical user of the site. It is invaluable to have plural perspectives. An awareness step is achieved by the throw the mouse over the shoulder.
LU: Experience is that a programmer being the tester is more tolerant of errors that is part of the tester's perspective.
JB: When we handed our template first, it was not well received because the tester wanted to be friendly. It is easier to do a checklist (more structure) for the evaluator, because they don't have to be personally attached to the results. There is a lot more substance when doing a cross culture evaluation.
MK: How is it that you can get valid feedback with 8 when it is only 7 more than 1.
JB: Formal selection gives you more dimension to the feedback when it is formalized.
SLH: This is a hot topic in the usability field. When you add people with disabilities the additional dimension needs to be evaluated.
MK: We are trying to connect users with industry.
JB: We want to expand on the guidelines for the inclusion of users with disabilities. There are some interesting perspectives.
LU: Need to identify the user types and the disability types.
LK: You can improve the presentation by including the addresses to the materials mentioned.
JB: They are in there. But in addition I should tell people how to get there.
LK: The text is too big because I can't see it all.
JB: It is in HTML and I zoomed in. I tend to present the documents and tend to loose people by jumping back and forth.
LK: You were reading the screen.
JB: If there is a blind person in the room then I voice the slides. We also publish them on the site, you can find them in the Talks directory.
JB+LK: [Discussion of techniques for presentation.]
PG: How do you evaluate sites with over 1,000 pages?
JB: The answer from WAI EOWG is to describe the whole site, then follow the algorithm to determine pages within the site for manual tests. If the robot is finding errors then you should expand the scope.
SAZ: Test the unique instances, but not every page that is generated.
PG: That won't work for our sites
JB: Need to tell the client that they need a CMS and templates to help the evaluation process.
NL: Connecting everyone to the power of technology. 54M in US 500M worldwide. September 21, 2000 HP CEO and 45 other CEOs committed to making information access to all people including those with disabilities. Standardized enterprise standard across the enterprise. HP is 508 and WCAG Priority. Accessibility guidelines are part of development, all sites are required to be compliant. All government standards.
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/accessibility/Webaccessibility/index.html
Accessibility team trains all developers and retrain as needed.
[Natasha proceeds to go over her training presentation. The presentation is scrubbed of HP sensitive information. She goes over the specifics of their guidelines, and how to best utilize them in their current environment.]
Part of evaluation process is a self administered checklist. Don't forget HP is doing random compliance audits.
JB: [responding to Harvey's comment about standards versus guidelines"] W3C does put out standards but not standards like ISO. Standards versus guidelines. They are industry standards.
PG: HP is big company and it is possible, we will use HP as an example.
LU: What was of interest, I would love to see specific changes articulated.
KG: You combined 508 and WAI.
NL: Yes it is a combination of 508 and WCAG level 1 and 2.
JB: It is priority 1 and 2.
NL: It is internal nomenclature.
KG: Do you have checklists?
NL: Yes, we have a whole Web site and it details each requirement. It also has an FAQ etc...
JB: This is confidential training. It is nice to see the level you have taken the set.
KG: Training looks very similar to the Oracle set.
slides: http://www.w3.org/2003/Talks/07-eo-wac-wcag2/
[Wendy ran through her slides.] WCAG 1.0 is the standard and should be used for production. 2.0 is at minimum 16 months from a recommendation stage. If you want to be involved then you should contact WCAG working group.
WC: the main issues I take from the discussion are:
[There were various questions about status and next steps.]
SLH: [Shawn is using two different personas to describe her as a trainer and her as a peer to this group.]
SLH: [Running through presentation and describing various scenarios of alt text. Short descriptions versus long descriptions.]
[There is a group activity to describe an image in different contexts. Point of exercise is to demonstrate contextually-based image equivalent descriptions.]
PG: Who does the ALT text for images?
NL: At HP it is the SME.
CC: We go back to business owner and tell them to fill in the blanks.
KG: The owners got to do it. But just need to educate them. The consultants are, but the owners aren't.
JB: Lets focus now on training.
JB: Reminder on using the approaches presented today - using the approach is fine; if want to use material, check with presenter.
SLH: Would customize presentation to company and the owners of the roles in the process.
CC: Do long description tags show up by themselves?
SLH: In IE no, in Home Page Reader, yes.
JB highlighted sections of Overview: Planning Web Accessibility Training
AC: what shawn did was what expected and hoped for, and I'll do for next time
LU: very helpful. would be nice to have more time at the end for talking at end
KG: mirror what AC, LU said. good to have more specific demos like Shawn's
MS: would be good to know different messages for different audiences
MK: ITTATC trying to do a database of what training is being offered, to do matchmaking. encourage trainers to fill out online training survey. also trying to develop training material for others. would like material from those willing to share
CC: love a variety of things. helps when you have visuals
JB: for registration, tried to get enough information for planning, but not scare people away. suggestions on how we explain the session?
MS: I'm really excited about tomorrow
HBj: interesting doing more stuff like Shawn did, go into presentation mode. but each then needs to be 2 hours each, only 3 sessions
JB: maybe only allowed 5 minutes for set up, and must do rest in presentation mode
WC: need to think about goals. i found today very nice mixture, to find out what different people are doing - in depth & broad
LK: echo Wendy. Best Practices makes it sound like you're going to see the best thing, but instead we discussed them
JB: need to think about naming, clearer prep of speakers so we get more of really getting into the substance of the presentation
MS: say ahead of time: what your goal is, what you're presenting, what the outcomes you want
JB discussed tomorrow
[adjourned]