12:23:29 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #eo
12:23:29 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/03/14-eo-irc
12:23:31 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
12:23:31 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #eo
12:23:33 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 3694
12:23:33 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
12:23:34 <trackbot> Meeting: Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference
12:23:34 <trackbot> Date: 14 March 2014
12:24:04 <Sharron> Chair: Shawn
12:24:09 <Sharron> Scribe: Sharron
12:25:58 <AnnaBelle> AnnaBelle has joined #eo
12:28:03 <Zakim> WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has now started
12:28:10 <Zakim> + +1.615.417.aaaa
12:28:33 <Sharron> Regrets: Paul, Helle, Vicki, Eric, Anthony, (?)Sylvie and Liam. No response from Denis, Wayne, Suzette, Bim
12:28:49 <shadi> zakim, call shadi-617
12:28:49 <Zakim> ok, shadi; the call is being made
12:28:51 <Zakim> +Shadi
12:29:32 <AnnaBelle> zakim, aaaa is me
12:29:32 <Zakim> +AnnaBelle; got it
12:29:54 <Zakim> +Sharron
12:30:21 <Zakim> +Shawn
12:33:13 <Andrew> Andrew has joined #eo
12:33:36 <Wayne> Wayne has joined #eo
12:34:54 <Zakim> +Jan
12:35:05 <Zakim> +Wayne
12:36:25 <Zakim> +Andrew
12:38:18 <shawn> zakim, who is on the phone?
12:38:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see AnnaBelle, Shadi, Sharron, Shawn, Jan, Wayne, Andrew
12:38:29 <Jan> Jan has joined #eo
12:38:34 <Sharron> Topic: Tutorials
12:38:51 <shawn> cover page http://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/
12:39:59 <shawn> feedback in wiki: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Tutorials#Feedback_12.2B_March
12:40:01 <Sharron> Shawn: Refresh your agenda, the page has been moved. We are planning to announce on Monday and want this cover page to be ready so let's look at it. We can still change it if needed, but want oit to be clear on Monday
12:40:10 <Sharron> ...feedback in wiki
12:41:27 <Andrew> I notice typo in opening para - "usefull" instead of "useful"
12:44:33 <AnnaBelle> +1 to Sharron's edit of final paragraph
12:46:41 <Sharron> ...first comment was addressed by Eric before getting on the plane.
12:46:45 <Andrew> could we just have [Status - This is an in-progress, unapproved draft.] at the top?
12:47:05 <Sharron> Wayne: Can we remove the "draft jargon from the top and put it at the bottom...it seems unfriendly.
12:47:08 <Andrew> and the second sentence repeats the bit in the box at the bottom already
12:47:44 <Sharron> Shawn: I think it is important since this version is still a very rough draft and is not approved by EO
12:47:48 <Andrew> q+
12:47:55 <AnnaBelle> q+
12:47:59 <shawn> ack sh
12:48:59 <Sharron> Wayne: I understand but think it is just unfriendly
12:49:00 <shawn> Sharron: last week I was agaginst even announcing it because it was such a tentative state. need to be clear that it's a work in progress. can work on wording so not unfriendly. but so much of it we haven't even reviewed. it's gonna get a lot of attention
12:49:04 <shawn> ack a
12:49:08 <shadi> +1 to sharron
12:49:37 <Sharron> Sharron: In general I agree, but in this case it is in such a rough draft that I don't think we should risk any misunderstanding
12:50:01 <shawn> ack a
12:50:11 <Sharron> Andrew: What if we leave only the first sentence, this is an in-progress unapproved draft.
12:51:05 <Sharron> AnnaBelle: Or something even more brief, leave the word DRAFT at the top with an asterisk leading to the detail at the bottom. The green color is disturbing to me.
12:51:46 <Sharron> Andrew: Do we need to inlcude the word "unapproved" within the Draft
12:51:50 <shadi> q+
12:52:42 <Sharron> Shawn: Yes, it may be splitting hairs but there are different kinds of Drafts, "WG Draft" "Editor's Draft" etc and many do not know what it means. Nevertheless I think we need to make clear that this is not an approved draft.
