Session Start: Fri Oct 19 14:15:04 2007
[phone bridge down at start of call, discussion initially only on IRC chat]
Judy: it appears that our phone bridge, zakim, is temporarily down; someone is checking on it now
Judy: Hi all, the Zakim problem has been identified, and is being worked on now...
Judy: So, in the meantime, any comments on the readings? ;)
Sylvie: very dense material
Alan: How can we help both audiences, who only know one side of the story, to understand the other?
Alan: Does it help you understand the Mobile Web stuff?
Andrew: Policy makers and guideline writers are not mentioned in the draft document (they were in the Google doc)
Sylvie: could you clarify what the google doc is in relationship to the draft document ?
Alan: The "stakeholder" includes policy makers
Alan: Sylvie, the Google docs document is specially for this call
Alan: Maybe we can get used to only uisng IRC
Helle: I think the initiative to make the link between the 2 is very good
Judy: ok, let's continue discussing in irc...
Judy: i'll let you know if zakim comes back
Alan: The Mobile to WCAG section is complete. There will be a seperate section for the inverse mapping.
Judy: sylvie mentioned that the material seemed very dense; did others find this as well?
Alan: [responding to Andrew] They are not symmetrical, so they are seperate
Alan: The WCAG to mobile section has only a few examples.
Alan: Pending more work on it.
Andrew: dense? yep - the tables take a lot of reading
Alan: Re the density of the material, I think there is a need for much more introduction
Judy: Alan, do you have thoughts about what you'd write for introduction, or need ideas for that?
Alan: About understanding user limitations and needs and device limitations
Sylvie: Yes, I agree with andrew, the tables took a long time to read. In particular the table in section 2, if I remember correctly, that someone proposed to remove.
Alan: And the reason for actually using the document in the first place, to achieve more accessibility with less effort if you've already done mobile stuff.
Wayne: Hi all, I've not been feeling well this week so, I'm checking out., Wayne
Alan: I've removed the summary table, after disucssion in the group.
Helle: which one is that?
Judy: still no update on zakim progress, so let's go to the question list from the agenda, OK?
Alan: the one at the start of "3. How Mobile Web Best Practices can Benefit..."
Judy: starts with: other overall reactions to the documents?
Judy: oops, sorry
Judy: yes -- 1. overall reactions?
Judy: sylvie mentioned dense; are there other reactions?
* Andrew says it is a welcome document
Judy: great
Alan: Needs much more introduction
Sylvie: agree with Andrew, welcome document.
* Andrew ... help extend the audience for WCAG
Judy: anyone else on overall reactions?.... ok
Alan: Explanation of *why* there are similarities
* Andrew ... and hence the business case gets stronger
Judy: 2. any thoughts about the purpose, goals, audience?
Judy http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dftkhw2k_21dw7jpf
Alan: Actually business case is a good term I had forgotten to include
Judy: then good addition...
Alan: I think that "Spread awareness" isn't covered hardly at all at the moment
Sylvie: One thing has been forgotten in this document :
Sylvie: people who benefit from accessible Web site according to WCAG are people with disabilities
Sylvie: but people with disabilities also use mobile devices
Judy: so that needs to be stated more explicitly then?
Andrew: yes - I had a similar thought to Sylvie
Helle: don't understand Sylvie?
Andrew: can that be used?
Andrew: eg deaf people love texting
Alan: There's a whole section missing. About how people with disabilities use mobile phones.
Sylvie: more and more people with disabilities use mobile devices, to browse on the web
Alan: On the other hand, it isn't about making mobile-friendly web content accessible
Alan: Rather about how one recommendation relates to ther other
Alan: Although the other is also very necessary
Andrew: and usable is an important aspect
Judy: the way i'm understanding sylvie's comment is that the purpose & audience etc aren't clear enough about PWD's direct use of mobile phones...
Judy: couldn't this be addressed in the use cases as well? at least indirectly?
Helle: Are most people with disabilities that are using mobile devices using them with AT?
Alan: That was put in a wish list for future documents, but it would be useful introductory material
Alan: There are screen readers and magnifiers. I know some who use older phones with bigger keyboards.
* Judy notes, Hi all -- we've got Zakim back. Switch to phone?
Sylvie: Answer to Helle : I think it's the same as with computer : there are people with disabilities using computers with AT, and hthere are people with disabilities using mobile devices with AT.
Helle: NAd specially designed ones for VI and old persons I've seen adverts here in Denmark
Andrew: Topic: Relationship between Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
Andrew: Topic: Target Audiences
Andrew: Helle: Govt for example may have to comply to WCAG - but may also desire to comply to MWBP
Andrew: Alan: a few theing should have been taken into acocunt but weren't, and vague references to WCAG exist
Andrew: Helle: will P&F look at the MWBP?
Andrew: Alan: presume so - but is waiting on XHTML Basic
Andrew: Judy: W3C used to produce documents that described the overlap between technical specs and accessibility - and mix or technical and marketng to describe the accesisbility benefits of W3C technologies
Andrew: Helle: similar to SVG and SMILL, also CSS
Andrew: Helle: and ARIA?
Andrew: Judy: different from ARIA. WAI ARIA is defining new ways to make content accessible
Andrew: Judy: this is more of just a comparaison or mapping
Andrew: Alan: an annotated mapping
Andrew: Topic: Use cases (http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dftkhw2k_16w7bkx7)
Andrew: Judy: what about disability orgs trying to consider PWD using mobile devices and looking for overlaps
Andrew: Alan: pushing the extent to which conformance with one set of recs nearly has you conforming wit another
Andrew: Topic: overall organization and approach
Andrew: Alan: needs more intro to explain why the document is needed
Andrew: Judy: what needs to be said about 'scope' in the introduction?
Alan: yes
Andrew: Justin: positive elements should appear before the negative elements
Andrew: Alan: section 4 may be easy to read for us as it starts from WCAG
Andrew: Justin: can the document be broken up - so you only get the version/overlaps you're interested in?
Andrew: Justin: eg - depending on your starting point - WCAG or MWBP
Andrew: Justing rather trying to have it all in the one document
Andrew: s/Justing/Justin:/
Andrew: Justin: or depending on the use case
Andrew: Judy: as Alan has to leave, we should wrap up for today
Alan: need to think about going out to dinner together one evening
Helle: yes
Helle:: Govt for example may have to comply to WCAG - but may also desire to comply to MWBP
Alan:: a few theing should have been taken into acocunt but weren't, and vague references to WCAG exist
Helle:: will P&F look at the MWBP?
Alan:: presume so - but is waiting on XHTML Basic
Judy:: W3C used to produce documents that described the overlap between technical specs and accessibility - and mix or technical and marketng to describe the accesisbility benefits of W3C technologies
Helle:: similar to SVG and SMILL, also CSS
... and ARIA?
Judy:: different from ARIA. WAI ARIA is
defining new ways to make content accessible
... this is more of just a comparaison or mapping
Alan:: an annotated mapping
Judy:: what about disability orgs trying to consider PWD using mobile devices and looking for overlaps
Alan:: pushing the extent to which conformance with one set of recs nearly has you conforming wit another
Alan:: needs more intro to explain why the document is needed
Judy:: what needs to be said about 'scope' in the introduction?
<Alan: yes
Justin:: positive elements should appear before the negative elements
Alan:: section 4 may be easy to read for us as it starts from WCAG
Justin:: can the document be broken up - so you
only get the version/overlaps you're interested in?
... eg - depending on your starting point - WCAG or MWBP
... rather trying to have it all in the one document
... or depending on the use case
Judy:: as Alan has to leave, we should wrap up for today