W3C logo Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) logo > EOWG Home > EOWG Minutes

EOWG Minutes 06 February 2004 Meeting

on this page: attendees - outreach updates - Upcoming meetings - WAI Resources - Social Factors - Standards Harmonization - next meeting

Meeting Summary and Action Items


agenda in e-mail list archives: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2004JanMar/0066.html



Regrets: (partial: leaving call early or arriving late)

Regrets: (full)

JB: Changes to agenda: Item 3 (Standardization) ... no new draft ready for this meeting. Helle requested we move discussion of Cannes meeting earlier in the meeting. Also some new discussion of Social Factors on the list. Agreement to rearrange agenda?
[Concensus: Yes.]

Outreach Updates

JB: any updates?
JB: any trends or issues to report?

DS: A trend: The British government has plans to install chips in telephone poles to monitor traffic (over the Internet) that may benefit people with blindness (or others needing accurate positioning information (as opposed to GPS which can be inaccurate)).

HS: Surprised to learn, when he went to Austria last week, that a group with a proposal to make educational portals accessible - a European Union project - was just trying to start with composing accessibility guidelines from scratch. Henk is concerned that a large part of the world may not be getting our message about the WAI.
JB: to comment on this with respect to deliverables planning - she looked at very old deliverables that included campaigns to proselytize to different types of audiences. One was an electronic-campaign to worldwide groups like librarians, education groups, etc. Should we put educational campaigns to these kinds of groups go back on the wish list?
[Consensus: yes, let's do it.]
HBj: Henk, what were you going to do in the EU project?
JB: what will be new that will be coming out of it?
HS: what is new? - not much, but at least, we will reach out to all Education portals stakeholders in EU, and will make technical guidelines for educational portals. In other words, reaching out to a group that hasn't got the message.

JB: any comments about using this part of the meeting to focus on trends and issues, rather than outreach updates? Why, because outreach updates have been posted more regularly on the mailing list.

Upcoming meetings reminders.

Background (from agenda):

up-to-date EOWG teleconference schedule for first quarter 2004:

EOWG face-to-face in Cannes-Mandelieu, France
- Monday 1 March, Tuesday 2 March, Friday 3 March 2004
- registration open:


HBj: any new information about the Cannes meeting?
JB: we have identified several issues we want to talk about, so we have the beginnings of an agenda. We could look at this now and she could try to pull it together in a draft agenda for next meeting. Look at first quarter deliverables... thinks there was some plan to brainstorm on Glossary. Any other suggestions.
[Some discussion followed, with Judy indicating some possible problems with joint meetings with WCAG WG]
HB: with respect to the Glossary discussion, he would be very interested to get feedback about translation problems.
HBj: good idea since there will be people from Europe at that meeting.
JB: has had requests to set up an official W3C translation policy, and has been working on an internal draft for quite a while now with certain groups inside the W3C - rest of W3C is also getting interested in having an official translation policy. By the March meeting, she might be able to show the draft WAI translation policy. Feedback from local language communities would be nice. Would people be interested in looking at this at the Cannes meeting?
[Consensus: Yes]
Action Item: Judy and Helle to coordinate on content of this Translation topic.
See http://www.w3.org/WAI/glossary for more information about the Glossary work.

WAI Resources Page updates

Background (from agenda):

- some revisions will be available before teleconference
- note that this will be _only_ for discussion of some content updates
- design & organization of material are being discussed separately in WSTF


JB: made quite a lot of content updates (many that had been pending for a long time) and hopes to revise more frequently in the future. Not suggesting we talk about the redesign and re-organization at this time.

HS: pointed out two documents described as Draft in the Evaluation and Repair Tools section aren't indicated as such when you link to them.
JB: a dilemma?
HBj: thinks you should take the "draft" away.
Action Item: JB to remove "draft" designation from links to documents in Evaluation and Repair Tools section.

HS: question... how long can things stay draft? We have some very old drafts.
JB: e.g. "How people with disabilities use the Web" for three years or so? Well that is on a clearly defined NOTE track process. For things not on Note or Recommendation track we are a bit fuzzier. Do you remember what the 4-year-old draft was?
HS: "Techniques for Accessibility Evaluation and Repair Working Draft"
JB: [Judy explained the convoluted history of this document- contact her if you want to hear it again.]
JB: Asked Blossom to take an action item to the Web Site Task Force to decide how to organize but distinguish some documents that are legacy but still useful.
Action Item:Blossom to discuss with Web Site Task Force to decide how to organize but distinguish some documents that are legacy but still useful on the Resource page.

HBj: concerned that the Getting-started page goes directly to the language of preference in your browser profile - without warning. No other pages she has seen do this.
JB: not sure how to inform people in advance about content negotiation. There may be a few other documents set up in this manner.
JB: asked Blossom to take this back to the WSTF as well - to look at how to explain to users what might be happening.
BM: will, but confused about language content negotiation.
JB: showed one technique for seeing other available language - e.g. try -
Another technique is to set your browser language preferences and have content negotiation done automatically.
Action Item:Blossom to discuss with Web Site Task Force this issue of language-negotiation confusion.

Social Factors page

Background (from agenda):

New agenda item.


JB: some comments came to the list about this page recently.
JB: Harvey posted a link to the Microsoft sponsored Forrester Research report on assistive technology.
[see "The Wide Range of Abilities and Its Impact On Computer Technology" http://www.microsoft.com/enable/research/ and
"The Convergence of the Aging Workforce and Accessible Technology," http://www.microsoft.com/enable/aging/workforce.aspx]

CL: astounded and happy to use it as a leverage piece (but not sure about the numbers - some concern about the credibility factor). It bears huge credibility simply by reason of who commissioned it, and the fact they published it so prominently.
SP: agreed that numbers seem high and wants to look at methodologies.
CC: happy to be able to use it as a concept piece
JB: how can we use it in our business case suite?
CL: we ought to use it as a reference in the suite.
SP: agrees.
JB: will add this to the change log. We can discuss how to do this most effectively at a future meeting.

Why Standards Harmonization is Essential to Web Accessibility.

Background (from agenda):

- an updated draft will be available before teleconference


[Discussion of this item: Postponed to future meeting.]

Next Meeting

[13 February 2004]

Regrets for 13February: Chuck Letourneau, Andrew Arch

JB: proposed closing the call early.
[Consensus: let's close early]

Last updated on $Date: 2004/07/12 01:55:45 $ by $Author: shawn $