Brent: Thanks to all for the good work, we see these revisions coming and greatly appreciate it. Notice that we are coming up on the end of September, will have much to review in the next 4 to 5 weeks. Want to make everyone aware of where we are.
... as editor you should be completing your drafts, in small group review and getting ready for full EO review. Don't hesitate to ask for whatever help you need - ask Shawn, Sharron, or me and we will help you get the help you need.
... hoping that small team review is doing a good job of polishing and we will have lots to review in the next few weeks so plan on that time.
... editors please think about when you want to bring your resource to the bigger group. Any comments or questions? OK let's get started in hearing from the editors.
Nic: We did a fairly drastic rewrite to simplify and tersify. We are in the small group review, been getting feedback and expect to have a new version next week.
Brent: Wanted to note that the revision plan that Nic and Norah made was a terrific model. Others may want to look and use it as a template.
Shawn: One of the things we want to do today is to make sure that everyone knows where the resources are in the revision process. People are welcome to chime in, review and comment on any that are of interest to you.
Brent: Yes thanks Shawn and editors can also ask for the help they need.
Norah: Main work has been revising the eight stories of web users, most have been complete and we are ready for small group review.
Brent: make sure that you let people know where/how to provide feedback and also to provide a deadline to keep people motivated.
Norah: Review team is Caleb, Shawn, Sharron and a few others.'
... Entire group has participated in renaming some of the sub pages and those have been changed as well.
Robert: It is in good editorial shape due to recent work by full group. Will take one more editorial pass to be sure we hit the makes on voice and tone. We had an email glitch should be back on track for next week.
... not sure if we want to review when it is in new design or go forward with it as is.
Eric: I plan to put many of the resources into the new wrapper over the next week
Robert: We also proposed a workflow in the wiki and comments submitted will be addressed this week. Expect to be on schedule since it is in good shape.
Brent: And we have been getting submissions, noting that people are using the resource, very good. Thanks Robert.
Vicki: Hello, been working with Charlotte on the Overview page that links with four other pages. We chose to remove the presentation resource until it can be updated so tht leaves 3 sub-pages.
... have asked for feedback next week.
Sharron: Thanks Eric for putting this set of articles into the new design wrapper. It is very helpful to see what it will look like in the new design of the site. We did a serious rewrite of the landing page. Original thought was to condense everything into one page but feedback was in favor of maintaining the separate topics. So we have maintained those as sub-topic links and are seeking to add some case study examples.
...Also seeking feedback from outside EO from people who have written about the Business Case in the past. Feedback has been mostly good so far. People seem to appreciate tight focus and brevity. Should have the full suite ready for small team review the following week.
Brent: I am working with Sharron on this and have been providing feedback. Since my focus has been on project management I have not been as active but expect to review in the next few weeks
Brent: Neither Susan or Charlotte is here so I can tell you that they have made a plan and have made a decision about what should be included and omitted. They have accepted the feedback,
... are working on the landing page to answer the most frequent questions that people ask about mobile and WCAG. The landing page will link to the Mobile Intro written by the Mobile Acessibility TF, editors need to complete the draft and send for small group review.
... any other comments about that?
Brent: I have seen the plan from Denis and Vivienne, either one can comment
Vivienne: Did you see my recent message Denis?
Denis: yes I did and I have been traveling a lot and so have not had a chance to work in depth as yet.
Vivienne: Have stripped out extraneous language and realized there are so many dependencies in this resource that we need to be very very careful about how we reference documents. Many of them are outdated and will need updating after all the other resources have been completed and posted.
... in that way we can have more confidence in the links to other resources which make up the most content in this resources. So have focused instead on the overall structure. It has been slower since denis traveling, Andrew moving etc.
... my hope is that this is a good start and a list of what needs to be addressed as well as a sugestion about methodology to address.
Denis: I feel like we may not want to integrate resources about 2.1 until it is more stable.
... this is now a window where we highlight the resources that we have confidence in.
Vivienne: As 2.1 SCs are accepted and agreed upon, we may want to provide information on them.
Denis: We may want to mention that as 2.1 resources become available we will feature them but not until then.
Shawn: We will have more information on 2.1 status in 2018 and may want to provide brief mentions of that but in the meantime, there are great resources that have been created since this was published and we can and should add links to those.
... also want to put the training resource in a regular schedule for updating as we create new material.
... the basic content will not change and so you can go ahead and reference them in the revision.
Vivienne: yes I noted the videos and other new resources that need to be included.
<shawn> [ maybe comment out post-launch revisions -- e.g., presentations -- OR for this one resource, we might leave some, and note that they will be updated? ]
Brent: We may need to think about the A / B approach. We have the A list of things we will be sure to complete before the relaunch and then the B list of things to do post-launch. So let's be sure to capture the updates that will be needed on all of our resources after the launch.
Denis: Just this week in training, I was teaching about WCAG2 and I could not help but mention some things that are coming up to let people begin to become aware of it.
<krisannekinney> +1 to Denis
Brent: Our documents can be revised at any time, they are not TR docs as Sharron often points out, we can update them as we have the bandwidth to do so. Thank you Denis and Vivienne, appreciate this work.