12:52:45 <Andrew> s/Do we need to inlcude the word "unapproved" within the Draft/Do we need to include the term"unapproved draft" as well as "DRAFT"/
12:52:45 <AnnaBelle> s/disturbing/eye-catching
12:53:17 <Sharron> ...how do people feel about Andrew's suggestion to leave only the first sentence and move the rest to teh bottom and tweak?
12:53:20 <Wayne> +1 andrew
12:53:22 <Sharron> Sharron: +1
12:53:43 <shawn> +1 shawn
12:53:54 <shawn> +1 to andrew's suggest
12:54:03 <shawn> s/+1 shawn/ /
12:54:15 <shadi> q-
12:54:35 <Sharron> Wayne: I like annabelle's suggestion and if we could move the whole status down. But I understand now why we were so tentative about it.
12:55:38 <Zakim> +Howard_
12:55:44 <Sharron> RESOLUTION: Remove second sentence from status declaration and make the word Status in the same font as the rest.
12:55:56 <Howard> Howard has joined #eo
12:56:15 <Howard> zakim, mute me
12:56:15 <Zakim> Howard_ should now be muted
12:56:23 <Howard> zakim, mute me
12:56:24 <Zakim> Howard_ was already muted, Howard
12:56:30 <Sharron> Shawn: Another question was do we think project managers are the primary audience and should be named first?
12:56:32 <Howard> zakim, mute me
12:56:33 <Zakim> Howard_ was already muted, Howard
12:56:39 <Sharron> Sharron: Who would you name first?
12:57:03 <Sharron> Shawn: Developers...and what is the difference between authors and developers?
12:57:20 <Sharron> Andrew: Authors may use authoring tools.
12:57:51 <AnnaBelle> +1 to Shawn's suggested reordering
12:58:04 <Sharron> Shawn: Should we make that distinction? Seems to me we should talk about developers, designers (who are not mentioned here) and put authors later on and PMs last.
12:58:37 <Wayne> q+
12:58:54 <shadi> q+
12:59:12 <Sharron> Andrew: Maybe authors will need to use the CMS tools properly for tables
12:59:19 <Sharron> Sharron: and image content
12:59:31 <Sharron> Shawn: and what does it mean to frame content
12:59:32 <shadi> +1
12:59:36 <Jan> +1
12:59:43 <Andrew> s/Authors may use authoring tools/Authors may use authoring tools to write content; developers do technical development
12:59:46 <Sharron> ...so do we want to move PNs lower in the sentence?
12:59:52 <Sharron> Sharron: +1
12:59:52 <shadi> +1
13:00:07 <Sharron> s/PNs/PMs
13:00:20 <Sharron> Shawn: and do we want to add designers?
13:01:23 <shawn> s/ move PNs lower/ move Project Managers lower/
13:02:02 <Sharron> Shadi: Developers are the main target audience. Adding designers makes it clear that these are our main target sudiences. Add a qualifying statement to the "authors" to disambiguate that they may not look at code but will benefit from the principles. Include the others as secondary audinces
13:02:06 <shadi> q-
13:02:20 <Sharron> Shawn: Do we want to remove PMs altogether?
13:02:31 <shawn> ack w
13:02:36 <Sharron> Wayne: Absolutely not, they are the ones who make the changes
13:02:59 <Sharron> Shadi: I agree with Wayne, they need to understand the princliples and ideas
13:03:18 <Sharron> Sharron: +1 Wayne, Shadi keep PMs as an audience
13:03:51 <Sharron> Shadi: Maybe a rewording to make it clear that some folks need the technical detail and others like PMs and authors need to understand comcepts and principles
13:04:10 <shawn> suggested wroding ->> PMs: get basic understanding of the concepts and principles
13:04:40 <AnnaBelle> I think Web Designers need to be added right under Web Developers
13:05:04 <Sharron> Sharron: Maybe make it two sentences or clauses, one for technical skills and others for principles
13:05:15 <shawn> suugested wording for authors ->> maybe non-technical content authors
13:05:55 <Sharron> Shadi: non technical content authors can learn concepts and principles/ requirements, that they need to create accessible content
13:06:01 <shawn> authors - change "frame"
13:06:05 <Sharron> ...maybe add the suggestion of CMS
13:06:18 <Andrew> Authors will learn how to frame their content in an accessible way >> Content Authors will learn the concepts for preparing their content in an accessible way
13:06:28 <shawn> Content Writers
13:06:36 <Sharron> Shawn: What about content writers
13:06:41 <shawn> s/Content Writers/ /
13:06:51 <shadi> +1 to andrew
13:07:07 <shawn> +1 to andrew's suggestion
13:07:17 <Sharron> Andrew: Add content authors to prepare there content in an accessible way
13:07:21 <Howard> +1
13:07:37 <Andrew> s/Add content authors to prepare there content in an accessible way/Add content authors to prepare there content in an accessible way
13:08:36 <Jan> +1 designers separate bullet
13:08:39 <Sharron> AnnaBelle: I feel strongly that Web Designers should be mentioned separately and included. If I were a designer and heard web developers and designers, I would assume it was another instance where they did not know the difference.
