on this page: attendees - redesigned WAI home page issues - next meeting
agenda in e-mail list archives: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2004AprJun/0048.html
Background: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2004AprJun/0044.html
Shawn provided background regarding home page design. Draft content has been developed. Several persons have suggested places for various text. What information do you want to have above the fold? “Above the fold” means what you can see without scrolling. “Valuable real estate” means information that can be seen at the top of the page without scrolling. Some criticism has been that there is too much information on the WAI site about WAI rather than Web accessibility. This is impacted by what is above the fold. We don’t have on the home page information about what can be found on the site.
SLH: Does the information tell you what you will find. Does it encourage you to go further?
LC: Do we want to add the word “strategies” or “techniques”?
JB: Techniques is under resources. I’m not sure why techniques would be called out separately.
CS: Techniques should not be called out separately.
SLH: The word “techniques” doesn’t resonate. In usability testing people did not recognize and understand it.
HB: methods
HB: Strategies seems higher level than techniques.
LC: I think that we need a word that signals to Web site developers that they can find information on the site:
RC: Strategy may be better.
SLH: I like strategy. It connotes solution solving.
CS: add implementation strategies.
JB: On the one hand, it’s not necessary. Can also find implementation and standardization strategies.
SLH: We are talking about adding the word “strategy.” Let’s look at the overall perspective.
JB: New sentence #1: WAI develops strategies, guidelines and resources to make the Web accessible to people with disabilities in collaboration with people around the world.
Blossom: As part of the World Wide Web Consortium…
JB: I don’t think that it should be in front.
CC: There has to be a context to make sense.
SLH: In collaboration with organizations around the world are many words. But, it doesn’t answer what I will find on this site.
SP: I agree with Charmane.
SLH: How is this helpful from the user perspective.
SP: It establishes credibility. I have come to the right source.
SP: home page will a link and a section about WAI. If we have a statement like this, what you will expect to find on this page, Charmane’s statement is appropriate.
JB: Andrew, you were saying that the condensed version sounds like a description about what we do rather than what one finds. Is the switch to “develops” rather than “provides.” Can we keep “develops” and indicate what one gets.
SLH: Collaboration around the world provides description of what we do?
AA: It says how we do it.
SLH: The second sentence, while it breaks out the groups, identifies target audiences.
JB: Help the audiences
SLH: I fall into one of these categories so that it applies to me.
JB: Left out people with disabilities. I want to avoid cataloguing.
RC: This kind of text is too formal, too far from the user. Here you will find guidelines, strategies, and resources developed by WAI. Say everything in one sentence only.
JB: I like the concept and “here you will find..”
SLH: we can provide context.
JB: It feeds into people’s brains fast. Maybe it works.
SLH: Some of the straw proposals had the source for. One reaction is that it is almost arrogant. Something like the "your window to" has more pizzazz.
SP: It could appear as if we are the only source. So, it could appear arrogant.
JB: It could mean definitive.
SLH: If we say that we are the source for international guidelines. Is this factual or arrogant.?
CC: collaboratively developed is a true statement. “A source for” puts me off.
AA: It is the source for guidelines. In terms of strategies and techniques, we have little for software developers.
RC: Your source is arrogant and it is not as direct.
SLH: Some of the issues are: setting the context
JB: I was thinking about what Roberto is saying. Could just have “Strategies, guidelines, and resources to make the Web accessible to people with disabilities.”
SLH: Is this appropriate for a tagline?
AA, CC, HB, RC: I like it.
SP: What will be in the title?
SLH: Web accessibility…..
BM: I like it. It will also have to do with Tim Bernerss-Lee’s quote. If we want to keep as a sentence, could have “WAI offers strategies, guidelines…..”
SLH: For a tagline, we don’t have to have as a full sentence.
LC: Five people said yes. I wonder if we can postpone a firm decision until we talk about some of the other concerns.
RC: We were starting from a phrase that is quite long. We now have a very short phrase. Isn’t it too short? I think that we should keep TBL quote.
SLH: It’s too short if it is too explain context and everything. But, it’s not too short if it is a tagline.
SP: Can we have W3C-WAI? This will help with context and will be short.
JB: There is no WAI in the phrase now.
SLH: W3C – WAI will be conveyed somewhere on the site. The tagline should be simple.
JB: Adding that would limit it.
SLH: On TBL’s quote, we need to get across ideas about what can be found on this site. Could also have highlights above the fold. The Task Force has discussed that the quote doesn’t specifically describe what WAI does. Where should it be?