<shawn> Using Combined Expertise to Evaluate Web Accessibility (fka Review Teams)
Shadi: There are three resources in this suite. One is how multiple evaluators work together, another is the template, another for addiitonal context.
... was a tips and tricks about dynamic systems that were new at the time, so we found that there is no need for this, can be archived.
... I have taken the lead on the eval template and Howard has done some work on it previously. The current template may be to take a report generated from the WCAG-EM tool and annotate it. I am planning that but have not yet documented the plan. Vivienne is more advanced on her part.
<Vivienne> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Eval_Analysis/Combined_Expertise
Vivienne: I found a previous doc and have considered and moved to a wiki page the requirements analysis.
Brent: Since this is late to the group, the review team is smaller only Robert, Laura, and Amanda. If others can join this small team, let me know.
<Norah> I can join
Vivienne: Because the Presentation one has higher priority, do I privilege time on that?
Brent: Yes.
... thanks for the update, good to know.
Shawn: We decided to leave the Easy Checks title for now largely because we will do a significant revision in early 2018. Will do a few minor things pre-launch and then implement this revision plan later. Questions?
Shawn: There is a very old page on WAI, newer one on W3C page and had expected to update that and then just point to it. Reviewers suggested that we maintain the two page model. Will now update the W3C page - thanks to James for a great first pass at the editing of that - but the WAI page needs more significant rewriting.
... W3C page is edited, draft is complete, sent to review team. WAI page is still in process, no drafts yet available.
... the purpose of the WAI page will be to have a more thorough discussion, broaden beyond the developer info provided on the W3C page, and will be much more in depth. The WAI page will provide the option of the higher level.
... one of the things about the WAI page, is to get input about what to keep or cut. Put input in the GitHub
<shawn> input on WAI intro resources: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-eo-archive/2017JulSep/0000.html
<shawn> thanks to Vicki for review pass of all of these!
Brent: On the RM spreadsheet is a tab called "ready for new site?" Planning team had decided there were some that needed little or no revision. As we developed our style and tone guide, we did a bit of rethinking and took another look at them.
... decided they needed one more final pass to check accuracy of links, tersification, etc. Vicki did a first review of all of them and whether they *really* were ready to go. It was careful and tremendously helpful work, thank you Vicki!
... then Nic has followed up with tersification and we will need to do a group review to make sure we have not lost critical info or introduced error. So wanted everyone to be aware that they will be coming up.
Brent: Will be going into a lot of review upcoming. When you are we need you not to approve if you have not read it carefully.
... instead just say pass or give a date when you may be able to do a careful review.
... And in the survey please indicate what you have been working on.
Sharron: So you may think, 'If I've not reviewed why even answer the survey?' But the fact is that EO must have documentation of participation by the member representatives and invited experts. We need people to acknowledge that they're aware of the responsibility of this for as part of their EOWG participation. In the past, we have seen several blanket 'approvals' while others were finding significant issues. It can be really misleading for an editor to see such contradictions. Better is to use the option of 'no time for review, will accept group decision' or leave a date in the comments for when you will be able to give the time for that level of review and comment.
Shawn: Complete survey, even when can't do thorough review
Brent: Feel free to indicate the work you *are* focused on and pass on the current review.
Brent: There is a WAI site TF, big shout out to Eric for the dev work he has done, and to James who has led the TF. The Visa team has been doing extraordinary work and I want to recongnize that. On Oct 3,4,5 will be doing usability studies in the Visa lab in Austin. Have been creating test questions focused on navigation and IA.
... Shawn has created a wiki page about what to look for during the test. Want to invite all of EO to add to this list, anyone can join the meeting that week if you want to observe.
Shawn: Not sure if anyone has time, it is an optional invitation, not a requirement at all.
Vivienne: Are the testers people with disabilities?
Sharron: A few people with disabilities but the focus is not accessibility testing but rather for general audiences which will include a few people with disability.
Shawn: Once prototype is closer to being actually ready, we can open up for accessibility testing
Denis: I think the focus *should* be on people with disabilities, likely to identify issues more quickly.
<shawn> +1 to Denis that participants with disabilities find usability issues usually better.
Sharron: one target group we want to make sure to get is developers and designers
Denis: it will provide insights on a deeper level. We will not get a lot of feedback about readability and such without that focus.
<shawn> ... ideal, e.g., developers with dyslexia
<shawn> +1 to Denis not necessarily screen reader. good to get low vision, dyslexia, autism spectrum, color-blindness - older & arthritis
Denis: good to have perspective of older users, etc
... dyslexia, autism, keyboard only, covering the basics, voice input, older, different user scenarios
Vivienne: Is there interest in using people from off-site?
<notabene> good to test plain, not-too-accessibility-savvy people - who are a big target of this site I think
<shawn> Vivienne: remote?
Shawn: Clarify that absolutely it will be great for y'all to run local tests. Important to note right now that Eric is working like crazy to get the prototype content reading for usability -- not focusing on addressing all technical issues yet. it may not be fully accessible by the first week of October. Currently keyboard access is not fully functional and may not be there yet.
