No items brought forward
Judy: Evaluation Resource Suite
is not getting enough focused attention. So, we want to do a
task force.
... Does it seem like a good idea?
Looking at task force on Educational Resources Table of Contents
group: Draft looks realistic, but attendance is light today so this might not be a good time to make a final decision.
William: Will volunteer to help.
Barry: May need to add new members from his organization.
Judy: William, Alan and Barry plus others who may become EO members
<judy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/charter4#scope
<emma> this is:
<emma> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/ers-req.html
Wayne: volunteered
Shawn: Purpose Section: say what is not included; perhaps a link to scope.
William: Purpose is a little vague - the wording "expand certain sections" may do it.
Judy: Add more information in components of suites to the purpose.
judy what we need is something to tell humans and computers apart, and what we're getting is something that separates computers and disabled people from other humans
Shawn: Evaluators of Web site accessibility might do, but specific groups should be tied to the purpose.
Alan: Perhaps "specialists"?
Emma: Separation of evaluators from generally interested parties.
Shawn: Have the task force clean
up the requirements.
... "View of Evaluation Suite" page will be linked to the new
WAI Site
<shawn> Shawn: missing Special Considerations
<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/Overview.html -- the list in the nav has the planned sub-pages
<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ut3/eval/Overview -- has what is ready now for site rollout
Shawn: These topics are the latest list of what is planned for the list.
Barry: Would prefer more detail in the last point.
Judy: Will do her best to clarify.
Emma: The steps make sense, but they are brief.
Judy: Do people have enough (information) to proceed? That is for the work statement and the requirements pending the cleanup that have been mentioned.
Shawn: The task force needs to review the requirements, but not the work statement.
Judy: Will do clean-ups. Will address Barry's concern. Will ask EO members who were not here. Will pass requirements to the task force and EO will review their changes.
Does this page cover what is needed. Is it presented effectively?
<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ut3/techpapers.html
Shawn: Based on the title people may not recognize it.
William: This a major barrier, CAPTCHAS, and must be emphasized
Judy: The term CAPTCHA is obscure. The problem is our overly technical statement of the problem.
Natasha: Security barriers may be the issues.
Emma: The term is obscure, but the concept is common and easy to understand.
Liam: Explain it in terms of the need, of separating real people from spambots.
Emma, use a case study, or situation, or maybe the introduction needs to be expanded.
Judy: The paper may be more specific than the current usage of CAPTCHA
Shawn: Is this the right amount of information?
Judy: It is too much. Comments about the sight being too heavy.
Shawn: Do we need a form, link first with explanation.
<shawn> ACTION: shawn, intro to captcha: 1. mini-screen, 2. link to paper, 3. the text, edited (probably no need for headings) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/15-eo-minutes.html#action01]
<judy> jb: ..."find out why these are inaccessible to many people with disabilities, and what kind of alternatives can be used to better accomplish this security screening"
<shawn> s/min-screen/mini-screenshot
Emma: Could two or three tight paragraphs reduce it in size?
Judy: CAPTCHA will be the term of use.
This topic skipped due to time constraints
Judy: Asks for comments. Issues - Disregard WAI as wrong topic, Some aging people need explanation of relevance, some want to avoid linking aging to disability.
William: Exclusion is a greater factor in the movement. Aging is a disabled if labeling and exclusion means disability.
Judy: It looks like a new location for a face to face is needed.