13:08:42 <Wayne> designers +1
13:09:15 <shawn> +1 for separate bullet for designers
13:09:21 <Andrew> s/Add content authors to prepare there content in an accessible way/change "Authors will learn how to frame their content in an accessible way" to "Content authors will learn the concepts for preparing their content in an accessible way"
13:09:28 <Sharron> Shadi: I think AB's explanation was good and I am convinced, but it will be difficult to find different language to describe what designers will get.
13:09:40 <shawn> Anna Belle will provide wording for the designer bullet
13:09:47 <Sharron> AnnaBelle: I disagree, but can't come up with it right now. Will work on it.
13:10:25 <Sharron> Shawn: Second paragraph...is it too negative?
13:10:31 <Sharron> ...how important is that?
13:10:49 <Sharron> ...in Easy Checks the disclaimer was vital, is that true here?
13:10:55 <shadi> +1
13:11:01 <shadi> q+
13:11:05 <shawn> can simplify "This collection of tutorials" to "These tutorials"
13:11:07 <shawn> ack sh
13:11:14 <Sharron> Andrew: I don't think there is much danger of people believing this is complete coverage
13:11:33 <shawn> change "readers" in "It is usefull to a variety of readers including"
13:12:31 <Sharron> Shadi: There were 2 points: Tutorials do not cover all WCAG requirements. Second in each turtorial, like the images, there are lots of good examples, but does not cover every situation or instance. There will always be missing information.
13:12:40 <Sharron> Shawn: Why is that important to say?
13:12:41 <AnnaBelle> s/where they did not know the difference/where they did not know the difference and I would leave the tutorials site.
13:12:59 <Sharron> Shadi: So that people do not think they have learned everything about it by taking the tutorial
13:13:45 <Sharron> '...at the end of the day they will still need to know how to meet WCAG and this will not give them complete information for that.
13:14:10 <Andrew> s/	'...at the/	... at the/
13:14:38 <Sharron> Wayne: If that is the main point, take the exhaustive comment away and make it more positive.
13:14:42 <shadi> "These tutorials help you learn WCAG 2.0 ... but you still have to learn it :p"
13:15:03 <shawn> q+ to say bascis of oh pwwds use web
13:15:07 <Sharron> Shawn: What if we mention the basics in advance and then get to what we think is the main point of WCAG understanding
13:15:48 <shadi> [[please avoid "basics"]]
13:15:58 <Sharron> ...like "these tutorials cover the basics and some advanced aspects. They are a good starting point for learning and addressing WCAG. You will still want to use WCAG directly to ensure that you meet the requirements
13:16:42 <shawn> starting point for...
13:17:05 <Sharron> Shadi: We are working hard to include advanced techniques and would like attention from those who may understand the basics already and will benefit from learning from these.
13:17:36 <Sharron> Shawn: if we avoid basics, how is the approach in general?
13:17:45 <Sharron> Shadi: OK
13:18:21 <Sharron> Shawn: What about the call for contributions that is on the bottom of each page?
13:18:35 <Sharron> AnnaBelle: Is it OK that we use the GitHub icon?
13:18:45 <Howard> I didn't recognize it either
13:19:00 <Sharron> Andrew: Oh, is that what that is, I thought someone was just being cute
13:19:14 <shawn> deleted from top: "Please send any suggestions, edits, or comments to the publicly-archived list: wai-eo-editors@w3.org."
