12:10:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #eo
12:10:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/05/01-eo-irc
12:10:15 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #eo
12:10:29 <doylesaylor> zakim, this will be eowg
12:10:29 <Zakim> ok, doylesaylor; I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM scheduled to start in 20 minutes
12:10:42 <doylesaylor> rrsagent, make logs public
12:11:00 <doylesaylor> Scribe: Doyle
12:11:14 <doylesaylor> ScribeNick: doylesaylor
12:11:25 <doylesaylor> Meeting: EOWG
12:11:48 <doylesaylor> Chair: Shawn
12:13:12 <shawn> shawn has joined #eo
12:17:30 <Sharron> Sharron has joined #eo
12:25:47 <Zakim> WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has now started
12:25:54 <Zakim> +doyle
12:26:03 <Zakim> +Sharron
12:26:51 <LiamMcGee> LiamMcGee has joined #eo
12:27:50 <Zakim> +Shawn
12:29:41 <andrew> andrew has joined #eo
12:31:03 <Zakim> +Loughborough
12:31:37 <Zakim> + +0137383aaaa
12:32:01 <LiamMcGee> Zakim, aaaa is LiamMcGee
12:32:01 <Zakim> +LiamMcGee; got it
12:32:19 <Zakim> + +7.902.aabb
12:32:34 <andrew> zakim, 7.902.aabb is me
12:32:34 <Zakim> sorry, andrew, I do not recognize a party named '7.902.aabb'
12:32:46 <andrew> zakim, +7.902.aabb is me
12:32:46 <Zakim> +andrew; got it
12:33:44 <doylesaylor> I am mute now.
12:35:33 <shawn> zakim, who is here?
12:35:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see doyle, Sharron, Shawn, Loughborough, LiamMcGee, andrew
12:35:35 <Zakim> On IRC I see andrew, LiamMcGee, Sharron, shawn, Zakim, RRSAgent, doylesaylor
12:38:09 <doylesaylor> Topic: Business Case draft update 
12:38:54 <doylesaylor> Shawn: Bsuiness Case have two sections discussed in the WAI task force and bring back to EO for discussion before we wrap up and give approval.
12:39:40 <doylesaylor> I have to call back in.
12:40:02 <Sharron> scribe: Sharron
12:40:04 <Zakim> -doyle
12:40:30 <Zakim> +doyle
12:40:32 <Sharron> Topic:  Business Draft Update
12:40:37 <Sharron> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/Overview.html#intro
12:40:54 <shawn> zakim, who is here?
12:40:54 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sharron, Shawn, Loughborough, LiamMcGee, andrew, doyle
12:40:56 <Zakim> On IRC I see andrew, LiamMcGee, Sharron, shawn, Zakim, RRSAgent, doylesaylor
12:41:07 <doylesaylor> let me call back
12:41:11 <Zakim> -doyle
12:41:43 <Zakim> +doyle
12:41:48 <Sharron> Shawn: Changes are shown tracked here, both the deleted and added from the original version. 
12:42:27 <Sharron> ...comments?
12:43:01 <Sharron> William:  Five pages?  why are they called pages? 
12:43:20 <Sharron> ...are they separate documents?  sections?
12:43:47 <Sharron> Shawn:  It is one document presented in 5 webpages
12:44:03 <Sharron> Andrew:  Broken out by topics.
12:44:12 <Sharron> William:  Maybe doesn't matter.
12:44:29 <Sharron> Shawn:  How about first of a series of five web pages?
12:44:33 <Sharron> Andrew:  OK
12:44:52 <Sharron> Shawn:  Let's look especially at the first three paragraphs.
12:45:07 <Sharron> William:  why becoming esential rather than has become.
12:45:27 <Sharron> Andrew:  Not as widely used in every country.
12:45:41 <Sharron> Shawn:  Parts of the world where there is no internet access?
12:46:13 <Sharron> William:  Even there it is deemed essential, hence the term digital divide.  They are working hard to get it.
12:46:32 <Sharron> Shawn:  True, but still is it essential if they don't have it?
12:47:02 <Sharron> William:  It is recognized as essential and so they are working hard to get it.
