w3c logo Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) logo > EOWG home > EOWG Minutes

EOWG - 27 July 2007

We have 2 versions of minutes for this week. This is one. The other is at www.w3.org/2007/07/27-eo-minutes

Judy, Liam’s comment can’t get in to IRC.  WCAG 2.0 presentation with updated analysis of presentation.  Available in different drafts.  List of questions under open issues.  Upcoming teleconference schedule.  Because of August vacations.  November 2007 tech meeting.  Logistical issues Judy’s hard drive is almost gone.  So may drop off of IRC not look at document fully.  Liam is on the UK number.

Liam it’s fine.

Judy Any questions on the agenda.  Shawn can you start us on the WCAG 2 presentation discussion.  Andrew will help fill out on IRC notes.

Shawn this morning I updated the file format blurb.  Thank you Sylvie.  Refresh if you have a version. Of the.  Anyone not able to get the presentation itself? 

Sylvie still the version from last week?

Shawn it is an updated since last week.  Wednesday late my time since then.  Not a whole lot changed, but some.  Let’s go to the requirements doc.  The changes are the approach.  Did anyone have any additional comments.  Objective, goals, purpose, or audience?  Approach…Comments on approach.

Harvey we assume anybody can use power point?

Shawn we assume anyone can use powerpoint, open office, or html.  Any comments on any of the approach section.  Datedness or the simplicity?  Let’s look at open issues.  Under the H2 notes, and H3 open issues.  Rough concept draft.  Lot of holes and rough spots but generally are the important topics included or what’s missing?

Judy Going back to audience I was looking at Justin, and Sylvie, to have the open issues section we might need two tiers of the audience section, who might deliver for the presentation that might have knowledge.  Are we stating the level of the audience of the audience, the presenters.

Shawn Justin?

Justin, the may be somewhat aware but at least know on a general high level.

Andrew I would assume some knowledge of WCAG one and limited of 2.

Judy new to accessibility but find their way into it somehow.

Shawn we assume that there is some knowledge in WCAG one, but little or no knowledge of WCAG 2.  Does that work?

William the listeners should be well aware of WCAG 2.

Shawn we can’t be sure of that.

William once they have read the presentation they are familiar.

Harvey tentative date for WCAG 2?

Shawn that is a tangential question!  Anything else? 

William refreshing for audience.

Shawn our audience assuming some knowledge of WCAG one, and no knowledge of WCAG 2, are the important topics included, or what’s missing?

Henny I’m not sure if this belongs in the description the main criteria and principles could go in there.

Shawn there’s a four principles, 12 guidelines, and then a whole bunch of success criteria.  What are you thinking Henny?

Henny what a guideline is, success criteria is.  Describing the framework.  Not sure it goes in this or not.

Shawn I think it does.  Record to make sure it is in there?  Yes.  What else?  What things do you want to make sure get in there?  Over view of structure and make sure of layers.

William if we are presenting to people who don’t know what accessibility is.  That should be in.

Shawn what about a statement up front this is  about accessibility, and if you don’t go here?  Ok next? 

William it might include with accessibility not familiar with WAI.

Shawn ideal thing to have a hand with relevant with putting links through out the slide.  So that people can copy.  Links throughout the slides, or the end?

Andrew people try to scribble down, so I am careful.  I prefer in the handout to the end.

William do they take notes frequently.

Andrew if you minimize the notes they need to take.

Justin I have reference to my blog which covers my presentation.

Shawn one URL that is for all the rest of the URLs.  I am going to make an action for myself.  Any other comments.  Where to put URIs?

Judy at the end of each section?  Go back to a page of a collection of them.

Shawn that is what Justin said.  What else you would like to see in there?  Are the myths adequately addressed? Not one slide it is throughout the presentation.  Like WCAG is huge and you have to address the whole thing.

William in keeping a certain amount for the novice, a list of the standard myths.  Like you can’t have images.

Justin more the secondary audience keep the intro material to a slide or two.  So they aren’t lost.

Judy how many things would be on that?  Not dull and boring, what else?

Shawn too restrictive?

Judy I’m torn almost feels like a distraction to the forward moving thing, more important to have something up front that points where they need it.

William summed up in the myth dull and boring.

Shawn Mention smoothly, enough to say only a little said doesn’t interpret the flow and bore the advanced.