13:19:20 <Sharron> Shawn: The sentence we deleted from teh top was [above]
13:19:58 <Sharron> ...it feels a bit too specific and could be confusing. Maybe just use the sentence removed from the top
13:20:47 <Sharron> Shadi: It was taken from the boilerplate that we used in the Images tutorial where we were seeking an ARIA example. It should be more general overall, more geenric.
13:20:59 <Sharron> s/geenric/generic
13:21:12 <shawn> Call for Contributions box - on main page, make more generic. probably use text moved from the top
13:21:15 <shadi> zakim, mute me
13:21:15 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
13:21:25 <Sharron> Andrew: send suggestions, edits or comments is pretty generic
13:21:34 <Sharron> Shawn: OK, anything else?
13:21:47 <shawn> SUB-TOPIC
13:21:50 <shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/more/
13:21:51 <Sharron> ...what about the More On the Way page?
13:21:55 <shawn> More on the way page
13:22:16 <shawn> not link to our wiki pages
13:22:17 <shadi> ack me
13:22:19 <Sharron> ...I don'
13:22:24 <Andrew> +1
13:22:32 <Howard> +1
13:22:32 <Sharron> t think we want to link to the wiki pages
13:22:56 <Sharron> Andrew: Don't think we want to draw public attention to it
13:23:06 <Sharron> Shawn: I agree
13:23:30 <Sharron> Shadi: But there is a lot of what we are thinking about and it might help people who are interested in what's under the hood.
13:24:30 <Sharron> Shawn: We have a table with current issues, what if we move that to a public page and point to that so they don't get the jumble of past comments etc
13:25:05 <Sharron> Shadi: That will be OK but I would encourage people to contribute so that we have ideas even after WAI ACT comes to an end?
13:25:10 <shadi> +1
13:25:21 <shadi> zakim, mute me
13:25:21 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
13:25:25 <Andrew> +1
13:25:30 <Howard> +1
13:25:32 <Sharron> Sharron: +1
13:25:44 <Wayne> +1
13:26:20 <Sharron> RESOLUTION: Create wiki page intended for external interaction which includes Eric's table and some context?
13:26:36 <Andrew> whjat about putting it in WAI-engage?
13:26:37 <Sharron> Sharron: Will that be on the EO wiki or the WAI-Engage wiki?
13:26:45 <Sharron> Andrew: I wondered that as well.
13:26:55 <Andrew> s/whjat /what
13:27:04 <Sharron> Shawn: Shadi any thoughts or reactions to that?
13:27:10 <shadi> ack me
13:27:17 <shawn> Call for Contributions box opn this page would be a little different, too
13:27:22 <Sharron> ...call for contributions will be different here as well
13:27:23 <Wayne> zakim, mute me
13:27:23 <Zakim> Wayne should now be muted
13:27:44 <Sharron> Shadi: I am kind of thinking of what is the benefit of using WAI-Engage?
13:27:59 <Sharron> Shawn: It allows people to add comments directly
13:28:29 <shadi> zakim, mute me
13:28:29 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
13:28:35 <Sharron> Shadi: But it needs a bit more curation in my veiw to encourage volunteers. I am not entirely sure about pros and cons and will think about it
13:28:43 <shadi> +1
13:28:45 <shadi> ack me
13:28:57 <Sharron> Shawn: On Sunday we will choose the next three to work on and can list that on this page
13:29:08 <shadi> zakim, mute me
13:29:08 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
13:29:21 <Sharron> Shadi> Yes agreed that would be a good thing to publish in the wiki
13:29:26 <shawn> List on this page the ones that we're working on -- which we'll chose on Sunday
13:30:16 <Wayne> zakim, unmute me
13:30:16 <Zakim> Wayne should no longer be muted
13:30:31 <Sharron> Shawn: On tables we have Editor's draft, not ready to reveiw. Not sure we need to confuse the issue with the difference between draft categories
13:31:40 <Sharron> ...I propose not to use the term Editor's Draft, that we make "Not ready for review" more clear, and ...