12:47:49 <Sharron> Doyle:  "Digital divide" refers to people who live in aculture that is online but lack access.  If a culture does not use it, that's a different scenario.
12:47:53 <Sharron> Liam:  Agree
12:48:22 <Sharron> Andrew: Most are moving in that direction, but have not attained.
12:48:58 <Sharron> Shawn:  We have strengthened the language in this version.
12:49:15 <Sharron> ...the web is increasingly an essential resource
12:49:42 <Sharron> ACTION: Andrew to consider ...the web is increasingly an essential resource
12:50:27 <Sharron> Shawn:  What else in the introduction?  Need feedback especially on balance for intro to a business case?
12:51:30 <Sharron> Liam:  Thinking about the sense of a document given by trigger words.  Would like to see more words like ROI, sense that this doc will really give me what I need.
12:51:59 <Sharron> Shawn:  Can add the acronym to the words already in the doc.
12:52:09 <Sharron> ACTION:  Andrew to add ROI
12:52:36 <Sharron> Liam:  Looking for ROI that is more than what you put in, not simply neutral.
12:52:49 <Sharron> ...however ROI can be significant.
12:53:09 <Sharron> ...in third paragraph.
12:53:35 <Sharron> ...don't only want to see costs offset, want to see a gain.
12:53:50 <Sharron> William:  Rather than offset by...need more
12:54:18 <Sharron> Liam:  When we are selling SEO, consultancy always note the increase in visitors
12:54:30 <Sharron> Doyle:  How about exceeds the initial cost.
12:54:42 <shawn> "There are initial costs for organizations implementing Web accessibility; however, there can be a significant return on investment."
12:54:42 <Sharron> Liam:  Yes that is implicit in notion of ROI
12:54:59 <Sharron> Doyle:  Phrase initial costs might be the problem.
12:55:22 <Sharron> Shawn:  "There are initial costs...but can be substantial ROI"
12:55:55 <Sharron> Liam:  If you start with poorly marked up, poorly desinged site and implement WCAG 2, will see significant boost.
12:56:08 <shawn> ACTION: Andrew, bcase, Overview, Intro: "While there are initial costs for organizations implementing Web accessibility, there can be a substantial return on investment."
12:56:50 <Sharron> Shawn:  Overall, does this address the business case?
12:57:39 <Sharron> ...William you mentioned "with and without dicabilities"  let's look at paragraph 2.  Should we say "older users and people without disabilities
12:58:07 <Sharron> Liam:  While it is implicit to us, it may not be to those not as familiar.
12:58:18 <Sharron> William:  How about first paragraph?
12:58:34 <Sharron> Shawn:  Treid to keep paragraph 1 for PWD
12:58:50 <Sharron> ...don't want to dilute the message.
12:59:26 <Sharron> Liam:  It's difficult to get people thinking about conceptual models of disability.  In intro more of a sense of what information will follow.
12:59:43 <Sharron> Shawn:  it does kind of feel like mobile should be in there...
13:00:01 <Sharron> Andrew:  It is included in second paragraph, could be emphasized.
13:00:51 <shawn> While accessibility focuses on people with disabilities, accessibility also benefits older users, mobile users and other individuals, as well as organizations that develop accessible products.
13:02:10 <Sharron> William:  mobile devices
13:02:13 <Sharron> Doyle:  mobile phone
13:02:30 <shawn> ACTION: Andrew, bcase intro: While accessibility focuses on people with disabilities, accessibility also benefits older users, mobile phone users and other individuals, as well as organizations that develop accessible products.
13:02:41 <Sharron> Shawn:  Is the sentence too complex?
13:02:48 <Sharron> Doyle:  Good for me.
13:02:59 <Sharron> Andrew:  Reads easily like a list.
13:03:26 <Sharron> Shawn:  Anything else on intro?
13:03:53 <Sharron> Doyle:  Paragraph 2:  why do we need to say "can also realize"  rather than "will realize"
13:04:10 <Sharron> Shawn:  Because it will not in every case.
13:04:29 <Sharron> Andrew:  can play with will because we do not say how much of a benefit.
13:05:02 <Sharron> Shawn:  Can we back up every statement?  Maybe because we have done due diligence within the document we can be a bit stronger in the intro?
