See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 02 December 2014
<Kenny> hi, Joshue, item added, and kick start trackbot
<Joshue> Chair: AWK
<Joshue> Scribe list:https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
<scribe> Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea
<AWK> Scribe: Katie
<scribe> ScribeNick: Ryladog_
<scribe> Meeting: WCAG Working Group Teleconference
<scribe> Chair: Andrew Kirkpatrick
<AWK> Update: "We are still in dialog with OMB on the regulatory impact analysis"
AWK: Update from the Access Board
is that there is still work to do
... No obstructions just more due diligence
... Settlement from DOJ in March 2015 - they are asking PeaPod
to address Accessibility on their website and that WCAG is the
way for Peapod to do that
JO: Eric did a tidy up
EE: I have put the use cases into tasks
<yatil> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Resource_Redesign/Quickref/Analysis#Tasks
EE: also added some functionality
AWK: Does anyone want to add comments to this document
JO: On maybe Thusday yes
... There are sections you want us to look at
EE: Yes, we want filks to look at
the tasks - that would be helpful
... We should put the progress into prototyoes
<MoeKraft> thanks
AWK: Great. Did people get a chance to look thru this? Do you know what we expected of you? What would be helpful?
ME: I would like some context. Are we thinking of developing an umbrella for introductory method onhow people would find things
<yatil> http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/
<AWK> redesign of http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/
AWK: This is for the redesign of
How To Meet WCAG document - the Quick Ref
... One of the challenges - redesign opens up other questions.
But we need to be careful of scope. We may identify that we
need to make
<AWK> KHS: One of the big issues in the US in trying to get ppl to use WCAG is
<AWK> ...that the people freak out
<AWK> ...BB and I have a course to help people
<AWK> ...will be 100s of K ppl looking at this once 508 refresh is out
<AWK> ... especially with WCAG2ICT bringing in SW also
JO: Question Eric I see that you have a list of 12 or 13 tasks. Are you thinking we might need to add more tasks?
EE: Yes and we need to do a prioritization
<jon_avila> +1
JO: I see #3 - AWK thought this was a good idea - a check-off thing - I like this idea. Thanks Eric
<Kathy> +1
JA: Yes for like images , form etc
AWK: I am doing a site - I dont have tables, I do have forms, I di have images, etc. Getting techniques specific to their content
AWK; I am not sure how gradular we want this to be. Do others think this is a good idea?
<Joshue> KHS: Absolutely
ME: What about the WCAG 2.0 database - does it have a good search function?
<Zakim> EricE, you wanted to say something about the implementation details
AWK; We could do a directory search capability - I am not sure W3C will allow us to have a Google search box in the DB
JE: Yes that is the functionality I was thinking of
EE: Well that is what we want but
I am unsure that we can do that. We are working on an approach
- for some type of exchange format
... I am working on a tool. BUt we do not hvae a search
functionality capability right now - but we have to look into
that
ME: Techniques section and how to
make it more useful - part of the issue is putting information
into context - good website format - for sceening out things
that werrent relevant. Something like a mock webpage
... for some one using a web editor - this is just a
thought
AWK: I like the before and after
ME: Something that is more interactive - like if you were working on a ttable you could click on it and it would take you to techniques for table etc
EE: That is the plan but we need
resources
... We want to get to an intuitive UI so filks dont have to
know where to go - which they have to do right now
AWK: Eric to clarify the task for the WG - they should first look at the list of tasks or should they just go top to bottom?
EE: top to bottom is the way to go
JO: I think so as well the tasks are the most important
AWK: Do we have a define list of everthing we think the current QuickRef does?
JO: EO WG said that it doesnt actually do what it was designed to do - but I didnt get what that idea was
MC: stuff we can point to
AWK: a 10 minute exersize for a
first stab
... a 10 minute exersize for a first stab
<yatil> scribeNick: Ryladog_
MC: We can look thru meeting
minutes from 10 years ago - but I think it was like a checklist
which is what we did with WCAG 1.0
... But perhaps we should not worry about that too much
JO: But we should look at that so we do not make any missteps
<MoeKraft> survey
AWK: OK we will go with putting our comments on the wiki
<Joshue> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/surveyReview/results
AWK: Thanks to those who submitted comments
AWK: Loretta what did you want to say?
LGR: Lots of folks find it hard to navigate, and different kinds of feedback on the design of the docs
AWK: Did you get a sense - what is critical to chamge?
LGR: I would say people were
giving their reactions to the questions. Less white space,
shorter lines. But in general more things about what is
difficlut about the documents
... I tried to group them in my summary
AWK: Yes I see them
LGR: customization
AWK: Kathy and Tim. What Tim got
was that it was too difficult to search
... I am using Chrome that puts everything in this fat font
me too
ME: On the first question - it
was hard for popel o find the information they were looking for
in a quick way
... they are not sure how to find the techniques. You have many
people coming in with different needs
... Most commnets wee about the problems with finding things in
WCAG period
AWK: Back to number 2
then...
... Tim said - Users Guide, maybe clearer on how to find
techniques,
... Kathy?
Kathy: Archived noticed, want
more techniques for documents (word, ppt)
... I summarized
AWK: What I hear out of 1 and 2
are similar stuff - better simpler organizaation. Which
validates what we think we know
... This is
JO: The take away - there is too
much information - more relevant info - shorter -
... and some specific - use introductory space for how to
use
AWK: Too long to read
JO: Stop letting academics write documentation
Andrew: a question was Why aren't their failure for everything?