... please be patient with the cross-browser, full keyboard access, fully responsive, etc.
<dboudreau> gah
Brent: Everyone is welcome to come to the usability testing in Austin and observe the testing.
Shawn: Please register for the conference, the main hotel is full, there is an overflow hotel as well.
<shawn> Report issues/concerns related to participant travel to w3t-tpregister@w3.org. It's important to understand at this stage if folks don't have budget to travel or prefer to avoid travel to/from the US.
<shawn> Email w3t-tpregister if anyone needs help with getting a hotel room, and I will do my best to help until our Crowne Plaza is 100% full. If we get another small block, the *discount* rate will be close to 400 USD/night. Dreamforce is the 2nd largest conference in the US. We want to minimize folks getting locked out of local hotels.
<shawn> 7 October: Fees will increase from 115 USD two weeks from this Friday, 22 Sept. Late and unpaid registrants will be charged 175 USD/day.
Brent: Work for this week will be updated with review requests from editor, will also have minute approval and input on what you are working on.
Shawn: Do you want to allow people to put their review team work in there?
Brent: Not sure that everyone is comfortable updating. If you are, then put your review request in there yourself and point to the instructions or put them in there.
<shawn> Here is where you can list work for your teams:
<shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Meetings#Teams_Work
Brent: If you are an editor and you do not see something listed in WFTW let me know and I can add to the list or of course, feel free to update it yourself
<Howard_ip> Names would help
Brent: Under Team Work, put people's name and due date for each item.
... editor's can do that or if they don't know how, I will add that to the list.
... Shawn, please put list into public archive mailing list
<shawn> public-eo-archive@w3.org
<shawn> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-eo-site/2017Sep/0026.html
<Brent> Prototype Link: http://w3c.github.io/wai-website/
Shawn: Propose to move out from Tutorials and into Design and develop on its own
<Norah> done
<dboudreau> done
<Brent> Nic is done
<Brent> done
<Brent> done
<krisannekinney> done
<James> Done
<Howard_ip> Done
<yatil> Done. Emphatic support for the proposal. But what would it be called? Intro to Accessible Media?
<shawn> Vivienne said in e-mail: vote for the proposal to move Media out of the tutorials and put under the Design & Develop as its own item. I'm not a great fan of the titles, and would be more comfortable with Multimedia and perhaps 'tips' or 'guidance on practice' or similar in brackets - I don't mind what. Multimedia (in my own mind at least) encompasses both audio and video quite nicely and seems to be understood at that level.
<shawn> Nic: said in email: support idea of moving this away from tutorials is a good one.
<Vicki> I'm okay with Shawn's suggestion. bye folks. have a great weekend!
<Howard_ip> I support moving it out of tutorials
<Sharron> +1
<Norah> I think accessible media encompasses both audio and video, and multi is not needed.
Sharron: agree with Norah that multi is not needed and is in fact confusing and a bit antiquated
James: makes more sense to have it look like the other intros rather than tutorials
<notabene> +1 with Norah
<notabene> +1 for "accessible media"
Shawn: Charlotte has a question related to this so it would be good if a draft can be made
<dboudreau> +1 to not feeling like it ever fitted as well
Brent: I know that Judy really wanted to make it fit into tutorial, now that we are changing it, make sure it does not look like the tutorials. What will happen to the name?
<Norah> Intro to Accessible Media
<krisannekinney> Creating Accessible Media
<Howard_ip> Like guide
Shawn: I propose that for the testing we call it a "Guide" or something temporary. We had a naming discussion previously and can revisit later
<Brent> +1 for moving out of tutorial, changing name and look
<krisannekinney> +1 to move it out of Tutorials
Shadi: Group is much in favor of moving away from Tutorials, but personally I disagree. It is fine but actually it is a how-to and is a tutorial and I would much like to see more things put into tutorial format and put into this suite. I find it unfortunate that we are splitting hairs about format and not keeping things together as resources to help people learn to do something related to accessibility.
<Norah> is this part of the usability study?
<shawn> Accessible Media (Video, Audio)
Shawn: Judy suggested that we say that tutorials are specific and these guides are broader. Not for discussion now but for later consideration.
... should we add vido and audio to the title?
James: I agree with your vision for the future, we need to produce more of this kind of resource. Right now, however, it is an outlier. If we develop more that are broad then we can reconsider and create a suite of tutorials that do all of these things.
<shawn> +1 to James that we can change IA later when have different resources
Norah: A question - will this be part of the usability study, that may help us determine where it should be.
<shawn> Accessible Media (Video, Audio)
Shawn: yes there is a question about it
<yatil> -1 to Media
Sharron: -1
Denis: Mulit-media?
Shawn: last time people said no, I went with majority
Denis: time-based media?
Nic: a mouthful
Denis: but an official media
<Brent> WCAG says "Time-based Media" so I think that "multimedia" word is not needed.
Sharron: +1 to Accessible Audio/Video
Nic: I support that
Denis: I could live with that
<Brent> What about media matching Guideline 1.2
<notabene> +1 to Accessible Audio/Video
Brent: Thansk Shawn, that's a wrap, and thanks to all!