13:05:10 <Sharron> ...are we comfortable with that?
13:05:22 <Sharron> William:  "will benefit from"
13:05:39 <Sharron> Doyle"  be direect:  "also realize"
13:05:49 <Sharron> Andrew:  will realize
13:06:41 <shawn> Organizations with accessible Web sites also will realize business benefits such as search engine optimization,...
13:06:41 <shawn> Organizations with accessible Web sites benefit from search engine optimization,...
13:07:12 <andrew> Organizations with accessible Web sites also benefit from search engine optimization,...
13:08:56 <Sharron> Action:  Andrew to tersify beginning of sentence in Paragraph 2 about additional bus benefits.
13:09:20 <Sharron> Shawn:  Anthing other questions for the group Andrew?
13:09:31 <Sharron> Andrew:  No, that's good for now.
13:09:42 <shawn> SUBTOPIC: Expanding coverage of olders users in the Social Factors page
13:09:57 <Sharron> Shawn:  in socila factors, we have a more complex question...how to include older users?
13:11:14 <Sharron> ...in original we had major section refering to equal opportunities, barriers of use, overlap with digital divide and then the section "benefits for P with and with D"
13:12:00 <Sharron> ...originally Andrew expanded the section Access for Older People.  When we re-looked at it, it seems like expanding that section there, it doesn't flow with the naarative.
13:12:32 <Sharron> ...also access for older users is a higher level issues because of equal access, overlap with accessibility, and growing demographic.
13:12:50 <Sharron> ...specific question then is Agenda item 3
13:13:11 <shawn> Different option to add a higher subsection under "Web Accessibility is a Social Issue" section http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/soc-older_uses-slh.html#older
13:14:32 <Sharron> Doyle:  My question is that if we move that to a higher level, another major social issue is the one for people with low literacy.  How to address that?
13:14:45 <Sharron> Shawn:  Is the overlap with accessibility as significant?
13:14:51 <Sharron> Doyle:  I don't know.
13:15:08 <Sharron> Shawn:  Keep that in mind Doyle as we consider this.
13:16:58 <Sharron> ...look at original as well as new draft with an added section.  Compare and see how it would work to leave the orginal comments and link to the new section.  Does it make sense?  is it confusing?
13:17:28 <Sharron> Andrew:  If it makes sense in principle I will make the change and see how it reads.
13:17:42 <Sharron> Liam:  I agree with the priciple but can't follow the implementation.
13:18:34 <Sharron> Shawn:  Look at second link in agenda. The h1 is "Social Factors..." scroll through there and I'll indicate where it would be inserted and you can judge the flow.
13:21:51 <Sharron> Liam:  Suggest a more natural flow through...
13:23:35 <andrew> Liam: Overlap with Digital Divide Issues > Overlap with Design for Older Users >  Web Accessibility Benefits People With and Without Disabilities > Access for Older People and move CSR to the bottom
13:24:57 <Sharron> Doyle:  I think many disabilities are language related so when a page is presented in muti modes it is beneficial to many.  I worry that much of what we focus on does not address cognitive issues, but not sure how it relates here.
13:25:35 <Sharron> ACTION:  Andrew to relook at flow especially with idea of having aging narative more integrated
13:26:09 <Sharron> Shawn:  anything else on that?
13:27:03 <Sharron> ...plan for Business Case is for Andrew to make these changes on Monday, send out call for review to EO and WAI-AGE taks force.  Please let us know by 5/13 if you have comments, approve or need more time.
13:27:22 <Sharron> ...Does that work for the group?  enough time?
13:27:29 <Sharron> All:  yes
13:28:04 <Sharron> Shawn:  Everyone should speak up if more time is needed, we can extend it.
13:28:17 <Sharron> ...that wraps it up, thanks Andrew.
13:28:27 <Sharron> Andrew:  Great, goodbye
13:28:33 <Zakim> -andrew
13:28:36 <Sharron> Shawn:  Back to agenda.
13:29:12 <Sharron> Topic:  Improving Access to Governemtn through Better Use of the Web
13:30:40 <Sharron> Shawn:  William brought up the fact that this is a W3C Note it is not proposed as a Recommendation, although it is more formal that other documents, such as Biz Case.  Notes go through MUCH less rigorous review process.