William put a canned speech near the top.  Being in the notes then the presenter can decide.

Shawn the other thing, something said WCAG 2 is so hard oh ok not so bad.  In general up front such as dull and boring, hard to read but that is hard to read.  Take something I can put into the flow easily.

Liam you don’t have to put in the negatives.

Shawn that is a reason to not have myths.

Liam without referencing the myths have some positives.

Shawn ideas?

Judy just be start with the one that is current.  If you have heard the draft is hard to read, please read the current one you might be surprised.  The myths from a positive angle. 

Liam show a success criteria from the first draft.

Justin slightly self deprecating?

Wayne I think Liam’s thing about feedback is important.  We listened and we addressed them in the latest draft.

Liam these are better then.  Tortured sentence, and then and elegant one.

Shawn ok.

Justin people think that WCAG 1.0 is not good enough.  Tired of WCAG 1.0 realize not enough and moving forward?

Shawn Henny said earlier some people don’t see the need, a lot of people do, but not everyone.  We have to be careful because 2.0 isn’t done, and 1.0 is the only one out there.  Self deprecating from the staff it might be ok, but someone else would not  work.

Liam it is an interesting document and takes time.   A lot of people need to look at it.  Even if you are not in the inside.

Shawn what else do you want to see in here?  The questions about WCAG 2 answer those questions?

William as it is no.

Shawn ok what?

William a long way from complete.  Changing a whole lot.  For example…I can’t find but there is a whole bunch preclude it is used as is.

Shawn are we addressing the questions, the content is roughed out there, the question might be all the content is there.

William the devil is the details.

Justin start implementing with it, what is my take away?  What can I do right now.

Shawn yep.

Liam continuous improvement thing.  If you have knowledge at all.

William put in slide ten put in participation.

Liam I am keen on the participation which overcomes various objections.  When you comment.

Shawn see if you can get to the presentation near the end.  Three slides from the end.  Delete this slide.  Advancing web accessibility.  There is a place holder for that.  Also for what to do advance improvements.

Justin is that the take away in this presentation?

Shawn two things what to do, and advance.   Distracting?

Justin now listen to 45 minutes then go talk to WCAG.

Shawn go to the vender to make sure they do what you need to do accessibility.

Andrew more particularly if you are developing or customizing CMS.  For large organizations.

Shawn added the authoring tool meet WCAG 2, and what you can do.  Got those.

Judy just on what you can do.  We shouldn’t be saying the main thing they can do is comment.  They can also do, but the main thing they can do is what they can draw from it now.

Shawn they can submit techniques.

Judy I think t hey need a graduated thing to do.  The top of the list things would meet their own self needs.  Here is what it can do for you first and here is what you can do to move the process along.

William one problem sort of indicates it is less complete than we pretend it is.

Judy we should give pretty straight.

William how far alongit is.  Dictates how you get comments.

Judy we are not anxious to get a whole lot more comments.  The focus on what they can do now.  Most focused, but not a big issue.

Shawn comments?  Questions that people are asking that you want to make sure are covered.

William authoring tool question is sort of dominant.  Most people won’t get into the nuts and bolts, use a tool that has it’s contents.

Judy where is that now Shawn.

Shawn three quarters down action slide.  But not yet fleshed out.

Judy what if we spent a few minutes multiple specific questions.  What would be better for you?

Shawn I have the whole spiel, I would rather wait.

Willima I would like to listen.

Shawn it’s at the Yahoo video.  They don’t have the transcript.  The whole issue of transcripts.  At the end for anyone to talk about it.

Liam put on the end of the list.

Shawn I’m not comfortable sending out yet.  I can send off list though.  Anything else,  next question in what order should topics be covered.  On the mailing list, Justin sent a comment.  WCAG 2.0 open issues.  Anyone want Justin to read.

Justin Essentially give this is where WCAG one is complete and where WCAG 2 will fill in the gaps.  Why is it inadequate now, how two makes all the pieces fit together.  What is the time frame, action points.  Go forth and talk in the world.

Shawn read through one two three.  What do people think about that order and sequence.

Justin.  For people to think WCAG 2 is the answer for all their needs.

Shawn any questions of that order and approach.

Judy I think it depends upon the presentation specifically, but sounds like a good potential flow.

Shawn it takes what I was doing on my own,  It think it is really good and I will try for that if there are no objections.  Next question any other big things that jump out at you.  Ooo that doesn’t look right.