13:31:42 <Howard> zakim, ack me
13:31:42 <Zakim> unmuting Howard_
13:31:44 <Zakim> I see shawn on the speaker queue
13:31:57 <shawn> AA suggest: This is an in-progress, unapproved draft not yet ready for review.
13:32:50 <Sharron> Andrew: If it is not ready for review we don't want comments, suggestions, etc. You can't have it both ways, they are contradictory
13:32:53 <shawn> Call for Contributions box should be different for the pages that are not yet ready for review.
13:33:13 <Andrew> saying it "is not yet ready for review" means we should not call for comments at this stage
13:33:30 <shawn> [ don't like draft as an image in the h1 ]
13:33:36 <Sharron> Howard: The outline of the paragraph etc does suggest that this is a much more rough draft, it came across clearly
13:33:41 <Howard> zakim, mute me
13:33:41 <Zakim> Howard_ should now be muted
13:34:07 <Sharron> Shawn: The call for contributions must therefore be different on those pages not ready for review
13:34:24 <Sharron> Andrew: Yes, it MUST be changed
13:35:00 <Sharron> Shawn: So what we are thinking for the announcement to address some discomforts
13:35:09 <shawn> Web Accessibility Tutorials in Progress
13:35:09 <shawn> Dear WAI Interest Group Participants,
13:35:09 <shawn> WAI invites you to provide input into our new Web Accessibility Tutorials at:
13:35:09 <shawn>       http://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/
13:35:09 <shawn> We have a *draft framework* in place and welcome feedback on the navigation, visual design, etc.
13:35:10 <shawn> The *Images tutorial* starting at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/> is fairly complete and we welcome detailed feedback on the content. Specifically, we would like input on the use of the WAI-ARIA attributes aria-label and aria-labelledBy for images.
13:35:10 <shawn> The *other draft tutorials* there (Tables, Forms, Sliders/ Carousel) are still rough, so you probably want to hold off on doing a detailed review.
13:35:10 <shawn> Over the next few months, we'll be developing additional tutorials covering basic and advanced topics.
13:35:10 <shawn> Please send any input to the publicly-archived mailing list:
13:35:11 <shawn>       <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
13:35:11 <shawn>  or you can contibute directly via Github:
13:35:11 <shawn>       <https://github.com/w3c/wai-tutorials>
13:35:11 <shawn> *For those at CSUN*, let's talk tutorials at:
13:35:11 <shawn>       The WAI to Web Accessibility: Education & Outreach Update 2014
13:35:11 <shawn>       Thursday 4:20pm
13:35:12 <shawn>       Gaslamp B, 2nd Floor, Seaport Tower
13:35:12 <shawn> If you might be interested in actively contributing to the development of these tutorials as a participant in WAI's Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG), please read Participating in WAI at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/participation> and Participating in the EOWG at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/participation>, then contact Shawn Henry <http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/>.
13:35:32 <Andrew> s/Yes, it MUST be changed/Yes, "draft" in the heading MUST be changed from image to text/
13:36:23 <Andrew> images - disappointing to note that the complex image (graph) relies on colour alone :(
13:36:54 <shadi> uh, that should not be
13:37:37 <Howard> zakim, ack me
13:37:37 <Zakim> unmuting Howard_
13:37:38 <Zakim> I see shawn on the speaker queue
13:37:54 <Sharron> Shawn: If this is adequately communicating that this is a work in progress, please provide that feedback, esp Andrew and Sharron who had those concerns. Make sure if you have changes to suggest, you send to wiki and WAI editors list
13:38:06 <Howard> zakim, mute me
13:38:06 <Zakim> Howard_ should now be muted
13:38:10 <Sharron> Howard: I think this is a very good way to communicate status, well done!
13:38:22 <shadi> andrew - why does it rely on color alone? the bars have labels beneath
13:38:37 <Sharron> Topic: ATAG promotion
13:38:42 <shadi> zakim, mute me
13:38:42 <Zakim> Shadi was already muted, shadi
13:38:44 <shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Outreach_for_ATAG_2.0#Elevator_Pitch
13:39:31 <Sharron> Sharron: Do you need to approve the card before printing?
13:40:03 <Sharron> Shawn: It would be nice to look at it.