13:31:44 <Sharron> ...so WAI or EO is not approving this document.  We are in fact on record as saying it needs significant revision.
13:31:55 <Sharron> ...does that help.
13:32:45 <Sharron> Sharron:  What we know is different than the perception of the world.  if it appears on the W3C site, there is implicit assumption of approval.
13:33:15 <Sharron> Shawn:  What if we ask Sharron to continue to serve on the IG.
13:33:49 <Sharron> ...and continue to strongly advocate for a rewrite of the doc
13:34:01 <Sharron> Doyle:  rechatered?
13:34:39 <Sharron> Shawn:  Yes, they run out in May and expect to be rechartered.
13:35:09 <Sharron> ...back to commenting on existing document
13:35:33 <Sharron> ...positive note is that they have adopted our comments verbatim.
13:35:49 <Sharron> Sharron: Accessibility is well represented in the document.
13:36:33 <Sharron> Shawn:  Judy recommended a section in ToC on accessibility, that should help.
13:36:49 <Sharron> ...let's review multi-channel delivery system
13:36:50 <shawn> Multi-Channel Delivery section http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/Group/docs/note#multi-channel
13:37:26 <Sharron> Shawn:  all we focus on now is accessibility references.
13:37:49 <Sharron> ...note accessibility coverage in new material.  
13:38:59 <Sharron> Doyle:  No mention of assistive tech when mentioning various devices.
13:39:27 <Sharron> ...in section "the web is a main channel..."
13:41:15 <Sharron> Shawn:  what to add here?
13:41:33 <Sharron> Doyle:  some mention of AT in addition to the PDAs etc
13:41:51 <Sharron> William:  Maybe they do not think of it as a "wide-spread channel"
13:42:23 <Sharron> Shawn:  Do we feel strongly that they should add AT here or can we accept that they are focused on mobile?
13:42:54 <Sharron> Liam:  Multi channel basically means they are talking about web, TV, mobile
13:43:05 <Sharron> ...could argue that AT sits on top of that
13:43:17 <Sharron> William:  Yes it sits on top of all of those
13:43:36 <Sharron> Shawn:  So it is not itself a separate channel and does it need a mention?
13:44:42 <Sharron> ...may not fit specifically in this paragraph.
13:44:54 <Sharron> Liam:  Yes, the very next paragraph mentions AT
13:45:04 <Sharron> Shawn:  Let's look
13:45:58 <Sharron> Doyle:  This is the only place where they mention accessibility in the entire section.  "accessibility aspects" what does that mena in this context?  It is very unclear what that means.  I would like clarity rather than a vague phrase.
13:46:17 <Sharron> Shawn:  Was it mentioned earlier in the document.
13:46:30 <Sharron> Doyle:  If so, link to the defintion.
13:46:55 <Sharron> Liam:  Difficult to comment out of context.
13:55:32 <Sharron> Shawn:  Would be great if the IG could publish an updated Working Draft, put it out for more comment, breathe, recharter and get an editor. 
13:55:59 <Sharron> ...with a little more time, we could probably get them some strong expertise.
13:56:11 <Sharron> ...feel free to ask and suggest.
13:56:52 <Sharron> William:  The tentative tone is insufficient 
13:58:36 <Sharron> ...will make suggestions to their list
14:00:13 <Sharron> Shawn:  Let's go through this section and the next section, search for references to accessibility and review.
14:02:15 <Sharron> ...The section "facilitating..." needs to say soemthing like PWD are often found in this category but not ALL  
14:03:58 <Sharron> Liam:  It does apply to many with disabilities, because even though you may use a wheelchair and be perfectly able to use computers without AT, you still face the challenge of getting there.
14:04:19 <Sharron> ACTION:  Sharron to take a look and perhaps link to Biz case Overlap
14:05:17 <Sharron> Shawn:  They reference many many external documents can you see appropriate places for them to reference policies, Biz case, Intro, components, How PWD use the web intro, etc
14:05:43 <Sharron> Liam:  Only one reference to WCAG and omits fact that it is designed to be legally referencable.
