See also: IRC log
<Barry> I am the 301-367 number (Barry Johnson)
Liddy: In Australia, interested in how to contribute to this conversation, particularly in the use of limited language
Thanks!
<Lisa_Seeman> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2014Feb/0005.html
Lisa: Quick review of my comments and Neil's comments on top of that?
<Barry> Sure that would be great
Lisa: Difficult to do, asked to review something quite comprehensive, a bit early to jump in with group recommendations. Do we want to discuss this in more detail or shall I write it up and send it to the list?
Liddy: I think it would be interesting to hear you explain.
Lisa: Guideline 3.1 was to help
users avoid unnecessary messages. Felt it was open to
misinterpresentation (advertisers would argue that their
messaging was hugely important). Recommended change:
low-priority messages to the user or not critical to the use
case
... We can use the queue if needed, if there's no one in it,
open questions are fine
John: Common problem with people with cognitive disabilities is that there's no consistent navigation, would be terrific if we could suggest the use of a universal help symbol, that consistency would be great for people with cognitive disabilities and great for everyone
Lisa: Mentioned in the email about the use of a question mark icon
John: Saw that, wasn't sure if that was true across languages
Lisa: Certainly we want to get there, somewhere that we may end up, but not sure that we can include it for this
Suzanne: Essential theme, the idea of what's important and what's essential to the task. Initial point was messages, now content, being able to show what's in the main landmark vs. a complementary landmark
Lisa: Bit of a change in how
landmarks are used, main isn't necessarily task focus, might
want to suggest a change or additional role
... Next comment was about helping users avoid issues
correcting mistakes, need to be able to get back to the
information that you put in before as a user... so, if it's too
much to fill in within the span of a day, can go back. Neil
added that users should be able to go back a step without
losing what they've entered so far. Often CD users have low
confidence in what they've done. The ability to be able to go
back and check your work, I couldn't ag[CUT]
... When you add features, almost hoping that users select them
by mistake... if someone is moved away from the original
offering to an alternative, it should be very clear and the
original offering should be the same size, positioned next to
or above the alternative offering
... Neil added that the original choice should be selected by
default and not the item that they want to up sell. I agree
with that as well, although made it softer that it should be
clear, can get back to it easily. Neil suggests that it should
be the default even if it's easy to get back to it.
<NeilMilliken> Q
Elle: Just curious about how to enforce that
Neil: The reason why I think it should stay on the default, if you're clicking on a link, it should take you to what's been advertised. AVG is a good example of how confusing this is.
Elle: That's the exact example I was thinking of, too.
<Barry> And they use a link to go back but a Button to go forward...
Neil: I think that's pernicious, that despite you're getting the information, the product still appears to be free, more likely to catch out people with cognitive disabilities.
@Barry - This is a tough sell, though, for design teams, especially when trying to define UX best practices and make that agreeable to marketing teams.
<Barry> @Elle - That is the hard part for us I guess
Suzanne: We can't really require specific design, but we can require a tag (ex. "This was your original offer.") with a visual indicator like a blue outline.
Lisa: Difficult to put this into
this review, as they're in Last Call status, perhaps in
semantics UI where we could see this put into place, but we're
not there yet
... Maybe we can say "if semantics become available, we can use
that to identify it"
... 1st suggestion is to have the original offering as big and
positioned before the alternative 2nd suggestion is Neil's
proposal is to keep the original offering as the default choice
and 3rd suggestion is Suzanne's to handle it via
semantics
... Put forward proposal that we suggest Neil's, another option
is Lisa's, and Suzanne's when that option becomes available
<NeilMilliken> Agree
Agreed
Lisa: Context sensitive (easy to
see) help more useful for people than hiding it inside a menu
or on a large page of content
... Suggested use of tool tips on all icons, jargon and
abbreviations, aids with limited working memory, less
disoriented than going to a new screen
John: All great suggestions
-q
:)
<NeilMilliken> tool tips also have an impact on Dragon users
Great point, Neil
Tool tips (if too large) may have an impact on low-vision users, too
Katie: layered help - instant feedback "Save" and then you can go into a deeper dive, more information than what initially comes up, one way to implement this
Lisa: Would like to propose that tool tips used like layered help, short and concise (similiar to or with title attribute) and then more information available
<JohnRochford> Agreed
Agreed
<NeilMilliken> Agree with Elle that tooltips should be succint
<NeilMilliken> agreed
<Barry> Agreed
<Michel> agreed
<scribe> Agenda: Questions and issues for making user scenarios
Lisa: Is everyone comfortable with posting items on the Wiki before members in their group have seen it?
<NeilMilliken> I am happy and have already posted a straw man gap analysis
Lisa: We can use it as a scratch pad
<Barry> If we can use it as a "white board" for others to "cross out" or edit, I think it is a great idea
Lisa: Going to assume people are comfortable with what they're doing with the gap analysis. We'll actually start going through what others have, when ready to be reviewed by the group, let me know.
<NeilMilliken> I hope to be ready for a tear down by next week
Yes
aging and dementia
Elle: Will work with our group to coordinate a plan for finishing publishing to get it ready for review
<NeilMilliken> John I am happy to discuss with you - I also have access to a lot of users
John: Connections in Mass to many individuals we could utilize in testing. How to use them? Will come up with suggestions for the group by next meeting.
<JohnRochford> ok Neil, thank you
<Barry> Have to go to another meeting. Bye everyone!
Lisa: Thanks, everybody, will pick this up next call!
<Liddy> bye
<Barry> Thanks Elle!
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Agenda:/topic:/g No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: ElleWaters Inferring Scribes: ElleWaters WARNING: Replacing list of attendees. Old list: +1.508.856.aaaa Michel_Fitos +1.301.367.aabb Rich_Schwerdtfeger Michael_Cooper John_Rochford Elle_Waters Katie_Haritos-Shea Janina_Sajka +1.301.367.aacc Liddy_Nevile Barry_Johnson New list: +1.508.856.aaaa Michel_Fitos +1.301.367.aabb Rich_Schwerdtfeger Michael_Cooper John_Rochford Elle_Waters Katie_Haritos-Shea Default Present: +1.508.856.aaaa, Michel_Fitos, +1.301.367.aabb, Rich_Schwerdtfeger, Michael_Cooper, John_Rochford, Elle_Waters, Katie_Haritos-Shea Present: +1.508.856.aaaa Michel_Fitos +1.301.367.aabb Rich_Schwerdtfeger Michael_Cooper John_Rochford Elle_Waters Katie_Haritos-Shea Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cognitive-a11y-tf/2014Feb/0001.html Got date from IRC log name: 03 Feb 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/02/03-coga-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]