RC: The quote should say on the page and positioned under the title, Web Accessibility Initiative. It makes a wonderful summary of what we do now. It’s really attractive. I have seen translations of this quote in many languages. It is known all over the world.
SLH: Chuck said above the fold.
SP: What will be below the tagline? Are there going to be highlights, links,…
SLH: We don’t know what will be under it, We are just talking about above the fold.
SP: Could use the quote as a separator.
JB: I agree in sentiment with Roberto and Chuck about the impact of this statement. Having it above the fold could be good. The feedback from the TF is important. The quote doesn’t tell you what is on the page. Chuck has said that it should be dated. I believe that it was in 1997, W3C’s intent to launch WAI. Dating it might discourage use. Harvey, you commented about political correctness. Some people, say that he misquoted. He intended to say, regardless of ability.
HB: My concern had been about political correctness. But, I withdraw it.
JB: He did mean it, as is.
HB: We all have disabilities, some we can’t recognize.
SLH: Does anyone want to make a comment about below the fold?
CC: I think that it is important. But, it doesn’t have to be above the fold.
SLH: The main argument is that if it’s above the fold, something else is not. Let’s talk about highlights.
SLH: Chuck and Roberto are in favor of highlights.
RC: Many people speak about the W3C Web site as static. We should have dynamic elements. We should impact the quality.
JB: Should be as short as possible to convey meaning.
SLH: Some people were thinking that the highlights would give information, in and of themselves. Examples could be: tip, examples from standards harmonization document. So that you could learn something just from reading it.
CC: One of the things that we could here, is to showcase different resources. My first response is that it could be specific and technie. Whose hot topic is it? But, we have a lot of resources that could be highlighted. Could also cut across the user base.
SLH: Could have technies and fuzzies; newbies and advanced. Do we want a nugget of information or a descriptive title?
JT and others: nugget
JB: One other place is the “tip of the day” on W3C Validator. I would tend to do more rather than less, at least three. Keep them trimmed down but still conveys some nugget. We should change it frequently.
SLH: If go to W3C home page, the text for the news announcements are 54 words, for example.
JB: Have more, rather than less, Have at least 3 items. Different types and content to appeal to different audiences. Draw out varied resources so that even advanced users would see something new. Rotate frequently enough to draw people back. Frequency is a resource issue. We could cue up a large supply. The maximum to have something there is a week. Maybe could rotate in sets.
SLH: There might be some things that are timely and important that might need to stay there longer. W3C home page sometimes has a top item that doesn’t scroll. Could have a new one, every week or so. Could have database where could get a different one every time you came to the site. Would have a link where you could see all of them.
SP: Frequency. A week is ok; month is too long. Could be two weeks.
SLH:: If quote is above the fold, some things get lowered.
CC: I think that the quote should be on the page. Where it is, I don’t have a push.
JB: above
SLH: Anyone vote for below?
JT: People want highlights and resources. Many people don’t know who TBL is. Target audience many not know.
HB: Tim’s is identified as the father of all this. Many people will have heard of him.
AA: Quote has become synonymous with WAI.
LC: Agree with Andrew and Roberto. It also conveys a vision.
SLH: We will take this back to the TF.
HB: Can tagline be put in logo?
SLH: We are not changing logo now.
Refer to: http;//w3.org/wai/eo/drafts/ucd/components.html
SLH: We miss communicating the various pieces. We think that it’s very important to communicate these aspects. We could say how WAI addresses these aspects. Could use the technique of progressive disclosure which allows people to drill down and get more information. Questions:
SP: The graphic is good. In terms of presentation, could use a question/answer approach. Questions can be grouped into categories. Components seems ok.
LC: integration
AA: Leave out the people aspect.
JB: It’s difficult to look at text description and look at it the same way. Can we get more informed reaction? It’s hard to react to a written, conceptual intent of an illustration. If I have something visual to look at, it helps to tell how it fits together. This is one iteration of how it can be expressed.
SP: This is the first time that it has been presented. It’s a very good first attempt. There is a depth to it, a concept.
SLH: Take a few minutes and brainstorm what to call this and a methaphor. Send comments to SLH rather than to list.
BM: I am still unclear what you are aiming at. This could be a newbie page.
SLH: This would be an intro page.
BM: Think in terms of not just the illustration, the whole concept.
Friday 7 May 2004