14:06:38 <Sharron> ...has good reference to accessibility but without seeing whole doc, hard to identify the gaps.
14:07:06 <Sharron> Shawn:  Another mention of accessibility under "Using Standards, Principles...."
14:08:06 <Sharron> ...comments on that?  
14:08:43 <Sharron> Shawn:  broadly what we would want is that the first bullet be just accessibility, take out the second bit because it is covered below.
14:08:55 <Sharron> William:  what is ...API?
14:09:13 <Sharron> Shawn:  don't know but not relevant.
14:10:49 <Sharron> ACTION:  Sharron to suggest in accessibility bullet, take off the mobile reference and then leave bullet that has both together. 
14:10:50 <shawn> ACTION: Sharron: eGov under "Using standards, principles and best practices:" - accessibility bullet, take off mobile part. leave the bullet that has both together
14:11:11 <shawn> "relationship between Web Content Accessibility and Mobile Web [WAI-MWI]."
14:12:06 <Sharron> Shawn:  When they reference relationship of accessibility/mobile web, ask them to change that reference to something more like WCAG/MWBP
14:12:07 <shawn> ACTION: Sharron: change "relationship between Web Content Accessibility and Mobile Web [WAI-MWI]." to something like [WCAG-MWBP]
14:13:42 <Sharron> Shawn:  use of accessible outside of defintion...filter for that.
14:18:47 <shawn> Topic: "word on the Street"
14:19:33 <Sharron> Liam:  Casual conversation led to the conclusion tha the public sector emphasis is on usability more than accessibility.
14:20:03 <Sharron> William:  In Madrid, Brussels, CSUN shocked at the number of people whose profession is now web accessibility.
14:20:28 <Sharron> ...in Brussels 30 or more were from the Commission
14:22:19 <Sharron> Shawn:  We have been in reactive mode and so in May as we look at what next, the issue of usability and accessibility is one of the things we address in WAI-AGE. 
14:22:55 <Sharron> ...One of the issues is the overlap between accessibility and usability and may be next in the WAI-AGE agenda. 
14:23:10 <Sharron> William:  and should be a focus of e-Gov
14:25:47 <Sharron> Shawn:  Keep in mind what you got from that and in May maybe even at the next meeting, where will EO put resources next, so be thinking about it.
14:26:08 <Sharron> William:  At CSUN, much higher number of Deaf participants.
14:26:45 <Sharron> ...Deaf/blind as well.  More participants by PWD at CSUN as opposed to Europe.
14:28:34 <Sharron> Shawn:  Lisa Harrod, scenario girl wrote a piece on Deaf issues and accessibility published on A LIst Apart.  Translation between Australian Sign and ASL at CSUN and the experince made her giddy, despite a few difficulties. 
14:29:49 <Sharron> Shawn:  Managed to make it to the end of this meeting, probably not meet next week.  Will follow up with Sharron about eGov work.
14:30:44 <Sharron> ...if meeting is needed, Judy will chair.  Review Andrew's revisions next week and on May 15 we will look at plans for the next year.
14:30:49 <Zakim> -Loughborough
14:31:04 <Zakim> -doyle
14:31:15 <Zakim> -LiamMcGee
14:31:29 <shawn> zaki, who is here?
14:31:34 <shawn> zakim, who is here?
14:31:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sharron, Shawn
14:31:35 <Zakim> On IRC I see andrew_off, LiamMcGee, Sharron, shawn, Zakim, RRSAgent, doylesaylor
14:35:27 <LiamMcGee> LiamMcGee has left #eo
14:44:37 <Zakim> -Sharron
14:44:38 <Zakim> -Shawn
14:44:39 <Zakim> WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has ended
14:44:40 <Zakim> Attendees were doyle, Sharron, Shawn, Loughborough, +0137383aaaa, LiamMcGee, andrew
14:45:52 <shawn> ACTION: Sharron look for appropraite places to reference WAI docs (which are listed at http://www.w3.org/WAI/Resources/Overview)
14:46:00 <shawn> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:46:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/01-eo-minutes.html shawn
16:47:25 <Zakim> Zakim has left #eo