13:42:50 <shawn> text for cards: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Outreach_for_ATAG_2.0#Cards_Version_4_.28previous_versions_below.29
13:43:46 <Sharron> Shawn: so we will ahve buttons and cards, but are working on the elevator pitch
13:45:06 <shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Outreach_for_ATAG_2.0#Elevator_Pitch
13:45:43 <Zakim> +Jeanne
13:45:51 <jeanne> jeanne has joined #eo
13:46:34 <shadi> sharron++
13:46:42 <Andrew> 250 buttons - excellent!
13:47:18 <Andrew> what size/diameter?
13:47:40 <Sharron> Jeanne: When people are looking for conversation starters, Ask Me About ATAG it will be a natural.
13:47:59 <Sharron> Shawn: And so if you have the button and someone asks you, what do you say?
13:49:04 <Sharron> Jeanne: Suggest to start with "Have you heard of WCAG - the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines?" to make sure thay have even that much context.
13:49:23 <shawn> zakim, who is making noise?
13:49:33 <Zakim> shawn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Shawn (39%), Wayne (9%), Jeanne (74%)
13:50:11 <Sharron> Jeanne: the key point to get across is that ATAG enables web authors with disabilities to use tools and makes the tools more able to create accessible content
13:50:23 <Sharron> Shawn: AND do you want to submit impleemtnation or test?
13:51:11 <Sharron> Sharron: I agree with Jeanne that people need to make the points their own
13:52:03 <Sharron> Shawn: Even when I mentioned it at the WAI staff meeting, people asked for a link to the elevator pitch. So we do need to have a clear message that people can adapt as their own
13:52:27 <Sharron> Wayne: So maybe we need just a bullet list so advocates know what to cover.
13:52:41 <shadi> [[would like main points about the status and what kind of feedback/contribution AUWG wants]]
13:52:46 <shawn> when tools help with accessibility, it saves millions of developers work -- it's more efficient and effective for for the few 100(1,000?) tools to help with accessibility in order to lift some of the burden off the millions on content providers
13:52:53 <Sharron> ...like it makes it easier to make accessible content if the tools are ATAG conforming
13:53:25 <shadi> q+
13:53:31 <Sharron> Jeanne: It helps you write more accessible pages without having to be an accessibility expert
13:53:50 <Sharron> ...which will save $$
13:54:02 <Sharron> ...avoid retraining, retrofit, etc
13:54:09 <Jan> How about using the term automate in some way?
13:54:17 <Sharron> Wayne: From the POV of developers, it will save time
13:54:28 <shadi> ack me
13:54:36 <Sharron> Shawn: Makes accessibility easier and faster
13:54:40 <Jan> ATAG helps automate the development of accessible content ...
13:55:11 <Jan> ATAG helps authoring tools automate the development of accessible content....
13:55:15 <Sharron> Shadi: ATAG doesn't really do any of this, the tools do. There is an indirection going on there. And if I am sold on it, what next?
13:55:29 <Sharron> ...what is the call to action?
13:55:38 <Sharron> ...how can they help?
13:56:04 <Sharron> Jeanne: Ask for ATAG in your authoring tool vendors
13:56:19 <shadi> zakim, mute me
13:56:19 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
13:56:46 <shadi> ack me
13:56:53 <Sharron> Shawn: When I mentioned adding that to the messaging, y'all said that you did not want to broaden the message
13:57:15 <Sharron> Jeanne: And that is true, it is not ready yet, but it is a background message for the general audience.
13:58:04 <Sharron> Sharron: So when you are talking to folks who are not testers, implementers, tell them to ask for ATAG the next time they consider an authoring tool
13:59:10 <Sharron> Shawn: What did we call the big implementers?
13:59:25 <Sharron> AnnaBelle: Influencers? Integrators
13:59:49 <Sharron> Shadi: So what if I am an implementor, what do you want me to do?
14:00:11 <Sharron> Jeanne: Test, we are not looking for feedback, we want validation
14:00:37 <Howard> that's an important point - regarding testing tools. I hadn't realized that.
14:00:49 <Sharron> Shadi: Are there criterion that are well covered and others that you need people for?
14:01:14 <Sharron> Jeanne: I have no testers for anything and those who are good WCAG testers will be able to do that.