Judy I have a minor thing whenever you want.

Shawn right, anything else?

William slide 41 encourage harassing authoring tool vendors.

Shawn that’s the plan man.  Actively encouraging improvement instead of harassing.  Anything else?

Wayne, organization of WCAG 2.0 is so much better than 1.0 because we understand what to do with accommodations.  Which is about articulating guidelines.  2.0 is really formed, something significant.

Shawn ok.  Anything else?  The last thing I talked is a specific question.

Judy on slide 11 I would really like to see those two questions split, benefits of WCAG 2 some overlap with slide 13.  The speaker notes for that are answering in a structural way, but really different concepts.

Shawn separate in Justin’s outline.  Anything else.

William when should I start using WCAG 2.0?  When can I though is to a lot of people.

Andrew because if your local discrimination law requires WCAG 1.0  How can I start using instead when.

Shawn we want to make sure that is stressed.

Wayne in areas where the main result is success criteria is sharpened, apply if you are using 1.0 or 2.0.

Liam that is a really good message.  They might ask themselves the relationship between 1.0 and 2.0

Shawn I’ll make a note of that.

Wayne the only way you are following one point oh is to use a 2. 0 technique.

William is slide 12 put the over all advantages of using these guidelines.

Shawn anything else?  This may be too specific.  The last question any ideas of the layout to slide 32.  I just never did come up with a good with that.  Any brilliant or brain storms to use that.  Techniques and understanding.  Presentations builds on those four boxes.  Differences between normative and informative.  The first half, this adds on to that, the idea the overview document adds on to, trying to say, is make sure you read the overview first, then these other documents provide additional information.

Wayne this is you big picture slide?

Shawn yeah.

William I’ve never been able to get over the word quick.  Our most widely distributed pub is quick tips.

Shawn we have talked about before that comment Judy?

Judy we submitted a list of names we have been unable to recommend.  We recommended not change the name a consensus from and them to not change multiple times.

Shawn William we might have a new brainstorm about that.

William I hope that people don’t get the idea quick reference does not equal quick tips.

Judy in addition to the specific ask people very general reactions at this point even though rough initial draft impression of how it is shaping up. 

Harvey real good progress.  I don’t have any major improvements.

William keep on going.

Wayne I think the notes are really important.  In slide 32 really doesn’t explain it.  Notes about what you want to get from the slide.  I think that is really helpful, notes are really important.

Shawn any other comments?  Any level?  Gone.  For the schedule as Judy mentioned in Tech Plenary in Boston, dates are not finalized pretty easy, WWW.org/2007/11/tpac.  Wednesday is set scheduled we are at the beginning of the week.  Slight change, wait till finalized before buying tickets.  That could change Monday or Tuesday.

Andrew are we listed as EO?  William Daws room.

Shawn we have a fair amount of people who said they would come.  From the eo current surveys which is availability for this meeting.  You can change you answer.  If you availability has changed.  Remind people is coming up for travel planning.  We will not meet 3rd of August.  We will probably meet other weeks in August.  Andrew?

Andrew 10 august maybe, 17 good, 24, and 31 doubtful, September 7 good

Sylvie 10 and 17 not available but afterwards available 24th,

Jack not quite sure but I should be available.

Henny I am available all of august and September

Shawn transcripts.  Podcasts.  I have noted how hard it is to get transcripts any presentations and it’s slowed things down.  And even in places where there is not much out there.  Not common.  Relatively easy.

Andrew I might be able to affordable.  In India do that.

Shawn turn around on an hour of material?

Henny good with technical presentations. 

Andrew they will put in xxxs for technical words.  They got most things though.

Shawn I do use human dictation service, too expensive large scale dictation.  It is a huge issue. 

Wayne editing a journal and a topic is cost effective way.  40,000 faculty a few times do twice a day.  Fix it.  Looks very good.

Justin one interesting captioning video, app used anyone do it.  Anyone can add.  Put their videos, get captioned in English.

Shawn I will send addresses and share this off list.  Ok Judy,

Judy people understand this constraint.  Crowd sourcing very specific not like sustained regular production kinds of things.  Special effort is sustainable.

Justin if you have an audience with passion, having the passion, don’t have the community throwing over the fence to see what happens.  This guy has a huge amount of people who like his videos.

Shawn.  We will adjourn.