JO: I got that there was a lot of wishful thinking folks wanted more techniques and failures
JA: I think we should have a documented failure for each thing that could be a failure. They wanted to see updating and modernizing
Folks didnt want to see techniques mapped to GL they only wanted to see it mapped to SC
KHS: I think we need to cintinue to do that where we have little choice
AWK: We do not want tto have to do that - maybe we will be able to addess this in the neext veersion of out GL
JO: It would be interesting for us to document thoe tech/failure that dont map to specific SC and we are mapping to GL - to work on those gaps
AWK: Overwhelming was the profound noise. Many said dont change it
AWK: Reer by handles, not sections. Organized by tasks
MC: The wording was by HTML elements - I would generalize that to tables etc
EE: Some details they are not interested in.
AWK: People want to filter and customize and this is in Erics document already as a task
Nothing
EE: People have a desire to have detail,
AWK: Bruce said - they want clear
language, to be able to identify things
... Can you extract stufgf from Bruce
AWK: Make it easier to use,
<jon_avila> I had a comment on 11. People said they wanted to use it as a checklist -- this is similar to what Michael had said was a goal.
AWK: someone said - Make it clear
that WCAG is not for documents
... One said W3VC should approve course offered at universities
for certifications
... We should assume HTML5 for all examples
<jon_avila> HTML4 is still relevant -- much overlap there is
Dont break the web - just add new HTML5 examples - dont kill the old ones
<jon_avila> +1 to James
AWK: Filter out technologies that
aren't of interest - muassbility testing
... Filter, you can, use QuickRef
JN: But that isnt taken into account throughout
AWK: You think they want a
comprehensive filtering capability
... So that is harder than changing just the QuickRef Guide
JN: That is what the majority of what people are going to want
JO: I am just wondering about relevancy
JN: Provide a link to every page that has one
AWK: we are trying to maintain that WCAG is not just HTML
AWK: Micheal said that it was mostly about things we do not need
JO: Divided opinions - and even split
AWK: So we do not have many
actionable items here
... Did we have consistamce commnet shtere
AWK: Plain langauge
Mix
AWK: Folks were unsure about how
it is relevant
... thank you to everyone who looked at those
... Please look at those items again where we didnt have
answers
... We will want to refer back to thos as a resource for what
will be the same steps
<jamesn> not me
AWK: Did any of the WG take this survey?
I didnt
AWK: Me eother
... One thing we can do - with what EE is working on - is
figuring out what we can do to improve these documents. What is
the low hanging fruit. There arre users who want to use our
docs but are having problems doing so
... How do we address this? The lowest hanging fruit is -
simplifying th language and structure and the techniques with
more example and simplifying the examples. What do others think
we shoukd di as out next stoes?
<Mike_Elledge> +1
<Joshue> KHS: We are responsible for this, so it calls for someone external to fix it
AWK: Do we need to wait because ERIC is going to solve all of our problems
I think we need folks who were not here to make some of these changes
AWK: Well yes and no. One problem is scale. Now we have all of these documents which wasnt there before
JO: It is almost too much informaion now
AWK: Other thoughts?
ME: maybe we should look in places where there are such people. Maybe we should ask some developers. I can ask some developers in my group
AWK: that would be useful.
thanks
... maybe you and I Josh need to think about what the big items
ae here - maybe we need to come up with a task list
... Should we ferret out instances of and references to XHTML
2, etc
JO: Yes, and if we could have folks look at the survey
AWK: what i interpret fro peoples comments - users are in agreement that there are things that we need to do - but they seem to want specific items placed in front of them
<AWK> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/actions/open
<AWK> Also check https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Comments_Needing_Responses
AWK: Everryone please go down the
actions list and see if you have any open - pleasde address
them
... Please review the comment responses page
+ Moe Kraft
+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
+ EricE
+ Michael_Cooper
+ Kathy_Wahlbin
+ Marc_Johlic
+ Loretta
+ jon_avila
+ Brent
+ James_Nurthen
+ Andrew_Kirkpatrick
+ James_Nurthen
trackbot, end meeting
<MichaelC> chair: AWK
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140 of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Erik/Eric/ Succeeded: s/amnot/am not/ Succeeded: s/loo/look/ Succeeded: s/Eo/EO WG/ Succeeded: s/AWK;/AWK:/ Succeeded: s/z mute// Succeeded: s/ScribeNick: Ryladog/ScribeNick: Ryladog_/ Succeeded: s/AWK; Bacjk/AWK: Back/ Succeeded: s/HTML%/HTML5/ Succeeded: s/JW/JN/ Succeeded: s/AWK; So that is harder than changing just the QuickRef Guide// Succeeded: s/tale/take/ Succeeded: s/a s a/as a/ Succeeded: s/What si the low hanging fruit/What is the low hanging fruit/ Succeeded: s|me/ thanks yatil|| Succeeded: s/AWK;/AWK:/ Succeeded: s/wew/we/ Succeeded: s/zakin, next item// Succeeded: s/TOPIC: Survey// Succeeded: s/bye all!// Succeeded: s/trackbot, status?// Found embedded ScribeOptions: -final *** RESTARTING DUE TO EMBEDDED OPTIONS *** Found Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea Found Scribe: Katie Found ScribeNick: Ryladog_ Found ScribeNick: Ryladog_ Scribes: Katie Haritos-Shea, Katie Default Present: Joshue, EricE, +1.617.766.aaaa, Michael_Cooper, +1.617.766.aabb, AWK, Kenny, Marc_Johlic, Katie_Haritos-Shea, +1.313.390.aacc Present: Andrew_Kirkpatrick Joshue_O_Connor Michael_Cooper Marc_Johlic Jon_Avila Mike_Elledge Kathy_Wahlbin James_Nurthen Loretta_Guarino_Reid Brent Moe_Kraft Eric_Eggert Katie_Haritos-Shea Kenny_Zhang Regrets: Bruce_Bailey Christophe_Strobbe Alistair_Garrison Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2014OctDec/0135.html Found Date: 02 Dec 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/12/02-wai-wcag-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]