14:01:22 <shawn> refresh: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Outreach_for_ATAG_2.0#CSUN
14:01:58 <Sharron> Shadi: Then we are likely to find many of those at CSUN and to communicate that (if you know how to test for WCAG, you can do this) is important.
14:02:52 <Sharron> Wayne: And I was looking at the audience list and I thought about those who use LMS, CMS could check to see if those systems turn out accessible end products.
14:03:00 <Sharron> Shawn: Refresh the wiki
14:04:29 <Howard> zakim, ack me
14:04:29 <Zakim> unmuting Howard_
14:04:30 <Zakim> I see shawn on the speaker queue
14:04:46 <Zakim> -Sharron
14:04:50 <Howard> scribe: Howard
14:04:51 <Sharron> Sharron has left #eo
14:05:18 <Andrew> wonders if we a=want any tool tested, or have we had tools volunteered that claim to be implement (at least part) of ATAG 2.0
14:05:23 <Wayne> asks Jan can we speak today?
14:06:11 <Howard> Jean: we have about 15 tools claiming to implement ATAG
14:06:27 <Howard> Andrew: that's the tools we want tested?
14:06:34 <Andrew> s/a=want/want
14:07:12 <Howard> Jean: can send those with questions to my talk Thurs at 12:00
14:07:39 <Howard> Jean: or can catch me after the talk or at the bar, tweet-ups, etc.
14:07:52 <Andrew> * Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines for your accessible web - Jeanne Spellman - Thursday 12:00 noon Balboa A
14:08:32 <shadi> q+
14:08:41 <Howard> Jean: do not say that ATAG prompts you for accessibility - agreed that this is terrible way to do accessibility
14:09:21 <Howard> Jean: ATAG focuses on the unique parts of accessibility for authoring tools
14:10:05 <Howard> Jean: for example, the editing view - how do you identify and manipulate movies when they aren't identified on the page.
14:10:52 <Howard> Jan: requests meeting between Jean & her senior developer - see about meeting part b.
14:11:01 <jeanne> If you want to arrange meetings with me, my email is jeanne@w3.org
14:11:57 <Howard> Shawn: asks Jeanne if she plans to make the meeting on Tuesday
14:13:27 <Howard> Jeanne: depends on how her flight goes
14:14:02 <shawn> refresh: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Outreach_for_ATAG_2.0#CSUN
14:15:09 <Zakim> -Jeanne
14:15:13 <Howard> Topic: Sunday Brunch
14:15:31 <Howard> Shawn: any news on the brunch
14:16:07 <Howard> Wayne: there's a Mediterranean place
14:16:12 <shawn> s/Jean/Jeanne/
14:16:35 <Howard> Shawn: will talk after the call about the brunch
14:16:45 <Howard> Topic: meeting on 28 March
14:16:47 <shawn> EOWG meeting time 28 March: Note different time (one hour earlier?) in several non-US locations
14:16:57 <shawn> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=EOWG+in+March&iso=20140314T0730&p1=142&ah=2
14:17:10 <Howard> Shawn: reminder: not meeting next week
14:17:20 <Howard> Topic: CSUN face to face agenda planning
14:17:24 <shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2014/03f2f
14:18:10 <Howard> Shawn: on the bottom of the page is the logistics for the meeting
14:18:32 <Howard> Shawn: on Sunday afternoon, start talking about implementation guidance
14:18:52 <Howard> Shawn: Shadi will walk us through that
14:19:24 <Howard> Shawn: in afternoon will work on tutorials planning, then work on dev'l topics planning table, what next topics should be
14:19:55 <Howard> Shawn: on Monday, 2 different breakouts - one on tutorials, 2nd will be from list of potential topics (see bottom of page)
14:20:25 <Howard> Shawn: Tues - may continue in the breakouts or get back together as a group and discuss what came up in the breakouts
14:21:14 <Howard> Shawn: in the afternoon, Eric will cover using GitHub ... then reminder on ATAG promotion. See the url above for more details.
14:21:56 <Howard> AnnaBelle: wondering about usability testing - can we get images moved over before the testing?
14:22:20 <Howard> Shawn: will try to get that done in the next few days.